No, quite clearly it is all of the above. Either that or you’re a rat troll. Which is it? Shall we ask the mods to check on it? Your posting history of doom and glooming conservatives while boosting liberal Republicans might be interesting to the powers that be around here.
It is a little less than a year and a half until the next election. To be predicting as you are at the current time, you are either ignorant or you have an agenda.
I evaluate the political climate, which is always changing, based on experience, history, and a healthy dose of communication and observation.
Right now, you have to be blind, deaf, and dumb to miss the anger and helplessness that people are feeling towards Washington. The Democrat controlled congress has it’s lowest approval rating since they’ve been keeping records of the congressional approval rating. Bush’s approval rating is in the toilet. The population at large wasn’t really sold on the idea of electing Democrats to solve problems in 2006, as was evidenced by the large number of very close races. The Democrats have done nothing to move things in their direction.
Now, after putting the Democrats in charge and watching as they do nothing and watching as our politicans try and enact a much more radical agenda than promised and then shove amnesty down our throats, people are, quite rightly, disillusioned with Washington.
Anyone who wants to win is going to need to use that anti-Washington sentiment. Who is going to exploit that? Hillary Clinton? Barak Obama? John Edwards? How? With promises of tax raises and bigger government? Yeah, that’s going to go over really big when it comes down to the wire. With promises of having that same government control our health care?
I don’t know whether or not you do have ulterior motive, but if you don’t and you are honestly so mired in conventional wisdom and so stuck in the 2006 election and the 2000 electoral map that you can’t think beyond it, then you would be well suited to stay out of the predictions business. It just ain’t for you.
Threatening to get the mods to look into my posting history is silly. I have been on FR longer than you have and have a good posting history since then. That childishness speaks volumes for you, and it isn’t flattering.
I supported Dubya in 2000 and 2004, and predicted victories for him in both races. Look it up. In fact, I overstated Dubya’s appeal in 2004 - he won by fewed Electoral Votes than I expected.
That’s not a doom & gloomer, nor a troll, unless you have a pathological need to oversimplify things so that they agree with your delicate worldview. I’m sorry it’s so fragile.
Clarity first. And I strive for clarity. That doesn’t mean I;m always right. It does mean I try not to put partisan blinders on. I evaluate the political climate as of now. Of course things can change and likely will - thing is, it’s immature to think they will necessarily change for the better.
Through the latter half of 2005 and all of 2006, the conventional wisdom on FR was wrong. Things important to FR were seen as alienating to the general electorate. The result was that even though the election was a while away, or the requisite snarky remark that Bush won’t win reelection, things didn’t get better and steadily grew worse.
We had Freepers insist that Katherine Harris was going to win, when it was clear to anybody with a little bit of clarity that she would be an early casualty in what was going to be a long night for the GOP.
And those that said that were right, and the snarky types joined the denial types in the losers circle. Well, I’m not happy it happened. It would be a profound misread to think that.
But I call it like I see it. If I see it wrong, fine, but that doesn’t make me a troll or a democrat. Disagreeing with the conventional wisdom on FR doesn’t make someone an enemy, no matter how that kind of simplistic worldview is comforting to some.
In 2006, almost every race that could have broken in our direction broke in the other direction. Any way you cut it, that’s not a good sign. It demonstrated a lack of confidence in GOP and conservative leadership. Despite massive self-hypnosis around some pockets on FR, many conservatives were rejected by the electorate in 2006. It wasn’t all RINOs.
And the polls, on balance, were right. They predicted a big night for the dems, and the dems had a big night. They now enjoy about a 30 seat margin in the House and a close ideological margin in the Senate.
I don’t doubt that the polls showing remarkable disapproval of the president and Congress are accurate. I never suggested otherwise. Not so important for now - we have a GOP president who has alienated a lot of people, and is stick in the low to mid 30s in approval. He also enjoys disapproval around 60%. The country has no confidence in his ability to win the war in Iraq. The conventional wisdom now is that it is lost. As that perception solidifies, his stature diminishes.
That has nothing to do with how well the public perceives congress. His fortunes do not inexorably rise as Congress’ stature diminishes.
A lot can change in 16 months, but like I said a year before election 2006, there are no signs of movement so far. As it stands now, odds are strong the country will elect a democrat in 2008.
What’s the point in writing otherwise if that’s how I evaluate things? and I’m not alone. Rush is beloved on this forum and he frankly has said there is an 80% chance the dems win the WH in 2008. I suppose he is a troll? A liberal? The enemy?
Type what you want. As the circumstances change, I’ll evaluate and acknowledge. But I won’t deny polls in order to feed some shallow, immature worldview.
Sometimes things just don’t go your way. And pretending that they are going your way doesn’t help.