Posted on 05/01/2010 8:30:27 AM PDT by Notwithstanding
If you need a reason to raise a glass this weekend, here is a round up of PROMISING data from Democratic pollster Scott Rasmussen.
(Excerpt) Read more at rasmussenreports.com ...
People are more outraged by frivolous abortions than they are about efforts to ban abortions. The real numbers on abortion have more to do with rape and incest. Wedge out those two, and abortion is looked upon as murder.
As encouraging as these numbers are, it’s important to remember that the People fired the Republicans four years ago, and that the manifest horribleness of the Democrats, although it may lead to a temporary electoral victory, won’t put the full weight of the People behind a GOP majority, at least not until they do something constructive - which is unlikely.
“So-called “Tea Party” candidates in various districts will siphon off enough votes to ensure a Democrat win in them.”
“Could be... BUT, it seems a lousy choice for the avid Constitutionalists among the electorate, if all they have from which to choose is the Pubbies and the Rats; neither of them fully represent the tea party view.”
Certainly re-electing Pelosi speaker by splitting conservative votes is a lousy choice indeed.
Smart Tea Partiers are not going third party, but are selectively supporting good individual GOP challengers.
“I’ve heard the BS about the ‘damage’ done by having a third party in the mix. And, I don’t buy it.” It’s not BS. People rationalize their decisions as not having the consequences they have, because they dont want to live up to them. LP 3rd party candidates have caused numerous liberal Democrats to win by narrow sub50% vote totals; in Texas there were about 5 state rep races decided that way, and the result was a more liberal lege. 3rd party voting will cost the GOP many seats across the nation in 2010.
“But, it doesn’t mean one or the other group should compromise their beliefs, IMO.” You dont compromise your beliefs when you vote for the best major candidate, you merely ensure that the person who IS elected IS the best of the viable options.
If your vote for a 3rd party candidate would get Obama re-elected, would you make that vote? ... then why make it in 2010, when the “obama mandate” has a chance to get repudiated.
It’s tough for Repubs to do something that is reported favorable when:
A) You have a minority in DC
B) The media lies about Republicans daily and covers up for Dems
C) Angry voices are ready to shoot first and ask questions later at any sign of Republicans doing something that offends someone else, or is not enough right-wing, too much right-wing, etc.
In short, we and the media over-criticize Republicans and under-criticize Democrats.
Given that, the poll numbers are stunning.
...they have a recent track record that belies everything they are saying.
The People want the beast to first be chained, then slain.
If the Departments of Education and Energy had been abolished in 1995, and if the logical followup actions had occurred, we would not be having this discussion.
There is every reason to suspect that, if the GOP is rewarded with the powers delegated by the People to their Congress, that they will again do nothing of a positive nature but will instead work to follow up on their previous catastrophic harms such as NCLB and the Medicare drug benefit.
The Democrats are SO bad that it's understandable that the GOP looks better by comparison.
Like cancer is better than gangrene.
That will not be sufficient.
Much truth, there.
Though rape etc. are a very small minority of cases.
I never fail to feel better seeing fresh poll numbers like that!
you are right my FRiend, it is a free country. I would die to defend these freedoms.
As soon as a few of them get mugged. LOL
I never raise a glass for polls...only elections.
You are right on that at first, but it didn’t take long for them (MSM and Dem.) to go back into Bush Bashing... but with Obama I just think he has been insulting Americans and playing the race card that us bitter clingers to our guns etc. will never rally around him. I could be wrong but hope we never have to find out...He is so weak as a president anything could happen...
Great response! You wrote: “If your vote for a 3rd party candidate would get Obama re-elected, would you make that vote? ... then why make it in 2010, when the “obama mandate” has a chance to get repudiated.”
I firmly believe that my vote is best cast for that candidate who most closely represents (or, at least appears to represent) my beliefs and principles. If that means I cast a vote for a candidate other than a ‘viable’ (ie, major party) candidate, then so be it.
If that same voting process is carried forward by enough people, then it’s likely to have some impact, yes. And, it’s clear that it may be sufficient to keep a lib in office. However, that only reveals that at least one of the two major parties champions a platform that cannot attract enough votes to win... Maybe they should start to rethink their platform? As long as people keep voting for the lesser of two evils, we will continue to be faced with evil in public office.
There is nothing to be gained by choosing between two tribes of cannibals...you are still going to be eaten.
And, that Pelosi comment is pretty weak. The only person who could beat Pelousy is Stalin, but he’s still dead. That whole district is a socialist enclave.
“If that same voting process is carried forward by enough people, then it’s likely to have some impact, yes.”
Yes, liberal Democrats have gotten elected because 3rd party Libertarians split off votes and allowed the democrats to win races with under 50% of the vote.
You are okay with that consequence?
“The only person who could beat Pelousy”
41 new Republicans in Congress can make pelosi irrelevent.
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.