Republicans are going to win big in November, so drop the negativity!

[mysterio]

History will prove you both wrong. IMHO

What, that Republicans don't have to lose to make them stop acting like dems? I hope you're right. When is this turnaround scheduled to happen?

[peacebaby]

Newt Gingrich reminds me of Rush in his courage to be upfront and outspoken. And what's his baggage besides divorce and marrying another woman, really?

[LittleBoPeep]

Amen and Amen!

[HitmanLV]

You are correct. A lot can happen between now and election day, but it won't shift on anything said in the original post.

I think the author makes a few assumptions that are questionable. One if the unspoken idea that naturally republicans are stronger on defense than democrats. That's not necessarily true. I think the dems are running 15-20 retired military types in House elections: it's difficult to characterize those guys as weak on defense, provided that they don't talk weak on defense.

Since the Dubai stumble, the democrats for the first time in as far back as anyone can remember poll better on national security issues. That dovetails with another assumption the article makes: that the polls are broadly rigged against the GOP. I think there is a slight liberal bias in polls, but how can it be that when the president was doing well, all the major polls showed him doing well, and when he is doing poorly, all the major polls show him doing poorly?

The polls, despite wholesale Freeper denial, are on balance accurate. There is an astonishing, and unhealthy, resistance to bad news on FR. During the impeachment of Clinton, polls consistently showed that the american public didn't support removal of the president. Freepdom projected its own disdain for the president onto the american public. When the results came in, it was clear that Freepdom wasn't just wrong: it was remarkably wrong.

The idea that Bush will poll better and the GOP will gain ground in 8 months based on some issues where they are polling terribly today isn't very reassuring. Talk of good and evil notwithstanding, there is no broad public perception of the dems as the agents of evil. Maybe misguided. Maybe befuddled. Maybe inept. Not evil, though. Banking on an overstated theme that isn't really accurate in the first place is very sloppy thinking that won't lead to success.

If the GOP does well in 2006 (and I think they could, but you'd never know it now), it won't be for any of the reasons listed in the essay.

[peacebaby]

Friends close, enemies closer

[Fudd Fan]

I see a lot of conservatives staying home.

I guess they'd be the stoo-pit ones. Definitely.

[HitmanLV]

Denial.

[hawkiye]

"Well, I am a pragmatist, which by definition around here makes me a Bushbot.

Huh? I think your defintion is a little skewed. here is how dictionary.com defines it:

1. Philosophy. A movement consisting of varying but associated theories, originally developed by Charles S. Peirce and William James and distinguished by the doctrine that the meaning of an idea or a proposition lies in its observable practical consequences.

2. A practical, matter-of-fact way of approaching or assessing situations or of solving problems.

A pragmatist would be willing to question the President and do or support whats right even if they disagreed with the president rather then rubber stamp anything he does which is what a Bushbot would do.

[txrangerette]

Before Cheney was picked for VP, he lived in Dallas, TX for several years. He and Lynne only visited Wyoming. His official residence including his voting precinct was in Texas. When he agreed to run, he had to establish his Wyoming residence, as the President and VP cannot be official residents of the same state. It is very easy and quick to establish that legality, and so he did. Most likely they will live in TX once again when he retires.

[Fudd Fan]

I'm really not looking for an argument, and I hope I'm right too.

[hosepipe]

[ This rant has nothing to do with 2008. It's about November 2006, and I think this rant is long overdue. ]

Not about 2008?.. 2006 is just prep for 2008.. However if you are wrong about 2006.. A simple auto butt-kicking machine will do.. We'll need you around for the big one.. in 2008..

[FreeReign]

Friends close, enemies closer

No, Newt.

Newt was spanked severely by the Clintons, '95 onward.

It's one thing to keep your enemies close. It's another thing to bend over and have your enemies slap -- it.

[bill1952]

Bet me. Please.

Don't need to. - What I will do is put it right in your face, and that is worth far more to me than an insignificant amount of money, given my current economic situation.

remember it come 11/06. - I will.

[djstex]

Well said!

[FreeReign]

A pragmatist would be willing to question the President and do or support whats right even if they disagreed with the president rather then rubber stamp anything he does which is what a Bushbot would do.

That of course is true. A pragmatist would be willing to questioning the president.

A pragmatist is also be willing to recognize when a president is being pragmatic.

[Politicalities]

When he agreed to run, he had to establish his Wyoming residence, as the President and VP cannot be official residents of the same state.

Nitpick: actually, they can be... but an elector cannot vote for candidates for President and VP from the same state. Theoretically you could still wind up with a Prez and a VP from the same state.

[peacebaby]

I'd like to see Gingrich bend over and tell them to kiss it in 2008.

[FreeReign]

Well baby, let me tell you how it ‘be’.

Don't call me "baby".

Shirley, is fine.

[bill1952]

2006 is just prep for 2008

I like your posts, so with all due respect, that is wrong.

It IS all about 06. Incremental changes and advance are how the socialist agenda has gained so much in the good old USA.

We need to look at one battle at a time. - and win those.

Now, who said this? - "we must achieve communism by non communist means?"

[Politicalities]

Don't need to. - What I will do is put it right in your face, and that is worth far more to me than an insignificant amount of money, given my current economic situation.

Well, that's not very considerate. It's not going to be worth much to me to rub your face in it after the election. Everybody on FR will be glum, and I-told-you-sos will be neither welcome nor therapeutic. On the other hand, in the highly unlikely event that I'm wrong I'll be only too happy to have my nose rubbed in it.

What amount of money would you consider significant? I've got a fair amount of sporting blood.