If you had read the posts on FR prior to the 2000 elections you would have been certain Buchanan was going to win. You should expand your horizons beyond the immigration threads.
A cursory perusal of immigration threads reveal the same malcontents who misjudged voter interest concerning immigration in 1998, and 2000, just as you did in in 2002, and 2004. 95% of Freepers avoid these threads because of the insipid sloganeering, circular logic, and personal slander used by the isolationist who live on those threads. There is no substance to be found.
Have you ever thought to ask yourself why the leaders of the anti-immigration movement can't get elected to statewide office much less be thought of as a national leader?
I would really love to read your explaination of this contradiction between your certainty that immigration is a make/break issue, and the last 50 years of elections.
While I have not agreed with you inquest, I do have to say you have done a remarkable job making the best arguement with the facts available for your opinion. Your persistence is admirable and your arguments are clearly understandable even if I remain unconvinced. You have also made your case without resorting to insulting personal remarks, something I am not always able to say about my posts.
The "close your eyes" comment is a little bit a chuckler for me because in 1992 I thought George HW Bush's defeat would usher in a re-awakened GOP. I idolized Bob Dornan and Alan Keyes, both of whom I met at the 94 Republican state convention. I was certain Clinton would be defeated in the next election. Even when Dole was defeated I assured myself that Dole was a bad candidate and massive voter fraud overcame the 200+ Clinton body count. The 98 GOP loses were a personal wake up call that ideology does not trump reality. Some day you will hear that call.
I highly doubt that. What you were most likely seeing back then was idealistic enthusiasm by a small but vocal number of devotees. What we have now is something quite different: massive disillusionment and anger over an issue that resonates with a huge proportion of the electorate.
A cursory perusal of immigration threads reveal the same malcontents who misjudged voter interest concerning immigration in 1998, and 2000, just as you did in in 2002, and 2004.
Just as I did when? If you can come up with a quote from me predicting a third-party upset in either '02 or '04, I'd be fascinated to see it, because I'm quite confident that I never made any such prediction for either of those two years. What I'm seeing now is a very significant change. It's not all the same people on the border threads then as now. The number has grown, including by people who were strong advocates of the President's reelection in '04, and who had mostly muted their criticism of him prior to that vote, thinking that he'd come around. He didn't.
Have you ever thought to ask yourself why the leaders of the anti-immigration movement can't get elected to statewide office much less be thought of as a national leader?
Because both parties have their reasons for being seriously hostile to border security, and that leaves voters mostly trapped. That's why it took voter initiatives to get laws like Prop 200 enacted.
The voters know that there's really only one viable way to break through that electoral stranglehold, and that is to vote third-party. They've avoided doing so for the most part, because they didn't want to give up their voice on other issues. But that's already begun to change. Jim Gilchrist's placing of 25% is a huge number for a third party, well enough to undo what might otherwise be a very comfortable victory by a Republican. The more people see how blatantly their "elected servants" are thumbing their noses at them, the more motivated they'll be to hit back at them.
The 98 GOP loses were a personal wake up call that ideology does not trump reality. Some day you will hear that call.
What "ideology" are you referring to here? I didn't know that obsession with Clinton's sexual escapades constituted an "ideology". The lesson from both '94 and '98, taken together, is this: When Republicans focus on what they believe - smaller government, personal responsibility, cultural sanity - they win. When they focus on partisan pounding against Democrats, they lose.
I'm not saying they shouldn't have called Clinton on his misbehavior; they definitely should have. But it's not a good idea for Republicans to make voters think that that's what they're all about.
The main reason anti-illegal immigrant candidates can't get elected is that the lapdog media refuses to publicize certain truths about this ongoing invasion. If most Americans knew that illegals were getting tapayer financed benefits for housing, medical, etc. and are now being offered below market interest rates for home loans as well as the fact that thanks to Bush et al they will now receive Social Security benefits, even the dubest dumbed down Americans can figure this nonsense out......and I didn't even touch on the fact that more and more illegals are committing very heinous crimes against Americans.