Scandals Alone Could Cost Republicans Their House Majority

sinewave

Avenger
Joined
Feb 26, 2004
Messages
14,141
Reaction score
0
Points
31
washingtonpost.com said:
Scandals Alone Could Cost Republicans Their House Majority

By Jonathan Weisman and Jeffrey H. Birnbaum
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, November 2, 2006; A01

Indictments, investigations and allegations of wrongdoing have helped put at least 15 Republican House seats in jeopardy, enough to swing control to the Democrats on Tuesday even before the larger issues of war, economic unease and President Bush are invoked.

With just five days left before Election Day, allegations are springing up like brushfires. Four GOP House seats have been tarred by lobbyist Jack Abramoff's influence-peddling scandal. Five have been adversely affected by then-Rep. Mark Foley's unseemly contacts with teenage male House pages. The remaining half a dozen or so could turn on controversies including offshore tax dodging, sexual misconduct and shady land deals.

Not since the House bank check-kiting scandal of the early 1990s have so many seats been affected by scandals, and not since the Abscam bribery cases of the 1970s have the charges been so serious. But this year's combination of breadth and severity may be unprecedented, suggested Julian E. Zelizer, a congressional historian at Boston University.

For more than a year, Democrats have tried to gain political advantage from what they called "a culture of corruption" in Republican-controlled Washington. Republican campaign officials insist the theme has not caught on with the public, but even they concede that many individual races have been hit hard.

"So many different kinds of scandals going on at the same time, that's pretty unique," Zelizer said. "There were scandals throughout the '70s, multiple scandals, but the number of stories now are almost overwhelming."

At least nine GOP seats have been affected by scandals and are highly vulnerable to Democratic takeover next week. Foley's abrupt resignation has jeopardized a Florida House district that had been on no one's radar screen. Under indictment and amid a swirl of ethics investigations, former House majority leader Tom DeLay (Tex.) resigned from Congress earlier this year, forcing Republicans to mount a long-shot write-in campaign for their chosen candidate. Rep. Robert W. Ney's guilty plea last month on corruption charges still hangs over the Ohio campaign of his would-be Republican successor, Joy Padgett, especially because Ney still has not resigned from Congress.

The GOP has all but abandoned longtime Rep. Curt Weldon (Pa.), as federal investigators examine charges that he steered lobbying contracts to his daughter. Weldon went on television yesterday with an ad featuring actors pleading, "Would you give a friend the benefit of the doubt? . . . Today, Curt Weldon needs our support."

Republican campaign strategists fear they have also lost the seat of Rep. Don Sherwood (Pa.), who has been dogged by the settlement of a lawsuit filed by a mistress who charged that Sherwood had throttled her.

Congress watchers once saw the swing seat of Rep. Rick Renzi (R-Ariz.) as a missed opportunity for Democrats. But now, as the U.S. attorney's office in Phoenix examines his role in a land deal for a business partner and political benefactor, Renzi's race with political neophyte Ellen Simon (D) has tightened.

Farther west, Rep. Jon Porter (R-Nev.) has had to contend with charges lodged last month by a longtime former aide, Jim Shepard, that the lawmaker made dozens of illegal fundraising calls from his congressional offices. And two reliably Republican districts in California are under assault by Democrats because Reps. Richard W. Pombo and John T. Doolittle have been linked to Abramoff, the lobbyist who pleaded guilty in January to fraud, tax evasion and conspiracy to bribe public officials.

Beyond those nine jeopardized GOP seats, four other Republicans have been tainted by the Foley page scandal. Rep. Thomas M. Reynolds (N.Y.) chose to issue a public apology after he admitted that he had known about inappropriate contact between Foley and a former page this spring. Democrats have repeatedly hit Rep. Deborah Pryce (Ohio), the House Republican Conference chairman, for inaction on the Foley matter. And Democrats have tried to hold two former members of the Page Board, Reps. Sue W. Kelly (N.Y.) and Heather A. Wilson (N.M.), accountable for Foley's actions.

Meanwhile, new allegations continue to spring up. Vern Buchanan, a Republican running for the Florida seat vacated by Rep. Katherine Harris (R), was the target of local media reports this week detailing his use of business entities in Caribbean tax havens to reduce levies on his auto dealerships. The Albany Times Union published an article yesterday charging that the wife of Rep. John E. Sweeney (R-N.Y.) called police late last year to report that her husband was "knocking her around" during a late-night argument.

And Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.), who made his name pushing campaign finance changes and governance reforms, was confronted with media reports alleging that a 2003 trip to Qatar -- partly funded by a group loosely tied to Abramoff -- had not been properly disclosed.

"The corruption issue plays in two ways: It contributes to the sour mood of the country and to the low job approval of Congress, and it particularly plays in races directly touched by allegations of scandal," said Republican pollster Whit Ayers. "And in those races, it plays a significant role."

House Democrats have had to deal with investigations of their own, involving Reps. William J. Jefferson (La.), Alan B. Mollohan (W.Va.) and Jane Harman (Calif.), but none of those cases have put Democratic seats in jeopardy.

In the Senate, a federal inquiry into Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) and his ties to a nonprofit community agency that paid him more than $300,000 in rent while receiving millions of dollars in federal assistance has provided his Republican challenger with a strong issue and has kept that race close. But the seat of Sen. Conrad Burns (R-Mont.) may be in even more jeopardy, primarily because of Burns's ties to Abramoff.

Recent polling suggests that the issue of corruption is beginning to stick. A CNN poll last month found that "half of all Americans believe most members of Congress are corrupt" and that "more than a third think their own representative is crooked."

And where the issue has hit directly, Democrats and their allies have been playing up charges to the hilt. Just yesterday, Christine Jennings, the Florida Democrat running for Harris's House seat, held a news conference to attack Buchanan's alleged offshore tax dodges.

Even the most peripheral contact with a scandal has not gone unnoticed. "Those that knew got to go," Albuquerque's Democratic mayor, Martin J. Chavez, thundered at a rally last month against New Mexico's Wilson, citing her role on the Page Board during Foley's misconduct. "Those that didn't know need to explain why they didn't."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/01/AR2006110103146_pf.html
 
Mr Sparkle said:
You Fool! You've Murdered Us All!!!!!!

I'll be honest, I just posted this article to because I wanted to rub the Republicans' faces in the fact that their party is indeed more corrupt currently than the Democrats and it may very well cost them their precious majority in the House. Ain't I a stinker?

Cue attacks from the right-wing.......now!
 
Kerry's dis at the troops will hurt democrats even more.
 
Fred_Fury said:
Kerry's dis at the troops will hurt democrats even more.

Hit on any Senate pages through IM lately, Fred? :)

jag
 
Fred_Fury said:
Kerry's dis at the troops will hurt democrats even more.


Pedophile vs Botched joke.


Yes, logic prevails!
 
Darthphere said:
Pedophile vs Botched joke.


Yes, logic prevails!

Logic doesn't dictate how people vote, emotion does more than anything.

The American people, despite all the stupid scandals, are likely going to stay pat, more or less because they care more about their security than holding anybody accountable.

Both parties have pretty much the same amount of corruptness. It's just that the Democrats aren't in power.
 
War Lord said:
Logic doesn't dictate how people vote, emotion does more than anything.

The American people, despite all the stupid scandals, are likely going to stay pat, more or less.

Both parties have pretty much the same amount of corruptness, it's just that the Democrats aren't in power.


Great, what does that have to do with my post you quoted.:huh:
 
Darthphere said:
Great, what does that have to do with my post you quoted.:huh:

I was just confirming your sarcasm as having some truth to it.
 
War Lord said:
Logic doesn't dictate how people vote, emotion does more than anything.

The American people, despite all the stupid scandals, are likely going to stay pat, more or less.

Both parties have pretty much the same amount of corruptness, it's just that the Democrats aren't in power.

no, look at the precentages. how many more republicans are rapped up in scandals compared to dems? you can't hide that fact. the article even states that there are more scnadals right now than there have been since the 70's. for all the talk about moral values by the republicans, it's obvious they don't practice what they preach.
 
You'd figure their policies alone would be enough to cost the Republicans the house majority, but hey, people are stupid. :o
 
Darthphere said:
Pedophile vs Botched joke.


Yes, logic prevails!

according to fox news that guy was a democrat, so I'll think of it like this... he was a democrat PRETENDING to be a republican. :cwink:
 
sinewave said:
no, look at the precentages. how many more republicans are rapped up in scandals compared to dems? you can't hide that fact. the article even states that there are more scnadals right now than there have been since the 70's. for all the talk about moral values by the republicans, it's obvious they don't practice what they preach.

Doesn't matter what the polls say. Remember 2004 when all the networks were ready to annouce Kerry winning, because the polls said he would?

It's more likely that the scandals won't have as much of an effect as you might like or the Republicans might deserve, but I'm guessing that because the Democrats haven't shown them as being strong on security and the dissing of the military, that the American people are choosing to stay pat.

If people's minds weren't on terrorism and security, and illegal immigration, it might be different.
 
Fred_Fury said:
according to fox news that guy was a democrat, so I'll think of it like this... he was a democrat PRETENDING to be a republican. :cwink:
Are you a person who hopes to be taken seriously?:huh:
 
War Lord said:
Doesn't matter what the polls say. Remember 2004 when all the networks were ready to annouce Kerry winning, because the polls said he would?

It's more likely that the scandals won't have as much of an effect as you might like or the Republicans might deserve, but I'm guessing that because the Democrats haven't shown them as being strong on security and the dissing of the military, that the American people are choosing to stay pat.

If people's minds weren't on terrorism, it might be different.
Don't forget about the electronic voting machines that provide "absolutely no paper trail" for ballots casted. Those I'm sure are going to work wonders for the Republicans. I also wouldn't count ChoicePoint out of meddling with this election like they've done in the past. Hooray for democracy :whatever:
 
Fred_Fury said:
according to fox news that guy was a democrat, so I'll think of it like this... he was a democrat PRETENDING to be a republican. :cwink:

yeah, tell me that wasn't intentional. :rolleyes:
 
Oh said:
Don't forget about the electronic voting machines that provide "absolutely no paper trail" for ballots casted. Those I'm sure are going to work wonders for the Republicans. I also wouldn't count ChoicePoint out of meddling with this election like they've done in the past. Hooray for democracy :whatever:

You mean the ones that Chavez owns?
 
War Lord said:
Doesn't matter what the polls say. Remember 2004 when all the networks were ready to annouce Kerry winning, because the polls said he would?

It's more likely that the scandals won't have as much of an effect as you might like or the Republicans might deserve, but I'm guessing that because the Democrats haven't shown them as being strong on security and the dissing of the military, that the American people are choosing to stay pat.

If people's minds weren't on terrorism and security, and illegal immigration, it might be different.

i didn't mention polls. i said percentages.

the dems haven't dissed the military, you're thinking of the republicans.

and why are people's minds on terrorism? because the GOP keeps fearmongering about it.
 
sinewave said:
i didn't mention polls. i said percentages.

the dems haven't dissed the military, you're thinking of the republicans.

and why are people's minds on terrorism? because the GOP keeps fearmongering about it.

Most American's impressions of the Democrats is that they aren't strong on protecting America. Whether true or not, that is the impression and the Democrats haven't done much to change this impression.

If people didn't believe that terrorism was a threat to them, the GOP couldn't do anything to make them believe it was.
 
I expect a very slim Democratic majority and their wins will less than what the party expected. However, I wouldn't be surprised if the Republicans managed to keep their majority.
 
War Lord said:
Most American's impressions of the Democrats is that they aren't strong on protecting America. Whether true or not, that is the impression and the Democrats haven't done much to change this impression.

If people didn't believe that terrorism was a threat to them, the GOP couldn't do anything to make them believe it was.

sadly, it's true that the dems haven't taken advantage of all these scandals and come out with a clear stance on what their fighting for. on the other hand, why would someone vote for corruption? people are sick of the war and i think when you combine that with all the scandals, it'll come out in the dems favor. it's no good for anyone having the government controlled by one party for this long. there aren't enough check and balances that way and that's how you end up with all this corruption. just like what happened in canada with the liberal party.
 
sinewave said:
sadly, it's true that the dems haven't taken advantage of all these scandals and come out with a clear stance on what their fighting for. on the other hand, why would someone vote for corruption? people are sick of the war and i think when you combine that with all the scandals, it'll come out in the dems favor. it's no good for anyone having the government controlled by one party for this long. there aren't enough check and balances that way and that's how you end up with all this corruption. just like what happened in canada with the liberal party.

Because people are likely going to choose safety and security above all else.

It might be different if so many Dems were able to convince the American people that they would protect them.

If you had a corrupt police chief, would you be fighting to remove him in the middle of a crime wave if his replacements didn't seem to care?
 
Fred_Fury said:
Kerry's dis at the troops will hurt democrats even more.
Hardly...........Reps can try to spin that however they want. People are SICK of them and some of them had better grab some boxes to pack up:word:

Its funny to me how a guy that hid out in the Air Force Nat'l guard has the nerve to say anything to a combat vet.
 
comicgirl said:
Hardly...........Reps can try to spin that however they want. People are SICK of them and some of them had better grab some boxes to pack up:word:

Its funny to me how a guy that hid out in the Air Force Nat'l guard has the nerve to say anything to a combat vet.

Kerry was a combat vet?

Wow, you learn something new every day.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"