Posted on 05/10/2006 7:15:13 PM PDT by Dems_R_Losers
Disaffection over spending and immigration have caused conservatives to take flight from President Bush and the Republican Congress at a rapid pace in recent weeks, sending Bush's approval ratings to record lows and presenting a new threat to the GOP's 12-year reign on Capitol Hill, according to White House officials, lawmakers and new polling data.
Bush and Congress have suffered a decline in support from almost every part of the conservative coalition over the past year, a trend that has accelerated with alarming implications for Bush's governing strategy.
The Gallup polling organization recorded a 13-percentage-point drop in Republican support for Bush in the past couple weeks. These usually reliable voters are telling pollsters and lawmakers they are fed up with what they see as out-of-control spending by Washington and an abandonment of core conservative principles more generally.
There are also significant pockets of conservatives turning on Bush and Congress over the their failure to tighten immigration laws, restrict gay marriage and to put an end to the Iraq war and the rash of political scandals, according to lawmakers and pollsters.
Bush won two presidential elections by pursuing a political and governing model that was predicated on winning and sustaining the loyal backing of social, economic and foreign policy conservatives. The strategy was based on the belief that conservatives, who are often more politically active than the general public, could be inspired to vote in larger numbers and would serve as a reliable foundation for his presidency. The theory, as explained by Bush strategists, is that the president would enjoy a floor below which his support would never fall.
It is now apparent that this floor has weakened dramatically and collapsed in places.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
I don't base anything on the polls, just pretty much all the word of mouth. Even most regular people who are Democrats want a wall and a secure border.
Maybe not where you are, but illegals are apprehended all the time by regular beat-cops.
The moral of your story: DON'T HIRE ILLEGALS!
He's not MY "fellow conservative."
Jeb's stated many times that he's not running. After the lies and distortions from the press, who'd want to?
LOL
I couldn't think of how to respond to that totally naive post - your response is perfect
I'm sorry, but that is even more worthless than polls. My sister is a liberal artist living in Portland OR. She told me in 2004 that George Bush could not possibly win a second election because "nobody she knew would even consider voting for him". Well, 51% of the country proved her wrong. Unless you make a habit of traveling this country non-stop and striking up conversations with people you don't even know, everywhere you go, you really cannot determine national sentiment based on "word of mouth".
I'll ask you then, should we not give any credence to the things he said about Connie Hair?
Yeah!!!, the crowd loudly yells from the sideline.
The other week when over 50,000 Mexicans marched and heald rally, I was with the counter rally folks face to face with the che t-shirt marxists.
You know, I've been busy working and haven't had time to keep up on a lot of things, but even during this time even I was aware that immigration has certainly been on the hot topic list for several months now. And most certainly since December.
Sorry, the evidence dictates that I just have to disagree with you on that.
No, simply a reference to one's ability to make choices, rather than living with a boot on one's neck. Very anti-Talibanarian.
They are detained by LE here just for being illegal, but only if BP is willing to take them right away, which is a case by case thing, as far as I know they are not arrested for being illegal if BP won't take them. This state does arrest them for most offenses, not just violent offenses. As far as I know if they are arrested for minor crimes near the border they are deported by immigration but if they are any distance away they are allowed bail so really they walk on minor stuff, since they seldom show for court.
I know when we have issues with illegals, the sheriff's dept. wants us to call BP instead of them unless it is really serious. I have had days when BP tells me to call Sheriff's office and SO tells me to call BP, then BP asks how I know for sure they are illegal- when that happens I yell a lot at both of them and someone shows up.
This is who you're relying upon for truth, Howlin. He's a disgusting man:
" G. Morris' Step-Daughter. Holly Buck, Maureene's daughter
by a previous marriage, is eighteen years old (R. 728). She was
seven years old when her mother and Morris married, and she has
lived with them in the house at Mathews from then until the
separation (R. 728). Holly testified that, in the summer of 1977,
Morris attempted to molest her in the following incident (R. 729):
One night Maureene and Morris were sitting drinking wine and
discussing a case Morris was trying. She was with them. Around
eleven or twelve o'clock Maureene went to bed and Holly stayed up
with Morris discussing the case. Morris kept offering Holly wine,
some of which she accepted. At Morris' suggestion, they went
outside to the pool, and he suggested that they go for a swim, but
Holly was tired and declined (R. 731). She went to her room and
then went into the bathroom. Looking out the window, she saw Morris
in the bushes beside the bathroom window looking in (R. 731). She
said "Morris, is that you", but he said nothing and ran away (R.
732). Two months later, she was asleep one night and Morris entered
her room from Ellie's room, through the bathroom. He was in his
underwear and he sat on the bed where Holly was lying on her stomach
facing away from the door. He touched her on the back and woke her
up. He told her that he had brough her a present, and he presented
her with a vibrator. He plugged it in and said he had brought it to
her. He proceeded to rub it on her back and said, "Let me show you
how to use it" (R. 733). She said that's not necessary, but he
started to place it between her legs when she raised he voice and
said no loudly. He then took the vibrator and left (R. 734). All
he had on was a pair of bikini underwear shorts (R. 734). About two
hours later, she had fallen back asleep and he came back in (R.
735). He brought the vibrator with him, plugged it in and said
again, "Let me show you how to use it." He tried to show her again
by putting it between her legs, but she raised her voice again and
he stopped. He took it and left (R. 635). She did not tell her
mother about this incident until the separation when they moved out
of the Mathews house in the spring of 1979 (R. 736)
So are your perceptions more reliable than polls? I'm not making a dig here. I'm just wondering if you believe they are. Because your perceptions are not supported by polling data. So either you, or the polls are wrong. You live in California (I'm guessing). California is perfectly happy to elect representatives that don't take any stance on illegal immigrants. Why haven't you picked up on that sentiment? It would appear the voters in your own state don't care enough to make it a top issue.
I thought we were supposed to hate Connie Hair. But this website posts data that makes her appear to be a normal conservative. And this website is a good website. Because it posts data that makes Simcox appear to be a pervert. So if we agree with the website that Simcox is a pervert, then we should agree with the website that Connie Hair is a respectable human being. But no, she sells herself to the highest bidder and has her rose lips planted in a bad place. And she is persona non grata here.
You're giving me whiplash.
You forgot the "Dommed. DOOMED" guys.
Voting for a third party is, to the contrary, the BEST choice at this point. Schwartzenegger should serve as a blazing example for you here.. for myself as well because I took your approach in giving him the thumbs up for the same cautious reasons everyone does. And what did I learn? Simple, voting for the guy that represents what I want is better than voting for the watered down fallback position. There were far better conservative choices in that race. Vote for crap, end up with crap. That is the bottom line. The GOP has proven it is crap. When your best argument is what would happen in a worst case scenario in trying to vote crap out of office.. you've already lost the debate. Sorry.
The Dems and the GOP have both outlived any worth they ever had. There may be some worthy people in Washington from both parties. But, the majority of them have no allegiance to America much less to it's citezenry.. not when they can do on Immigration and related issues what they have done - all over greed. Not money, greed. If you don't know the difference, you have a problem. You need a better argument than 'voting against us could be bad because someone else might get in who isn't us'. That is, rather, the point - neither the GOP nor the Dems should ever be entrusted with offices they have shown they can't be trusted in. Dems can't be trusted with defense. Republicans can't be trusted with Immigration, trade and the Economy. Which is worse? Both spell our utter ruin.
And this is America. Since when are you going to tell Americans what they can or can't do. This is a Can do society. The only thing any of you dyed in the wool GOPers have shown we can't do is make our party do what is in the interests of the American people instead of the interests of their favorite business buddies and their own personal greed. You've illustrated that we CAN'T trust either party.
Why in the name of H$LL would we elect anyone from either of them, then?!!!
And you'll have to do better than 'the devil you know' arguments. Because we're being carried off to hell in a basket doing that. Dem and Republican have become the political equivelant of voting for the head of the Communist
Soviet Party. If you don't think you can stomach one communist, another will do. In the end, they're both full of globalist traitors. Six of one, half dozen of the other.. Neither has any morals in predictable areas. I wouldn't keep a subordinate for fear of finding worse. I'd can his butt in hopes of doing better and keep doing so until I got a good one. But common sense seems to leave when there are agendas to protect. Screw your agendas. Third party is the way to clean out the traitors' nest up their short of war - which I think is inevitable at this point either way. Purging Washington of the bought and paid fors will send the monied interests into a frenzy. That's gonna mean war as much as keeping these traitors in place.
The end of either course is taking back America. So with all due respect, you can stuff your hyped up nonsense. It's the same crap we all hear every four years with the same results.
Shouldn't we start reporting how these folks are making threats of blowing up things in America and contacting their other cells about it? ;)
But let me make this perfectly clear: if being a "real, true conservative" means I have to support a child molester just because he's with the Minutemen, then I don't want to be a 'real, true' conservative.
There you go again. Has the man been convicted of child molestation? NO, he hasn't. You're reduced to talking in circles!
I would, and I don't have one. I'd also bet your farm. And I'm not a betting man. Gambling is a vice.. a sick one at that.
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.