If We Lose Congress, It Won't Matter Who We Nominate

[THUNDER HANDS]

Either way we'll see a replay of the Clinton presidency where we try to make the best of the Republican agenda, not enact our own.

Part of the reason I'm supporting Obama is because I think he can help our congressional candidates in red states, like he did in 2006. He went to places where the candidates there wouldn't even ask Clinton to come.

An Obama presidency would mean adding House and Senate seats, and each congressional and senate seat added is another step closer to enacting the progressive legislation both candidates are talking about on the campaign trail.

A Clinton presidency, if we want to look to history as any indication, would mean a loss of house and senate seats in areas that are not normally receptive to Democrats. And each seat lost is a step backwards from what Hillary wants to do.

So I think that's that's the choice.

[DainBramaged]

1. 28 Rethuglicans are retiring, we're closer to a bulletproof majority than ever

And we are 5 Senators away from same.

[Buzz Clik]

2. Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong! The power is in the White House.

Yes, we'd like to control all of it, but the White House is the key.

[THUNDER HANDS]

4. i'm not saying we won't win the white house with either

I'm just saying that only one has the potential to campaign in every state for our down-ticket candidates.

[DainBramaged]

8. I distinctly remember Bill Clinton being rendered powerless by the Reich wing takeover

And I ain't that old.

[Buzz Clik]

10. Absolutely. But would you rather see a replay of the past 12 months with GOP Prez?

:scared:

[Thrill]

3. We're going to clean up Congress, especially with Obama as the nominee

[TexasObserver]

5. I don't think we lose congress with either candidate.

I do believe we are much more likely to get workable majorities in the House and Senate with Obama topping the ticket, however. I do believe Hillary will cost us seats that Obama won't, simply because she will bring out every Republican voter in America to vote against her, and in doing so, hurt down ticket candidates.

[AndyTiedye]

14. If We're Running Against McCain, It Could Get Ugly Down-Ticket

[TexasObserver]

16. If Hillary is our nominee, it WILL get ugly downticket.

She's going to hurt down ticket.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

6. Congress is VERY important

and too many people don't realize this. What we need to do is not just get Democrats elected, but to make sure that PROGRESSIVE Democrats are the ones who win the primary. So please consider sending money to PROGRESSIVE candidates for the House and Senate.

[Donkeykick]

7. So what happened during Clinton's...

presidency has to happen with and if Hillary gets in too?

Does this mean she is necessarily going to have an affair also? :eyes: :wtf:

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

9. We're talking Congressional majorities

in 1994, if memory serves, the GOP gained the majority in Congress, which started the inability for Clinton to enact all the programs he wanted to. He had to veer strongly to the right to get things passed.

[Evergreen Emerald]

12. and the congress attempted to block him at every turn. They had an

"Idependent (rightwinghack) counsel" look under every rock to find dirt, and after billions of dollars with nothing getting done in Congress--they found a blow-job.

I blame the Republican Congress (and the media) for 911. When Clinton attempted to go after Bin Laden, the Congress (with the media's help) refused to do anything, saying Clinton was "wagging the dog," and other such nonsense.

[Donkeykick]

17. OK.

But if Hillary gets the job, it doesn't necessarily mean that it is going to happen to her, too.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

19. But why take the chance?

The more Dems in Congress, the easier it will be for the next Democratic President, don't you agree? I'm just saying that we should work to elect as many Democrats to Congress as possible.

[PeaceNikki]

11. It'd be REALLY tough (if not, impossible) to lose ground on either side

Senate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_elections,_2008#Predictions

In the Senate Democrats possess a field advantage in 2008, needing to defend only 12 seats, while Republicans must defend 23. In addition, five Republicans and no Democrats have announced that they are retiring. The open seat gap between the parties is the biggest in 50 years.

House
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_elections%2C_2008

Shortly after the November 2006 election, Scott Elliott of ElectionProjection.com said that the Democratic majority would be tough to beat - at most the GOP could take back fourteen House seats - two short of a majority. InTrade.com, the only betting site currently offering odds on control of the House, puts the odds of the Democrats retaining control at about 80% as of mid-November 2007.

Conservative columnist Robert Novak wrote in May 2007 that he believes there are at least a few House seats that were won by Democrats in 2006 "solely because of GOP corruption," and that such seats would be "the most likely to return to the Republican column in 2008." He also argues that "a continued sour mood over the Iraq War could produce another massive Republican defeat in 2008 that makes 2006 look tame by comparison. Republicans in Washington generally concede that the continued presence of U.S. troops in Iraq by next November could mean disaster for the party;" However, he qualifies this by noting that in "previous elections, major House gains by either party have always been followed by losses in the next election."

Associated Press wrote an article titled, "House GOP fear fallout from ethics cases". After the 9/11 attacks the Republican Party branded itself as the party of President George W. Bush. Various ethics issues now taint Bush and the GOP. With House Republicans actively protecting the Bush administration in Congressional hearings and numerous Republicans under investigation the voters may decide to punish Republican candidates at the ballot box.

[cali]

13. For the tenth time: Dems will gain seats no matter who the nominee is

Do you really think Mark Warner will lose in VA? How about Tom Udall in NM?

This is just a very bad year for Congressional repukes. Why else do you think 29 repuke reps are retiring? And quite a few are retiring in districts where they barely eked out a win in 2006. 22 repuke Senate seats are up this year compared to 11 dem seats. Now, I think Obama would definitely help on top of the ticket, but we are going to see dem gains no matter what.

[Bread and Circus]

15. agree

[KaryninMiami]

18. Yes indeed. K&R

Remember everyone- WE NEED A LANDSLIDE of turnout and at this moment, it does not appear that a Clinton ticket will make that happen. Without a landslide, we will not gain the seats we need in Congress and we could also loose Supreme Court seats since, it could and probably would, mean we'll have a McCain presidency.