How much is President Bush and Bushies to Blame for this Loss?

opinion | 11/7/2006 | brianbaldwin

[MaxMax]

Amen.

[umbagi]

Sorry -- "ping"...

[Dosa26]

Not to you in particular Howlin...Fox commentator just said we "most probably" lost the senate.

[Sir_Ed]

I don't really consider myself an "agenda person."

I voted for a pro-choice Pubbie for OR governor, (Ron Saxton) who, unfortuately, lost.

Because he would have worked with us in RTL.

I do think that Terri Schiavo was murdered by starvation, and I wish they had saved her life.

I wish I could clearly understand what exactly happened to the GOP tonight. It wasn't being a moderate that cost elections, it wasn't being a conservative, it wasn't being a "seal-up the borders" person, it was ALL of those factors that cost votes.

Ed

[Howlin]

Precisely.

[Defender2]

#244. I think it was the constant pounding by the MSM shilling for the dems. Enemedia!!!!

[montag813]

The President will have to stand firm, get out his veto pen and be prepared to do battle with congress on a daily basis. They'll be relentless.

They cannot overrride a single veto.

[keepitreal]

One year ago during the Harriet Miers debate the Ingrahams, Noonans, Coulters and NRO gang threw a temper tantrum because they didn't approve of the President's pick. They put him in office and they wanted control of the courts or they were going to bring him down. Well they did with their months of ridicule. Unfortunately, in the end they brought down the Republicans. Any hopes for a conservative court has been lost, as well as a win in Iraq.

I bet they all feel proud today.

[MinorityRepublican]

Do we have the stomach to win now?

No. Up until tonight, I was sanguine about the war. But now, it doesn't matter if American troops never lost a battle, American public opinion would demand the withdrawal of troops in a year.

[ClarenceThomasfan]

I think it was the immigration issue that lost it for us. I knew it was a loser from the very beginning. I would love to see what our Hispanic vote was tonight.

[Dosa26]

One year ago during the Harriet Miers debate the Ingrahams, Noonans, Coulters and NRO gang threw a temper tantrum

Miers was the 101'st most qualified person for the position. This loss had to do with the war and the media.

[umbagi]

I didn't like the Miers choice much, either, but I'll add a "well said" bump to that.

And btw, in case it's been neglected in the heat of the week: Welcome to FR, Keeper. I like your posts...

[screaming eagle2]

I fear the Dems in power in the house,we may actually get situation similar to the series"JERICHO" having watched the show<i am distressed by such a prospect.GOD haelp President Bush and GOD help the U.S.!!!

[keepitreal]

No the Miers choice was not the best, but the self-proclaimed intellecutals of the right blew it all out of proportion, giving the dems and the MSM the sense that there was blood in the water. It really destroyed our united front. The NRO and its ilk won the battle but lost the war. Unfortunately the next nominee to the Supreme Court will have to be far more liberal than what Miers was perceived to be by the self-proclaimed keepers of the Reagan flame.

I am a conservative, and by your standards I would qualify as very conservative. However, you have to pick your battles. Unfortunately our side decided to battle with each other. Even in this the NRO crowd acts as if this is good for the Republicans - puts those not in lock step in their place. Unfortunately being in the minority makes it so that nothing we wanted gets done. The GWOT was too important to lose over a temper tantrum by the right.

[screaming eagle2]

Well,I've been told I'm so conservative I have to look to my left to see the Pope.

[Finalapproach29er]

Alcee "IMPEACHED CROOK" HASTINGS is chairing US Intelligence Committee.

Feel safe?

I think America is going to be horrified when they see the Democrat freak show roll out.

Dems won't win WH in 2008.

[Dosa26]

Unfortunately the next nominee to the Supreme Court will have to be far more liberal than what Miers was perceived to be

Not neccessarily.

I am a conservative, and by your standards I would qualify as very conservative

You knon't know me or my standards.....lol.The GWOT was too important to lose over a temper tantrum by the right.

The terror war will not be lost. It's just a matter of how many of our brave warriours and citizens must fall. I don't know these things, but I do hope that Americans will not ever have to quake in fear of nuc's on our soil...If we do I will lose a great deal of faith in our people.

[justa-hairyape]

Dems will blackmail Bush with impeachment hearings for every bill he threatens to veto-we are fudged!

True, but Clinton was impeached by the House and the Senate left him in office. Same could happen to Bush if he keeps the Senate Republicans on his side. But looking back on the Clinton Impeachment, the Democrats would have been better off in the long run by removing Clinton from office. Gore would have used the incumbency advantage to beat the Electoral College margin, assuming of course that he did not have to pardon Clinton. So if Cheney wants to run in 2008, all bets are off with regards to the US Senate. Unfortunately it is also possible that we could have a Nixon replay here. The new dynamic now is that we have crazy leaders in Iran, Venezuela and North Korea. They will probably force our hands because DC is split and weak once again. In a nut shell, we are in for a very rocky ride. The Democrats used hook and crook (Foley, MSM et. al.) to be in power and my guess is they will probably end up wondering if it was worth it all.

[dawn53]

I read Krauthammer and Steyn. From what they say, this is a "normal" mid-term response.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/02/AR2006110201597.html

From the article:

What to say about such a victory? Substantial, yes. Historic, no. Before proclaiming a landslide, one has to ask Henny Youngman's question: "Compared to what?" (His answer to: "How's your wife?") Since the end of World War II, the average loss for a second-term presidency in its sixth year has been 29 House seats and six Senate seats. If you go back to Franklin Roosevelt's second term, the House loss average jumps to 35. Thus a 25/6 House and Senate loss would be about (and slightly below) the historical average.

[Skooz]

I blame the 'teach them a lesson' crowd.

Ditto.