Although you can read Sasha Abramsky’s entire profile of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi that graces the current cover of SF Weekly, the piece instantly loses credibility in the sixth paragraph. “Most polls suggest that [Democrats] will do pretty badly in November,” writes Abramsky, “especially in conservative areas such as the Deep South, where Democratic congressional candidates made considerable inroads in 2006 and 2008 [my emphasis].” That’s just patently false. Democrats won back Congress in 2006 (and expanded their majority in 2008), despite losing the South badly – and in fact can credit their current majority to a “non-Southern” strategy. Because the rest of the 4,716-word article focuses on how much Pelosi’s political destiny hinges on the November elections, it’s hard to take the rest of it seriously (although in fairness, I read the whole thing.) Democrats might still lose in November, but not because of the South.

Let’s look at the facts here. In 2006, Democrats won 31 House seats – more than twice the number they needed to win a majority. Only four of those seats were in the South.

One was in South Texas, a Latino-majority district where the immigration issue ended a Republican’s career. Two other victories were the product of scandal-plagued incumbents (Tom DeLay’s seat in Texas, and Mark Foley’s seat in Florida), and both seats flipped back Republican in 2008. In only one district – Heath Shuler of North Carolina – can we truly say that a Southern Blue Dog conservative flipped a seat blue.

Without the South, Democrats would have won 27 seats in 2006 – still enough to make Nancy Pelosi the House Speaker.

Okay, let’s look at 2008 – where Democrats expanded their majority by another 21 seats. Only six of those were from the South. One was in Florida, where progressive hero Alan Grayson is anything but a Blue Dog – and whose exalted status among the netroots will help him prevail. Another was in suburban Virginia (which the McCain campaign claimed is not real Virginia), leaving us with just four seats – one in Alabama, one in North Carolina, and two in Virginia – where you can say that Democrats made “considerable inroads.”

Oh, and Democrats lost a Louisiana seat in 2008 – while also losing the Tom DeLay and Mark Foley seats they had picked up in 2006. That almost cancelled out those gains.

How did Democrats win in 2006, and expand their majority in 2008? By knocking off Republicans in the Northeast, mobilizing Latinos in the West and making a few inroads in the Midwest. After the 2008 elections, Beyond Chron did a good analysis of where Democrats picked up seats. It was decidedly a “non-Southern” strategy – and gave Democrats a mandate to enact a progressive legislative agenda, because that is who elected them.

This year, Nancy Pelosi would need to lose 39 seats to end her Democratic majority. Of the Southern conservative seats she should be worried about where Democrats “made in-roads” in 2006 and 2008, only five of them exist. It should also be noted that many of these Congressmen – Heath Shuler and Bobby Bright, for example – are anti-progressive Blue Dogs who have stymied much of the Democratic Party’s agenda. Losing those seats could be a godsend for Democrats – giving them a “leaner and meaner” majority that can leave the reckless obstruction to Republicans, who are relegated to a permanent minority.

And while Democrats play defense in November, remember that House elections are also about offense. In California, eight House Republicans represent districts Obama carried – and most have a serious Democratic challenger. Palm Springs Mayor Steve Pougnet has outraised Mary Bono-Mack, Irvine Councilmember Beth Krom is taking on “birther” John Campbell, Dan Lungren is getting a run from Dr. Ami Bera, Ken Calvert has a rematch from his 2008 opponent Bill Hedrick, and Francine Busby is again challenging Brian Bilbray. Even if Democrats lose a few seats in the South, they can compensate by winning over here.

Of course, I don’t blame the SF Weekly for getting its facts wrong – they were just repeating false conventional wisdom. Immediately after the 2006 elections, pundits started to lie about how Democrats won Congress because they were ran “conservative” candidates. Never mind that Vermont elected a Socialist and Ohio gave us populist Sherrod Brown – it fit with the corporate agenda, so that was the new political “spin” we heard on CNN.

And few people in the past four years have attempted to correct the record.