Democrats take high-profile Republican district
Sun Mar 9, 2008 10:43am EDT

By Michael Conlon

CHICAGO (Reuters) - A Democrat captured on Saturday an Illinois U.S.
House of Representatives seat that had been a Republican stronghold, in
a symbolic blow to President George W. Bush's party ahead of November
elections.

Returns showed physicist and businessman Bill Foster beating dairy owner
Jim Oberweis by 52 percent to 48 percent of the vote in the district
that had been held by former House Speaker Dennis Hastert for more than
two decades.

Democrats already control both houses of the Congress with a 30-seat
edge in the House so Foster's win does not affect the balance of power,
simply adding a seat to that majority. All House seats and part of the
Senate, as well as the presidency, are at stake in the November general
elections.

Hastert retired in December, setting up Saturday's special election for
the balance of his term, which runs through this calendar year and into
January when the new U.S. Congress will be seated. Oberweis, 61, and
Foster, 52, will also face off in November for a full two-year term.

While the area has been a Republican stronghold for years, redistricting
brought geographic changes and population shifts including more
Hispanics and younger suburban families that changed its make-up. The
2008 edition of the Almanac of American Politics rated the district as
"a tough one for Democrats to win but not impossible."

Congressional campaign committees from both parties poured hundreds of
thousands of dollars into the contest.

The conservative Hastert was replaced as speaker in January 2007 by
Nancy Pelosi, a liberal Democrat from California, after the Democrats
took control of Congress in the November 2006 congressional elections.

On Mar 9, 11:24*am, HK wrote:


While the area has been a Republican stronghold for years, redistricting
brought geographic changes and population shifts including more
Hispanics and younger suburban families that changed its make-up. The
2008 edition of the Almanac of American Politics rated the district as
"a tough one for Democrats to win but not impossible."

Yeah, in a red state it would be called cheating. In a blue state, it
is a valid election tool, right behind voter fraud... Like the
William Jefferson issue, Corzine in Jersey, et' al', this is just
another open slap in the face of democracy. Disgraceful.. All those
voters, cheated out of their vioce to fill another democrats pockets...

wrote:
On Mar 9, 11:24 am, HK wrote:

While the area has been a Republican stronghold for years, redistricting
brought geographic changes and population shifts including more
Hispanics and younger suburban families that changed its make-up. The
2008 edition of the Almanac of American Politics rated the district as
"a tough one for Democrats to win but not impossible."

Yeah, in a red state it would be called cheating. In a blue state, it
is a valid election tool, right behind voter fraud... Like the
William Jefferson issue, Corzine in Jersey, et' al', this is just
another open slap in the face of democracy. Disgraceful.. All those
voters, cheated out of their vioce to fill another democrats pockets...


I'm sorry, but I cannot follow what you have posted.

HK wrote:
Democrats take high-profile Republican district
Sun Mar 9, 2008 10:43am EDT

By Michael Conlon

CHICAGO (Reuters) - A Democrat captured on Saturday an Illinois U.S.
House of Representatives seat that had been a Republican stronghold, in
a symbolic blow to President George W. Bush's party ahead of November
elections.

Why no link to the article? Are you doing you usual "edits" to these
articles you cut and paste?

BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
Democrats take high-profile Republican district
Sun Mar 9, 2008 10:43am EDT

By Michael Conlon

CHICAGO (Reuters) - A Democrat captured on Saturday an Illinois U.S.
House of Representatives seat that had been a Republican stronghold,
in a symbolic blow to President George W. Bush's party ahead of
November elections.

Why no link to the article? Are you doing you usual "edits" to these
articles you cut and paste?


My edits? Hehehe. Yeah. I "edited" the Reuters article: in reality, the
wookie won.

On Mar 9, 12:13*pm, wrote:
On Mar 9, 11:24*am, HK wrote:



While the area has been a Republican stronghold for years, redistricting
brought geographic changes and population shifts including more
Hispanics and younger suburban families that changed its make-up. The
2008 edition of the Almanac of American Politics rated the district as
"a tough one for Democrats to win but not impossible."

Yeah, in a red state it would be called cheating. In a blue state, it
is a valid election tool, right behind voter fraud... *Like the
William Jefferson issue, Corzine in Jersey, et' al', this is just
another open slap in the face of democracy. Disgraceful.. All those
voters, cheated out of their vioce to fill another democrats pockets...

Harry claims that he's found some much better newsgroups than
rec.boats. One would wonder what he's still doing here.

On Mar 9, 12:22*pm, HK wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 9, 11:24 am, HK wrote:

While the area has been a Republican stronghold for years, redistricting
brought geographic changes and population shifts including more
Hispanics and younger suburban families that changed its make-up. The
2008 edition of the Almanac of American Politics rated the district as
"a tough one for Democrats to win but not impossible."

Yeah, in a red state it would be called cheating. In a blue state, it
is a valid election tool, right behind voter fraud... *Like the
William Jefferson issue, Corzine in Jersey, et' al', this is just
another open slap in the face of democracy. Disgraceful.. All those
voters, cheated out of their vioce to fill another democrats pockets...

I'm sorry, but I cannot follow what you have posted.

Let me make it clear, if you redistrict in Texas, Tom Delay gets
thrown out, if you do in Ohio, it is just fine, you will be rewarded
accordingly. Like Jefferson.. It is the way of your party.

wrote:
On Mar 9, 12:22 pm, HK wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 9, 11:24 am, HK wrote:
While the area has been a Republican stronghold for years, redistricting
brought geographic changes and population shifts including more
Hispanics and younger suburban families that changed its make-up. The
2008 edition of the Almanac of American Politics rated the district as
"a tough one for Democrats to win but not impossible."
Yeah, in a red state it would be called cheating. In a blue state, it
is a valid election tool, right behind voter fraud... Like the
William Jefferson issue, Corzine in Jersey, et' al', this is just
another open slap in the face of democracy. Disgraceful.. All those
voters, cheated out of their vioce to fill another democrats pockets...
I'm sorry, but I cannot follow what you have posted.

Let me make it clear, if you redistrict in Texas, Tom Delay gets
thrown out, if you do in Ohio, it is just fine, you will be rewarded
accordingly. Like Jefferson.. It is the way of your party.


Delay was not "thrown out," and the reasons for his elected official
political demise went way, way beyond the Texas redistricting scandal.

On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 10:27:42 -0700, justwaitafrekinminute wrote:


Let me make it clear, if you redistrict in Texas, Tom Delay gets thrown
out, if you do in Ohio, it is just fine, you will be rewarded
accordingly. Like Jefferson.. It is the way of your party.

If I'm not mistaken, redistricting is mandated by law, one man, one
vote. There will be lots of redistricting going on after the 2010
census. It gets dicey when the party in power's only criteria is to
maintain that power, but both parties are guilty. One of the complaints
about the Texas redistricting, was that it wasn't done because of a
recent census, but because the Republicans had just taken power.

On Mar 9, 2:21*pm, wrote:
On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 10:27:42 -0700, justwaitafrekinminute wrote:
Let me make it clear, if you redistrict in Texas, Tom Delay gets thrown
out, if you do in Ohio, it is just fine, you will be rewarded
accordingly. Like Jefferson.. It is the way of your party.

If I'm not mistaken, redistricting is mandated by law, one man, one
vote. *There will be lots of redistricting going on after the 2010
census. *It gets dicey when the party in power's only criteria is to
maintain that power, but both parties are guilty. One of the complaints
about the Texas redistricting, was that it wasn't done because of a
recent census, but because the Republicans had just taken power. *

And why do you think it was done in Ohio? The only difference is how
the two partys find themselves accountable.. or in the case of the
democratic party....