Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Democrats don't need Dixie
The Baltimore Sun ^ | 10/27/06 | Thomas F. Schaller

Posted on 10/27/2006 10:56:36 PM PDT by LibertarianInExile

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-73 last
To: bimbo

"... just another Maryland Lib trying to deny that Maryland is a Southern State."


That's true.
However, the bluer it becomes, the further north it seems.

I hope Steele whoops the pants off of the 'Rat.
Maryland needs a bit more red in it.

He's such a GOOD man.
The rest of us would benefit greatly, too.


61 posted on 10/28/2006 10:41:18 PM PDT by dixiechick2000 (There ought to be one day-- just one-- when there is open season on senators. ~~ Will Rogers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Jedi Master Pikachu
....If in your eyes telling the truth about Baltimore makes me a "racist", then you need to go live there a while to enjoy for yourself the fruits of black majority governance.
62 posted on 10/29/2006 5:13:33 AM PST by STONEWALLS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: staytrue

Please tell me the Southern states that went for Kerry. BTW, your argument is foolish. You could say the same thing for any state that went for Bush (with enough electoral votes).


63 posted on 10/29/2006 5:24:31 AM PST by ItisaReligionofPeace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
Nonsense. Had Kerry won Ohio he would have been president without a single southern electoral vote. And the Democrats could easily win on 2008 without a single southern vote as well.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

The possibility is always "could" or "might have."

The fact is that is there was a SOCIAL dynamic that would have "flipped" Ohio to be won by Kerry, the same SOCIAL dynamic would have brought one or more Southern "Dixie" states in to balance it.

The question of gaining knowledge of how the Southern States balance the Moon Bat dynamic in our nation needs to be clearly nderstood. It is more complex than mere Mathematics.

So this can be understood: NO DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT WILL BE ELECTED, NO CONTROL OF THE SENATE OR THE HOUSE WILL HAPPEN UNLESS THE SOUTHERN STATES CAN BE TURNED TO THE DEMOCRATE CAUSE.

The chances of that happening are as likely as Hillary Clinton successfully pinching a fart when she tries to respond to the truth about Islamofascism, as expounded by Rick Santorum.

Only the Democrats think they can win without the South, and they cannot.So take a look at the SOuthern states that are Democrat, and watch for the changes over to the Republican party, Louisianna, New Mexico, and Arizona among others.

64 posted on 10/29/2006 6:35:25 AM PST by Candor7 (Into Liberal flatulance goes the best hope of the West, and who wants to be a smart feller?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: ItisaReligionofPeace

The article says democrats don't need dixie and I agree.

Dems can lose all of dixie, flip ohio and win.


65 posted on 10/29/2006 8:28:32 AM PST by staytrue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: staytrue

I think what you are trying to say is that somehow Ohio is the most important state. It's not. Any of the bigger Southern states flip and Ohio doesn't matter. BTW, when the 2010 census is completed the South will be even more powerful politically.


66 posted on 10/29/2006 8:47:55 AM PST by ItisaReligionofPeace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: ItisaReligionofPeace
I think what you are trying to say is that somehow Ohio is the most important state.

NOW HEAR THIS. WHAT I AM SAYING IS THAT THE DEMOCRATS DO NOT NEED ANY STATE IN DIXIE TO WIN.

67 posted on 10/29/2006 9:07:45 AM PST by staytrue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Maelstorm

Kool-Aid is chock full of preservatives. It keeps 'em alive.


68 posted on 10/29/2006 9:15:33 AM PST by uglybiker (Don't look at me. I didn't make you stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: uglybiker

They'll have a tear in their kool-aid come election day.


69 posted on 10/29/2006 9:19:18 AM PST by Maelstorm (The one thing that is certain about politics is that nothing is certain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford
There are no countervailing offsets against the creeping blue stain.

There is one. As with Ohio, and other states with 'rat-rot, stagnant population has taken a number of house seats and electoral votes already, and will take more in the next census.

70 posted on 10/29/2006 9:32:23 AM PST by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: LibertarianInExile

He didn't see the need for any further national gun laws, but wanted to see the assault weapons ban renewed, and was for keeping the brady law waiting periods and wanted to outlaw private gun sales at gun shows.

He's far from pro-gun.


71 posted on 10/29/2006 9:40:43 AM PST by Armedanddangerous (I'm from West Virginia, and yes, I know Jesco White.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: DocH
I agree with you 100%, the Dems must have the South to win, because win they cannot, even if they "flip" Ohio.

The good ole boys will hold off the imaginary, " Democrat Charge " that the MSM has supposedly convinced in the minds of the media challenged.

Why are so many Dems looking for the rural southern vote? They can't get it.And some of the Southern border states will be turning Republican on the illegal alien issue. I think that there is a lot of hoo-haw going on here on FR about," Ohhhh! The Dems are going to WIN without the South."The supposition is that the Dems will hold the seats they have in the South, and THAT IS WRONG! The Dems will lose seats in the South, especially in the border states with Mexico.

Rush Limbaugh has noticed this too:

"They continue to write. Yesterday it was Tennessee. Yesterday it was Tennessee and Virginia that the Democrats need the rural vote. Tennessee, Virginia, and what was the other state? It was an LA Times story. Tennessee, Virginia, they need the rural vote -- and that, of course, is the hick vote. Was it Missouri? Okay, they're saying it about Claire McCaskill now. She needs the rural vote. She needs the hick vote. When I see stories like this, I wonder about the conventional wisdom that the Democrats are going to sweep to victory.

This is from, let's see, a couple of days ago. St. Louis: "Hundreds of bogus address changes have surfaced near St. Louis and the election board is warning voters to make sure they get a polling-place notification card.

"If the card does not show up, a voter's address may have been fraudulently changed, the county elections director said. The bogus address changes are among fraudulent voter-registration cards turning up in St. Louis County within the past couple of months, The St. Louis Post Dispatch reported. The bogus registrations included at least one dead person..." In fact, the Post-Dispatch story is dated October 11th. Suspect voter registration cards found in St. Louis. There are a number of stories like this. For example, a blogger today wonders this. "If the Democrats are going to sweep into power on November 7th, why are a majority of Democrats in hotly contested House and Senate races rejecting a timetable for withdrawal in Iraq?"

From:

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_102706/content/rush_on_a_roll.guest.html

72 posted on 10/29/2006 1:52:43 PM PST by Candor7 (Into Liberal flatulance goes the best hope of the West, and who wants to be a smart feller?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Armedanddangerous

"He didn't see the need for any further national gun laws, but wanted to see the assault weapons ban renewed, and was for keeping the brady law waiting periods and wanted to outlaw private gun sales at gun shows. He's far from pro-gun."

Thanks for the tip. I only vaguely recall this discussion of his history being pro-RKBA, so I'm sure not going to disagree with you. However, based on your statement, I will still give the man credit for being a moderate in the Rat camp on the issue if he doesn't see the need for further national gun laws. I agree with you that does not, however, make him pro-gun.


73 posted on 10/29/2006 7:42:46 PM PST by LibertarianInExile (When personal character isn't relevant to voters or party leaders, Foley happens.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-73 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson