HRH Extra: Wave Or Scandal?
If Republicans lose control of the House, will it be because of President Bush and Congress's low approval ratings or because of scandal?
Three of our top six "vulnerable seats" (FL 16, TX 22, PA 10) are in play primarily because of scandal, and not because of an anti-Bush/anti-GOP wave. Another two (NY 26, OH 18) are also high on our list. If the Dems win control by only a narrow majority, ethics scandals will have provided the majority for victory.
If there is a sizable wave, look at the GOP-held seats in the Philly suburbs, Connecticut and the open seats in the Midwest. Republican incumbents and capable candidates are running here in mostly Democratic or Democratic-trending CDs. If Republicans hold these seats, the NRCC's "all politics is local" mantra would certainly ring true. If not, Dems could be looking at winning over 20 seats.
But the surprise of this cycle is that Dems could win the House without winning big in their most favorable territory. Instead, Chris Carney, Tim Mahoney and Zack Space -- once considered long-shots -- could be heading to Congress. If that happens, '08 promises to be a very volatile cycle. [JOSH KRAUSHAAR]
If Republicans lose control of the House, will it be because of President Bush and Congress's low approval ratings or because of scandal?
Are these two things mutually exclusive? I don't see this as a binary situation, but that these two and other environmental factors are feeding on each other.