Threatening to get the mods to look into my posting history is silly. I have been on FR longer than you have and have a good posting history since then. That childishness speaks volumes for you, and it isn’t flattering.
I supported Dubya in 2000 and 2004, and predicted victories for him in both races. Look it up. In fact, I overstated Dubya’s appeal in 2004 - he won by fewed Electoral Votes than I expected.
That’s not a doom & gloomer, nor a troll, unless you have a pathological need to oversimplify things so that they agree with your delicate worldview. I’m sorry it’s so fragile.
Clarity first. And I strive for clarity. That doesn’t mean I;m always right. It does mean I try not to put partisan blinders on. I evaluate the political climate as of now. Of course things can change and likely will - thing is, it’s immature to think they will necessarily change for the better.
Through the latter half of 2005 and all of 2006, the conventional wisdom on FR was wrong. Things important to FR were seen as alienating to the general electorate. The result was that even though the election was a while away, or the requisite snarky remark that Bush won’t win reelection, things didn’t get better and steadily grew worse.
We had Freepers insist that Katherine Harris was going to win, when it was clear to anybody with a little bit of clarity that she would be an early casualty in what was going to be a long night for the GOP.
And those that said that were right, and the snarky types joined the denial types in the losers circle. Well, I’m not happy it happened. It would be a profound misread to think that.
But I call it like I see it. If I see it wrong, fine, but that doesn’t make me a troll or a democrat. Disagreeing with the conventional wisdom on FR doesn’t make someone an enemy, no matter how that kind of simplistic worldview is comforting to some.
In 2006, almost every race that could have broken in our direction broke in the other direction. Any way you cut it, that’s not a good sign. It demonstrated a lack of confidence in GOP and conservative leadership. Despite massive self-hypnosis around some pockets on FR, many conservatives were rejected by the electorate in 2006. It wasn’t all RINOs.
And the polls, on balance, were right. They predicted a big night for the dems, and the dems had a big night. They now enjoy about a 30 seat margin in the House and a close ideological margin in the Senate.
I don’t doubt that the polls showing remarkable disapproval of the president and Congress are accurate. I never suggested otherwise. Not so important for now - we have a GOP president who has alienated a lot of people, and is stick in the low to mid 30s in approval. He also enjoys disapproval around 60%. The country has no confidence in his ability to win the war in Iraq. The conventional wisdom now is that it is lost. As that perception solidifies, his stature diminishes.
That has nothing to do with how well the public perceives congress. His fortunes do not inexorably rise as Congress’ stature diminishes.
A lot can change in 16 months, but like I said a year before election 2006, there are no signs of movement so far. As it stands now, odds are strong the country will elect a democrat in 2008.
What’s the point in writing otherwise if that’s how I evaluate things? and I’m not alone. Rush is beloved on this forum and he frankly has said there is an 80% chance the dems win the WH in 2008. I suppose he is a troll? A liberal? The enemy?
Type what you want. As the circumstances change, I’ll evaluate and acknowledge. But I won’t deny polls in order to feed some shallow, immature worldview.
Sometimes things just don’t go your way. And pretending that they are going your way doesn’t help.
Many of the other RudyBoosters were here longer than this username has been registered too. Considering the lack of general respect in your post for the people here at FreeRepublic, I’m surprised you even bother to grace us with your presence.
Thank you for a prime example of exactly the myopia, simple mindedness, and ignorance that I previously pointed out.
You’re stuck in 2006. You get so mired down in punditry that you don’t even see that most of the GOP faithful are very much against Bush too. You think that because something is said on FR that it’s conventional wisdom here.
You’re not disagreeing with any FR conventional wisdom. You’re the myopic one, not me. You seem to think that if someone types it on FR, it must be incorrect because someone supported Katherine Harris once, therefore the opposite must be true.
You’re conveniently ignoring any positives in an effort to convince others to be more negative. You are the one denying things that don’t fit your world view, not me. It always amuses me when people use a tongue in cheek Rush remark to justify their closed mindedness.
By the way, I could see you taking this attitude if I was saying that someone like Duncan Hunter was going to sweep the primary states and win the general by 20 points.
I’m not doing that, nor am I saying that the landscape is perfect or even very good for Republicans. There is, however, quite a lot more to it than what you are pointing out. Nothing is set in stone and there are some encouraging indicators. There are some discouraging ones too. Time will tell how those things play out. But you’re one of the people trying to call the game over at this early date. That just smacks of an agenda, plain and simple.
Sometimes things just aren’t as crappy as you would like everyone to think. Pretending that they are doesn’t help you convince anyone.