As for DeWine, he was a conservative by voting record. It wasn't conservatism that worked against him in OH, but rather a string of individual stupid positions ("gang of 14," anti-gun) that separately eliminated entire sections of his conservative base. Still he lost big, and it can't all be attributed to Taft's unpopularity.
While I do not think "conservatism" is to blame for any of the losses, I do think there was a small but substantial Iraq defection by "moderates" and independents in EVERY state; a small but still important "sit out" by some conservatives in protest to the budgets and the Medicare bills; and a large "we need a change" sentiment across the board.
It is the latter that concerns me. As I wrote a week ago ("The Party of Bad Ideas vs. the Party of Old Ideas"), the GOP is now viewed as having no "new" ideas. It will NOT sell to say "well, we are in line with the Constitution." Reagan understood that and leapfrogged Jimmy Carter by selling tax cuts as "full employment and recovery" and by jumping over MAD to argue for "rolling back" the Soviet Empire. We are in desperate need of a party-wide "marketing plan" that will portray the GOP as moving forward, not just holding the line. I have argued in the WoT this needs to be a new, aggressive plan against not only Iran but against the radical schools in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere; a kind of "Marshall Plan/Voice of Arabia" approach. In domestic policy, a radical new free-market "cut the fat out" approach to medical care, rewarding doctors with some sort of tax breaks when they accept cash over employer-insurance. But whether it's THESE specific ideas or something else, there is no doubt in my mind that whatever happens in the presidential election, we will lose another clump of seats in both houses if we don't appear to be the party of NEW ideas.
I'm not in Idaho, I'm in Nashville, and my Congressional district has been rodent red since U.S. Grant's 2nd term in 1874. Boise is not solid rodent, though has had an influx of them, it does have a rodent Mayor now (thanks to a crooked RINO predecessor), and unfortunately, Ada County voted for the rodent in the Gubernatorial election (but still solidly 61-38% for Dubya in '04), but ID overall is one of the most "Blue" Republican states in the nation, and that's not going to change any time soon.
"As for DeWine, he was a conservative by voting record. It wasn't conservatism that worked against him in OH, but rather a string of individual stupid positions ("gang of 14," anti-gun) that separately eliminated entire sections of his conservative base. Still he lost big, and it can't all be attributed to Taft's unpopularity."
DeWine was lurching to often to the RINO side (in '05, for example, he scored a paltry 56% from the ACU), and between those antics and Taft, not to mention the RINO legislature, it was a fiasco for the GOP overall in OH. We're lucky we didn't rack up further losses there.
"It is the latter that concerns me. As I wrote a week ago ("The Party of Bad Ideas vs. the Party of Old Ideas"), the GOP is now viewed as having no "new" ideas. It will NOT sell to say "well, we are in line with the Constitution." Reagan understood that and leapfrogged Jimmy Carter by selling tax cuts as "full employment and recovery" and by jumping over MAD to argue for "rolling back" the Soviet Empire. We are in desperate need of a party-wide "marketing plan" that will portray the GOP as moving forward, not just holding the line. I have argued in the WoT this needs to be a new, aggressive plan against not only Iran but against the radical schools in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere; a kind of "Marshall Plan/Voice of Arabia" approach. In domestic policy, a radical new free-market "cut the fat out" approach to medical care, rewarding doctors with some sort of tax breaks when they accept cash over employer-insurance. But whether it's THESE specific ideas or something else, there is no doubt in my mind that whatever happens in the presidential election, we will lose another clump of seats in both houses if we don't appear to be the party of NEW ideas."
We do need new ideas on a variety of fronts. Unfortunately, leadership isn't big on "ideas" (as problematic as Gingrich was, at least he was always brimming with ideas). I think we basically forgot why we were elected in 1994, and if we don't recapture that mojo and hatch new ideas (or old ones we've forgotten about) that play to today, we'll lose again -- even with a 14% approval rodent Congress. And that's what is really a tragedy. Even if we do win back Congress, we need to put newer members, fresh faces, in leadership. Boehner has been there too long and he had already been previously booted from leadership. He shouldn't have returned.