[neverdem]

I guess that could be interpreted as if the pubbies lose the Senate, it wouldn't be much of a loss. Think judges!

[inquest]

If the Republicans lose only because some conservatives vote third-party, then it would only be a temporary loss. All the Republicans would have to do is cut the amnesty nonsense, and they'd be back with a vengeance in '08.

[12th_Monkey]

Yes, we should all think judges, we don't need any more activists in our courts.
I'm no fan at all of what the Republicans have done or are doing, nor am I pleased about GWB either. But what choices do we have? Democrats to me are the center of pure evil, Libertarians and any 3rd party is a joke. For myself I'm sticking with the hand thats been dealt, Republicans do or die.

[Republic_of_Secession.]

Conservatives are going to be facing tough decisions when at the polling station.

[manwiththehands]

I don't buy this. Republican spending "cuts" were minimal, if they happened at all. Furthermore, spending that angered us the most (i.e. "The Bridge To Nowhere") was not cut at all. No. This is a "Republican" problem. Not the Republican President, not the Republican Senate, and not the House.

Republicans are in trouble because they have not acted like Republicans - at any level.

And I'm still not convinced that the House going back to the Rats in 06 would be that devastating. We've been there before and bounced back in a big way just two years later in '94. Fighting a 'Rat controlled House for two years may be the best thing that could happen to Bush. Backed into a corner he might start showing some real stones for a change.

[dead]

According to the media, the months leading up to every House election always point to a big sea change in favor of the Democrats. Always.

Every once in a while they're right, but I don't think it's this time. People are unhappy with the Republicans, but the Democrats offer absolutely nothing as an alternative.

The Democrats can't even think about enunciating their positions on anything. If they say anything that looks moderate, the moonbats howl, and if they say anything that pleases the moonbats, the moderates run from the party like its wearing a Jason mask.

The GOP will retain control of both houses mainly because they suck less and aren't carrying a bloody axe.

[tobyhill]

With gas topping $3 a gallon it's probably too late. Average American's don't care about supply and demand except when they demand a change being there is enough supply of politicians.

[jmaroneps37]

The worst rino is better than the best rat. End of story.

[austinite]

Democrats: Run for office from the center and govern from the left.

Republicans: Run for office from the right and govern from the center, slowly shifting left all the while.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

Think judges!

Exactly. It would be better to lose the House than the Senate. Though we need a more conservative Republican Senate. Since the House tends to overspend no matter what, it would better to go back to blaming Democrats for that angle. They can't actually increase spending all by themselves anyway.

[savedbygrace]

There's a touch of "blame the victim" reasoning in this issue. President Bush and the pubbie leadership are destroying this nation with their immigration policy failure. Yet, if we, the victims, fight back, we are blamed for the mess that ensues.

President Bush and the pubbie leadership are to blame, and if they fail to correct their path, they will be causing the loss of majority status, not us, their victims.

[mtntop3]

A few of these musings seem as if coming from a lunatic asylum.

You would actually allow Democrats control over our national security and over our men and women in the armed forces in the childlike fantasy that the Democrats would then be immediately be replaced by more-conservative Republicans??

The surefire result of this: 1) becoming a political eunuch; 2) directly acquiescing in the destruction of our nation.