Dean: If we don't end this war, Democrats could lose power.

[MODU]

I think that is a false assuption on Deans behalf.  If the Democrats had a major landslide victory in 2006 as the Republicans did in 1994, then I could agree that the Democrats were actually elected to end the war.  However, many of the seats lost by Republicans were due to incumbants self-destructing during their own terms rather than a national tidal change.  Now, he is right though that they might lose in 2008, because so far, all they have done is spin their wheels since taking over.  They need to accomplish something, and major, in order to prove themselves to the public.

[MODU]

I think that is a false assuption on Deans behalf.  If the Democrats had a major landslide victory in 2006 as the Republicans did in 1994, then I could agree that the Democrats were actually elected to end the war.  However, many of the seats lost by Republicans were due to incumbants self-destructing during their own terms rather than a national tidal change. 

Oh my God, how can you still be in denial about last year? The Allen vs. Webb race was not the entire election. How do you explain the Democratic landslides in Indiana and New Hampshire? There were no major gaffes there. There was a 6 seat pick-up in the Senate, 30+ in the House and both switched control! If thats not a national tidal wave I don't know what is.

If you happen to see what I said, I said "many of the seats" not "all of the seats," as well as "during their terms" not "during their campaigns."  And that doesn't include the few cases where the incumbants were not running.  I wasn't discussing any particular race.  Thank you.

[MODU]

How do you explain the defeats of Jeb Bradley and Jim Leach?

Bradley was an upset, and since I am not too familiar with his district, I can't give you the details on his election.  Leach's was a Republican from a very Democratic district.  With that being the case, it was understandable that he was pro-choice, against the 2003 tax cuts, and voted against the Iraq war.  He barely won in 2002 (4%), so his loss by an even smaller margin (2%) in 2006 wasn't very surprising.  The only surprise was that Loebsack was a write-in candidate.

[MODU]

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.