Posted on 11/08/2006 6:15:22 AM PST by Anitius Severinus Boethius
I think this applies to politics and to the war in Iraq. Quit trying to be a nice guy to everyone, take a position, and fight to win. Being PC in politics and war gets you one thing: a loss.
Here's another lesson, for at least the 4th time since 2000: THERE IS A PERFECT DIVIDE IN THIS COUNTRY.
Look how many close races there are and have been. Really, really close as to make it ridiculous to give up until all the absentee/provisional ballots are counted (yes, in MD I don't think the 2 biggies should be giving up until then and we all shouldn't be treating it as a loss until then).
IOW, I think we are really ripe for civil war. Seems the battle lines keep being drawn and half the population is against the other half.
I was trying to look at some issues in finer detail, but I can't figure out how to grind the data finer on the SOS database.
You're absolutely right. There has to be a difference between the Rats and the Republicans. Perhaps too many Republicans have forgotten that. Every once in a while the people will remind us who's really in charge. The biggest shame to me is that many Republicans have learned this lesson before, but they seem to have forgotten it (until now). Well, let's go on from here and do what we can to make this country better. God bless!
I've been saying this for a while but it doesn't seem to sink in. We also don't have the numbers to win the presidency alone. If we do not get the middle on to our side we won't win in 2008 either.
One thing that's become apparent to me is that a number of conservatives are not very intelligent. (I hope saying that doesn't get me in trouble.) They think there's a majority out there for someone who is conservative down the line and nobody can tell them differently. They look at themselves and their friends and they think the whole country's that way - a mistake liberals often make.
For example, on spending, while a majority of the country wants less spending in the abstract, you start cutting specific things and you usually lose votes in the hotly contested swing districts where independents are the balance of power. It's just not a vote getter. The Republicans in Washington, now so reviled by fiscal conservatives, figured that out a long time ago. That doesn't mean they should stop looking for places to cut, but cutting across the board, deleting entire departments etc. like conservatives want is a loser. The Bridge to Nowhere should have been cut, and they should be criticized for that.
Conservatives will have to allow Republicans to deviate on a few issues without screaming RINO!! People have to grow up for crying out loud. For example, on global warming, they should allow Republicans to advocate taking some steps to deal with it - but not something extreme like Kyoto. There are other ways - like scientific research. The squishy middle wants it dealt with. I know it may not be necessary, but it's not the end of the world if they fund some research into new technologies.
Yes they do. All the polls in all the states pick these three. It's not only MSM polls. If we insist on ignoring the people again and choose an unknown we will lose.
Look up all the counties in Blunt's District. Count up all the Talent votes in those counties. Compare with the Blunt votes in those counties. (Not entirely accurate, because I believe Polk and Taney counties are splint between the 7th and 8th district)
GOOD POST! I totally agree!
But that was before the people of Missouri elected a RAT as Secretary of State.
I know there are factions here on FR who really, really want this to be about illegal immigration. I'm sorry, but it just isn't.Unfortunately, I think it was as much about Foley, Abramoff, Cunningham et. al. and the failed house leadership. Republicans cannot win with scandal tainted candidates. Democrats may not care (witness Hevesi in NY) but it doesn't work for us. Our elected officials have to be above reproach.
I don't know I really agree about the "middle" concept.
I've seen too many times when talk is tough on the core platform, the Repubs gain ground; lose it when they try to be wishy-washy and play to Dem ideas (here in MD, for sure). I think it's likewise for the Dems.
Maybe both were too wishy-washy on their platforms and confused people.
The Stem Cell issue was driven to split the Republicans and should never, never, never have gotten this far. The language of the bill was deceptive and to think that five courts in Missouri approved a ballot initiative with such divergent language is beyond belief. But people would rather have hope than nothing and that's what they think they got. It was brilliantly marketed and most people's understanding of the scientific and legal ramifications was low. When people did start waking up to the devil in the details, the tide turned, but it was too little too late. It also shows that the power of organized religion in Missouri has faded. Church scandals as well as general demographic trends to a more secular nation have hit the homeland.
Nixon spent much of his time out of office to help rebuild the party after Goldwater. Similarly, there is an opportunity for McCain or Romney to prove that he can be worthy of running the country by rebuilding the party. Hillary has never hit above 45 in any poll but after last night, everything is hers to lose. If the social conservatives don't show up to vote, they should not continue to be allowed to drive policy. It is going to take someone who can deal with the newfound power of liberals to get elected in 2008. Clinton had the appearance working toward the center. They stole our themes and won last night. Hillary will try it yet. We have to reclaim the most basic of those tenets and appear approachable with regard to issues such as immigration.
In my opinion this is what distinguishes a leader from a weak candidate who is easy to topple in the next election. What we need in this country is Americans who will work together as leaders in Congress for the benefit of America. We need people who are going to govern with their convictions, not people who are worried about keeping or attaining power for themselves or their party.
Gaining the middle doesn't mean you have to go to the middle. Much of the middle will respond well to leadership. Witness Reagan, George W. Bush, and the 94 Republicans.
But what we can't do is say "our base is energized, screw the middle!" like some here advocate.
I agree with you totally. IMO, we're engaged in WWIII and Liberals will only bring us closer to destruction. We're fighting an enemy that only stops when you destroy them. Democrats are cowards and they will assuredly invite terrorism to American soil. Yesterday proves that the American people have forgotten 9/11 and the implication of an enemy determined to destroy our way of life.
I would like to distinguish between conversatives and republicans. First of all, most republicans in congress are not conversative. If you noticed in this election, independents voted for conversative and moderate democrats this election because they also realize that the republicans were not conversative. That is why they voted democrat. If the republicans were truly conversative, they would have not lost the election.
Face it...everyone in politics is there for the power and power is measured by the size of the budget you control, be it money you get for your state, committees you sit on...whatever.
What would happen if the President came out and simply said, via executive order: "All budgets are hereby cut by 5%. If you can't provide the same service to our citizens within that budget, I'll find someone who can."
Yeah, I know it won't happen, but give me my moment in my happy place...
It depends which issues. Republicans should be true to their core ideas, like being pro-life, conservative judges, missile defense, against gay marriage, tax reform, defending the borders. A campaign focused on spending cuts is a loser nationally and in many swing districts. The evidence has been strong on that for some time.
Steele nearly pulled off the impossible - winning in a bad year for Republicans in a heavily Democrat state. The last Republican senator from MD was Mathias, a RINO. If you think he blew it by not being more conservative you're delusional.
Wrong. There are not more conservatives than moderates plus liberals in this country. Wanting it to be otherwise does not make it so.
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.