Posted on 11/10/2006 6:59:08 AM PST by Pokey78
Thank you! After reading FR for these last few days I was wondering if any Reaganites were left besides me.
To the rest of you, Reagan would be appalled
Well you take what you can get. Wasn't McClintock running for Lt. Gov? Is that tied to the governor's ticket or is it separate? Did he win?
I think Rumsfeld and the American people deserved better!!
If the STRATEGY in IRAQ is changed to one of NEGOTIATION with Syria and Iran, all we accomplished will have been done for nothing!!
Yes, I think the biggest failure was the failure to communicate. We know that Bush is not a good communicator, but where was the man/woman in the WH who should have been fixing/ameliorating this problem?
Yes, they were so kind to Reagan.
I keep seeing freepers posting how much they "like Newt" for 2008...and I just don't understand it.
Newt is the ultimate in opportunists...he never misses an opportunity to bash Bush...after holding his finger in the wind, of course.
He should talk less....much less.
It's so ironic to see in USENET how many the blue blooded country, club open, open border republicans blame the hardline right and their righteousness for losing the election are now using those same tactics to attack Newt.
An accurate description of both parties, I'd say.
What about the apathy that keeps the people from issuing cease and desists demands when the government acts unconstitutionally? (mccain-feingold, eminent domain, illegal amnesty, NAFTA, etc.) The government answers to us, remember?
While we are blaming politicians and parties for the Republican loss in the House and Senate, we should remember to stand in front of a mirror and ask the same hard questions.
If it did not matter, why did he quit?
Iraq. That's why we lost. Period.
I guess the Dimmies are having a great day watching us squawking, squealing, and finger pointing.
Newt's pretty good as a pundit but he's not presidential material. He's good for think tanks, etc. but he wouldn't win the presidency.
Did Bush ever smack back at the media? I think he made it easier than it should have been for them to crucify him.
Maybe he was just too nice.
He's not the only one (COUGH!)
No matter. The truth, however inconvenient, can't be stifled.
I guess he forgot about the 98 election. His words may be correct, but they would also apply to why he resigned.
All of the polls were telling them that the single biggest issue pulling the Republicans down was unhappiness with the administration's performance in Iraq.
If Bush had decided to dump Rumsfeld anyway, he should have announced it 6 weeks before the election and the proposed replacement would then be in a position to say he will study ways to change the tactics to make us more successful without having to be specific. Yes, the Rats would have claimed it was just a stunt but it would have been better than not dealing with dissatisfaction over progress in Iraq.
Republicans would NOT have been demoralized, they would have been more energized by a message was that we are going to find a way to be more effective and win in Iraq.
It is a mistake to conclude that because the polls show people are unhappy with the administration's conduct of Iraq that they want to pull out and accept defeat -- a move by Bush to demonstrate that he seriously wants to change tactics to make Iraq successful would have been a big net positive in the elections.
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.