Skip to comments.Losing in 2006 to win in 2008
Posted on 10/03/2005 7:57:40 AM PDT by for-q-clinton
The Conservative movement may benefit by losing the House and Senate in 2006. Im not advocating that we campaign to lose; however, if you look at the ramifications of losing in 2006 the Conservatives have a better chance of winning in 2008. Note: I didnt say the Republicans I said Conservatives.
First, look at the current political landscape. The sitting Republican President is floundering and struggling to get his message out or even finding a message. His 2nd term started off bold; however, the Democrats have stymied any meaningful action for his 2nd term. Its easy to be an opposition party when all you have to do is stick together to stop anything from happening. This is precisely what led to out of control spending. The Republicans cant pass any meaningful legislation to appeal to their base because the Democrats are there to stop it by a filibuster. The only thing they can agree on is spending money, so they all spend money hoping to buy votes for the 2006 election. Conservatives although winning in elections are still losing where the rubber meets the road.
If Republicans hold on by a thread in 2006 there isnt any precipice for real change, so it will be more of the same. Of course if the Republicans won a super-majority in the Senate and even a few more seats in the House, then that would be the best case scenario; however, that has a snowballs chance in Hell of happening based on the current political scene, Im not going to go in a race-by-race analysis here; however, most pundits are thinking a couple seats either way and for the sake-of-argument Ill accept that analysis.
So if the Republicans continue on this path their base will not be motivated in 2008. The only motivation theyll have is to vote against Hillary (or whoever the Democrats nominate). We all know you dont win elections by voting against the other team (remember Dole in 1996 or the Democrats voting against Bush in 2004?). Something must be done to slap the Republicans out of their political hazelosing in 2006 will do just that.
By losing in 2006 they will realize they screwed up and they cant govern playing softball with the opposition and even acting like the opposition. Losing has several benefits. One is that ideally the Republicans that lose will be the ones that havent been living up to their Conservative roots. By shedding the fat the Republicans can become a leaner, meaner conservative political party.
Another benefit of losing is that the Democrats will no longer be the opposition party. They will have to propose bills and take a stand on issues and not just stand opposed to the President. This in turn may wake up the President to actually veto a spending bill, since he wont be buying votes for fellow Republicans he will be vetoing out-of-control Democrat spending. By losing we may actually be able to refrain from over spending.
Also there are quite a few Democrat Senators that want to be President. Theyll try to pass extreme liberal bills to motivate their base. In the past this was the formula for success--run hard to the left (or right) then run to the center after you get the nomination. This is no longer a winning strategy due to the Internet with bloggers and sites like the FreeRepublicthe new media will not ignore previous votes and history like the old media does.
If the Democrats remain completely out of power for another election cycle they will be desperate for a win in 2008 and will allow their politicians to campaign in the center, just so they can get a win. By giving them some power in 2006 they will go ravenous with their new found power and think their ideology has won. This will scare the Electorate away from the Democrat nominee.
Finally, this will validate the War in Iraq and take it off the table as a political issue in 2008. The Congress controls the purse strings and can stop funding the war effort at anytime. How can they attack Bush on the war if they were the ones funding the war? If they do vote to cut spending (which most likely wont pass) theyll be on record as part of the Left fringe not suitable for the highest office. One of two things will happen, either their extreme left base will lose enthusiasm because their party didnt stop the war or mainstream America will be scared off of the Democrat party.
But what about Supreme Court nominees? Wont this allow the Democrats to vote against all his nominees? Not necessarily. The first pick of John Roberts was a gem and the Democrats would have voted for him whether or not they controlled the Senate. The current pick is a bit too early to know which way it will go, but Bush has proven he wont send up a true Conservative with a Conservative record (like Scalia or Thomas). Hes already picking nominees based on what the Democrats will say, so nothing is really lost when in regards to the Supreme Court.
Im not trying to say it will all be roses. We dont know what the future holds and what happens if we have another terrorist attack? Who knows what impact that will have on the President and Party in power. Typically you want your party in power during a crisis. Theres a good chance each party will blame the other just like 9/11.
The biggest downside that I see is that the President wont be able to pass his agenda in his current term. But is that really a down-side? As mentioned earlier the opposition has already stymied his 2nd term agenda. A worst case scenario is that hed agree to Democrat spending to get some of his initiatives passed and thats a better situation than we are in today of out-of-control spending and no real reform.
I'm a conservative; just not a Donner Party Conservative.
The "real, true" conservatives voted in no larger numbers in 2004 than they did in 2000.
Great, now substract that number from the total vote for Bush. Does he win either election? I didn't think so.
Have you ever had a job where you were the reliable one who consistently delivered, and it led to you being crapped on while the boss pandered to the lazy to try to cajole a little work out of them, simply because he needed people? That's how I feel as a conservative in the republican party. They keep fighting for the middle and screwing me because they THINK I will vote for them regardless.
All I see right now is a lot of conservatives 'scratchin their collective heads and mumbling... What happened?
If we lose in 2006, the dems will have control and will make the last 2 years of Bush's Presidency Hell. They will have subpoena power and be in charge of the agenda-- they would purposely thwart everything in the run up to '08 and, with the help of the media, would blame Bush for all problems. They would be happy to drive the country into the ground so Hillary could swoop in in '08. How effective was Papa Bush with a Democrat Congress? That sure didn't help him win in '92.
Nope. You're a kool-aid Konservative. You'll drink whatever Bush hands you.
I'd eat flesh before bullshit any day.
It's remarks like yours that win so many over to your "kind" of conservatism.
You know, it's the UGLY face of conservatisim.
They pretty much get what they want now by demanding independent councils that do their bidding.
If they do spend all their time on bogus charges they will feel the backlash in the 08 elections. I was actually going to address this in the article, but thought it would be rambling on (more so than I already did :-)
You drew first blood with the Donner Party reference, friend.
Losing elections in the hope of a backlash has never worked by the GOP before, with the exception of 94, and the reason why it worked in 94 was that Bill Clinton pushed thru Congress the largest tax increase in the history of the world. I don't think we can count on that happening again, nor would we wish it.
Wow, great analogy. And yes, I've been the one of those workers most of my life. Eventually you just get fed up and leave or try to play lazy, which eats at your core because it's just not you. And since it's not "you" the boss knows it and then trys to get rid of you as a bad influence :-) Lucky for me the boss ends up leaving before me ;-)
Trust me, if the Dems sweep in '06, Hillary will win in '08.
"The current batch of elected officials has sold out the principles of conservatism on far too many points."
Our two RINO senators from Ohio are prime examples. DeRINO is up for reelection next year. I hope some REAL conservative has the cajones to run against him in the primary and WIN, but I'm afraid it will be Toomey vs. Specter all over again. There are rumblings that the RAT darling du jour, Paul Hackett, will run against DeRINO. That would be interesting, given the close election he ran against Jean Schmidt, and the state of the GOP here in Ohio.
Who said sweep? Or what do you mean by that? I'm thinking if we just barely lose...shed some RINO weight and are no longer the party in power (by about 1 vote).
"Go Team! Let's lose one for the Gipper!"
That was really funny; I'll give you that.
Im not advocating that we campaign to lose
I like the idea of voting 3rd party in 2006 to send Republicans the message to get back to conservative roots.
Better to send them that message in '06 than in '08 ;)
The evidence for that is mixed. When Republicans run as conservatives in conservative states, they win. When they run as conservatives in liberal states, they lose. When Democrats run as liberals in liberal states, they win. When they run as liberals in conservative states, they lose.
The reality is, most people like their pet government programs, and don't really want smaller government. And most people don't like radical change. Shrinking government when people don't want it shrunk is a recipe for electoral failure. That's a lesson the Republicans seem to have learned. If they keep control of the purse strings, they have the chance to direct policy to encourage individual responsibility and individual choice. The long term effect of this would be to reduce demand for government.
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.