Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

'06 Senate Picture Changes a Bit
Real Clear Politics ^ | July 1, 2006 | Charlie Cook

Posted on 07/02/2006 12:05:44 AM PDT by YaYa123

The fight for control of the House is getting more ink than the battle for control of the Senate, but several recent shifts in individual Senate races merit attention. All year, talk about the Democrats' chances of taking the Senate has focused on the five most endangered Republican incumbents.

They are, roughly in order of vulnerability, Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, Conrad Burns of Montana, Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, Mike DeWine of Ohio, and Jim Talent of Missouri. The discussions then turn to the second tier of vulnerable Republicans, speculating whether Democrats can perhaps pick up a sixth seat (the most likely prospect is the open seat in Tennessee that Majority Leader Bill Frist is vacating) and whether they will be able to hold on to all of their own Senate seats. The open seat in Minnesota and Maria Cantwell's seat in Washington state are the Democrats' biggest vulnerabilities

(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...


TOPICS: Politics/Elections; US: Ohio; US: Pennsylvania; US: Rhode Island
KEYWORDS: 109th; 2006; 2006elections; congress; election2006; electioncongress; elections; november; senateraces
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-64 next last
Highly respected Charlie Cook shouldn't be ignored, and this isn't good news.
1 posted on 07/02/2006 12:05:49 AM PDT by YaYa123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: YaYa123

Why is Talent in trouble?


2 posted on 07/02/2006 12:09:10 AM PDT by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123
Charlie Cook's forecast on 10 Aug 2004.....

"This election is certainly not over but events or circumstances will need to fundamentally change the existing equation for President Bush to win a second term."

3 posted on 07/02/2006 12:12:33 AM PDT by Rokke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative
because the polls say so. And we know how accurate and infallible they are.
4 posted on 07/02/2006 12:12:49 AM PDT by CzarNicky (In the magical land of unicorns there's no need for clothes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

Don't know...he's been trailing consistently in the polls.


5 posted on 07/02/2006 12:14:48 AM PDT by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123

He cites no polls. Just gum flapping n speculation.


6 posted on 07/02/2006 12:15:16 AM PDT by WOSG (Do your duty, be a patriot, support our Troops - VOTE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rokke
LOL!

But--but he's well-respected! =(

7 posted on 07/02/2006 12:16:46 AM PDT by Darkwolf377
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123

Charlie Cook, along with Stuart Rothenberg don't have a clue. They are both Democrat shrills, but try to cover it up as best they can. They were wrong in 2000, 2002 and 2004, and they are both wrong about 2006. They will both look like fools after election day in November. These are the guys that predicted Tom Delay would face a "stiff" primary challenge (Delay slaughtered his primary opponents), and that the 50th congressional district in San Diego would go Democrat (It did not). These two guys like Chris Mattthews and Howard Fineman are just about as dumb as one can get. They both live only in the Democrat and MSM bubble. Ask either of them to tell you some demographics on NASCAR, etc. Neither has a clue. End of story!!!


8 posted on 07/02/2006 12:34:52 AM PDT by JLAGRAYFOX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JLAGRAYFOX

bttt


9 posted on 07/02/2006 12:38:51 AM PDT by ConservativeMan55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: RobFromGa

(( ping ))


10 posted on 07/02/2006 12:40:35 AM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123
"Perhaps the most important thing to remember about Senate races is the domino effect. In cycle after cycle, the closest Senate races all tend to break in one direction on Election Day." ---

****

Uh-huh. And global cooling in general and perhaps the commencement of glaciation was believed to be imminent in the early 70's on Earth Day.

We'll see what happens in the Senate in November.

11 posted on 07/02/2006 12:58:13 AM PDT by beyond the sea (Scientists Are Itching to Blame Poison Ivy's Effect on Global Warming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: beyond the sea

One thing for certain, November will be here before we know it. Charlie Cook has this to say in a Recent Cook Report:

"From my own e-mail inbox and perusing popular Web sites, I see many, both on the left and right, who refuse to believe any data that is critical or provides bad news for their side, but will then jump on the flimsiest poll numbers if they are favorable, as if sent down from the heavens on tablets of stone. I suppose it is selective perception -- people see or believe what they want, and discredit what they choose not to believe."

I don't know what's going to happen, but I sure don't feel cocky about the Senate. If Dems take either the Senate or the House, George Bush is going to have a living hell for the next two years.


12 posted on 07/02/2006 1:27:39 AM PDT by YaYa123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: JLAGRAYFOX
They will both look like fools after election day in November.

And if this should prove true, watch the entire Dumb Party go into near-psychotic tilt, as "the Bush/Rove fraud machine steals another election".
But, unlike women, Dumbs are NOT beautiful when they are angry...

13 posted on 07/02/2006 2:11:45 AM PDT by ARepublicanForAllReasons (Mass immigration and mass indoctrination of illegals is the current marxist strategy to gain power.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123
I don't know what's going to happen, but I sure don't feel cocky about the Senate. If Dems take either the Senate or the House, George Bush is going to have a living hell for the next two years.

You're right! I'm looking for some divine intervention for the Republicans in November (Santorum especially here in PA).

;-)

I guess I believe in that kind of thing ever since I was thirteen and Bill Mazeroski hit the homerun over the left field wall in the bottom of the ninth in the seventh game to bury the mighty, "unbeatable" New York Yankees in the 1960 World Series.

:-)

14 posted on 07/02/2006 2:17:34 AM PDT by beyond the sea (Scientists Are Itching to Blame Poison Ivy's Effect on Global Warming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123

The GOP hasnt been listenning to the base. The general attitude has always been that the base will come around at the time of elections. I dont think so this year.

Watching the spineless ones has turned off a lot of conservative voters. There is a total lack of leadership within the GOP at this time.


15 posted on 07/02/2006 2:25:13 AM PDT by rrrod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123
If Dems take either the Senate or the House, George Bush is going to have a living hell for the next two years.

It's the USA that will have the living hell.
16 posted on 07/02/2006 2:28:59 AM PDT by GodBlessRonaldReagan (Count Petofi will not be denied!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123
Somehow we've got to get rid of DeW(h)ine. But the thought of his Democrat opponent getting in is frightening.
17 posted on 07/02/2006 3:41:51 AM PDT by JoeFromSidney (My book is out. Read excerpts at www.thejusticecooperative.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

I don't know anything of Jim Talent's race, but I did find this for you:


http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/12414
Missouri U.S. Senate: Talent 47%, McCaskill 46%
July 2, 2006

"- Incumbent Jim Talent holds a slight advantage in the Show Me State, according to the latest poll by Zogby Interactive. 47 per cent of respondents in Missouri would vote for the Republican in the election to the U.S. Senate, while 46 per cent would support Democrat Claire McCaskill.

Talent was first elected to the U.S. Senate in a 2002 special election, defeating Democrat Jean Carnahan—the widow of former governor Mel Carnahan—with 52 per cent of all cast ballots. Talent had previously served in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1993 to 2001.

McCaskill has served as Missouri’s state auditor since 1998. She lost the 2004 gubernatorial election to Republican Matt Blunt by 2.9 percentage points.

Talent and McCaskill are widely expected to earn their respective nominations in the Aug. 8 primary ballot. The election is scheduled for Nov. 7."


18 posted on 07/02/2006 3:48:00 AM PDT by YaYa123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123

There is nothing wrong with House Members it's Senate that needs a cleaning out of the likes of Specter, Graham, McCain.


19 posted on 07/02/2006 3:59:43 AM PDT by stopem (God Bless the U.S.A the Troops who protect her, and their Commander In Chief !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rrrod
The GOP hasnt been listening to the base. The general attitude has always been that the base will come around at the time of elections. I dont think so this year. ..................................................... Watching the spineless ones has turned off a lot of conservative voters. There is a total lack of leadership within the GOP at this time. ........................................................................... Sounds right to me – both as prognostication and analysis.
20 posted on 07/02/2006 4:06:46 AM PDT by 9999lakes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123

Elections are not held in the Summer. Elections are held in the Fall. A heck of a lot of things are going to happen between now and Election Day. The 'Pubbies seem particulary adept at peaking at the right time.

I stand by my tagline.


21 posted on 07/02/2006 4:12:51 AM PDT by gridlock (The 'Pubbies will pick up two (2) seats in the Senate and four (4) seats in the House in 2006)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JLAGRAYFOX
Charlie Cook, along with Stuart Rothenberg don't have a clue. They are both Democrat shrills, but try to cover it up as best they can. They were wrong in 2000, 2002 and 2004, and they are both wrong about 2006. They will both look like fools after election day in November. These are the guys that predicted Tom Delay would face a "stiff" primary challenge (Delay slaughtered his primary opponents), and that the 50th congressional district in San Diego would go Democrat (It did not). These two guys like Chris Mattthews and Howard Fineman are just about as dumb as one can get. They both live only in the Democrat and MSM bubble. Ask either of them to tell you some demographics on NASCAR, etc. Neither has a clue. End of story!!!

I agree but then you will have so called "true conservative" doom and gloomers who will on cue say, "The republican leadership does not listen to the base" blah, blah, blah.

I ask one question of these people, do you think nancy pelosi and harry reid are going to listen to you.

22 posted on 07/02/2006 4:18:06 AM PDT by Dane ("Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall" Ronald Reagan, 1987)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123
If Dems take either the Senate or the House, George Bush is going to have a living hell for the next two years.

How so?

There is zero chance that the democrats will have a "veto-proof" majority.

The democrats' spending habits are actually quite similar to those of the republicans during this administration.

Although doubtful, our president does still have the authority to veto legislation.

Judges? president bush will possibly be forced to pick slightly different candidates, but hardly anything to get upset about.

Prospect of democrats attempting censure or impeachment? remote at best, and even if they do, maybe they'll spend so much time on that distraction that they won't spend OUR money quite as fast.
23 posted on 07/02/2006 4:42:18 AM PDT by WhiteGuy (It's about the People Who Count the Votes................. - Wally O'Dell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123
Cook is not highly respected by me. He was, as I recall, way off in 2004, predicting a Kerry victory and missing most of the Senate seats. I don't think he was close to my record: I had Bush at 300 EV (missing only PA) and had EVERY GOP Senate seat called correctly except CO.

I don't think Talent is in trouble; DeWine is already leading; MN is likely ours; Cantwell fading; the MI Governor is trailing the Republican, meaning Stabenow may be in some trouble; and I don't really see Frist's seat as vulnerable. We also may pick up NJ, and Santorum isn't out yet.

It's a long, long way to the election, and so much can happen that can swing ALL of these to the GOP, it's not worth getting worked up over at this point.

24 posted on 07/02/2006 5:01:49 AM PDT by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WhiteGuy
Ever hear of judges? Imagine Schumer as the head of the Judiciary Committee. Specter, despite what you may think of him, has been STELLAR in getting Bush's judges out and confirmed.

And Armed Services? Do you possibly think a Dem Senate wouldn't be holding major show trials for the military over Gitmo?

Your analysis is really, really thin.

25 posted on 07/02/2006 5:04:55 AM PDT by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: LS
Ever hear of judges?

Yes I addressed the issue of judges. Perhaps I should revisit. How many federal judgeships are expected to be vacated in the next 2 years? Of those, how many can logically be expected to face some opposition from the senate judiciary committee? How have presidents in years past managed to keep judges on the bench when an opposition party has in the majority in the senate? I think this is an issue of leadership by the president more than anything else. Either he is a strong enough leader to nominate respectable judges or he is not. (of course we won't mention harriet meiers)

Armed services? The president is the commander in chief. It is his responsibility to lead the military. How have past presidents handled this leadership responsibility without the benefit of a friendly senate?

Major show trials? - Please explain, what is meant by this comment?
26 posted on 07/02/2006 5:18:40 AM PDT by WhiteGuy (It's about the People Who Count the Votes................. - Wally O'Dell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: beyond the sea

beyond the sea is "looking for divine intervention" to save the GOP in November.

Maybe. God will certainly do as He sees fit, and doesn't need my advice or opinions to make His choices. AND I DO think we have God to thank for more than a few past election victories.

But maybe God is getting as impatient as I am.
Who knows? Maybe even God might be getting tired of electing Republicans who promise but don't deliver....

...And then bring the promises out again at election time.


27 posted on 07/02/2006 5:28:36 AM PDT by 9999lakes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123
speculating whether Democrats can perhaps pick up a sixth seat (the most likely prospect is the open seat in Tennessee that Majority Leader Bill Frist is vacating)
 
Don't bet on Ford winning, he may try to distance himself from his uncle- charged in the Tennessee waltz sting- but once Coker wins the nomination, and he will win it, Ford wont stand a chance.
 
TV ads at this point, Fords are full of only half truths (what a surprise) and Coker is about himself, his experience, his faith, including one with his momma :) Both Hillary and Bryant have yet to have TV ads here in the Chattanooga area.

28 posted on 07/02/2006 5:39:07 AM PDT by backinthefold (banoonie baloni?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: backinthefold
I live next door to Tennessee in NC. If Al Gore could not win TN in 2000, my gut feeling is that there is no way that a Dem from a corrupt political family can take this seat away from the Pubbies.
29 posted on 07/02/2006 5:49:30 AM PDT by srmorton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: LS; YaYa123
Cook is not highly respected by me. He was, as I recall, way off in 2004, predicting a Kerry victory and missing most of the Senate seats. I don't think he was close to my record

(Imo) Lame-o Cook cooks his own studies, predictions, polls, and judgments.

He's merely a little bloated fool.

30 posted on 07/02/2006 6:36:38 AM PDT by beyond the sea (Scientists Are Itching to Blame Poison Ivy's Effect on Global Warming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: 9999lakes
Are you beginning to think that all these election charades are just theatre for the citizens?

You most likely are right.

Personally, I'd like to see Maria Sharapova getting ready to return serve.

31 posted on 07/02/2006 6:54:52 AM PDT by beyond the sea (Scientists Are Itching to Blame Poison Ivy's Effect on Global Warming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: WhiteGuy
You wrote, "Prospect of democrats attempting censure or impeachment? remote at best,"

I'm not nearly so optimist on this point. If Democrats take over the House, I believe they will start impeachment proceedings immediately.

32 posted on 07/02/2006 7:57:22 AM PDT by YaYa123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123
Everyone seems to be missing what I believe is the over riding issue and that is national security. With every call for us to cut and run, with every comment that diminishes the work being done by the FBI as they thwart potential attacks here and with every report of cells in other countries being broken up (Canada, Australia, England), the left re enforces the idea they are weak on defense and do not take the WOT seriously.

The safety and security of the country and peoples perception of it is paramount in their decision of whom to vote for. It's been said many times but it is true nonetheless, 9-11 cvhanged everything and people have not forgotten it despite the medias attempt to wish it away.
33 posted on 07/02/2006 8:15:06 AM PDT by Eagles Talon IV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123
I'm not nearly so optimist on this point. If Democrats take over the House, I believe they will start impeachment proceedings immediately.


Let's just look at the worst-case scenario.

democrats end up with more seats in the house and therefore all the chairmanships.

If they wish to start impeachment proceedings immediately, let them.

That's right! I don't believe that there have been any crimes or misdemeanors committed, do you?

They can screw around for the next two years for all I care. Maybe it will slow their spending down a bit huh?

So even if they begin proceedings on day one, it is a non-issue from my perspective.
34 posted on 07/02/2006 8:29:13 AM PDT by WhiteGuy (It's about the People Who Count the Votes................. - Wally O'Dell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123

Listen.....The supremes gave Republicans a huge gift with their ruling against tribunals, if it is done correctly. IF Bush goes to congress for that power, before the election, it's a lose lose propostion for demokkkrats. They can either vote to give it to him, and piss off their base, or they can argue against it, and try to explain to the electorate how these head chopping terrorists are not being treated kindly enough.


35 posted on 07/02/2006 8:55:07 AM PDT by weezel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gridlock
>>(The 'Pubbies will pick up two (2) seats in the Senate and four (4) seats in the House in 2006)<<

Well, I hope yer right and I hope one of 'em is Steele (Marland).

36 posted on 07/02/2006 10:36:21 AM PDT by evad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: 9999lakes
beyond the sea is "looking for divine intervention" to save the GOP in November.

He may already have ...twice.

I wouldn't count on the ole "Third Time's a Charm" thing. We better handle it ourselves.

Hold yer nose and pull the R lever, even if it stands for RINO.

37 posted on 07/02/2006 10:40:11 AM PDT by evad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: WhiteGuy
Ditto!

Two years of inaction by the House can't be all that bad.

38 posted on 07/02/2006 10:44:00 AM PDT by evad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative
Why is Talent in trouble?

I don't think he is, not really. Certainly not like Santorum or Burns is. The polls have gone back and forth but the key fact it that Talent has twice the money on hand that McCaskill has, and barring a major gaff on his part I think he'll be reelected with a 4 or 5 point margin.

39 posted on 07/02/2006 10:48:15 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: WhiteGuy
You are more naive than I first thought. Merely the appellate judges that will be confirmed under a GOP senate alone constitutes a titanic difference from the Dems.

Show trials? Be serious. With the Dems running the Senate AS committee, they would have the JCS up every week defending a new "atrocity." Oh, and forget ANY prosecution of the War on Terror. A Dem senate would completely hamstring Bush. Don't kid yourself about "commander in chief." A President is only as powerful in wartime as his support. Ask LBJ.

40 posted on 07/02/2006 1:05:21 PM PDT by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: evad

No.

Not going to vote for RINOs anymore!

How serious am I about that?
Just as serious as i said years back, when i said I would never again vote for any democrat for any office, under any conditions, no matter who it was or what the office was.

RINO's are just as bad for the programs I support, as libs. Sometimes worse. When they want to show how cooperative they are, MY programs are always the first to go.


41 posted on 07/02/2006 1:28:50 PM PDT by 9999lakes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: LS
Merely the appellate judges that will be confirmed under a GOP senate alone constitutes a titanic difference from the Dems.

Ok, so how many appellate judges are you talking about? 10? 50? 100? More? Are you suggesting that a democrat controlled senate would prevent all nominees from being confirmed? a percentage? I do understand that a lap-dog-gop judiciary committee rubber stamps nearly everyone who is nominated thus making our president's job easier - but I would argue that judges would still be confirmed regardless of which party is in the majority.

Show trials? Be serious. With the Dems running the Senate AS committee, they would have the JCS up every week defending a new "atrocity."

If no "atrocities" have been committed, there is nothing to fear, correct? Besides, as I speculated, any activity that prevents the congress from spending and passing bad bills is a win for US. (we can't count on gw to veto anything)

Don't kid yourself about "commander in chief." A President is only as powerful in wartime as his support. Ask LBJ.

I'm not touching that one - being an effective C-I-C is about being a strong and effective leader. I really don't think a comparison to johnson fits. I may be naive, but I'd rather be naive than be chicken little.

42 posted on 07/02/2006 1:34:56 PM PDT by WhiteGuy (It's about the People Who Count the Votes................. - Wally O'Dell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: WhiteGuy

Very fluid situation with the Senate races. I don't buy into that many seats switching hands to the Dems, at least not AZ, TN, OH, or MO. PA, MT, and RI are legitimate would-be losses, but they aren't close to getting a net of six seats. Factoring in the increased number of competitive Dem seats (MN, NE, WA, MD, NJ, MI), they should be hoping to gain a couple of seats at best.


43 posted on 07/02/2006 4:35:59 PM PDT by zebrahead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: JoeFromSidney

We tried, but he won the primary.

Next time.


44 posted on 07/02/2006 4:39:09 PM PDT by MikefromOhio (aka MikeinIraq - Foreman of the NAU)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123

Washington State is starting to get a track record of "finding" votes for democrats after they have apparently lost in close races. Whomever goes up against Cantvotewell had better have a comfortable lead....


45 posted on 07/02/2006 4:44:05 PM PDT by soccermom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WhiteGuy
I'm talking 100 judges in 2 years, yes. Do you follow this stuff at all? These are the people CONTROLLLING society, and NONE got through when the Dems held the 1-vote majority between 2000 and 2002.

As for atrocities, you really, really are naive. The Dems do NOT NEED real crimes to have show trials. They hate the WoT, they hate the military and they won't let anything like evidence get in the way of completely obstructing any progress we might make in the war. Yes, there will be show trials. Rumsfeld would be forced out. Regardless of what the House would do on illegals, the Senate would force an amnesty.

I'm no chicken little, and if you'd been around here for the last TEN YEARS you'd know I'm the most clear-eyed realist on the board, and I'm telling you that if you think there is no genuine detrimental impact of a Dem senate, you are pure and simply a fool.

46 posted on 07/02/2006 5:06:17 PM PDT by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: 9999lakes
>>..when i said I would never again vote for any democrat for any office, under any conditions, <<

Well, that's an interesting way to look at it but remember, when you don't vote for the Republican it is a vote for the RAT.

The place to defeat RINOs is in the primary.

47 posted on 07/02/2006 6:13:01 PM PDT by evad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative
Here's hopin' this donkey gets defeated:

48 posted on 07/02/2006 6:16:19 PM PDT by Recovering_Democrat (I am SO glad to no longer be associated with the party of "dependence on government"!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: evad
A non-vote for a RINO is the same as a vote for a democrat. ...............................................nope. ..................................................Not true. Not politically. Not even mathematically. ............................................... But besides -- RINO's a just as bad for social conservatives as are dems. JUST-AS-BAD! As in there's no difference on school vouchers, no difference on abortion, no difference on a family of a father and mother -- No DIFFERENCE.
49 posted on 07/02/2006 7:42:28 PM PDT by 9999lakes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: 9999lakes
RINO's a just as bad for social conservatives as are dems. JUST-AS-BAD!

Not really. Most RINOs (e.g. Specter, Collins, et al.) will still vote to support conservative judge nominees on the basis that the President's election gives him the right and duty to appoint.

If one considers tax policy to be a social issue, most RINOs will eschew the notion of government being the source of welfare and income for the underclass.

50 posted on 07/03/2006 1:24:47 AM PDT by Recovering_Democrat (I am SO glad to no longer be associated with the party of "dependence on government"!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-64 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson