WASHINGTON -- A Republican operative reviewing a map of open seats and conservative districts now held by Democrats calls the Mid-South "ground zero" for GOP pickups in the House of Representatives this fall.
To academics surveying the same scene, the analysis seems to hold up. Long-held Democratic seats may fall this year to a historic trend that has steamrollered the South for Republicans since Richard Nixon unwrapped his "Southern Strategy."
Outside of Memphis -- whose 9th District seat will likely be held by a solid blue Democrat whether former Mayor Willie W. Herenton or incumbent Steve Cohen wins the August primary -- the capital of the Mid-South looks to some experts to be surrounded by a wave of blue districts turning Republican red.
Rhodes College professor Marcus Pohlmann said the old Yellow Dog or Blue Dog seats Republicans are targeting represent "the last gasp of the old Roosevelt Coalition."
"Some of those seats are holdovers from an old era and were probably due to go red anyway, eventually," Pohlman said.
Republican National Congressional Committee spokesman Andy Sere, besides calling the region "ground zero," said that part of the impetus comes from policies being pursued by the Obama administration in a region that places a premium on "traditional values."
"But another part of it is a historical trend that's been a long time coming, but I think Obama has accelerated the pace," Sere said.
Today, Democrats represent 11 of the 17 seats in the three-state Mid-South House delegation. If the pundits are right, come November, the Republicans will pick up five formerly Democratic seats and flip the 11-of-17 margin.
The influential Cook Political Report last week said the 8th District seat held by retiring U.S. Rep. John Tanner, D-Tenn., which includes northern parts of Shelby County, is a "toss up," and the First District seat held by retiring Marion Berry, D-Ark., which includes the counties just across the Mississippi River, is "leaning Republican" in November.
Political scientist Charlie Cook also sees the seat held by U.S. Rep. Travis Childers, D-Miss., which includes DeSoto and Marshall counties, a "toss- up."
Sere said the Memphis area is the only place in the country with three seats likely to turn from blue to red in the same media market.
In addition to those three Democrat seats possibly changing hands, Cook places Arkansas' 2nd Congressional District, now held by Democrat Vic Snyder, and Tennessee's 6th District, held by retiring Democrat Bart Gordon, also in the "leaning Republican" column.
Tennessee Democratic Party Chairman Chip Forrester believes the prognosticators are misreading key elements of the races shaping up in Tanner's and Gordon's districts. He points out that Democratic state Sen. Roy Herron of Dresden, seeking Tanner's 8th District seat, is a minister and country lawyer who already represents nine of the district's 19 counties and has been a prodigious fundraiser despite Tanner's sudden December withdrawal.
Forrester said pundits look at Gordon's Middle Tennessee district and see the 2008 performance of John McCain and Sarah Palin. But they overlook Democratic Gov. Phil Bredesen's and Harold Ford Jr.'s solid performances there, he said. Forrester added that college professor Greg Rabidoux, running against what he called "an extreme right-wing fringe" candidate and "mouthpiece" in U.S. Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., is doing well in the 7th District, which stretches into eastern Shelby County.
Yet, The Rothenberg Political Report by Stuart Rothenberg last week put Gordon's seat near the top of his "Dangerous Dozen" likely to change hands.
While Rothenberg says Herron, the Democratic candidate for Tanner's seat, is a strong fundraiser, "being a longtime Democratic state legislator may be more of a liability than an asset in 2010."
That's because the GOP establishment in Washington has rallied around the gospel-singing Crockett County farmer Stephen Fincher for Tanner's seat and have touted his ability to raise money. Fincher will be challenged by Shelby County Commissioner Dr. George S. Flinn Jr. and by Jackson Dr. Ronald H. Kirkland in what is likely to be a high-profile and expensive race for the open seat.
Forrester predicted a "bloody" GOP primary fight that could redound to Herron's benefit.
Childers' opponent, state Sen. Alan Nunnelee of Tupelo, has been a prodigious fundraiser but is being challenged by Henry Ross, the former mayor of Eupora, for the Republican nomination. A bruising Republican primary the last time around helped put Childers in the seat vacated by Roger Wicker when he was elevated to the U.S. Senate.
Mid-South Memories
Tigers vs. Temple - January 11, 2014
Notable deaths of 2013
Scripps Interactive Newspapers Group
Comments » 21
Bluff_City_View (Inactive) writes:
But why do they want to govern? The GOP wish our government was small enough to flush down the toilet. So why do they want to govern considering how much they dislike government. Right?
Midtowner writes:
Well, if you dislike gov't, would you want to leave it in the hands of those who would make it bigger and more interfering? Probably not.
So therefore, it's a matter of self-preservation the the republicans would want to govern.
However, once in power, it's difficult to tell the difference between the two parties. The both grow gov't ...
itsakram writes:
Neither party can be trusted. They run on a platform and tell you all these wonderful things, and in the end do what they want once they are there. Come next cycle, the other party wins, they do the same thing and so continues the cycle. Government grows and becomes more bloated and they do things that cannot be possibly afforded in the long run. Let the trillion dollar deficit continue to grow under the watch of Repubs and Dems. When will we wake up?
For those who are wondering, I'm a Libertarian.
1American writes:
You're too dramatic. Of course the GOP wants to govern. Government is like "stoplights" and speed zones, the proper speed, the proper number of lights, properly timed and administered assist the millions of people in getting from point A to point B in their lives.
#1. Without rules or control (no government at all) and the people go berserk.
#2. Too many lights and controls allowing drivers to only go to certain destinations, on designated roads, in government designated cars, (Democrats) oppresses and restricts everyone beyond belief.
#3. What this country needs is limited control with freedom to choose one's destination, route, and method of transportation. This best describes the conservative GOP approach.
Thereitis writes:
Both parties are socialist. Republicans tend to be facist, meaning they rely heavily on business to lead in government redistribution programs. Under Obama the Democrats have been exposed for more communist style leanings. In fact, at times almost Bolshevik, meaning they insist on doing things that clearly will not work but forge ahead due to their ideological socialist views of equality. There are some from each party that do not fit that mold but ultimately have to vote yes or no on legislation crafted by either socialist flavor.
I wish we had a real choice in how America moved forward. That being said, I clearly don't like the Bolshevik flavor. As for the GOP being back in power...ug!
Euphemism writes:
Here, please allow me:
Obama da da da da Obama is despicable and wicked bah bah Obama is Chairman Mao bah bahn bah Obama Hussein Osama bah bah Obama cooks and eats human children bah bah bah bah.
This message brought to you by the intellectual wing of the Newly Ascended Conservatives. <tm>
Euphemism writes:
Except that government balloons, becoming far more intrusive and expensive, each and very time Republicans are in charge of it. Look it up:
Nixon
Reagan
Bush41
Bush43
And the next one will too.
If you want behemoth government insinuating itself into every corner of your life and wallet, vote GOP.
repubnomore writes:
Agreed both parties have gotten out of control. That's why in District 7, I am voting for Greg Rabidoux, not a Washington insider and extremist like Marsha Blackburn. The only way to change the tone in Washington is to send ONE of US to Congress who will represent ALL of US. Rabidoux, I hear, is a moderate with grassroots support. Works for me.
Santino writes:
Democrats have done the Republican party a great favor. A year of ineptitude and confusion has exposed their true agenda. America is not ready for the far left agenda and Obama and Pelosi don't get it.
Even now, after the majority of Americans have rejected a pi$$ poor health bill, the far left is trying to complete it behind closed doors.
Obama turned his back on the working man, except for those whose unions contributed large amounts to the Democrat coffers, in order to force the health bill down our throats.
He has turned his back on his campaign promises of, transparency and no more business as usual. Look at all the professional organizations and unions who really controlled the direction of the health bill. And how about his promise to bar lobbyist from the White House. Maybe he meant no lobbyist, except if they had Democrat connections.
Santino writes:
Your problem with the chart is it should be done by congresssional control rather than by president. Presidents suggest budgets, congress makes them. In most cases except Obama, presidents didn't have the power to override congressional vetoes and don't have line item veto power. Obama doesn't have line item veto, but he does have significant majorities in both houses.
That is a good try if you are one of the sheep and not a thinker.
By the way, Reagan was president during the biggest economic expansion in the HISTORY of our country. Do you want to give him credit for that?
Santino writes:
Try this site Mickey, even you may understand it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5yxFt...
Midtowner writes:
Two flaws in your argument.
1. As others have pointed out, the democrats were in control of Congress during much of those years and that is where the budgets are actually formed.
2. The democrats launched most of the social programs that are eating up our budget now no matter who is in charge.
Both major parties share the blame.
Midtowner writes:
I don't disagree that both parties expand gov't and have socialist tendencies.
I will disagree on your use of and characterization of the term fascist and fascism. So-called "progressives" (I think the more proper term should be "regressives" but I digress), have been running from the fact that they were enamored with Mussolini and fascism pre-WWII. Fascism, communism, and socialism all have common roots and are, in fact, just variations of each other.
hectorspector writes:
Civics 101:
"All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives"
The constitution is not a long document. Please spend a few minutes and educate yourselves on our system of government. That way you won't look stupid in public.
It is truly amazing that our republic has survived as long as it has with average ignorance of the modern voter.
Which party was in charge of the house for forty years before the 94 revolution which turned the tide on the deficit?
Santino writes:
Again, Mickey, you fail to comprehend. It clearly states 'all numbers are adjusted for inflation.' That is the only way you can logically weigh the differences.
Try again.
Euphemism writes:
"2. The democrats launched most of the social programs that are eating up our budget now no matter who is in charge."
Did they? Here are the small-government Republicans at work keeping the government out of your life:
--EPA
--OSHA
--Affirmative action
--War on Drugs
--Intensive gun control efforts (yes, Nixon and Reagan in CA)
--Fiat currency
--Wage and price controls
--Americans with With Disabilities Act
--Ever-expanding middle class entitlements
--Intensive Federal meddling in education, NCLB
--Agricultural welfare
--Prescription drug benefit
Democrats may well be worse on balance, but only on balance. If you let these people get power again they will do what they've always done before. The same thing Gingrich did. Republican party is a big government party. Face it. If you want smaller government you are going to have to look to the libertarians because the conservatives will never, ever give it to you.
overtaxed writes:
If the Mid-South counties going red helps remove Comrade Pelosi from her Speaker of the House Chair, so be it! I would love to be the one to give her and Reid a swift kick in their rumps out the door!!
Midtowner writes:
I don't disagree with you ... You've made my point. I think, with the exception of the prescription drug benefit which was a repulocrat congress and a republocrat president, that all the rest were bi-partisan in some nature.
Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum
Yanceybryan writes:
They do not call him chairman Mao merely that his policies and the policies of those who surround them are similar that of Mao and marxism then the constitution.
synapse writes:
There is probably a "republican operative" in Topeka, Kansas telling the local news paper that their area is "ground zero" for a republican takeover.
There is probably some "republican operative" in Joe-Bob Delaware seething with the news that Delaware is "ground zero" for the rebirth of the republican party.
puh-leez.
Euphemism writes:
And that sort of hyperbolic nonsense is why you guys will always be relegated to the fringe. Obama is not a leftist or a socialist or a Marxist. In any other G7 country he would be regarded as quite conservative. It is hard to understand how you can say things like that unless you are really not acquainted with socialist thought beyond what Fox television tells you.
There is a lot to disagree with in the government today but this mindless venom is really not doing anybody any good.
Want to participate in the conversation? Become a subscriber today. Subscribers can read and comment on any story, anytime. Non-subscribers will only be able to view comments on select stories.