When something happens three times, you've got a trend. "We're very proud of Mr. Van Hollen for three straight," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said, referring to Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. "Three for three! Batting a thousand! Batting a thousand!"

Last week, for the third time this year, Democrats took a House district away from the Republicans in a special election. In March, Democrat Bill Foster won the Illinois seat that former House Speaker Dennis Hastert had held from 1986 until he retired last November. On May 3, Democrat Donald Cazayoux won a House seat in Louisiana that had also been held by a Republican since 1986. On May 13, Democrat Travis Childers won a Mississippi seat that had been Republican for 14 years.

That makes three Democratic gains in staunchly Republican districts that President Bush won handily in 2004--in fact, with 62 percent of the vote in the Mississippi district. Both parties' national committees spent more than $1 million on each race. In the Louisiana and Mississippi contests, Republicans ran ads tying the Democratic candidates to Barack Obama. A Republican ad in Mississippi said, "Travis Childers, endorsed by liberal Barack Obama.... He took Obama's endorsement over our conservative values." The National Republican Congressional Committee ran an ad in Louisiana that charged, "A vote for Don Cazayoux is a vote for Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi.... He'll do what they tell him to do." Vice President Cheney even campaigned for the Republican candidate in Mississippi.

That didn't help.

"This is a hard-core Republican seat, and they lost it by 8 points," Obama said the day after the Mississippi vote. "They did everything they could. They ran ads with my face.... They were using every trick in the book to try to scare the folks in Mississippi. And it didn't work."

The Democratic candidates in Louisiana and Mississippi were, in fact, fairly conservative. Both oppose abortion rights and support gun rights. They did not rush to embrace Obama. Childers ran an ad denouncing "the lies and attacks linking me to politicians I don't know and have never even met." But the bottom line is that Obama's name and image did not prove to be political poison, even in the Deep South.

The GOP label was far more toxic. "When you lose three of these in a row, you have to get beyond campaign tactics and take a hard look and ask if there is something wrong with your product," said Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma, chairman of the NRCC. Rep. Tom Davis, R-Va., reminded his colleagues in a 20-page memorandum, "These races were not in New Jersey or New England, where Republican erosion has taken place over the last decade. They were in the heart of the Bible Belt, the social-conservative core of our coalition."

The Republican tactics may have produced a backlash. Turnout in counties with large black populations increased significantly between the Mississippi primary on April 22 and the May 13 runoff, The New York Times noted. Childers's support rose from 49 percent to 54 percent. The Republican vote was unchanged, remaining at 46 percent. The GOP "wanted to say [that Childers] was tied to Barack Obama. The question we asked was, 'What's wrong with that?' " a Mississippi Democrat told The Times.

The special-election results were good news for Democrats who are worried about the continuing split in their party and about Obama's electability. Democrats are looking for big gains in Congress this year. Republicans in the House and Senate are defending more open seats and more vulnerable seats. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., has warned his party, "Either congressional Republicans are going to chart a bold course of real change, or they are going to suffer decisive losses this November."

The House results also give Obama an argument he can make to superdelegates who were unnerved by his weak performance in last week's West Virginia primary. When Republicans tried to make Obama the issue, the tactic backfired. Sure, Obama could turn out to be a difficult presidential nominee to elect, for reasons that have more to do with his inexperience and views than his race. But you have to balance that against the fact that 2008 looks like a difficult year to elect a Republican.

This article appeared in the Saturday, May 24, 2008 edition of National Journal.

Want to stay ahead of the curve? Sign up for National Journal’s AM & PM Must Reads. News and analysis to ensure you don’t miss a thing.