The NYT likes to coach the RATs when they think they are falling short.
Adam N. is the head coach.
Fortunately, the advice is always wrong.
"Why take the lead when you already have the leader right by the gonads."
This a$$ is giddy over continued conflict in Iraq? As an American, I'd like to snap his neck with my bare hands!
Can you see the smile this reporter's face had while typing this? I can hear the glee from here.
Wohoo! More Iraq violence!
YES! Higher gas prices!
YEEAAAHH! Corruption investigations!
The NY Slimes. All the slant thats slant to slant.
uh.. the NY Times needed something to fill the page where the Escort Service Ads are?
(just a wild guess mind you)
:-)
They wilfully go against what decent, law abiding, Americans care about, and because they're such pompass asses they will stoop in their morale morass even deeper before they finally take heed of a clue!
Sounds like a strategy for losing.
The REAL reason for an article like this? "Yeah, we coulda won if we wanted to, but we didn't want to." Consolation if they manage to screw it up again.
.......a slightly heretical question
Who's the heretic? Is it Adam? Thought he was the play down the middle "journalist"!
sarc.........
Putting on turban and gazing into crystal ball:
Democrats will stay away from polls in large numbers.
Republicans will too but more Republicans will vote than 'Rats.
They know that they can't win and are setting up this fall back position, to say, "We didn't really want to win!"
"Such talk may well be premature. Election Day is six months away, and the party has lost many a winning hand. But here is a slightly heretical question, being asked only partly in jest right now: Is it really in the best interest of the Democratic Party to win control of the House and Senate in November? Might the party's long-term fortunes actually be helped by falling short?
"As strange as it might seem, there are moments when losing is winning in politics. Even as Democrats are doing everything they can to win, ...some of the party's leading figures are also speculating that November could represent one of those moments.
<0>"From this perspective, it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world politically to watch the Republicans struggle through the last two years of the Bush presidency. There's the prospect of continued conflict in Iraq, high gas prices, corruption investigations, Republican infighting and a gridlocked Congress. Democrats would have a better chance of winning the presidency in 2008, by this reasoning, and for the future they enhance their stature at a time when Republicans are faltering.
They know that their polls are full of BS, and most of the American People are not buying their bs.
I'm telling you, despite the lies they keep spreading about Bush's "poll numbers" or how the "Republicans are in trouble," they KNOW the real story. Yesterday, I posted a piece here on FR about supposedly "vulnerable" GOP House seats. Bottom line, the Dems cannot take control of the House, and more likely, the GOP will actually GAIN a seat or two!!!
Same in the Senate, I can't find one SURE GOP loser now---Santorum, down single digits, is the closest---and there are two Republican pickups as of this moment (NJ and MN). So that's a net INCREASE of one in the Senate---and Santorum won't lose, so we are really looking at two.
So when the Democrats lose the Times can claim victory.
Look at how cynical this is. They are saying it would be better for Republicans to win IN THE HOPE THEY WILL FAIL THE NEXT TWO YEARS! They aren't even bothering to argue there ideas are better.
The tide turns... The Democrats are damned if they do and damned if they don't ... hahahhaha.... I agree... If they do win in NOV... GRIDLOCK... every conservative would be wise to make them look like they act with no PLAN... plus they will mount senseless censure and impeachment attacks against the White House.... then they will look stupid and lose in 08... If they don't win in NOV... The Conservatives will mount a come back before 08 because... the war will be long over troops home peace in middle east low gas prices booming economy no attacks... hmmm they lose....
This is their worst fear...and even their buds in the MSM can't help them...
" Democrats need a net gain of 6 seats in the Senate, and 15 seats in the House."
We pick up 4,5, or 6 seats in the House and 1 or 2 in the Senate.
Gridlocked congress is a good thing. It means they aren't busy making up new reasons to tax us.
(Denny Crane: "Every one should carry a gun strapped to their waist. We need more - not less guns.")