Posted on 11/09/2006 4:58:44 AM PST by Leroy S. Mort
"Hispanics backed Democrats 69-30 - after backing Democrats 61-37 in 2002."
Well, if you believe the exit polls. They were 5% to 7% off.
It really does not tell that much, because we lost voters across the board.
GOP screwed up the vote incentive. Voters go to the polls to vote FOR something, someone - not to vote AGAINST someone, something. Voters told the "base", "Shape up your candidate and give us a reason to vote FOR them or else." Republicans may have "kept the base" - the mindless "R" pullers who give little thought to who/what wears the initial, but the independent voter, the swing voter voted just as the GOP viewed them - they didn't matter, it didn't matter - so the initial didn't cut cartwheels with them either way.
The media is definitely another factor. Now that it worked, they are only going to get worse. Here in Tennessee we had more Republicans voting for our democrat governer then the Repub challenger cause for all intents and purposes, our gov hasn't made the news much, the economy is pretty good, so they reelected him in a landslide. But if he had ben a Republican and did the exact same things, the media would have crucified him.
That pretty much describes the rats.
The RNC has been infested with RINOs and mealy mouthed country clubbers who ditched the girl they courted because she is from the wrong side of the tracks and they got pressured by the overly rich Democrats to choose between their society and the girl. Pretty in Pink, any one? I hope the Country Clubbers feel the sting of this election for a long time. And if we have another attack, I will be singling them out first. THEY ASKED FOR IT.
We are sunk then. This is a different enemy. One that has dug in world wide and blends in with society. We will be fighting this enemy for the rest of time.
I wish the same could be said for the electorate.
Someone is going to need to level with American people.
We are 9 trillion in debt, with another 60 trillion in unfunded liabilities (Soc. Security, and Medicare) this means we can not afford the entitlements we have today without doubling taxes. So, we certainly can not afford more entitlements.
After the honesty we appeal to their optimism and their individualism that their futures are in their hands and that they can make it on thier own and they are going to have to because the American government is essentially bankrupt.
This may not be the message they want, but it's the truth.
I thought Bush tried that with Social Security. The Congress really jumped on that issue didn't they?
I am optimistic that the electorate will understand the Muslim threat.
This is not like most wars where 19-22 year old uniformed males are killed crippled and maimed in the conflict on both sides, while the rest of their countrymen party on.
This is a religious war, Muslims against Infidels, and the civilian population eventually will be hardest hit. So people who usually can stay above the fray will be targeted also. When influential people who are usually immune from conflict get hit, it will cause a reality check.
I stress influential people because killing 3,000 office workers in NY on 9-11 didn't do it.
However if one of the planes had hit congress and wiped out some senators and reps it would have been a whole different reaction. Maybe next time. -Tom
Even though its the AP, the article is correct. Notice that the final pre-election polls understated RAT strength. The RAT candidate did better than the polls said.
For example, Santorum was down 10-15 points. He lost by 20.
Steele was either tied or trailing by 5. He lost by 10.
Talent was deadlocked. He lost by 2.
It appears that the last moment undecideds tilted to the RATS.
I love your tagline.
Bush tried to paint SS as bleak without admitting that Medicare was worse. Instead of being seen as restoring our fiscal house it was seen as a Wall Street scheme AND since he was the same guy who pushed through the Medicaire Presicription drug bill (which costs atleast as much as SS reform would have saved)...cynicism may have been merited.
And if the people really don't want SS privatized then we'll just wind up means testing it. That really doesn't bother me either.
Incindiary rhetoric? You would be an expert on that Dane. Voters weren't happy about Hayworths association with Jack Abramoff (friend of the whitehouse, remember him?)Plus getting on the illegal immigration bandwagon late in the game didn't help him much.
http://grades.betterimmigration.com/view_history.php3?District=AZ05&VIPID=44
It's going to take more than McCain or Guilani to get me back to the polls in 2008.
Oh and more honesty:
We are running a war on terror with a peacetime sized military. This won't work either.
Ultimately somone is going to have to level with the American people. Either us or the Dims are going to have to do it.
Then you must be young. :-) But seriously, means testing really annoys me because it's just another breach of faith from what the forced program was intended. They took my money for most of my life with the promise I'd see some of it back when I couldn't work. Now, because I worked hard and saved too, they're going to punish me? You expect conservatives to run on means testing? Good luck future and present minority party. By the way, what IS the conservative agenda on medicare? Are you going to tell grandma that she really doesn't NEED that heart medicine because she still owns her own trailer? Good platform, that's a real winner. ;-)
I don't necessarily agree with your premise. This sounds like more Army grumbling about money going to special ops but lets say you are correct, caveman. Finish the thought. Are you recommending a draft or stepped up recruitment? Exactly what?
But Mehlman turned out to be correct... If even Chafee had survived, Republicans would have held the Senate.
Mehlman always does a good job communicating on tv and radio; he made the choice very stark for viewers: the moonbat Dean on their side, reason and principle on ours. That voters chose the moonbat is not his fault.
The fact is, Mehlman represented the Republican establishment and did a good job of it. Change in the party just shouldn't be expected to come from that quarter-- change comes from the outside. Republicans need more groups than just the Club for Growth to support the conservatives in primaries and after--- we have the think tanks, they have the fund raising 527s.
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.