Out of Rahm's selected 22 races, all except one candidate were pro war.
Furthermore, only 8 of his candidates won. Keep that in mind as you run across the ever increasingly testimonials to Rahm Emanuel, Genius. [In the NY Sun, the quote actually reads "a stroke of Rovian genius." For chrissakes.]
The Dems picked up 29 seats, so it could be argued that Rahm's maneuvering hurt some Dem races. Doing some simple math, 21 of those Dem victories had nothing to do with Rahm & the DNCC. If more resources had been spent on other competitive and narrowly lost contests, defeats might have been turned into victories (see MyDD).
For instance, a lot of Democratic cash and political capital was spent on Tammy Duckworth in Illinois' 6th CD. Tammy Duckworth is pro Iraq War. Sounds a lot like Bush's position. (I'll concede that it was a cheap shot and she must have contrary views to the President, but the American public is making it very clear that they want OUT of Iraq.)
Here is an even better example of Emanuel betting on the wrong pony (and again, citing John Walsh's CounterPunch article):
In California's 11th CD primary, Emanuel backed the prowar Steven Filson who lost to the antiwar candidate, Jerry McNerney, who went on to win in the general election.Think McNerney is going to be invited to Emanuel's office often?
The boys running the Democratic Party are just as disinterested in what Americans want as the Republicans. Emanuel didn't hestitate to claim credit for the Dems' sweeping wins in House and Senate, but Americans were voting AGAINST White House policies and Emanuel relentlessly picked candidates who SUPPORT those policies.