Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here
Posted on 07/30/2006 2:06:41 PM PDT by rface
Rush Limbaugh announced on his show that the GOP house internal polling shows a circa 30 seat loss for 2006.
It is hard for me to write much on this subject, as internal polling is secretive and not generaly available to public scrutiny. But there are some thoughts for discussion here.
One, is Rush correct? I don't think Rush makes it up as he goes along. He is human, and can make errors (as can anybody talking solo for 15 hours a week). But I haven't known him to lie outright on a political matter ever. I believe Rush has reported what he has gleaned from a GOP member of congress or a staffer.
Two, is the information correct? Is it a leak, or a misinformation campaign? I guess I don't see much value in leaking incorrect data to Rush exagerating a potential house loss. So I tend to believe the leaker was being accurate.
Three, should Rush have reported this (and should I write about it)? No to the first part. Internal polling is not meant to be leaked or reported. Once millions of Rush listeners have the info, it is already public and so I offer it here for your analysis.
Four, implications? Internal polling isn't the "for public" polling that you get from groups like Zogby, Gallup, Rasmussen, etc. Internal polling is the hard core, scientific, no spin accurate stuff that the candidates and the parties get and is held close to their vests. Only the best of the best work directly for the parties and candidates. My point is that if the information Rush reported is accurate, there are dark times ahead.
Implications go beyond this too. With the recent failure of the GOP by raising the minimum wage and cutting (but enshrining) a major tax, and with no movement on issues like arctic and offshore drilling, the slow pace of federal court appointments, and unreal spending, the GOP is losing the base. Despite our war on terror and a robust economy, Americans see casualty numbers and gas prices.
Having just adjourned for a recess, I see little the house can do other than campaign localy in the near term. If we blow this election we have no one to blame other than ourselves (a moderate to liberal GOP senate and a spend happy house).
"Where have you gone Ronald Reagan, a nation turns it's lonely eyes to you".
Never underestimate the stupidity of the average American.
If you do not vote, you are un-American and unworthy of ever calling yourself a conservative.
Scum stays home because scum does not care about the blood spilled to create the opportunity to vote.
Whining about the GOP is a convenient excuse to be a lazy un-American S.O.B who does not vote.
I believe conservatives never stay home on election day because they honor those who gave them that vote.
Reagan, I agree. Why do we all worry about Summer polling when it really means nothing? I mean it is obvious that winds usually change in October when the average voter starts to pay attention. It all comes down to the ground troops and $$$ in the last 4 weeks. Just like Brian Bilbray beating Busby in California due to ground troops, after she, according to many Freepers here, was supposed to win.
right NY, Conservatives love their country and on election day will realize that the likes of Pelosi, Conyers, Rangel, Frank and the rest of Communist America will be a disater.
"Whining about the GOP is a convenient excuse to be a lazy un-American S.O.B who does not vote. "
I don't think we'll see this line in any GOP ads this election cycle.
You never use "GOP" and "conservative" in the same sentence in your rants. I guess that means you really do understand the issue at hand that threatens the GOP house majority.
The premise of the story that the GOP will lose 30 seats is that CONSERVATIVES WILL NOT VOTE.
This is an utter falsehood because only un-American pigs DO NOT VOTE.
Therefore, the analysis is flawed because it requires Conservatives to be un-American pigs.
NO CONSERVATIVE DOES NOT VOTE.
Since Conservatives vote, the GOP will not lose control of the House based on an analysis that requires their lack of participation to make that come true.
Something else must happen for the GOP to lose the House, because Conservatives always vote.
Another thing that doesn't add up. For those that say the GOP will lose 30 seats over immigration, let's ponder the specifics:
The president let us down on immigration.
The Senate let us down on immigration.
The Supreme court has previously ruled in ways that let us down on immigration.
DHS/ICE has been letting us down on immigration for quite a while.
The House is the only federal governmental body that has held the line, that hasn't let us down, that is the only thing that stands between illegals and amnesty.
So what do conservatives do?
Fire the GOP House...
Brilliant!
"NO CONSERVATIVE DOES NOT VOTE. "
Your syllogism is flawed.
It would not be unheard of for a conservative to vote for a conservative democrat, rather than a liberal republican.
That is the problem - a conservative voter does not equal a GOP vote.
And despite your namecalling, turnout is increased when there is someone/something worth voting for, and depressed when voters feel let down by their party.
One thing is for sure, conservatives have been let down by the GOP - especially with regard to government growth.
Some probably won't vote because they are so disgusted with their party. You may call them pigs, but that won't help the GOP retain house seats. Giving them a reason to vote for the GOP, by adopting conservative positions on government growth for instance, just might help retain house seats.
The problem is, the leader of the GOP is a big government guy. So, conservatives will likely not vote in as high numbers as they would if the GOP differentiated itself from democrats on the size of government, or some other important conservative principle.
Pigs or no, the GOP needs every vote it can get. Your reasoning fails to acknowledge this.
Stunning.
You're believing Google searches showing any inane, insane or incorrect statement from anyone. How about something concrete, credible and factual ?
I'm not debating the problems with the GOP.
Rather I am trying to shoot down the flawed analysis that conservatives will not vote.
Since there are no conservative Democrats, they will not be voting for them.
Moreover, Conservatives vote while un-American pigs do not.
I'm voting in 2006.
Un-American pigs will not.
It is not name calling to state fact.
FACT: If you do not vote, you are an un-American pig.
I have never missed a vote in any election because to do so would be the equivalent of urinating and defecating at Arlington Cemetery.
Since I do not plan to use Arlington Cemetery as a toilet, I will be voting in 2006.
Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here
Better do something......anything.
I was baffled by your response until I went back and reread our conversation, so let me clarify. My "yup I am" was in reference to being in the voting booth with my conscience, NOT to voting for the greater evil!
Frankly, I don't know what I will do, because I'm not faced with candidates (for president)yet. I admit, it's a huge conundrum to me, but I won't vote for a candidate who supports amnesty for illegal aliens. Our border issue is equally important in my opinion (may not be in other people's, and that's ok, I can disagree strongly with someone and not think they're unAmerican or whatever).
susie
Sorry, you can call it what you like, but you are name calling. If I go into a voting booth and don't like any of the candidates for a particular office, I don't vote in that particular election. For instance, in TX frequently I was faced with only a democrat for a particular office. I generally didn't vote for them (even tho clearly they still won, since they were the only candidate). So, you are calling me an unAmerican pig? Pathetic.
susie
The truth hurts.
No, actually, the truth will set you free.
susie
Even the notion that if the race is nationalized somehow the Dems benefit I think is old wisdom which is no longer relevant. The first nationalized election was 1994 and we smoked them. Each time we have gotten onto the issues and away from local pork, we have won (impeachment being the exception). Strangely, the GOP is now thinking that turning towards local pork politics as being the way to keep the House is smarter since it worked for the Dems for 40 years. That is probably a bigger sign of doom for us than anything else since it will mean we have become that which we sought to overthrow.
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.