Boring Facts

David Gregory won't stop saying the new Democratic House majority is going to be torn between its liberal leadership and the new "right of center" Democrats who've won races tonight and put them in the majority. Essentially every other MSM figure I've heard on television has said the same thing. But as Tom Schaller and Ben Adler have pointed out this is, um, just wrong.

It's true that a few races have seen culturally conservative Democrats winning conservative districts but beyond Health Shuler there really aren't very many clear-cut examples of this. The overwhelmingly predominant trend has been for moderate-to-liberal districts in the Northeast and Midwest to dump faux moderate Republicans in favor of fairly orthodox progressive Democrats. It's regional realignment backlash, not a new Democratic thrust into Dixie.

11/7/06 11:35PM del.icio.us this incoming links

Comments

Yes. I will be interested to see whether they remember their pronouncements of a divided Democratic caucus when the legislation and oversight begins. As the Magic 8-Ball would say, "All signs point to No."

Posted by: dj moonbat on November 7, 2006 11:42 PM

Of course, rightists would argue the same point, except from the perspective that its an example of the liberal media trying to falsely claim the new Democratic majority is moderate or centrist. To the left, the MSM is poo-pooing the gains of true liberals. To the right, radical leftists are being provided cover.

Posted by: Matthew Cooley on November 7, 2006 11:50 PM

And all the sweeter for the realignment aspect.

Posted by: SomeCallMeTim on November 7, 2006 11:58 PM

watching the punditocracy come to terms with the apparent outcomes here should be very droll: there is nothing a certified pundit hates more than a change in the narrative, and he or she will go to great lengths to preserve the backstory as written.

which is why david gregory won't stop saying...but here's where we came in.

Posted by: howard on November 8, 2006 12:14 AM

Yeah, this has been driving me crazy all night, too. Republicans are losing in NH, CT, PA, and NY. I mean, come on! Joe Scarborough (whose election analysis I normally enjoy a lot) has somehow offered both the correct and the incorrect take on the election. They're diametrically opposed! It's very weird.

Posted by: jhupp on November 8, 2006 12:16 AM

Republicans are also losing in IN, OH, FL, etc. It's not limited to the northeast.

Posted by: Al on November 8, 2006 12:18 AM

Matt, you have got to check out what craziness Kudlow is peddling in this vein.

Posted by: jhupp on November 8, 2006 12:27 AM

Has anybody seen how far Shep Smith has strayed off the reservation on Fox News? Turn him on, it's comedy gold watching him argue with Rich Lowry. Total professional.

Posted by: infinitelyabsurd on November 8, 2006 01:42 AM

It's not an issue now nor will it be in 2008 as none of the issues Dems want to tackle between now and then are a problem between conservative and liberal Democrats, the war, terrorism, spending, minimum wage, oversight, etc. they are all agreed on.

Shep Smith rules, he's the only reason to tune into Fox once a month.

Posted by: Fred F. on November 8, 2006 01:45 AM

Yes replacing moderate Repubs with moderate Dems is not change.
Well yes Dems get control of the chamber, and committee chairs (did I mention some of those guys are old and black), and more committee staff and set the agenda but really both candidates were for stem cell research and pay-go.
They are basically the same. I would not be suprised if the moderate Dems vote for Boehner as Speaker. I need another drink. Cokie. Cokie get over here and top me off.

Posted by: MSM pundit on November 8, 2006 03:28 AM

Heath Shuler's a conservative? Is that a backlash from his role in Brokeback Mountain?

Posted by: Jeffrey Davis on November 8, 2006 09:31 AM

Culturally conservative
Democrats winning conservative districts...I thought that described all three of our Indianianians, as well as Jason Altmire (anti-choice former health-care industry lobbyist) who unexpectedly beat Melissa Hart in Western PA.

Posted by: Cryptic Ned on November 8, 2006 10:05 AM

Except let's be reasonable about how the process works. On election day, you get a choice between the Democratic nominee and the Republican nominee. The Democratic nominee was chosen only by Democrats, and is significantly left of center. The Republican nominee is chosen only by Republicans and is significantly right of center. If you could put them on a scale of 0-100, with 0 being the most conservative and 100 being the most liberal, the Republican nominee would fall around the 25% point, and the Democratic nominee around the 75% point.

Similarly, in the House and Senate, you get a body that is controlled by Democrats or controlled by Republicans. The average Democrat is at the 75% point while the average Republican is at the 25% point, making the control of the body either significantly left or significantly right of center.

The only thing that is going to change this is to eliminate primaries and elect all representatives at-large, using a different voting mechanism like ranked-choice, instant-runoff, single-transferable vote, etc.

Posted by: Alan on November 8, 2006 10:42 AM

The cultural conservatism of some of the new House members won't ever be an issue, because Pelosi will not push divisive cultural bills. There won't be a "flag-burning allowed amendment" bill, or a "federal government pays for all abortions" bill (I doubt Pelosi wants either of those things, but you get the idea). Instead, it'll be stuff that's popular with people, but unpopular with the GOP. The minimum wage and stem cells are the most obvious examples.

Oh, and Yarmuth in KY is an unqualified liberal.

Posted by: American Citizen on November 8, 2006 11:52 AM

"The overwhelmingly predominant trend has been for moderate-to-liberal districts in the Northeast and Midwest to dump faux moderate Republicans in favor of fairly orthodox progressive Democrats."

This will be the Deaniac spin, but the truth is that the blogosphere has now had its first run of succcesses because it has been willing to support centrist and even conservative Democratic candidates in purple and red races. If the Democrats don't squander their majority on payoffs to big Democratic donors (certain corporations and public employee unions) like the California Democrats of the late Wilson and Davis eras they have a real chance at remaining in power for some time (not least because they are now the big tent party), but no one should believe that what is happening is any real sense a progressive phenomenon. There are few genuinely progressive Democrats and virtually none were elected last night.

Posted by: Linus on November 8, 2006 11:39 PM

thanksss

Posted by: oyun indir on December 28, 2007 01:48 PM

mirc
mirç
mırc
mırç
mircturk
turkmirc
mirc indir
mirc yukle
mirch
mırch
mirc turk
turk mirc
mırcturk
turkmırc
mırc turk
turk mırc
turkiyemirc
türkiyemirc
turkiye mirc
türkiye mirc
mircturkiye
mirctürkiye
mirc turkiye
mircturk
turkmırc
muhabbet
forum
forum
turkforum
turkiyeforum
mirc
turkmirc
toplist
site ekle
pagerank
turkmirc
turkforum
sohbet
chat
sohbet odaları
bedava sohbet
bedava chat
türk
karar