Posted on 02/18/2007 5:12:27 AM PST by Alas Babylon!
The Talk Shows
Sunday, February 17th, 2007
Guests to be interviewed today on major television talk shows:
FOX NEWS SUNDAY (Fox Network): Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich.
MEET THE PRESS (NBC): White House press secretary Tony Snow.
FACE THE NATION (CBS): Sens. Joe Biden, D-Del., and Richard Lugar, R-Ind.
THIS WEEK (ABC): Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and his wife, Ann Romney; actor Michael Douglas.
LATE EDITION (CNN) : White House press secretary Tony Snow; Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.; New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson; magician Penn Jillette; former Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael Steele; and Marc Morial, president of the National Urban League.
This is the same MSM, a member of which could not think of even one question after Pres. Bush refused to answer the one he had written about the Libby trial. GWB can answer questions for one hour without notes, and the MSM guy could not even think up a single question on the spot and yet they are convinced that the pres. is the stupid one. It is infuriating.
I remember every time that Reagan gave a major speech, I watched it so worried that he would make a gaffe. He never did and I realize now that it was the MSM promoting the same Reagan-is-stupid idea....just like with Phi Beta Kappa Gerald Ford.
Yes....but I am glad that he took the time to go back and explain his answer about Iran.
At one point Timmy asked him if the US would "go into Iran" to get the Iranians that are killing Americans and/or making the weapons, and Tony just said, "No".
I was kind of taken aback by that answer...but he did go back later in the interview and say that Pres. Bush hasn't taken anything off the table...
I am sure that the MSM will just use that ONE sound bite though..if it works towards their storyline.
Tony Snow...no Scott McClellan...praise be.
VA: Allen 49%, Webb 50%
MT: Burns 48%, Tester 49%
MO: Talent 47%, McCaskill 49%
One or two percent showing up, holding their noses, and pulling the "R" lever, and we wouldn't have Minority Leader Reid.
Too simplistic an explanation to understand the dynamics of these races. And some wishful thinking. It is similar to Kerry's bleating about 60,000 votes in Ohio, less than attend a football game in Columbus, that could have made him President. Or Gore about a few hundred votes in Florida. The plain truth is that no incumbent Dem lost.
Woulda, coulda, shoulda. In VA, Allen received 1,166,277 votes in 2006 to Webb's 1,175,606. In 2000, a Presidential election year, he defeated Robb 52% to 48% and received 1.4 million votes to Robb's 1.3 million.
In 2000 Burns defeated Schweitzer 208,026 to 194,567. In 2006 Tester defeated Burns 199,845 to 196,283. In 2006 Burns had some scandal problems and did not do very well in the debates. Also, Stan Jones, the Libertarian, received 10,377 votes.
In 2002 Talent squeaked by Carnahan 935,032 to 913,778. In 2006 Talent received 1,006,941 votes to McCaskill's 1,055,255. So both candidates received more votes than in 2002. It is debateable how much the Michael Fox ads made in terms of the margin of victory.
In all three cases above, the Rep was the incumbent. Each race had its own dynamics. To attribute the loss on Rep voter turnout is clutching at straws. Also, all three incumbent Reps had won office by fairly narrow margins.
Rather meaningless unless you can connect them to a specific election. Turnout is always lower in a mid-term. The fact that the Dems turnout was only 1% demonstrates to me that they did a better job of getting their people out to vote, i.e., they were more energized.
Rassmussen has it. 2006 Republican turn out down 8% compared to 2004. While a lot of this had to do with fewer voters due to no presidential race, the dems turnout was only down 1%. Significantly, Republican turn out was down 4% over 2002.
What was the Dem turnout compared to 2002?
And Rush has the biggest national audience by far. I believe Hannity is second and Levin is moving up.
That seems to be the general mythology, but when you look at each of the 31 seats that changed hands in the House, that doesn't appear to be the case. In the Northeast, we lost the following incumbents: Simmons (CT), Johnson (CT), Kelly (NY), Sweeney (NY), Bradley (NH), Bass (NH), Hart (PA), Weldon (PA), Fitzpatrick (PA), and Sherwood (PA). None of the 10 Dems who won would be considered blue dog dems with the possible exception of Sestak. Generally the Dems made no bones about being more liberal than the Rep opponents.
There were many pissed off 100%ers who didn't get their way here or there and heaven only knows how or even if they voted, that cost us probably enough to tilt several races.
More conventional wisdom without a lot of data to support it. The Dems also took 6 governorships in 2006 and didn't lose any.
Shortly before the election those of us who follow politics closely as sleuth,you and I both do could not help but sense a huge disaffection within our party. Chances are good it translated into rat votes to some degree we will probably never know how much or to what extent but it should not be ignored.
The most divisive issue has been illegal immigration. The WH has elected to go against the majority of its own party. The Reps voted 32-23 against the Senate bill [the Dems voted 38-4 for it] and the House Reps voted 203-17 in favor of the enforcement first bill. Surpisingly the Dems in the House voted only 164 to 36 against it,i.e., almost 20% of the Dems voting voted with the Reps.
When the RNC contacted me for my annual donation, I told them I would not contribute to the GOP as long as the WH stand on immigration stays the same and Mel Martinez is the chairman. I said I would contribute to individual campaigns and would vote Rep regardless of the candidate. The RNC lady responded that she agrees with me and that they have been telling their bosses that this is a major problem. They just don't listen.
Let's hope like you said, we get it together and soon, we have lots of senate seats up for grabs next time around.
The GOP has some serious problems ahead. Demographics and time favor the Dems. More and more the Reps are becoming a regional party with the South being our power base. The Dems are picking off the RINOs one by one and making inroads into states like VA, Colorado, Nevada and Arizona. One issue voters are also a problem if we want to continue to be a national party. The Dems are now consolidating their power. It took them 12 years to regain control of the House and it took us 40 years to win it from them. We are not going to regain power anytime soon so it will be important to hang together and keep what we have.
Are you talking to me?
Yes
I don't pick on anyone and you are a jerk for saying it.
You have freepmail.
Thank you for your kind response. Your prayers are pretty powerful! I feel much better this morning. Thank you, again.
b.
Understood. All I can say is IF the US pulls out of Iraq, or IF the Democrats force our withdrawal, Iraq then turns into the Democrats Defeat. We will not have lost in Iraq, we will have retreated before being allowed to win.
Democrats call for "diplomacy" is a joke. No matter what President Bush does the Democrats will find fault and take the other side. Democrats certainly did not call for deplomacy in Kosovo, and we are still there.
Agreed.
Democrats govern by polls and focus groups based upon what their special interest groups want them to do. That is not an effective way to govern, nor the leadership needed.
I remember during the Jimmy Carter era, as Democrats and the media started in on saying the US Presidency was too much for one person to handle and we needed to consider a co-president to solve all the problems. And yes, they were serious. Carter gave his malaise speech and it was clear he had no clue how to solve double-digit: inflation, interest rates and unemployment. Voters, however, knew better and President Reagan was elected. The rest, as they say, is history.
They could call is a "Contract With America."
Na, probably wouldn't work.
Agreed. I never fail to learn something new each Sunday morning. Others too, including anita. There is a wealth of information being listed each week and it's impossible to keep up with it all.
Watch a woman's body language. Any language and any country. They know what's up everywhere. That is how women are the same. They just make different sounds.
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.