Jonah Goldberg: Inherit the Wind. What if it takes a Democrat? (Maybe a Democrat should win)

National Review ^ | Feb. 16, 2007 | Jonah Goldberg

[oceanview]

but the flipside is also true - the base alone can't elect a President. Independents, and voters not totally driven by only the social issues, are a significant portion of the electorate. Every poll I see shows maximum turnout and margin amongst the base for Bush in 2004 - and it wasn't a landslide. If Bush had won 45 states in 2004, these "top 3" in the current primary, wouldn't even be in the race.

so where does that leave us? the conservative base can be part of a winning coalition that can elect a President. and with the country structured as it is today, that's how you achieve political objectives - by being part of the winning side, you get some "chips" to play with.

sure, its a razors edge, whether social conservatives feel like they are being "pushed off the edge". But that's always the nature of coalition politics.

[oceanview]

so let me get this straight - we can only generate support for any war when the media is on board. and because the media is liberally biased, the "price of admission" to getting the media on board, is to turn over the entire apparatus of government to the liberals.

is that it? sorry, I can't accept the deal.

[JCEccles]

if you read alot of the FR political threads, you can see this theme evident right here. many people would rather see Hillary win

The Rudy boosters certainly do. They deny that's their plan. But it's obvious to the rest of us.

[Elyse]

We need to run a conservative that will pull together all of our conservative coalition and have a platform that will rouse the base and the grassroots. We can't have a lot of liberal baggage dragging us down.

EXACTLY! There is no reason to run a social liberal candidate other than to split the party. I don't see why the Rudy supporters refuse to see this.

I also have the feeling that Rudy is garnering support and all the kudos he can get from Republicans, but will actually run Independant in the race. His campaign manager said that they left the party affliation blank on purpose and that is the only reason I can see that they would leave it blank. I wonder how many Rudy supporting Freepers will continue to support him if he runs third party. I think the very fact that he left that line blank is a big reason why Republicans should not be running around tooting his horn and running down the real conservative Republican candidates in this race.

[oceanview]

yes, that is real.

but there are other votes out there to displace that loss. look at states like PA - the urban centers are voting so heavily Dem, that there is no way for the republicans to take a state like that now. And I'm not just talking inner city voters, the suburbs tied to large metroplexes, are becoming solidly Dem. So in PA, the Philly and Pittsburgh suburbs give the state to the Dems. Virginia is moving in that direction too - northern VA is become a suburban hub of the DC metroplex, and the Dem margins there are increasing, and Virginia is close to being a "toss up" state now too. North Carolina is about 8-10 years away from joining this trend. I'd also like to see a map of where Claire McCaskill ran strong in 2006 in Missouri (inner city St Louis aside).

We've got to do better amongst these voters - white, in the denser populated suburbs, middle/upper income.

[oceanview]

I'm not sure where you are seeing that - one of the main appeals of Rudy to those freepers that are OK with him - is that they think he can win the general election.

I'm also surprised now at how many freepers seem to dislike Gingrich. Rasmussen is actually polling a Hillary/Gingrich race now, 50/43 Hillary currently. not too bad actually.

[mrmargaritaville]

And the lame stream media in the country would never hold a Dimocrat resposibel for anything that happened on their watch.
No lame stream media outrage or anal proble of Carter and his terrible handling of the hostage situation.
No lame steam media outrage or anal probe of Clinton bungling of Cole situation.
No lame stream media outrage or anal probe of Clinton bungling of embassy bombings.
No lame stream media outrage or anal probe of Clinton albright's disasterours forgein policy.
The theory would work if the media held Dims accountable, unfortunately the don't and never will.

[Doc Savage]

I have a choice. I can hire Ronald Reagan to babysit my kids,...or Hitlery Crinton. Let's see! Who would keep them safer?????????????????????????? Duh!

[Mojave]

No more Bushes!!

Free Kevin Curry!

[Mojave]

SOME conservatives don't seem to grasp the IRREPARABLE damage the Democrats can do.

Look at the irreparable damage Arnold Schwarzenegger and his Democrat appointees are doing to California.

[SuzyQue]

Image:Phanerozoic Carbon Dioxide.png

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Phanerozoic_Carbon_Dioxide.png‎ (32KB, MIME type: image/png)

Description

This figure shows estimates of the changes in carbon dioxide concentrations during the Phanerozoic. Three estimates are based on geochemical modeling: GEOCARB III (Berner and Kothavala 2001), COPSE (Bergmann et al. 2004) and Rothman (2001). These are compared to the carbon dioxide measurement database of Royer et al. (2004) and a 30 Myr filtered average of those data. Error envelopes are shown when they were available. The right hand scale shows the ratio of these measurements to the estimated average for the last several million years (the Quaternary). Customary labels for the periods of geologic time appear at the bottom.

Direct determination of past carbon dioxide levels relies primarily on the interpretation of carbon isotopic ratios in fossilized soils (paleosols) or the shells of phytoplankton and through interpretation of stomatal density in fossil plants. Each of these is subject to substantial systematic uncertainty.

Estimates of carbon dioxide changes through geochemical modeling instead rely on quantifying the geological sources and sinks for carbon dioxide over long time scales particularly: volcanic inputs, erosion and carbonate deposition. As such, these models are largely independent of direct measurements of carbon dioxide.

Both measurements and models show considerable uncertainty and variation; however, all point to carbon dioxide levels in the past that have been signifcantly higher than they are at present. (emphasis mine)

Then if you, for instance go to http://www.clearlight.com/~mhieb/WVFossils/last_400k_yrs.html  and place the chart of Atmospheric CO2 concentrations over the Temperature chart, you will notice that, while there appears to be a correlation between the two, the CO2 spikes lag behind the temperature - it does not appear that CO2 is driving temperature.

Finally, is global warming a bad thing?  It could be, may not be.  However that question is not even being asked.

[prov1813man]

Certainly, I do not advocate for such an outcome (dims in power). This was just a thought that has come to me as I watch the left undermine the war effort as part of it's own war against Republicans.

Yes, I did think of Johnson and Viet Nam, and yes I do think the left would "stop". However, I don't think the jihadists will stop. This will force a later, more expensive, conflict.

But, just for clarity, I am not advocating "dim control". I am simply observing that the daily drumbeat from the treasonous press would be dif if the CIC were a dim.

Personally, I believe Lincoln's words regarding those who undermine troop morale while encouraging the enemy should be brought to bear about 3 am this monday morning. Televised.

[stephenjohnbanker]

"Some will invoke here the operant definition of insanity.

And not without cause."

: )

[bray]

True Conservatives got us this Congress. We should be eternally grateful for their wisdom.

Pray for W and Our Troops

[stephenjohnbanker]

"Why not run a full blooded conservative rather than a candidate who is as bad as the dems on critical conservative issues and avoid all these downside problems? Do we not have faith in our own principles, values and convictions?"

Pure reason, with no BS. I wish every FReeper could read this post.

[George W. Bush]

If the Dims hadn't wrecked the car so many times already, maybe we could discuss letting them take the wheel.

I don't want to give Clinton's Wife a learner's permit.

[arthurus]

"An Iran run by terrorists..." would be just dandy to the Democrats. They would revel in $200 oil and what it would do to the American economy and do for the Democrats taking control in fine of the economy.

That said, the Republican party is not the Titanic. It is more like an old leaky ship that seeps from every seam and the leaks are beginning to overpower the pumps which are starting to clog. The ship won't turn its fantail to the sky and slide dramatically beneath the waves, rather, it is settling slowly and the crew continues in the delusion that they must simply pump harder even while a group of passengers is drilling more holes in the hull. The Republicans who are in power now, who were in power a few months ago, and who are in position to possibly be in power, given the right miracle, a couple of years from now, cannot save the ship. They are too busy pleading with the treacherous passengers for help with the pumps and trying to make nice with the pirates who are shooting RPGs from their dhows.

[omni-scientist]

I see it a little differently. Should we have a mega-911 event in the near future, whichever party is in the White House at the time will be toast for at least a generation. Any Republican will be excoriated in the media and accused by Dems. If a Democrat is in power, the voters will be reminded how soft they have been toward our enemies.

[AmishDude]

Bingo. His thesis is basically that the Democrats need to be in power to take the WOT seriously.

You nailed it. They will just do what they did in the (prayerfully, first and last) Clinton administration. Kick the can down the road.

The Left didn't learn from 7/7 in Britain, although the situation is different there. Note that Blair was on board from day 1 and stayed on board. So maybe the British left saw themselves as disjoint from their party's leadership.

A better example was 3/11 in Spain. The country, after being attacked, selected retreat.

[Iwo Jima]

..all the pundits who told their audiences not to vote Republican any more.

What pundit said that? None that I know of. And I am a regular listener of Rush, Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity, and the local talk show hosts.

It is untrue and divisive comments like yours that is splitting the Republican party apart.