Posted on 07/12/2007 9:40:13 PM PDT by gpapa
Is the Republican Party standing on the edge of a cliff? It's possible. Let's consider the bad news.
1) Fund-raising. Republicans are still portrayed as the little Monopoly man capitalists by the media, but the truth is that Democrats are now (alas) the party of the rich. As Peter Schweizer reported in National Review Online last year, "In 2004, Democrats made up 15 of the 25 individuals who gave more than $2 million to 527 groups. Of the Senate and House candidates who received 'bundled' contributions that year, 9 out of the top 10 in the Senate and 8 out of 10 in the House were Democrats. . . . In 2002, those who gave a million dollars or more gave $36 million to the Democrats and only $3 million to Republicans, a 12:1 ratio."
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
Hate to tell ya, Mona, but they've always been the party of the rich.
Mona Charen is one of the most dull and clueless columnists going.
The Republicans screwed themselves by abandoning conservatism. That’s all it took. The greedy bastards sold us out, and they are now reaping their whirlwind. I once contributed handsomely, but no more. Bush and the establishment Republicans have been as charlatan as Clinton.
And we non-Hispanic 88% ... we're indifferent?
Mona thinks in side the beltway.
If the Republicans can make the issues be on taxes, terrorism and the border, they win. The Rats will run on the Bush Bashing platform, Global Climate change, sometimes called weather, abortion, and free Health Care (it won`t be free, they`ll just make it sound that way). What else do the have? And, we still have our secret weapon-—HILLORAT!
Since when do we believe the polls?
The Rats will have the War of course, but that might not, by then, be something that`s good for them. We`ll see.
Is the Republican Party standing on the edge of a cliff?...If it continues to crap on the base it is...
The saving grace for the GOP is the cast of characters the Dems are running. None of them, including the increasingly nutty Al Gore (if he ran) are going to be able to do the Clinton middle of the road thing. They might still win due to depressed GOP turnout and the anti Bush flow of the sentiment, but it won’t be an easy slam dunk.
Of course the GOP is running a Mormon Mass Gov and a former New York Mayor who has a quirky combination of personal issues and views ON the issues...hard sells in the Red States. Thus the Fred dynamic.
Given the fact that the entire 2008 election might very well come down to Ohio yet again, Thompson is the only GOPER who could run the red state table. Guiliani and Romney are a strange mix for the red/blue dynamic. Though Rudy could theoretically do something I don’t think Romney could do, steal a PA, WI, MI, NY, NJ or Cali from the dems. Romney is smooth, I’ll give him that, but the Mormon, Mass and Flipflopper perception is a trifecta he cannot overcome.
I can see Fred being a force in the South and parts of the midwest. Not sure how he will play in PA, MI, Ohio and the like. Though if his opposition is Hillary he could win rather handily. A Rudy v Hillary v Bloomberg race would be the most bizarre and hard to predict IMO.
I quite agree with you. My sense is that Fred could run away with the election.
I figured Dubya had already pushed the party off the cliff with his amnesty obsession.
“I quite agree with you. My sense is that Fred could run away with the election.”
What Americans hate most in a president (which has not been brought out) is a nutjob - scares the Bejeebers out of them. Almost all the candidates on both sides except Fred and Duncan have a hinky feeling to them, something just not right.
I see a landslide, just no way people will want a harpy in office.
I heard that McCain-Feingold delivered the Democratic Party into the coffers of none other than George Soros.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1320747/posts
You might have to search for it, but it’s there.
Boy I hope Al Gore runs—that would be so fun to see him go up against Hill. I have a feeling Al has a lot of pent up frustration when it comes to Billary.
The Republicans might very well win the White House in spite of themselves. The Congress is lost, however, for the foreseeable future.
Reasons:
1. The war. Not that we’re fighting it, but that we’re fighting it incompetently. The people have not been rallied to it and given a role to play. The military has not been substantially increased in size. Large numbers of contractors are being employed at incredible expense to do the jobs our soldiers and the Iraqis should be doing. We’re building an “embassy” in the middle of Baghdad that only Joe Stalin could love. If progress is being made it’s too little, too late. If we want to stay in the game, we’ve got to deliver. A troop increase is now known as a “surge”.
2. The border and amnesty. Our own President and Party leadership attempted to sell us out in the most brazen and thoughtless display of political arrogance and ineptness that I’ve ever witnessed. The country is swamped with illegal aliens, the border is wide open and less than nothing is being done about it. They talk about deportations and mean letters of deportation.
It’s a lot more than that. Aside from the wild spending OF OUR MONEY it’s their spineless cowtowing to the dems and their complicity in the same kind of corruption.
We expect better .. and we didn’t elect them TO BE LIKE THE DEMOCRATS .. we elected them to advance conservatism .. which the repubs are not doing.
Nice concise analysis. I attribute the losses to hubris. Bush has underestimated all his enemies. Whether its in Iraq, the liberals, or the base’s wrath over immigration, Bush and the White House has consistently tried to run roughshod over everyone in its way. When Bush narrowly defeated Kerry, he claimed some kind of “mandate” to enact his policies. Well, that mandate didn’t last long, did it?
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.