Posted on 11/16/2004 6:32:51 PM PST by You Dirty Rats
I think it would be more accurate if red counties and blue counties were counted. check the map printed by USA today
I hope you're right, but certain demographic trends are in favor of the Democrats. Unending mass immigration no doubt helps the Democrats, as the faster growing segment of the population -- Hispanics -- typcially favor the Dems by large margins. Now of course IF Bush really did win 44% of the latino vote two weeks ago, then perhaps it signifies a shift, but I think you need more than one election to declare a trend.
I do not care about red/blue counties any more than I care about red/blue states. The Bush Presidency and our clear majority in Congress applies to all of them. That's my point.
We do have a very strong grip on the House and Senate. In the Senate, Bush won 31 states. If anything, I think over time we'll pick up more seats. If we get our agenda through in the next two years, and SCOTUS appointments over the next four, our House & Senate strength will see us through even if we lose the Presidency. That's how the 'Rats maintained power for decades. Now it's our turn!
bump
It's even more stark of a picture for the Democrats when you realize that taking the urban areas out of the picture California, Oregon, Washington, Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan and Pennsyvania all turn red. If they were to make good on their threat to secede they would have to do so not by states but by individual cities except in the case of New England.
The Rats, therefore, occupy islands of urban liberalism in an ocean of red which makes the funny idea of forming reservations for liberals even more appropriate.
Well I definitely agree that we should implement as much of the conservative agenda as possible now and in the near future just in case things go against us in the future.
Certain issues, like gay marriage/civil unions, must be one over the next few years. A Sup Court decision affirming the rights of states to settle the matter and upholding the federal Defense of Marriage Act would be great, but the problem there would be that it could be reversed by a later court. We need some sort of Amendment that precludes the Courts from getting involved, or that reverses a potential imposition of gay marriage/civil unions should it happen.
Its also important to try and make the tax cuts permanent and reform Social Security.
And we need more Scalias and Thomas on the Sup Court, not only for the marriage debate, but for the more general purpose of reigning in judicial power.
So I agree; do as much as possible as soon as possible.
Thanks to Ronald Reagan and Rush Limbagh!
JMO
yep, you are right. People underestimate Rush Limbaugh,,,he is vastly important.
Latinos voted for the Republicans in unprecedented numbers because most are family-oriented Catholics, and the Catholic Church actually intervened in this election, really for the first time, by suggesting that a vote for a pro-choice candidate over a pro-life candidate was complicity with abortion and therefore a mortal sin.
Church-going Catholics, for the first time, voted massively for Bush. This is what accounts for the Hispanic shift.
The problem, of course, is that this is a one-issue shift, and that issue is abortion. Therefore, to maintain the shift, the Republicans MUST deliver pro-choice judges.
And the problem with that is that they are in serious danger of elevating Arlen Specter to the head of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
IF the Republicans keep their head (and Borking Specter would be a good indication that they are keeping their head), then they will be able to keep this coalition by advancing on values, and Hispanic immigration will end up favoring the Republicans over the long term.
It started turning long before '94. What happened in 94 was simply the rising tide broke over the seawall for the first time.
Ya-HOO!
Red Bump This.
Unfortunatly, 55 votes is NOT enough to break a filibuster. We need 60.
I agree, in a broad sense. It started as early as the 1964 campaign, and we made a lot of progress during the 1980's.
We'll get some Democratic Senators from Red States. There is also the nucular option, which really needs only 50 votes. Either way, I don't believe the 'Rats will be able to stop the tide. Nobody wants to end up like Daschle.
Ping
Not only is 60 the number (not 55) but you forget the RINO factor..
The RINOs are not "moderate Republicans". They are socialists.
Lincoln Chafee? You honestly count him as a "Republican"?
The liberals control the Senate. The Republicans control the battle of the "letter"--"R" is bigger than "D".
But face this fact. The LIBERALS control the Senate. The Democrats + Jeffords + the Chafee type Marxists in the Republican Party gives the Senate majority to the liberals.
"Red Nation" is rising, but damn, that almost sounds like something Gus Hall might have applauded.
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.