Democrats Face Uphill Battle to Retake House

Washington Post ^ | April 13, 2006 | Jonathan Weisman

[LibLieSlayer]

Do you have any idea of how foolish that you sound?

I'll ping Jim so he can make comment if he wishes...

---

What a republican Majority gives us (just a few things):

1)Control ALL committees in Senate and House. Allows a more Conservative Agenda to be set!

2)Control appointment of Federal Judges, including SCOTUS!

3)LESS SPENDING than dims. Hard to believe, but envision hildebeast!

4)Abortion rights will not be strengthened.

5)2nd Amendment rights held to be a personal right, not a collective right.

6)Lower taxes, repeal of death tax, reduction of capital gains taxes.

7) Actually continue to fight the WOT. Strengthen the Military

8) Keep kennedy, pelosi, boxer, schumer, reid, mckenny, rangel, sheila jackson lee, henry waxman, john conyers, leaky leahy, and other satan worshipping dims off Chairing committees!

9) No impeachment of President Bush.

10) No reinstatement of the "Fairness Doctrine". This would essentially kill Conservative talk radio.

---

What voting for a third party will get you:

1)ANOTHER DIM PRESIDENT... PROBABLY hildebeast!

Ignorance is NOT bliss!

LLS

[Protagoras]

Case closed.

I love when people say that, like it is authoritative. ROTFLMAO

Close dis.

[Protagoras]

I might not be here when the Conservatives get back in power. :-)

When was it that they were in power?

[jazusamo]

[When was it that they were in power?]

When Chief Justice Roberts and Associate Justice Alito were put on the bench.

[savedbygrace]

Please point to where I said anything about voting 3rd party.

Of the items on your list, I will concede #9. The rest are more illusory than real. I will repeat what I wrote before: pubbies are never more conservative as when they're in the minority.

When they're the majority party, they collectively act more like RINOs than conservatives.

If they lose the majority in 2006 or 2008, it will be their fault, not voters' fault.

[Protagoras]

LOL,,,good one!

I love when people tell delusional jokes!

[ShandaLear]

Also might be that they are trying to make Republicans complacent.

[jazusamo]

Those who have exceedingly high opinions of themselves sometimes fail to recognize how well off they are.

[NapkinUser]

"But I guess you have your source and it gives you the answer you want...."

Pot, meet kettle.

[Rebelbase]

"History is proof. The Perot voters gave us 8 long years of Clinton"

Clinton gave us Bush. What is your point? It's cyclical.

[JCEccles]

Rothenberg is the smartest most well-informed man in American in these issues.

[91B]

Testify-our domestic enemy would see the Islamist agenda advance worldwide if it meant their return to power in D.C. As disappointed as I have been with the Republican majority, Dhimmicrat control of congress would bring us speaker Pelosi from San Fransisco home of the city government that has voted to make the city a "military-free zone". The choice between ineptitude and evil is no choice at all.

[LibLieSlayer]

It screams in clarity to us if we only listen. dims in majority will be the end of this Nation. I see people on here shouting about how OUR NATION is at its end because some activist mexicans want exactly what every other special interest group has received from the dims... special status, government subsidy of their lives, and servitude to their masters... the dims.

I am 100% for border security, and I will never support amnesty in any form. When, and only when we have secured the borders, will I consider a very limited guest worker program. One which will NOT lead to Citizenship shortcuts in any fashion.

Our Nation is far stronger, and Liberty runs far deeper than 20 million Hispanic illegals. Our Nation can survive and ultimately defeat ANY outside attack, regardless of the form it takes. What our Nation cannot endure, is the "enemy within" (dims) destroying it with their evil, their agenda, and their GODless majority rule!

dims and al qaeda... different groups, sharing common goals!

LLS

[georgia2006]

if DEMS have 201 and need 218 for a majority, how is that a net 15???

[georgia2006]

"". Exit polls showed that Perot took about equal support from both parties, though a little more republican. But the split was nowhere near enough to suggest that Bush Sr. would have won had Perot not been in the race. Bush Sr. would have gained votes, but still lost.""

this is actually some what of a myth. The GOP won 10 seats in the House in 1992, indication that Perot did infact take more votes from the GOP than from the DEMS. Fact that Clinton won NV, MT, CO and GA while Bush won no DEM leaning states is another indication that Perot took more votes from the GOP than from the DEMS.


based on the 1988, 1992 and 1996 voter turnout it is likely that 1/3 of Perot voters would not have voted had Perot not been on the ballot. Roughly the remaning 2/3 would have voted GOP.

The result state by state is that Clinton would have won 50.5% of the vote and 300EVS with Bush winning, CO, GA, MT, NV, OH, NJ


Ironically had that happened Clinton likely would NOT have lead off his term with gays in the military and national health care but with welfare reform. His 370 EV win in 1992 made both him and hillary arrogant.


Had Peor not run, it is possible Bush could have won because Perot added greatly to the climate of negativity in 1992. That cannot be factored by looking at voting results.


Bush lost because he broke his no new taxes pledge which prolonged the recession, led to Buchanan's run.

No tax increase, no buchanan insurgency and the economy rebounds not in the fall of 1992 but in the fall of 1991.

[Protagoras]

Those who are clueless always fail to recognize when they have been played for fools by the politicians.

And anyone who thinks there has been anything remotely like conservatism in the last 19 yrs, is clueless.