In both cases, the winner barely spent anything in money. Leach's 2002 opponent was far more well-funded and stronger than Loebsack, who was a no-name professor. The whole reason they won was because of the national wave. Upsets like that don't happen in non-wave years.
Hell, look at my old Rep. He won with over 60% in 2004, was not caught in any real scandals, and his opponent was a high school geography teacher from my town. And he lost.
And that still doesn't take away anything from what I originally said.
It doesn't really matter. You're original assessment was still wrong.
Anyway, I disagree with Dean. The Dems won't lose the House for years and Iraq, according to polls, wasn't what elected them.
