Title should more correctly read: "Get Ready for a Democratic Eerie".
God help us.
Posted on 12/22/2007 3:57:15 PM PST by melt
Karl Rove's grandest aspiration was to create a Republican majority that would dominate American politics for a generation or more. But as the effects of his distinctive brand of fear-mongering fade, it's the Democrats who are poised to become the country's majority party -- and perhaps for a long time to come.
Many conservatives have insisted that the Democrats' wins in the 2006 midterm elections, as well as their recent pickups in some 2007 races, were mere blips. They wish. Political, ideological, demographic and economic trends are all leading toward durable Democratic majorities in Congress, control of most statehouses and, very possibly, the end of the decades-old GOP hammerlock on the electoral college.
This sea change is the result of the electorate's disenchantment with conservative Republicans, beginning in the 1990s. The old conservative majority, as given voice by Ronald Reagan and Newt Gingrich, sought to cut federal regulation, to privatize government operations and to slash social spending. But by late in Bill Clinton's presidency, broad public majorities had come to back environmental and consumer regulation, as well as significant new government spending on health care and education. As President Bush discovered in 2005, the public also disliked attempts to gut Social Security.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Title should more correctly read: "Get Ready for a Democratic Eerie".
God help us.
No, the change is due to Republicans acting like Democrats.
I firmly believe that half of those that disapprove of Bush wish he was more conservative, not less.
What this jerk doesn’t realize is that the ordinary person is sick and tired of Congress’ shenanigans under RAT control. The RATS may take the WH in 08 since the PUBS have nothing running that’s better but Congress will go PUB in ‘08.
But my kids tell me that college kids are becoming more conservative, rebelling against the college status quo. The professors are all liberal so to rebel the kids have to go more conservative, but they are going for RON PAUL not the others.
Very much wish that G.W. Bush was more conservative especially on the illegal immigration problem.
Soros is heard from through one of his well-funded outlets.
The problem is a republican hasn’t won California, Illinois, Pennsylvanian, or New Jersey since 1988.
That means that every republican goes into an election 112 electoral votes in the hole.
This sea change is the result of the electorate's disenchantment with conservative Republicans, who tote more of a political attitude rather than a conservative attitude.
The perfect definition of a RINO.
Thanks be to God that we have him in these times however.
The article fails to mention most of the Democrats recent gains have been made by their candidates taking more Conservative positions on some issues.
Your optimism is worthy of praise. /s
Bush’s disapproval rating with conservatives is probably higher than DemocRats. We support his war efforts, but we all know that the problem with illegal aliens is also a long term war that we haven’t even started fighting.
This election is about only one thing..illegal immigration.
No Republican will be elected without a firm stand on that.
If we have to fight the immigration issue with pressure on every congress criter every day..we will..
Is intelligence and focus with concern for what is best for America.
No, the change is due to Republicans acting like Democrats.
Why is this so hard to understand?
When Republicans run as conservatives, they win. Because conservative voters turn out for them in droves.
When Republicans act as Democrats, they lose. Because conservative voters stay home.
The balance of power in virtually every election since 1980 has thus been held by the conservative voter. If we come out, Republicans win. If we don't, the Democrats win.
To pretend otherwise, as Judis and Teixeira are, is simply leftist twaddle.
You would think the GOP would've figured it out by now...
You're being a dream weaver.
Well The Wash Post is bailing water hard to keep the sinking Congressional RATS from looking all wet.
RAT era indeed. The have nothing they can actually truthfully represent to voters and survive an election. They have to deceive, distort ansd outright lie.
Fraid its more like a RAT’s Ass Second they have gotten.
So how did the Democrats do in Louisina?
Hmmm?
In California, much of the Dem majority is due to motor-voter.
I want some of what they're smoking.
You are absolutely right! Thank you for reminding us.
Excellent!!!!And in the R.I. statehouse?
That plus the fact that a lot of traditionally RED states have been turning BLUE. This is due to liberal from neighboring states escaping and then trying to turn those states into the Hell Holes they left. New Hampshire, New Mexico, and Nevada come to mind. Not that these are huge electoral-wise, but when things are tight, every state counts. Before 1990, CA was a mainstay Republican state. Losing it was a huge blow. It happened in large part due to the ever shrinking Defense industry, unchecked immigration, and the Motor Voter law. You can thank GHWB for that.
Actually - the title seems like it could be almost prophetic. If the Republicans nominate a looser who alienates the conservative base, I can pretty much guarantee the Dems will be ruling. And the way they like to wield power (unlike how the Republicans were whimps when they had power but wasted it), we are likely to see Dems in control for a long time through every conceivable twist of rules, new rules, and generally anything they can do to hold power.
And we will deserve it... The coming Democrat dynasty, I believe, will spell the end of the United States of America. And the Republican Party will be complicit.
Actually, most of us were/are disenchanted with LIBERAL Republicans (RINO's) and so called MODERATE Republicans (also RINO's).
Liberals do believe that if they lie enough, to the public and themselves, that eventually it becomes true. Truly disturbed people!
That's not centrist, that's schizo. People like that shouldn't even get near a voting booth.
Of course a lot of Democrats think the war on terror is a myth, simply a fear-mongering device of the Republicans. Once Hillary gets in and sends Bill on a round-the-world goodwill tour, all our foreign problems will disappear, and the nasty Republicans will have to find other fears to monger.
The idea is to get approval of the electorate. If 50+% of individuals are not happy with the state of their personal economy, Rove blew a wasted opportunity for the GOP.
Bush I blew it on taxes and Bush II may have blown it with making China one of his favorite trading nations. He traded jobs to control inflation. The next election will tell if it worked or not.
I tend to agree. However, if Hillary is elected POTUS, my shallow faith in the semi- intelligence of the sheeple of this nation will be irrevocably evaporated. I truly fear for my country if the Leftoids gain complete control.
That's called going insane... not conservative.
These guys said the same thing in a book about the emerging democratic majority right about the time that Bush won in 2ooo. They’re like a broken record that can’t get beyond the deep scratch.
Nanny state screwheads.
Many democrats wandered off the reservation to campaign as centrists. The democrat street let them slide because of their (D)s but weren't happy and pledged to ruun more radical candidates against them if they didn't walk the leftist walk in office. Pelosi, Murtha, Reid and others campaigned on ending the war -IMMEDIATELY! Not only have they failed. We have increased war funding, we have more troops in Iraq than before the election and the surge is working.
This isn't making the Daily Kos and Code Pink crowds very happy. If Hillary goes to the convention with enough delegates to make her the nominee we could have massive demonstrations staged for the viewing audiences across the nation. This could turn a lot of the center away from the party of defeat and taxes.
The task will be to get them to vote (R) instead of just staying at home.
I don’t post here much anymore...my “old fashioned”, “out of date” view of conservatism does not seem to fit with most people today—even with an “R” behind their name.
Just recently—I made some comments on another “Conservative” site, regarding homosexuality—and how it is NOT a “normal” lifestyle, that homosexuals should NOT be free to “display their affections for each other in CHURCH, and that any church that openly allows such is NOT a church I would want to attend—or, in my opinion, following God’s will.
The responses were predictable, but something I would expect MORE from KOS or DU—NOT from “Christians”.
As I told them—When “conservatives” start to think and act like liberals, talking about acceptance, tolerance, prejudices and such— SOMEONE needs to take a stand!!
But—it seems few want to listen anymore.
But he made one major mistake. In his desire to create a Republican majority, he ran "electable" RINO candidates who could get elected but who had few to no conservative principles from which to govern.
And when a true conservative like Pat Toomey or Bret Schundler managed to contest the Rove RINO, the White House shunned them. The result was a Republican majority with no conservative convictions and no balls.
Balancing conservatism with electability is a tricky concept but, too often, Rove simply sold out to whatever liberal would switch parties in order to get elected. It explains why so many conservatives are thinking of going third-party or staying home this time around. They feel the Republican Party has left them.
Wow: The Washington Post in in full retroactive mode in anticipation of Obama’s Iowas win — they think it’s the 60’s all over again.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/21/AR2007122101920_Comments.html
Wow: The Washington Post is in full retroactive mode in anticipation of Obama’s Iowas win — they think it’s the 60’s all over again.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/21/AR2007122101920_Comments.html
The problem with the Democrats is that by and large they are insane (Gore-bot!) liars. All we need to do is nominate smart candidates who tell the truth, and we will do fine.
Go Fred!
Other than “whistling past the graveyard”, there are two purposes to an article like this: to bash Bush (hence the Rove reference), and to scare panic-stricken inside the Beltway Republicans into adopting a more liberal tone (hence “you’re driving Latinos away with your anti-immigration rhetoric”, “people want free health care” and “the further away we are from 9/11, the less people care about terrorism”). The most significant thing about this article is the one topic it studiously avoids: higher taxes. Democrat Utopia cannot be brought about without ever increasing taxation. Therefore this article is a photographic negative of a blueprint for Republican victory: hang tough on low taxes, show the Democrats no mercy for their stand on illegal immigration (meaning no Huckster or McCain for the GOP), and remind people that if they’ve forgotten about terrorism, it’s not because the Democrats want every terrorist to have an ACLU lawyer.
That's why they have to be stopped.
And Code Pink/Mother Sheehan have faded in to the background.
I realize that this is the mantra on FR. Personally I would always prefer a Conservative. However, there is more to winning elections than this. If your statement is true, we should expect to see "conservative voters turn out... in droves" for Thompson and Hunter in the primaries. If this does not happen, does the thesis still hold? Or do we go back to blaming the MSM?
This opinion has been repeated over and over and there is no proof whatsoever that it is true. There isn't one voter with a half a brain that would ever vote for a Democrat believing that the Democrat would be more likely to cut spending.
The danger in believing this is that the real reason Republicans lost could be overlooked.
If this was true, why do we not have all kinds of politicians promising to cut spending? Because we're beyond that point in America. The truth is everyone is standing with their hands out. They believe in Santa Claus. They want their goodies.
I wish this theory were true. There would be hope because individuals would be willing to sacrifice but after all, we've become accustomed to the term "entitlements". We can't have it both ways.
It's going to take some really good educating.
Yeah, Clinton sure created a whole bunch of new democrats!! So many that it took twelve years to get the House back and they had to pretend to be republicans to do it!
Pennsylvania is winnable
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.