FReegards!
Posted on 02/05/2010 6:20:43 PM PST by Clintonfatigued
Maybe House Republicans learned their lesson last week after President Obama joined them at their retreat and proved once again to be a very formidable opponent rather than a mere foil.
But even if the president’s poised performance brought some of them back to reality, Democratic defeats in Virginia, New Jersey and Massachusetts, as well as public opinion polls showing voters unhappy with the direction of the country, have combined to make too many Republicans downright giddy about the fall elections.
In fact, GOP political consultants and strategists aren’t popping champagne corks yet. Instead, they worry about the euphoria on the right and believe that the party has a long way to go before it can nail down a big win in the midterm elections.
Some Republican operatives are openly concerned about the party’s tactical disadvantages, most notably its financial position. Others fear that circumstances could change, robbing the GOP of its strategic advantage.
The National Republican Congressional Committee ended 2009 with $2.6 million in the bank, far behind the $16.7 million that the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee had. While the DCCC raised $55.7 million for the cycle, the NRCC brought in about $20 million less.
(Excerpt) Read more at cqpolitics.com ...
Democrats were overconfident in 1982, 1996, and 2000. Republicans were overconfident in 1998 and 2006. This year reminds me of 1982 with the parties’ roles reversed.
FReegards!
You make a good point. Still, the ‘Rats and their candidates have a huge money advantage and conservatives need to remember this in any election strategy.
Well, it’s quite correct that we should not be overconfident.
But those smart political operatives where the guys in charge of the party who have screwed up at every opportunity in the last few elections. The guys that put Specter and Schwarzenneger into office. And I’m not really sure if they fear a Democrat victory nearly so much as a conservative takeover of the party that would relegate them to the sidelines.
As already pointed out, nobody with any sense is giving a dime to the RNC or the other party organizations, because they’re just going to blow it on the next Dede Scozzafava or Juan McCain.
What’s doubtful in my mind is whether the very widespread but relatively leaderless Tea Party movement can pull it all together and work to get the right people into contention in timely fashion. I don’t mean that there aren’t plenty of good leaders, but that there is no recognized leadership nationally, unless someone like Sarah Palin steps in and is accepted by the populist movement AND the party pros who know how to time things and work things.
And all of this needs to be done pretty soon, or it will be too late to get the momentum going to nominate the best candidates for congress and make them known to the voters.
But that’s not exactly overconfidence. It’s a question of whether the party pros will be willing to put their little power games aside and work with the base. And it’s a question whether everyone will accept a leader who can work with everyone and bring them together. That leader CERTAINLY isn’t Juan McCain or Michael Steele or anyone in DC.
>> The GOP’s Overconfidence Problem
That’s understandable given Steele’s magnificent work in MA.
“Still, the ‘Rats and their candidates have a huge money advantage and conservatives need to remember this in any election strategy.”
...exactly...as soon as the DEMs get fresh ACORN funding they’ll register tons of voters and more importantly drag them to the polls....and BTW the DEMS give $100,000 a month to the NAACP headquarters in Baltimore and in return they buy control of the voting apparatus of urban America.
LLS
No idea why this writer thought Obama was formidable. He had a poor speech, and his Q&A had an “other worldly” air to it as if he couldn’t understand what anyone was was asking him.
What was the $ advantage Corzine had in NJ... 5:1 wasn't it? Complete with SEIU thug enforcers.
All the money in the world won't motivate an unemployed electorate in the cities that are becoming increasingly aware of the fact that they've been screwed royally by the Dem party in general and by that A**Hole in the White House.
A barrage of TV/radio ads and sloganeering gets old real fast when you are both hopeless and hungry. And especially when you've got some one to blame for it.
FReegards!
I sort of want Kirk to win but I sure wouldn't campaign to his campaign, nor would 75% of Republicans. Is there any wonder why the GOP isn't getting contributions?
Formidable? I saw petulant and whiny.
With all the stimulus money the Dems are holding back, the Republicans have no business feeling overconfident.
Also, if they run anymore RINO candidates, confidence will have nothing to do with it - they’ll just LOSE, period.
Isn’t that stimulus money just going to go to continuing paying the public employees who have already been retained on state payrolls? Isn’t that what Roemer meant when she said we’d already seen most of the effect of the stimulus?
Hmmm, to be honest I’m not sure I want a bunch of ‘republican wins’ in November, and here’s why:
After the 11 Sep incident, the republicans won a good majority [in congress], and IIRC kept it until Pr Bush’s second term’s midterm... keep in mind that they had a majority in Congress, control of the executive, and that the USSC is considered the most conservative of the three branches (though I’m not sure if that’s meant in the political sense or the “status quo” sense).
The Republican platform includes things like:
1) Fiscal Responsibility;
Congress [who is in charge of bugiting] worked up a HUGE debt. Yes the TRILLIONS-&-TRILLOINS bugit makes that look like chump change, but that is avoiding the very real questions of paying off the debt: When & How?
2) Sanctity of Life;
Right after Roe v. Wade the Republican party added a pro-life stance claiming to want to overturn it. In Pr bush’s 2-term Presidency did they _EVER_ introduce a constitutional amendment, or even federal law, protecting the life of the unborn from the infanticide called ‘abortion?’
I will say that Pr Bush DID do some good work on that, such as denying monies to ‘foreign aid’ that would fund abortions; which was well in his right as head of the _executive_ branch. Furthermore, his push [on Congress] against embryonic stem-cells was a good and effective thing.
3) Small government / non-corrupt government / lower-taxes;
While not specifically part of the republican platform [as I’m stating/simplifying them], these are some common conservative concerns. Is the republican REALLY for a small government when they “just play nice” with the democrats who say they want government to take care of everything? Are they REALLY the party of morality when they _HAVEN’T_ raised issues on things like: the Kelo v. New London USSC case (government legitimized larceny), the ex-post facto laws regarding bailout funding (either tax-laws are laws or they are not), the near-complete disenfranchisement of GM bondholders (Congress is EXPLICITLY given the power over bankruptcy laws), etc.
4) Illegal Immigration;
Are the republicans, as a party REALLY against it? I seem to remember prominent ones like McCain and Pr Bush being FOR amnesty... IIRC, the only reason that was shot down was because of such a bad public-reaction to even the suggestion. Here’s an Idea: “call forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions!” [US Constitution Art 1, Sec 8] ...and let’s make sure to get those bastards thumbing their nose at immigration laws, thereby “giving aid and comfort to the enemy,” that are called “sanctuary cities.”
So, all-in-all, I’ve got little faith in the republican party because they’ve shown themselves to be nothing but ineffectual politicians who mouth words they think will keep them in office; I’m not going to vote for the party... I’m voting for individuals. If the best one available is a third-party, then I’m voting third-party; if the best one is a democrat, then I’m voting democrat; and if the best one is a republican, then I’m voting republican.
“Well, it’s quite correct that we should not be overconfident.
But those smart political operatives where the guys in charge of the party who have screwed up at every opportunity in the last few elections.”
Indeed. These are the guys who had both houses of Congress, AND the Presidency, and bumbled it all away in merely six years. From everything to nothing, and for no reason.
I agree. The “politics as usual” vermin will be destroyed in these times. They ride the tiger, and are slipping.
TeaPartiers:Becoming politically relevant through civic duty and the Precinct Committeeman Strategy.
And pass it on.
Cheers!
The National Republican Congressional Committee ended 2009 with $2.6 million in the bank, far behind the $16.7 million that the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee had. While the DCCC raised $55.7 million for the cycle, the NRCC brought in about $20 million less.
______________________________________________________________
Why can’t the Pubbies raise money?
I think individual Republicans are raising money.
It's the NRCC that's not.
Which is a good thing. When you send money to the NRCC you have no control over who they give your money to.
Or to whom they give your money for all you grammar nazis.
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.