[Indy Pendance]

Or Hillary. Get a grip. You people don't know history. Well, check this history out. This is the battle we're fighting. If people fail to see the big picture, than they shouldn't be allowed to voice an opinion, because the overall objective, outing the libs is forefront, not a one issue wonder. If you all can't see this, you don't belong here. IF we get a 300 majority, like the dems did in history, yes, review the below data, then maybe we can dictate how things are going to be. Now, we're lucky to get our dog catcher elected. And with the bare majority we had the previous 6 years, it's a wonder anything was done. For Gods sake, look at the FDR years, and you wonder why social security passed. People. You need to learn history, us nitpicking now isn't going to do it. Stand up, do something other than gripe and moan on the internet. Have you actually helped a conservative cause? LOL! And if this is what Free Republic's become, a bitch and moan session, then I suppose my time is done here. Frankly, I can join any chat site and get the same results.

Historical Party Strength in Congress U.S. Senate

Historical Party Strength in Congress U.S. House

As if anyone on this board other than us long timers really care about the history of politics. Look at the FDR years, they had at times over 2/3rds in the senate:

1933-1935 1935-1937 1937-1939 1939-1941 1941-1943 1943-1945	73rd 74th 75th 76th 77th 78th	D D D D D D	60 69 76 69 66 58	R R R R R R	35 25 16 23 28 37	1 2 4 4 2 1	F.Roosevelt (D) F.Roosevelt (D) F.Roosevelt (D) F.Roosevelt (D) F.Roosevelt (D) F.Roosevelt (D)
1945-1947 1947-1949 1949-1951 1951-1953 1953-1955 1955-1957	79th 80th 81st 82nd 83rd 84th	D R D D R D	56 51 54 49 48 48	R D R R D R	38 45 42 47 47 47	1 - - - 1 1	F.Roosevelt (D) Truman (D) Truman (D) Truman (D) Eisenhower (R) Eisenhower (R)
1957-1959 1959-1961 1961-1963 1963-1965 1965-1967 1967-1969	85th 86th 87th 88th 89th 90th	D D D D D D	49 65 65 67 68 64	R R R R R R	47 35 35 33 32 36	1 1 1 1 1 1	Eisenhower (R) Eisenhower (R) Kennedy (D) Kennedy (D) L.Johnson (D) L.Johnson (D)
1969-1971 1971-1973 1973-1975 1975-1977 1977-1979 1979-1981	91st 92nd 93rd 94th 95th 96th	D D D D D D	57 54 56 60 61 58	R R R R R R	43 44 42 37 38 41	- 2 2 3 1 1	Nixon (R) Nixon (R) Nixon(R) Ford (R) Carter (D) Carter (D)
1981-1983 1983-1985 1985-1987 1987-1989 1989-1991 1991-1993	97th 98th 99th 100th 101st 102nd	R R R D D D	53 55 53 55 54 56	D D D R R R	46 45 47 45 46 44	1 - - - - -	Reagan (R) Reagan (R) Reagan (R) Reagan (R) GHW Bush (R) GHW Bush (R)
1993-1995 1995-1997 1997-1999 1999-2001 2001-2003 2003-2005	103rd 104th 105th 106th 107th 108th	D R R R D R	57 52 55 55 50 51	R D D D R D	43 48 45 45 49 48	- - - - 1 1	Clinton (D) Clinton (D) Clinton (D) Clinton (D) G.W. Bush (R) G.W. Bush (R)

But take a look at the house in that same era. There were only two GOP terms up til 1994, and one congress was pretty slim. And add to the fact that FDR created a welfare country. Well, is it any wonder we are battling for conservative values today, when even the republicans don't know what real limited government is? Especially look where we've come since 1937. And people on FR think this is going to be a piece of cake when historical data indicates otherwise. In other words, getting a real majority of conservative republicans can be done in 6 years is a pipe dream. It's going to take a LONG time. And what have you done do advance conservativism, other than post on a chat site?

1933-1935 1935-1937 1937-1939 1939-1941 1941-1943 1943-1945	73rd 74th 75th 76th 77th 78th	D D D D D D	313 322 334 262 267 222	R R R R R R	117 103 88 169 162 209	5 10 13 4 5 4	F.Roosevelt (D) F.Roosevelt (D) F.Roosevelt (D) F.Roosevelt (D) F.Roosevelt (D) F.Roosevelt (D)
1945-1947 1947-1949 1949-1951 1951-1953 1953-1955 1955-1957	79th 80th 81st 82nd 83rd 84th	D R D D R D	242 246 263 235 221 232	R D R R D R	191 188 171 199 213 203	2 1 1 1 1 -	F.Roosevelt (D) Truman (D) Truman (D) Truman (D) Eisenhower (R) Eisenhower (R)
1957-1959 1959-1961 1961-1963 1963-1965 1965-1967 1967-1969	85th 86th 87th 88th 89th 90th	D D D D D D	234 283 263 259 295 247	R R R R R R	201 153 174 176 140 187	- 1 - - - -	Eisenhower (R) Eisenhower (R) Kennedy (D) Kennedy (D) L.Johnson (D) L.Johnson (D)
1969-1971 1971-1973 1973-1975 1975-1977 1977-1979 1979-1981	91st 92nd 93rd 94th 95th 96th	D D D D D D	243 255 242 291 292 277	R R R R R R	192 180 192 144 143 158	- - 1 - - -	Nixon (R) Nixon (R) Nixon(R) Ford (R) Carter (D) Carter (D)
1981-1983 1983-1985 1985-1987 1987-1989 1989-1991 1991-1993	97th 98th 99th 100th 101st 102nd	D D D D D D	242 269 253 258 260 267	R R R R R R	192 166 182 177 175 167	1 - - - - 1	Reagan (R) Reagan (R) Reagan (R) Reagan (R) GHW Bush (R) GHW Bush (R)
1993-1995 1995-1997 1997-1999 1999-2001 2001-2003 2003-2005	103rd 104th 105th 106th 107th 108th	D R R R R R	258 230 228 223 221 229	R D D D D D	176 204 206 211 212 204	1 1 1 1 2 1	Clinton (D) Clinton (D) Clinton (D) Clinton (D) G.W. Bush (R) G.W. Bush (R)
2005-2007	109th	R	232	D	202	1	G.W. Bush (R)

[onyx]

Now, there's a worthy post and it deserves a thread of its own! Excellent post and research. Thank you, Indy!!!!

BTTT

[neverdem]

Or Hillary. Get a grip. You people don't know history.

I know NY Rockefeller Pubbie history quite well. Thank you. That's why NY's Conservative Party was started. They had some successes. The RINOs is in NY have always been too smart by half. Now NY has become doomed by demographics, immigration into and emigration from NY to points south and west. The overall state poulation hasn't changed much in decades, a little over 18 million. I'm not voting for pubbies that want un-Constitutional laws.

[neverdem]

Have you actually helped a conservative cause?

I volunteered in 2004 in PA for the pubbies. I believe Tamzee might be able to verify that. I volunteered for McCain in the 2000 primary because I thought McCain was more electable than GWB. I now have no enthusiasm for McCain, Giuliani or Romney. I'm a life member of what was appreciated as the most effective lobby in D.C. It's not the AARP.

[beyond the sea]

Stand up, do something other than gripe and moan on the internet. Have you actually helped a conservative cause? LOL! And if this is what Free Republic's become, a bitch and moan session, then I suppose my time is done here. Frankly, I can join any chat site and get the same results.

I hear you.

For years, I have been thinking of these political shows on tv with their little round table political discussions with the "influential political writers" around the table, and all the political musing on so many variant websites, to me I really have been seeing them as a strange but humorous form of masturbation.

It's funny to me and I swear that this is true, when I see those round table sessions such as on Tim Russert's "Meet The Depressed", I really almost visualize all those participants at the table with their hands down under the table, "pleasing themselves ". All the talk serves to just make the participants feel better...... and darned if it doesn't.

Along those lines most of this political chat here and elsewhere seems to me to be about the same thing. And, as America's political scene morphs as the years go by, and Congress becomes with each day a club of like-minded, spineless cowards, I see most of these political ruminations as a large waste of time and often are just pure posturing.

It would be very funny if it weren't so pathetic.

p.s. I appreciate the Congressional numbers you produced here ..... thank you very much.

****

[newzjunkey]

Thanks, pretty scary. It's crystal clear the Republicans were never remotely close to any kind of "permanent majority" and squandered a truly unique opportunity for the party. Another think to "thank" Rove & W for. The only thing we can hope for is the Republicans to win back Congress mid-term when the next "unified" Democrat gov't screws up. We probably won't have a shot before 2010.

The total abandonment of fiscal conservatism has angered MANY who aren't in the group motived by "theocratic" concerns.