[sickoflibs]

FROM ABOVE :”The reasons for the vertiginous decline are both proximate and long term. At the top of the list, surely, is the Iraq war—a venture that, at the outset, had garnered the support of more than 70 percent of the public and strong majorities in both the Senate and House. But that support quickly unraveled. The Bush administration never fully recovered from the revelation that Saddam Hussein did not possess stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction, and many Americans came to believe, despite clear evidence to the contrary, that the administration had “lied” the country into war. Add to this an Iraqi insurgency the White House did not adequately anticipate and an occupation strategy poorly conceived and poorly executed, and one had the makings of massive political erosion. By the time Bush embraced a new and successful counterinsurgency strategy in Iraq, it was too late for Republicans. The public had grown bone-weary of the war and blamed both the president and his party.”

So many here will never accept this but they needed to talk to more voters and would see how much this ended up hurting republicans. And it wasnt just 'the liberal treasonous MSM' that caused this like Levin and Hannity claim on their shows because things looked bad on FNC too until after the surge. (The surge seemed to repudiate the GWB messages that everything was on track prior.)

[Cheetahcat]

So many here will never accept this but they needed to talk to more voters and would see how much this ended up hurting republicans. And it wasnt just ‘the liberal treasonous MSM’ that caused this like Levin and Hannity claim on their shows because things looked bad on FNC too until after the surge. (The surge seemed to repudiate the GWB messages that everything was on track prior.)

I agree and if that Idiot Bremer left the Iraqi Army intact this thing would have been over a long time ago, then add the Amnesty Framication and bingo you have the Whitehouse filled with Rats. Those 10+ Million Conservative voters that Bush and Co drove away made the difference.

[ken21]

a republican president has to communicate often with the american people.

to not do so, results in the mess we’re in now.

[MNJohnnie]

(The surge seemed to repudiate the GWB messages that everything was on track prior.)

No, as anyone who paid attention KNEW the Iraq war was "on track" from start to finish. What happened was a lot of supposed Conservatives, joined in with the Leftist media, whining "why is this all taking so long, we are bored with the war".

Where the Bush admin went wrong was assuming the Iraqis could be a stand alone force sooner rather then later and refusing to get out there and shoot back at the absolute reckless demagoguery spewed out by both the Neo Isolationists on the Right and the Appeasement Now crowd on the Left. All the Surge did was marry up a American battalion as a stiffening force to each Iraq brigade to speed up the on the job training and speed up the process that was all ready in place to Iraqize the war.

[KDD]

____________From Article

Running through this account of domestic and national-security issues is an attitude toward public life and toward public discourse. Tone and bearing are terribly undervalued commodities in American politics. On the whole, people drawn to a party like to feel that those representing the party are both amiable and peaceable. This hardly precludes conviction and tough-mindedness when it comes to articulating policy. Democracy was designed for disagreement, and the proper role of an opposition party is to oppose. But anger, personal attack, and extreme language do nothing to expand the appeal of a party in trouble.

Unfortunately, this point has been lost on some members of the Religious Right, whose scolding approach has created a significant backlash, especially among young people (including young Christians). It has also been lost on the party’s more abrasive populists, with their habit of pitting the heartland—aka the “real” America—against the denizens of the coasts. This not only vitiates their own claim to seriousness; it almost willfully alienates the very groups and regions that Republicans need to attract. There is no magic formula when it comes to dealing with such matters of tone, temperament, and the right use of language. They are admittedly delicate things to measure, but they are no less crucial for that.

Good advice...probably unwelcome here though.

[lakertaker]

If the GOP wants to attract it’s lost voters, like myself, it has to get away from a Woodrow Wilson/LBJ foreign policy and big government “compassionate” conservatism.

I don’t see anyone out there at the moment.

[spintreebob]

Is all politics local? 3 house seats in purple Illinois shifted from R to D

The 8th Crane to Bean, then McSweeney to Bean.
The 11th Weller (ret) to Halvorsen
The 14th Hastert(ret) to Foster
In none of them was Iraq in the top 5 issues. Corruption, Beltway Republican ads out of touch with voters, lack of constituent service, Republican invisibility, hypocrisy on taxes and spending all worked against the Republicans. Immigration worked against the Republicans, especially in the 14th.

Iraq was only an issue in the hotly contested 6th with the most pro-war Roskam (R) beating proud Iraq veteran Duckworth who was pro-war but anti-Rummy strategy. Seein an opportunity to win in VA, the Dems paid their anti-war wackos to “volunteer” for Duckworth. They cost her votes, and maybe the election with their anti-war campaigning.

Other Republicans clearly lost because they appeared mean-spirited on immigration. Duckworth gained by being soft on illegals.

Other Republicans lost for a variety of reasons. Please someone point to a district where the Republican lost over Iraq. There must be at least one who lost due to the war. But I can’t think where.