Post Mortem Why Republicans got shellacked in the midterms

the weekly standard ^ | 11/08/2006 9:00:00 AM | Fred Barnes

[flixxx]

THIS ONE IS PRETTY EASY TO EXPLAIN. Republicans lost the House and probably the Senate because of Iraq, corruption, and a record of taking up big issues and then doing nothing on them. Of these, the war was by far the biggest factor. Unpopular wars trump good economies and everything else. President Truman learned this in 1952, as did President Johnson in 1968. Now, it was President Bush's turn, and since his name wasn't on the ballot, his party took the hit.

[Paulus Invictus]

Did Diana Irey beat that traitor Murtha? I could not find any reference to the race on the web and that's strange.

[BigSkyFreeper]

The Democrats won by running on no agenda at all.

[Bushiefan]

"The MSM doesn't have to slant the coverage of Iraq"

Well, bless my boots. It's a war. Do you really expect no casualties? It is slanted when that is the major thing reported every day on the front page and on TV, and none of the positive or heroic incidences are reported.

If the 2400 killings in California in 2003 were blasted to the public via the MSM day in and day out, that might have an effect too. Who would want to visit or live there?

Iraq is the site of a war. What is the excuse of California and other states and major cities?

[Jerez2]

BS. Repubs lose because the media won't report anything good about us. They deny us our voice. Re Iraq, the economy, and much more. The R's really need better PR (Tony Snow is good but need more). And BUYING a major news outlet would be the best thing. Conservatives believe in private property - why have we not put our money where our mouth is on this?

I love George W Bush, really. But when I voted for him, I didn't realize how very important his two 'blind spots' - immigration and communication - would become. I'm still glad HE was on deck when 9/11 hit. I support the war in Iraq, but think we should take the gloves off. I know many R's/conservatives feel the same way. Do it - and TELL US you're doing it. Hah! if the media let you!

I'm depressed, but trust in God for a silver lining... someday.

[jmc1969]

That is bull.

The problem is that we have not had the troops to protect localities in Iraq so who do they rely on? You guessed it militias. And, these militias resort to killing and sectarian violence and crime.

There would be no Madhi Army or Badr militia today if we protected the Shia from Zarqawi by really occupying Western Iraq and the Sunni parts of Baghdad.

[DCPatriot]

365 24/7 trashing of POTUS and reports of only the ugly in Iraq.

Exactly! The REAL enemy of the USA is the maintstream leftist media.

I'm afraid the nearly 3000 military deaths and tens of thousands wounded in Iraq will have been in vain.

How are you going to explain leaving to this little girl?

[BigSkyFreeper]

If we see a terrorist attack on US soil before the end of Bush's term, I won't be surprised. After his term is finished I fully expect to see something awful happen.

That's not a matter of if but when, and it will be the Democrats who will be to blame. They'll do the same thing that they did to Reagan against the Nicaraguans. They'll slowly turn the tap off on funding the WOT, no one will notice until that tap is completely off.

[stacytec]

I blame the MSM for all the losses in Maryland. The Baltimore Sun and The Washington Post took shots at Ehrlich and Steele almost every day, never once giving them a fare shake or even attempting to objectively research their issues. This one wasn't an easy to swallow, those two were good men that deserved a fair shake.

[spinestein]

It takes a bit of twisted logic to think the election was a lesson for the Republicans to move left rather than right.

[satan]

Rove you stupid bastard.

Where are all the Rove fans today?

[PjhCPA]

I was thinking more along the lines of "Rove, you magnificent dumb@ass."

[BigSkyFreeper]

The PLAN is to raise taxes, give the right to vote to felons, illegal aliens and last but not least give Islamo-fascist terrorists the green light to attack us at home.

A googly eyed dingbat ain't gonna care about lower taxes, making sure felons don't vote, the crisis on the border, while strengthning ammoral issues like gay marriage and the furthering the culture of death.

[Wombat101]

That's the second nomination I've gotten for anything in the past week and a half on this forum! I've have demurred, because I work for a living and have talent, but perhaps now I should reconsider?

Nah, it's only common sense and having any of that pretty much disqualifies me for public office.

[satan]

"I hope the Republican Leadership is paying attention."

If Bush and TSB Rove had paid attention this wouldn't have happened.

[stacytec]

You're # 5 is my #1.

[stacytec]

LOL, I need coffee - I ment "Your #5".

[spinestein]

[Too much compassionate, not enough conservatism.]

[The Republicans got fired for non-performance.]




True and true.

[moonhawk]

Wow....

Thanks

[Southerngl]

>>>>>But the Republicans won't take that as the message. They'll simply think they weren't liberal enough.<<

It takes a bit of twisted logic to think the election was a lesson for the Republicans to move right rather than left.>>>

Sadly though, they don't seem to have a knack for listening to their base. So I don't have much hope that they will 'get it'.

[kabar]

The MSM doesn't have to slant the coverage of Iraq at all when you've got dozens of U.S. military personnel killed and hundreds wounded every month -- more than three freaking years after the President declared an end to "major combat operations."

But the MSM is slanting the coverage of Iraq if you believe our returning military. You don't use a scorecard of the killed and wounded to determine if you are winning or losing. It is the accomplishment of objectives, which are important. I think we are winning using those criteria.

FYI: US dead and wounded declined in 2005 from 2004 and will decline again in 2006 from 2005. The MSM used the slight uptick in October 2006 to give people the impression that we were seeing a massive increase in violence. Of course it was also intended to influence our elections.

2004

Dead--848[KIA-719]; wounded--7998; Total--8,846

2005

Dead--846[KIA-676]; wounded--5943; Total--6,798

2006 thru November 8

Dead--659[KIA-565]; wounded--4,338 [thru Oct 31]; Total--4,997

November 1-8, 2006, we have lost 20 dead [16 KIA]. Barring some unforeseen development, 2006 will mark the second straight year that US casualties have declined. You won't read that in the MSM anywhere.

Of the 20,687 wounded since March 2003, 11,682 were returned to duty within 72 hours. It also bears mentioning that 5,716 Iraqi securty forces [military and police] have been killed or twice the number of American military lost. Iraqi losses have been increasing as they take on more of the security burden. In the "infamous" month of October 2006, the US lost 105 [KIA-99] compared to Iraqi security KIAs of 224. And to put October 2006 into context, we lost 96 dead [KIA-78] in October 2005.

Major combat operations have ceased. It is amazing that Americans have become so casualty averse and unable to put our current low rate of casualties into some sort of context. We are a nation of 300 million. If we can't deal with these kind of casualties in pursuit of our national security interests, then we are indeed a paper tiger. I say that advisedly as a Vietnam vet who was in Danang during the Tet offensive.