or
Join Now!
|
|
Home/Government/Politics
|
| Forum |
Ask A Question |
Question Board |
FAQs |
Search |
Return to Question Board
| Question Details |
Asked By |
Asked On |
| Less Promise for Democrats in N.Y. |
Itsdb |
09/12/06 |
By RAYMOND HERNANDEZ
In a year when Democrats hope to take control of the House of Representatives, New York would appear to be fertile ground for toppling Republican incumbents. Democrats have a statewide edge in enrollment, and a popular incumbent, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, is at the top of the party’s ticket.
In fact, just a few months ago, Democrats envisioned significant gains in New York, perhaps picking up as many as four seats, possibly even five. But that goal now seems increasingly remote, and there is an emerging consensus among political analysts that the party’s best chance for capturing a Republican seat is the battle to succeed Representative Sherwood L. Boehlert, one of the most liberal Republicans in Congress, who is retiring.
At the same time, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee plans to spend roughly $50 million on advertisements for races around the country, according to Republican estimates. But none of that money has been set aside for New York races, except for Mr. Boehlert’s seat in the 24th District in the Utica area, according to Democrats involved in the races.
The shifting local fortunes for Democrats could have serious political implications beyond New York. The party needs 15 seats to take control of the House. Even one victory in New York would be an important step toward that goal, giving the Democrats a cushion if they lose elsewhere in the nation.
The situation in New York is particularly surprising given the state’s reputation as a Democratic bastion. National and state party officials have spent months trying to create buzz around those races. But Republican incumbents, in New York and elsewhere, have been trying to shift the focus of the races away from hostility toward the Bush administration to more local concerns, like the potential loss of federal aid to their districts if they lose veteran congressmen.
Representative John E. Sweeney, one of the Republican incumbents, said the situation in New York demonstrated the drawbacks of the Democratic effort to present the midterm elections as a national referendum on President Bush and the policies of Republican leaders in Washington. “Congressional races are local,” he said. “There can be superseding events like Watergate. But those are rare. These races really are a referendum on the people running.”
In addition — and perhaps most important — the incumbents in New York are benefiting from being in legislative districts drawn to keep the Republican incumbents in place.
The Democrats’ inability to gain traction can be measured in the fund-raising disparity between them and Republicans, and is reflected in interviews with strategists in both parties and independent analysts. The national party assesses the strengths of a campaign according to several factors, including the ability of candidates to raise money on their own and their standing in polls...
In the meantime, he (Charlie Rangel) said, the unusually high level of public unhappiness with the direction of the nation works in favor of Democratic challengers, as long as they have enough money to keep their campaigns running. “It is just as important as money,” he added...
Independent analysts say that several factors make New York an especially difficult place for challengers. The state has 29 House seats, and 9 are held by Republicans, most in upstate areas where districts have been drawn to give Republicans a significant edge, countering increasing Democratic enrollment in the state...
Democrats say there is plenty of time for challengers to close any gaps. To that end, one prominent liberal group, MoveOn.org Political Action, is running advertisements attacking Mr. Sweeney and John R. Kuhl Jr., a first-term Republican from the Corning area, as part of a national campaign to help Democratic challengers who are in so-called second-tier races: contests that have the potential to become competitive but are not considered competitive yet...
(edited for length)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Shifting fortunes for Democrats? Gee, this fall was going to be doom and gloom for Republicans, what happened? Is it because politics are local, Republicans are better at strategizing, have more money, redistricting? All of the above? Is it just that Democrats have nothing better to offer besides "public unhappiness"? Or will it still be doomsday for Republicans? |
|
Your Options |
Additional Options are only visible when you login! !
|
|
|
|
