Posted on 11/11/2006 12:00:19 AM PST by FairOpinion
The Democratic share of the eligible vote casting ballots for the House of Representatives increased from 16.8 percent in 2002 to 17.9 in 2006.
The Republican share declined sharply, from 19.2 percent in 2002 to 16.8 in 2006. This marks the first mid-term election since 1990 in which the Democrats garnered more votes that the GOP.
In the ballots so far counted in 2006 (and again excluding California, Oregon and Washington), citizens cast 31,703,311 votes for Democratic candidates for U.S. House, compared to 28,749,023 in 2002. The Republican candidates received 29,920,240 votes in 2006 compared with 32,771,580 in 2002.
(Excerpt) Read more at spa.american.edu ...
oops.... popcorn sales are now on.
Call a Scout and buy some.
I disagree. The Republicans and conservatives who didn't bother to vote were, in reality, accessories after the fact.
The primary perpetrators of this particular kettle of fish is the GOP Congressional caucus & leadership and, to a degree, President Bush.
Had they done the jobs they were elected to do, they would still be in the majority.
Like you, I was a vocal supporter of casting a conservative ballot in this election -- despite the GOP's miserable performance on the issues. But the fact is, our guys failed to perform sufficiently well as to motivate their base to support them.
The Democrats, for sure, didn't deserve to win. But the 'Pubbies deserved to be fired. And they were.
The Republican pols were their own worst enemies this time around. They're going to have to work to re-gain the bases's confidence.
The situation is more complicated than that. A political party must provide leadership that doesn't take party members for granted as if they will vote no matter what. Republican members of Congress and President Bush took the party members for granted. Party leadership mush assume responsibility for losses at the ballot box, not us disobedient robots.
At the same time, the party in the White House often loses seats in Congress during a non-presidential year. All the more reason for Republicans in office to act like Republicans rather that shallow imitations of Democrats.
Was it the fiscal conservative-social liberal, the social conservatives or Christian conservatives.
Southern California had a 5-10% lower Republican turnout than 2000 or 2004. They would have put 3 or 4 Republicans in state office. Those Republicans had nothing to so with national politics, yet they were punished.
I suspect, but can't say for sure, the Christian Conservatives failed to show - due to the sudden and shocking knowledge that there are homosexuals masquerading as conservative Republicans and are important members of the Evangelical community.
Sitting out a national election because of hurt feelings is childish. There are other more important issues at stake than the tender feelings of a certain group of voters.
Speaking nationally, so much for a conservative Supreme Court that so many social conservatives were hoping for.
I want to keep Third Party candidates because they saved us from at least four years of Gore.
Yep. It's laughable to see the same folks who deride the black vote for staying on the "Dem Plantation" think the GOP is entitled to the votes of certain conservative groups no matter what. Talk about hypocrisy.
I was once a Boy Scout... loved every minute of it. Still have friends from those days long ago.
LLS
They're selfish. They think of themselves before they think of the rest of the country.
One surprise this time was the high number of younger voters who turned out. I think it was 10 million more than 2004.
That would be my guess, too -- for the most part. Though there were some other segments, such as the paleos, who couldn't bear to vote GOP. Plus, there were some libertarian leaning Republicans who were put off by the Schiavo affair. But the Christian conservatives were probably the most "stay at homes".
Sitting out a national election because of hurt feelings is childish. There are other more important issues at stake than the tender feelings of a certain group of voters.
On the other hand, I'd wager that something like 80% of the Christian conservative vote actually voted. It was a relative sliver that responded as you suggest. But, of course, that sliver made all the difference. Which is exactly what the Foley affair was all about -- and it was the one pre-electoral event that the GOP never fully recovered from.
Speaking nationally, so much for a conservative Supreme Court that so many social conservatives were hoping for.
Ah, true. But, at the same time, perhaps something positive was accomplished. Perhaps, the GOP leadership will get it into their heads that the base wants them to do the job they were elected to do. And that rampant corruption, out-of-control spending and bloated government weren't on the agenda.
The Republican majority needed their butts kicked. And they got it, square in the keister. Hopefully, they can learn something from the experience.
It's up to us to make sure they do.
Yep.
We lost about 25 conservative seats in the House. The conservatives who stayed home in those districts are to blame.
It can't get much simpler than that.
Gone with the wind.
Yep, and now 43 will be blamed for appointing a moderate.
The excuse some Republicans used that their current GOP reps weren't one hundred percent perfect was an idiotic one. In an election, the voter ALWAYS!!! chooses the best candidate available. It will be rare that any candidate is one hundred percent perfect. Thanks to millions of pouty Republican non-voters, we will see a raft of socialist, defeatest legislation emanating from Washington for the next two years. Hey, pouty, simon-pure, non-voting Republicans, thanks for Pelosi, Rangel, and the rest of the lib idiots.
I did not sit back. I voted straight Republican even if I did like him/her or not. If Democrats win; all our hard work will go down the drain.
We lost because we did not have the ethusiam like in 2004. Either we were too over confident or got mad at the GOP for not solving everything in two years. The Democrats beat us because they had candidates act like Reagan Democrats.
The Republicans in the House and Senate also acted like RINOS. They spent money like drunken sailors with Homeland Security. Many Conservatives were alientated by using our government as a cash cow. Bush spent way too much in New Orleans but the city is also a major port.
We didn't do anything with Social Security and the border situation...and many conservatives were so upset over that. They didn't get they're way on these issues and so they stayed home to teach Republicans a lesson.
Cut your nose inspite of your face type deal.
I guess when Bush changes bankruptcy laws...that's not good enough for conservatives.
http://www.newstarget.com/010162.html
I also the passage of Healthy Forest Restoration Act in 2003 does not mean much for the Republicans.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/12/20031203-4.html
Even though the house was controlled by the Republicans back then the Democrats still have enough power to stop any conservative ideas from coming into law.
Can you name any other accomplishments the Bush Administration made?
The Iraq conflict is not going well. With the increase of violence in Iraq recently the American public got dishearten and want a easy fix by turning to the Democrats.
I believe the American public are not serious about winning against Islamic crazies and they prefer to postpone this problem for my grandchildren to deal with. For those Republicans who had a tantrum last tuesday and didn't vote...shame on you.
I know the Democrats will cut and run from Iraq. The Kurds who worked so hard to have their independence will be flushed down the toilet once again by the United States.
On a good note, the ball is in the Democrat court. They have two years to prove they're more clever and smarter to figure out Iraq situation without cutting and running. They also need a plan to tackle terrorism without resorting to a law enforcement problem only...ie USS Cole.
Those Reagan Democrats better display their intentions for the next two years or they will be voted out of office for being deceitful.
I don't trust the Democrats and they will high tail it to Pelosi's agenda.
All we need to have angry voters again.
:)
Still, there is the correct issue about lower turn out among registered Republicans.
There is also the issue of supposedly conservative leaning third party types who everytime find a way to enable the terrorist loving communist Democrats.
Alito and Roberts... The SS reform was stopped by the Democrats, NOT because the Republicans didn't try.
Third parties can help ya or defeat ya.
I'm sure Republicans enjoyed having Ralph Nader as a third party candidate to beat Kerry.
Third Party Perot helped Clinton in 1992?
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.