"if rethugs believed that they were on the verge of retaking the chamber, they wouldn't be retiring"

[babylonsister]

http://mydd.com/2010/2/27/yet-another-house-republican-to-retire

Yet Another House Republican to Retire

by Jonathan Singer, Sat Feb 27, 2010 at 04:02:34 PM EST


Charlie Cook says that it's "very hard to come up with a scenario where Democrats don't lose the House." The Republicans in the House apparently don't agree with him, though, as evidenced by the continuing trend of party incumbents opting to leave the House instead of waiting around for the GOP's supposedly imminent return to power in the chamber. Here's the latest.

Veteran Rep. John Linder (R-Ga.), an early ally of former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and an outspoken fiscal conservative, announced Saturday he was retiring.

Linder disclosed his decision at a Republican breakfast in his district and party officials in Washington confirmed the news.

The 18-year congressman represents a heavily Republican seat in the sprawling suburbs east of Atlanta that is likely to stay in GOP hands.

This district isn't competitive, you say, so why does it matter whether one Republican is going to be swapped out for another? It matters a great deal, in fact.

To flesh out what I stated above, and what I've said before, if House Republicans really believed that they were on the verge of retaking the chamber, they wouldn't be retiring. Take the retiring John Linder, for example. Linder is a member of the powerful Ways and Means Committee, and as a ranking member of one of its subcommittees would stand to earn a coveted chairmanship if the Republicans were to retake the House. Yet he's leaving rather than wait less than a year for something that's supposedly a sure thing -- the GOP winning control of the House?

Actions speak louder than words. When Republicans like Congressman Linder -- and a dozen and a half of his compatriots -- decide to leave the House, it says loud and clear that they don't think their party is going to win back the House in November, no matter what Charlie Cook or anyone else has to say.

[Yurovsky]

1. He might have other reasons...

I agree with you the GOP will NOT be re-taking the House anytime soon (not this year, certainly not in 2012 when BHO will be on the ballot). But Linder might just be ready to leave Congress and make a bajillion dollars peddling influence like most of the K street crowd. Even if the GOP were somehow able to wrest control of the House, Linder knows he'll make a lot more money pimping for corporations than he will as chairman of Ways & Means.

[babylonsister]

3. I think it's Charlie Cook's constant doom and gloom that inspired

this; I think he's annoying, too, and doesn't have a crystal ball despite the people who think he's the second coming.

[timeforpeace]

2. They never seem to hang around until they die while still in office.

[3waygeek]

4. Linder is my Congressman...

as a result of the 2000 redistricting -- before that, I was in Newt's district. Gives you some idea of how red this area is. Linder will almost certainly be suceeded by another Rethug, probably in the fundie or teabagger camp. However, a sufficiently conservative Dem may have an outside chance if the Rethugs are divided.

[Hav]

5. Well...

from a political party point of view, the year that will supposedly be good for you is the best time to let old incumbents retire to make place for new and younger ones. It's much better than hanging on to those who are very old or sick which will eventually put you in a position that some years later, a new candidate will have to win the seat in a climate that might not be that good for your party. Which seems to be the mistake of the Dems in the last years.

[AllentownJake]

7. What so the same faces the other side had been attacking

For years don't make an encore? Biggest retirements were in the senate with Dorgan and Bayh. Likely blue to likely red overnight. Dorgan was an ok senator, the guy who replaces bayh will be economically the same but more of a fundie on social policies. Dorgan was an economic loss because you will go from center left to far right.

[AllentownJake]

6. Most retirements were announced in early 2008

Unless there are another 3-4 of these in the next week, it means nothing either way.

[Imajika]

8. This analysis is terrible...

Sorry, but the arguments some people are trying to make, including in this commentary, are just laughable and so naive that I have to wonder if this stuff is just written to try to make us all feel good.

When one party looks set to do exceedingly well in an upcoming election cycle, you can have significant retirements from both sides for entirely different reasons. When a congresscritter wants to retire, party leadership will often desperately try to talk them into waiting until a friendly election cycle so they do not risk losing the seat. The Republicans that are retiring are largely doing so knowing they will probably retain the seat, so they are pretty much green lighted to go by leadership.

On the other hand, the party projected to lose badly will often see 2 forms of retirements. One, congresspersons that just don't want to face a tough election or don't wish to deal with suddenly being in the minority. Two, congresspersons whom are so unpopular that the party leadership knows they need a fresh candidate to have any chance of retaining the seat (those are the ones pressured to retire by party leadership).

Republicans and Democrats are not retiring for the same reason. To try to put a happy face on the way this election cycle is probably going to go is just sticking one's head in the sand.

Republicans stand to gain at least 20-30 House seats and around 2-5 Senate seats even if Obama and the Democrats rebound and look much better in the polls. This is just a function of the Democrats having so many seats to defend in areas the Republicans are strong. The GOP went through 2 very bad cycles, and they are bound to recover many of those seats - particularly the low hanging fruit which would normally be Republican seats anyway. The Democratic and Republican parties already know this.

Posting feel good analysis that no serious person who understands the dynamics of US elections believes is not good for anyone.

Right now the general consensus, most likely outcome is that the Democrats retain the House by a very few seats (extremely few), and retain the Senate by around 4-5 seats. The outlook for Democrats has been steadily deteriorating to the point that people like Charlie Cook are saying the Republicans will take back the House IF, and only IF, the current polling momentum continues. There is no reason to necessarily believe the bleeding will continue, at least assuming the Democratic Party makes the right moves over the next several months.