Posted on 11/01/2007 10:32:56 AM PDT by seanmerc
The chairmen of the House and Senate Democratic campaign committees sounded differing notes of optimism on Wednesday, just more than a year away from what they say will be a second straight election on the offensive.
Speaking to reporters at a briefing, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) was effusive, saying the 2008 election could be “a seminal election” on par with only a few in the history of the country. The two-cycle chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee said the results could “change the tectonic plates of politics.”
Schumer said he expects to hold all 12 seats that Senate Democrats have to defend in 2008 and to pick up a good share of the 22 that Republicans are trying to hold, expanding on his party’s slim 51-49 majority in that chamber.
Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.), with a tougher map in front of him as chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), struck a more measured tone. But he insisted that his committee will play offense on a wide field and that the committee already has strong challengers in 40 races.
In contrast to Schumer, Van Hollen tempered expectations to some extent, saying the cycle after a “wave” election is historically a difficult one and that the DCCC has to “beat history” after gaining 30 seats in 2006.
“I think the big story on the House side this election is that we’re not just trying to consolidate our gains,” he said. “We are very much on offense.”
Schumer and Van Hollen repeatedly insisted that the Democratic Party is still the party of change and said the voters still believe in it to effect that change, despite an inability so far to end the war in Iraq and lift Congress’s very low approval ratings.
Republicans said the Democrats have forfeited the change mantle in less than a year in power. They pointed to a number of so-called “failures” and “broken promises,” including not clearing any appropriations bills thus far and failing to live up to their pledges on ethics reform.
“One year ago, voters placed their expectations on the shoulders of congressional Democrats, and they’ve failed to deliver,” said a spokeswoman for the National Republican Congressional Committee, Jessica Boulanger. “Democrats’ inability to get anything accomplished, coupled with their growing list of broken campaign promises, has left the American people exasperated with this majority.”
Schumer and Van Hollen insisted that Democrats are trying to make change and are succeeding on some counts, while President Bush and Republicans have thwarted them on others, including embryonic stem cell research and an expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP).
They also addressed another line of attack from Republicans: that the party’s presidential front-runner, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), would hurt candidates in more conservative areas of the country. House Democrats in particular hold a number of seats in districts that have gone convincingly for Republicans in presidential contests.
“Whoever is the Democratic nominee, our candidates around the country will be letting people know where they agree with the positions articulated by the nominee and where they disagree,” Van Hollen said. “We have lots of people who will take different positions on certain issues.”
Schumer, who has endorsed Clinton, noted that she won over rural upstate New York voters who initially were opposed to her during her Senate campaigns. He said he expected independents and even Republicans to come around to her candidacy.
Schumer suggested that President Bush would have more of an impact on the race, despite his term expiring in January 2009. He said Democrats’ strategy of tying Republicans to Bush can continue to work.
Van Hollen assured, “George Bush and his legacy will be on the ballot in 2008.”
Schumer’s contention about a wholesale shift beneath the surface of the political landscape represents an ambitious forecast, even for somebody in as rosy a situation as he appears to be.
Senate Democrats have a growing field of opportunities due to GOP retirements and have built a significant edge in cash and candidates in the first year of the 2008 cycle. Some have even begun talking about a filibuster-proof 60-seat majority.
Schumer went so far as to compare the election to the 1932 and 1980 contests. In 1932, Franklin Delano Roosevelt led the Democrats out of the minority, and they wound up holding control of Congress for decades. In 1980, Ronald Reagan’s election helped Republicans gain 12 Senate seats and dozens of House seats.
“We’re about at the tail end of the Ronald Reagan era, where his ideas — fresh and, even as a Democrat, I’d say, many of them needed at the time — have just lost steam, lost resonance,” Schumer said.
A spokeswoman for the National Republican Senatorial Committee, Rebecca Fisher, said Schumer is missing the point.
“What Democrats fail to mention is that we have one year to go for voters to see their massive tax increases to pay for their obscene spending habits — something that will ultimately benefit Republicans next November,” Fisher said.
After what they did to Michael Anthony, I don’t care what they declare!
Bush the Elder killed the Reagan Era.
And they are talking about this now because? Seems way out of place and just a leftist puff piece.
Maybe Schumer's just a better BS artist.
Did Chuckie happen to declare his stance on Spitz’s illegal licenses plan? While he was spewing forth fantasy and all that. The NY senators should simply not be allowed to speak before the press without having to first address the most palpable issue for their state. The MSM should stop shilling and do their job.
Chuckie never met a microphone or a camera he didn’t like.
Perhaps the only way for conservativism to make a comback would be to allow jerks like Schumer and Hillary run America to the ground.
President Reagan left office nearly 20 years ago. Why are they still talk about his “era?” When he left, Democrats controlled both houses of Congress. Schumer’s comment is just a little weird I think.
It only took two posts, I'm impressed.
Gotta sooooth the base ya know. It’s all about feeeelings.
Schumer thinks that any military action against Iran, would deflate the already low approval ratings of Bush even further. Thats why he is so giddy. Keep in mind earlier this year, he was giddy about a troop withdrawal by Thanksgiving.
““What Democrats fail to mention is that we have one year to go for voters to see their massive tax increases to pay for their obscene spending habits — something that will ultimately benefit Republicans next November,” Fisher said”
As if the pubs can claim being the party of fiscal restraint.
We’ll see, Senator Putzhead.
I sense another “Dewey Wins” moment, here!
“Perhaps the only way for conservativism to make a comback would be to allow jerks like Schumer and Hillary run America to the ground.”
Perhaps a necessary step, given the ignorance of the electorate.
My older, wiser brother calls this scenario the Popping the Zit strategy. I believe he first deployed this term when the murderous scum, Ted Kennedy was running for President.
Much, much too often these days our "conservative" politicians do the opposite, revealing the shallow and self-serving nature of their own beliefs and motivations.
It is for the benefit of their discouraged base.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.