Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: 1curiousmind
Unfortunately, the Republican establishment was betting on Hillary....They lost.

And like 2006, the large contingent of "I'd rather stay at home true conservatives" played no role.

Sorry, you can't blame the "establishment", whoever thay are, for lousy turnout.

29 posted on 02/13/2008 5:16:21 AM PST by SJackson (If 45 million children had lived, they'd be defending America, filling jobs, paying SS-Z. Miller)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: SJackson
And like 2006, the large contingent of "I'd rather stay at home true conservatives" played no role.

Although I voted in 2006, I was totally demoralized over the GWB/Republican efforts to give AMNESTY to 20 million illegals, and to simultaneously INCREASE the number of poor, downtrodden, defacto socialist third-world illegals into America.

As a volunteer poll worker who spoke to thousands of Republicans in 2006, I am confident when I say that 40% of the Republicans who switched to Democratics (or didn't bother to vote) were upset at the GOP/White House stance on illegal immigration.

Another 40% were demoralized (falsely) by the slow Iraq war progress, and the other 20% by the Foley/Abramoff scandals which naturally were hyped by the liberal press ad naseum.

As for illegal immigration, I an many others view illegal immigration as the BIGGEST threat to America's future ..... not terror.

AlQaeda could NEVER launch an invasion of America. We are too strong and resolute militarily against armed enemies.

But we sit idly by as English is deemed almost second class, and as Latin socialists gain electoral power day by day.

Eventually, states such as Texas, Florida, Arizone, and California REALLY will have the desire to succeed from the union, and short of civil war, there won't be much the US government can do to stop it.

Hope I'm not being hysterical. Just realistic.

41 posted on 02/13/2008 5:29:11 AM PST by Edit35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]

To: SJackson

Well said.


55 posted on 02/13/2008 5:46:43 AM PST by alwaysconservative (The "Run Hillary Run" bumpersticker: on the back bumper for Dems, on the front for Republicans!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]

To: SJackson

“Sorry, you can’t blame the “establishment”, whoever thay are, for lousy turnout.”

It’s the party’s job to get their electorate excited. That is done by offering a choice. The Republicans didn’t offer a discernable choice in 2006, and they’re offering even less of a choice in in 2008. Every election, they are offering less and less of a contrast between themselves and the Dems. That’s no the way to win elections.

After eight years of one party, people are ready for something different. It’s very rare for a party to hold POTUS for 12 years. Reagan did it for Bush I, but he was the most popular president of the modern era. It is exceedingly unlikely to happen again.

Obama will paint McCain as a third Bush term. That may pull a few conservatives back toward McCain, but it will move independents and moderates who want “change” toward Obama. Obama has his base, so he will be free to play to the middle. McCain will spend the whole election season seesawing between playing to the base, risking losing the moderates, and playing to the moderates, risking losing the base. In the end it is unlikely bordering on impossible that he will be able to hold both. He’s not that good of a campaigner. Barring something unforeseen, this election goes to the Dems.


73 posted on 02/13/2008 6:33:26 AM PST by LadyNavyVet (“I will offer a choice, not an echo.” Barry Goldwater)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson