Posted on 11/12/2006 4:13:27 AM PST by nathanbedford
I've been saying that for days now. Bush finally has a congress that will work with him.
"We cannot win this war unless we find a way to turn the sane Muslim world against the crazies.
Well said. But it has not happened for the last 1400 years or so. Why should we expect anything different now?"
It hasn't happend in 1400 years because there is no such thing as a sane moo-slime. The demon they worship is controls their lives. They do what they are told and destroy anything and anyone who disagree.
There is only one way the west will eventually win this war, and you all know what that is, but will never say it. My tag line says it all.
It was Bush's immigration policy which drove many conservatives away from the voting booths.
The result of this is that he does not weigh his words and actions against a coherent standard grounded in conservatism, but instinctively reacts to do what is right for family, friends, and country. Thus we get Harriet Meirs, pandering to the Clintons and Kennedys, prescription drug laws, campaign finance laws, runaway spending, and the war in Iraq. The conservative movement is left muddled and confused and the Republican Party undisciplined and leaderless.
Awesome read!
I respectfully disagree with you. The reason why conservatives lost this election, and why they haven't actually won a national election since at least 1994 or perhaps as far back as 1984 is actually quite simple. Conservative leaders haven been unable to consistenly articulate a positive vision for a conservative future.
I think you can distill the conservative message for the 2006 election into one sentence: "vote for Republicans or your family will die." While conservatives may be able to argue that this is true, it isn't a positive message for the future that is going to get people excited about voting for conservatives.
What really set Ronaldus Maximus apart from other conservatives in my view was his ability to articulate a positive vision for a conservative future. He was able to communicate that vision and make other people want to be a part of it. In the 26 years since President Reagan was elected to the Presidency, the conservative message has evolved from the shining city on the hill, to vote for Republicans or your family dies.
Is it any wonder that the electorate is tuning conservatives out?
Oh, and it sure doesn't help when the individuals who are elected to office as so-called "conservatives" act like FDR leftists on a spending binge. For once, I think that the exit polls were actually accurate in their assessment of what voters were really concerned about. I suggest reading those with an open mind.
The electorate is a whole lot smarter than they're given credit for.
Let me invite you up to NH-01 for a reality tour, where you can ask former Congressman Bradley, who now has lots of time on his hands, about that.
his loyalty to family and friends affects his appointments and produce mediocrities like Brown at FEMA and Ridge at Homeland Security and Harriet Meirs.
A conservative party would never, ever win elections.
Not one.
He was able to communicate that vision and make other people want to be a part of it
The public may have perceived a Rummy resignation as a positive thing....that Bush and the Republicans were beginning to get the message the voters were trying to send...we need something other than the status quo there.
In turn, they may not have voted against us in such great numbers had he resigned.
However, it is possible they also would have seen it as weakness. It was a gamble, and no doubt they waited until after the election for this reason.
I agree.
President Bush has had great difficulty getting his mesage to the people or even that he has a message.He has also tried to play nice,too nice, with those who attack him and his policies.
He and the Republican leaders acted like it was their turn to spend ,spend,spend and the public does vaguely understand deficits cannot go higher without negative consequences.
Look for a lot of "tax the rich" proposals next spring.
Electoral politics is all about communication. And it doesn't necessarily have to be a top down process. Actually, it would be much better if the folks running for offices other than the Presidency were the ones communicating a positive message for once. And better still if individual conservatives were able to consistently articulate a positive conservative vision.
FR is an interesting microcosm of how conservatives communicate their message to the world at large. Stand back for a moment and just read any political thread. If you weren't already a member of the conservative choir, would you want to buy what we're selling?
Some would beleive that. I beleive the Christian base will not vote for social liberal republicans and stayed home because the congress and white house failed the conservative smell test and the base is not the same as the always loyal and always wrong dem base. The pubs lost the election because they deserved to lose the election and are now neo cons.
They don't understand that there are 51 Federal LIFETIME judges that will be appointed or how the Senate panel will now be populated--BUT they will bitch like hell about liberal judges
They haven't the foggiest idea how the house committees work
Rove should have nationalized the local elections by attempting to educate these fools
Absolutely correct.
IMHO, it seems that lengthy and convoluted explanations are akin to undergraduate term papers.
I get your point...you are right in many respects....it's hard for a conservative candidate to communicate his vision if there's no leadership at the top...you could be against illegal immigration but who's going to back you up...not many.
Although I agree wholeheartedly, I also believe The Bush Admin. never correctly articulated the parameters around their "we must win" goal.
Yes, we said Iraq must be strong enough to handle its own security, but that in itself is a nebuous concept, at best.
Thus, the GOP base was demoralized. I know I was.
Ironically, I believe this election will spur the Iraqi's to get their act together faster, and stop relying on the blood of US soldiers to keep their security.
Most voters, GOP included, just could not wrap their brains around the policy whereby fabulous young American soldiers were dying in Iraq due to a violent disagreement between two sects of Muslim hysteria.
The Iraq govt. must now get tough on the insurgent terrorist. If that means wiping out a few villages, then so be it.
But they must stop relying on the US soldiers to be the 'bad guys' in this mix, because all that does is turn US soldiers into targets on both sides of the Iraqi-Muslim spectrum.
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.