How about going out on a limb and specifying which of my assumptions you find worthless, and why?
Posted on 07/15/2002 10:28:18 AM PDT by gordgekko
My bad. You're right. Bad, rdb3! Bad boy! ;-)
That would be asking a bit much, wouldn't it?
How about going out on a limb and specifying which of my assumptions you find worthless, and why?
When the GOP canidate and the DEM POTUS canidate debate and the GOP canidate plainly states that there is really not that much difference between what he and the DEM canidate believe what are we supposed to think? No the difference between the two if any is getting mighty thin indeed.
Glad you enjoyed it. Just answering kind with kind, since polls were your criteria. As far as the reliability of polls, you might want to read "Mobocracy" by Matthew Robinson (a conservative, BTW). Polls have degenerated into not much more than propaganda tools (9 out of 10 people can't be wrong!) used more to sway public opinion than to report on it, and the RNC is not immune.
Correct, because this is my example of what I consider "pandering." Or an example of it, there are legion which have nothign to do with race.
I'm simply using the evidence here at FR. I'm not talking about an actual plan or policy submitted by the GOP, either. I'm talking about when a thread talks about convincing American blacks to vote for the GOP instead of the dims. Many FReepers become fit to be tied in these threads.
I would love to see. I have not yet seen a policy or plan that was not pandering.
Tell you what. I'm going to keep you in mind for the next time I see this, then I'll ping you to it.
Please do, if things are as xenophobic as you describe, then I would like to distance myself from them. I was speaking only of policies that are clear pandering.
Lastly and again, I didn't say anything about preference policies or handouts. You did.
You are correct.
SD
Oh, put a sock in it, Tom! Waiting for everything to suit you before you vote is a mighty good excuse for sitting on your duff and doing nothing...and feeling self-righeous about doing nothing. It's very soothing to the psyche, I'm sure, but...no thanks!
Yes, but it's not necessary yet. The numbers of people who want something other than what is being offered currently is growing rapidly. How they will express themselves is anyones guess.
In the mean time, I guess it's a good idea to deride anyone who offers a different choice.
If the Republican party doesn't differentiate itself pretty soon, it is finished.
Dicking around on the internet is what most of those here concider "doing something". Good luck
**Ultimately it would fall to the GOP leaders, including President Bush.
That's all I'm saying. I hope that Republicans control both the House and Senate. At this point I intend to vote GOP this Fall, but win or lose, the responsibility for the results of the President's strategy will rest with him.
I've seen far too many in this forum blame the voters for President Bush 41 losing to Clinton in '92. Although I voted for him, I blame him for losing those voters. No one's vote is the birthright of any politician.
I see the difference everyday, especially here in L.A.
Maybe those "principled" conservatives have that Yuppie eye sight problem that only allows them to see the virtues of dippy, unelectable, nothing-to-lose, third party, fringe folks.
I remember those people screaming about Richard Riordan being a RINO, sellout, country club Republican. Now that Bill Simon is the candidate, he's having to moderate and water down his previous statements. Haven't heard much from the true, principled folks.
To get all that you want, yes it is.
I don't remember the Reagan stuff. I was probably busy playing with my Barbie.
Of course, one must look at the wording of questions used in polls. But polls, whatever their ultimate use, are scientifically reflective of whatever they are trying to measure.
I am speaking, of course, of polls done by professional polling firms, and not the idiotic internet variety which are basically used as a vehicle for web hits.
You are right, he said that during impeachment, and his article was textbook pious and smarmy "conservatism".
If he teaches at all his introductory course should be called, "Wingnut kneejerkism 101", IMHO.
As opposed to the party faithful who see the virtues of having "their" team out democrat the democrats to ensure their re-election so they can out democrat the democrats in order to ensure re-election in the next election.....
The end result of this plan is obvious.
Democrats are bolsheviks.
Republicans are mensheviks.
Same goal, different rhetoric.
Regards
J.R.
That's brilliant. That's the best picture I have seen you do yet.
(It's also very clever.. eg: the "smudges" on the keyboard)
BUT, I have my own reason to vote in November. I want OUR SENTATE (and it is our Senate, hijacked from us by Judas Jeffords of Vermont) back.
So, I will be voting Republican on that day. Regardless if we win it back or not though, I expect to see a policy shift after the elections. Otherwise, I will simply write Dubya up as a slightly right leaning moderate and abandon any hope of him mending his ways.
Thus, for now I am left with a vain hope that this is all some "master plan" to just flat buy our Senate back. I guess I have to convince myself of that because the other option is that he's been acting on principle all this time... and that's just too depressing a prospect for me to face.
(that picture just looks so real.. wow... amazing.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.