How the Republican Party can save itself in the Elections

[308win]

I'd say that no one will actually win the next election. But someone will lose.

Yes someone will lose - us and the US. Politicians don't run to serve anymore they run to get in office and feed. Illegal aliens may fire up the voters enough to overcome the pandering to family values, prolife and all of the other political noise that the professionals are so good getting to play in Peoria but I doubt it. Here in Ohio we have an R nominee for Governor who is all to happy to cozy up to the Christian Taliban; fortunately we have a D nominee who is middle of the road and rated A on 2A by GOA.

 

[ArmedBear]

The Dems don't even have to be all that less tainted (though they certainly are in recent events) - they just have to be the alternative.

That's true. That was part of my point. In some districts, they are. In some, they're not. People do vote for candidates, ultimately. They won't punish their local Republican rep for Duke Cunningham's sins, Bush's total abandonment of the libertarian wing of the GOP. They won't punish their local Democrat for Kennedy's drunk wreck, or Monahan's corruption, either. And committed GOP voters won't vote for a really bad Democrat candidate over a mediocre Republican, any more than the Democrats would elect a Republican they despise over a Democrat they just don't like a whole lot.

People will, like .308win above, cross party lines for a good candidate over a bad one, however, especially locally or within their states. Nancy Pelosi and John McCain aren't even in the picture in that case.

Regarding generic vote polls, BTW, here's an interesting article. .355 correlation with outcome. Relatively meaningless.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/05/dont_bet_on_the_generic_ballot.html

 

[ArmedBear]

...and another piece, saying that the GOP is screwed in the next election...

Interesting read.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pnoonan/?id=110008359

 

[Sungun09]

The Republican party, with some exceptions, is made up of dim wits, just like the Democratic party, with some exceptions is made up of dimmer wits. I am speaking of politicos not the average man which we all are..

I've been both republican and Democrat, and both $uck.

When was the last time the Supreme court ruled something as "un-constitutional" ? When I was growing up, the term was often used on the nightly news. NOT anymore

We will NEVER go back to being a republic through the political process. Once the cat is out of the bag .............

 

[RealGun]

I disagree though. Remember that Reps made a BIG deal out of being the moral upstanding party who would restore dignity to the White House and so on. A lot of their partisans who may be less cynical than you or I believed them. Recent scandals have been heavily tilted towards Reps and tehre's no sign that the indictments and rumors will slow down.

What that does is it turns off the people who voted Republican on the morals issue (which if you recall played out pretty big in 04). It might make some of them vote Dem. It might make some of that not vote at all. It might make some not donate or whatever but it IS NOW hurting and WILL hurt the Reps no doubt about it. Look at current polls on whether the electorate would prefer a Dem or Rep Congress? I don't think that's coming about because of the minutiae of tax policy - it's coming about because of the general malaise and distrust about the current administrations, which is driven in no small part by never ending stories of abuse of power, cronyism and corruption.

The Dems don't even have to be all that less tainted (though they certainly are in recent events) - they just have to be the alternative. - dmallind

I think you would do well to separate White House scandal from Congressional scandal. It is very unfair to refer to all of it as "administration" or to interweave it as inseparable, implying more WH involvement than really exists. The White House has generated some controversy and had a couple personnel issues but no scandal per se. Disagreeing does not make a scandal. It has in fact been more dignified and stays on the high road. People simply have to decide if they want "homeland security" or not...whether they stand for anything grander than their personal desires.

 

[Lobotomy Boy]

Good article, Armed Bear. You may be right about districting preventing the Republicans from losing both houses. Or not. We won't know for sure for quite a few months yet.

An interesting thought crossed my mind while I was out mowing the lawn a few minutes ago. I was thinking aboutthe concept of "President Pelosi," which is pretty horrible, and I thought that I'd much rather have a President Hastert (talk about the lesser of two evils).

If the situation for the administration continues to deteriorate, if the Bush/Abrahamoff connection turns out to be much cozier than is currently realized, if the Plame investigation leads to some high-level indictments (higher than Scooter Libby), if new revelations about illegal spying on U.S. citizens, the build-up to the war, or if the finances of the war prove to have been funneled into administration pockets ala Duke Cunningham, and impeachment looks likely if the Democrats take over congress, maybe the Republicans should do a pre-emptive impeachment of both the President and Vice President in order to install one of their own in the Oval Office rather than some wigged-out moonbat like Pelosi.

It's unlikely to come to that, but then the current situation would have seemed highly improbable last August, before Katrina.

 

[Matt King]

The Republicans need to return to their roots. That is the only way that they could win the 2008 election.

 

[RealGun]

illegal spying on U.S. citizens - LB

It has not been established that communication surveillance is illegal. It is kind of moot if a strong majority approve...hardly a scandal except on gun forums.

 

[Matt King]

Oh, if they stopped spying on american citizen's, they might trust the republicans more than they do now.

 

[cropcirclewalker]

Whenever I say the words, "Republican Party", I spit.

Whenever I say the words, "Democrat Party" I

 

[Lobotomy Boy]

Real Gun, notice that I was talking about possible future scenarios that could make worsen the situation for the Republican party, and being the future is composed of events that haven't happened yet, what has or has not been established in the past is hardly pertinent to such a discussion.

 

[Manedwolf]

People simply have to decide if they want "homeland security" or not...whether they stand for anything grander than their personal desires.

I don't want "homeland security". I want a secure country. And so-called Republicans went and created ANOTHER NEW GOVERNMENT AGENCY of bloat and wasted money and cronyism appointees and bureacrats that hasn't really accomplished anything but mountains more bureaucratic paperwork and hassles for law-abiding citizens not likely to be a threat, and it changes directors like socks.

What happened to SMALL GOVERNMENT?

 

[1wildbill]

Lots of ideas, they generally assume that most Americans think for themselves. Most don't.

1. Lower gas prices somehow, most important issue to most Americans now, and be real loud about it.
2. Take a stronger stand on the border issue, and be real loud about it.
3. Get some good things going in Iraq that the media finds interesting, and be real loud about it.
4. Cut taxes more and be real loud about it.
5. Increase the minimum wage and be real loud about it.

I had some more ideas but all this noise made me lose my train of thought.
It doesn't matter what they do, except cut gas prices, gotta' get the PR turned around. Oh, yeah, and work together as a political party.

Should have read the poll first. Since when did doing the right thing ever win an election? Ask Barry Goldwater, all he did was tell the truth and you see where it got him. Come on, we are talking politics, you just gotta' tell the people what they want to hear. (Only 1 person had it right on #4. Promise, that's the word.)

 

[cookekdjr]

Quote:
illegal spying on U.S. citizens - LB


It has not been established that communication surveillance is illegal. It is kind of moot if a strong majority approve...hardly a scandal except on gun forums.

Ummmm....dead wrong. The Bush administration, via John Ashcroft, in testimony before Congress, said spying on US citizens would be a felony unless Congress passed their proposed legislation. Congress refused.
Undeterred, the Whitehouse began (continued?) spying on US citizens anyway, this time claiming it is NOT illegal.
This one anecdote sums up the honesty and integrity of Bush and his administration. This is who he is.
-David

 

[ArmedBear]

This one anecdote sums up the honesty and integrity of Bush and his administration. This is who he is

...which would hurt the Bush administration even more in the polls if any Americans actually expected integrity in the White House. But we generally don't. That's why it's a wildcard that can be played, but it's not a sure bet either way, election-wise.

Sad, but true.

 

[xd9fan]

+1 ManedWolf.

Instead of asking the thousands of law abidding armed citizens Which have personal stakes in thier community and thier property (like the borders) to be alert and active, we are givin a stupid rainbow color strip for a threat level, And a brand new agency that will abuse its power and spend more money and produce less results than any Minuteman ever could.

We need the Militia back. 18 to 60 years of age. Gun clubs everywhere and in the schools. De centralized but highly mobile. LOCAL.

Oh and while I'm dreaming. Make it a law that the National Guard can never step foot on foreign soil. They guard the Nation.....here....borders included.


Bush will be the Bill Clinton of the GOP. He will loose everything when he had everything.

 

[RealGun]

http://hprsite.squarespace.com/bushs-wiretapping-pro-032006/

Counterterrorism is a success story if anything, except for those who would prefer the administration to fail.

 

[71Commander]

Do away with the Patroit Act.

 

[jefmad]

I don't think there is snowball's chance in hell that the Republican Party will do what it takes to get my vote in 2008. I am voting Democrat, and going for stalemate. I dreamed of a time when the Republican party would control the Presidency, House, and Senate at the same time. I evisioned tax cuts, repeal of gun laws, downsizing of the government, less intrusion into our private lives, and a strong, secure nation. I have been sorely disappointed by what they have delivered. I have learned the hard way that giving any part complete control in Washington is counter-productive to the survival of our Republic.

This is the lesson that I have learned as well. The best that I can hope for is a stalemate between the major parties.

 

[Baron Holbach4]

I don't think there is snowball's chance in hell that the Republican Party will do what it takes to get my vote in 2008. I am voting Democrat, and going for stalemate. I dreamed of a time when the Republican party would control the Presidency, House, and Senate at the same time. I evisioned tax cuts, repeal of gun laws, downsizing of the government, less intrusion into our private lives, and a strong, secure nation. I have been sorely disappointed by what they have delivered. I have learned the hard way that giving any part complete control in Washington is counter-productive to the survival of our Republic.

Excellent. But I want to point out that the "Republic" died in 1865.

 

[Manedwolf]

Counterterrorism is a success story if anything, except for those who would prefer the administration to fail.

How's Osama bin Laden doing, then?

Five years later, still alive, and up to his ears in jihad recruits, a dream beyond his wildest dreams?

He's LAUGHING at us.

 

[Thin Black Line]

Republicans can win the same way they always do: gay bashing and religious fundamentalism. It has worked and it will work.

And, thanks to Bush refusing to sign an executive order protecting our
military chaplains who would dare utter the J-word in a prayer, the
Republicans are in danger of losing votes from they've-always-been-in-our
-pockets Christian fundamentalists. However, it is not just the prayer
issue alone for we Christians and who we would vote for, but our growing
perception that the leadership in the executive branch and members
of the Republican party have abandoned us and their former places of
worship for their new groves and high places. The Democrats had
abandoned them long ago given their support of R v. W.

The religious beliefs of voters in elections can put a whole new twist on
this poll and would probably fall under "#6 Other" for people. The
strength of these beliefs can not be underestimated. Even the commies
called it the "opiate of the masses" and tried to do away with Churches
and Temples across the former Sovietski Soyuz. Despite such oppression,
the Church has returned.

For us here in the USA, faith will probably be the only thing that sustains
us in the dark decades ahead!

 

[Sinsaba]

I have voted Republican all my life. In November I will not be doing so. I won't go against my political beliefs and vote Democrat but I will vote for a third party.

A waste of vote? I don't think so. What will the incumbants of either party think if various third parties get twice or even three or four times the votes they used to get? I might be wrong, but I think that they (of either party) will get the idea that the public is pissed with the politicians that are currently in office. At least I hope they will.

I must say I am amazed at this thread. I've seen little or no original thought here just Republician and Democratic talking points.

edited to remove snide unwarrented political dig

 

[Manedwolf]

I personally would never vote for a theocrat of ANY sort. I consider them one of the most dangerous sorts of people you could ever put in a position of power, as their decisions will be based often SOLELY on personal beliefs and emotion, rather than on logic, reason and research.

And any group that creates scapegoats as a distraction (while summarily endorsing the condemnation, then destruction of the scapegoats) is heading down the path that once led to straightarm salutes and grey uniforms.

Extreme religiousity and endorsement of a particular religion is also, I feel, an insidious poison to the Republican party, as it has nothing to do with LESS invasive government...rather, one telling you what you ought to BELIEVE. Or, if unchecked, what you must profess to believe to avoid state-sanctioned reprisals, discrimination, and even violence. The middle east went that way. Let's not follow their example.

 

[Thin Black Line]

I would say that our Founding Fathers had extremely strong religious
beliefs, but they also tempered this in the sense of not forcing their
particular beliefs on others. Somehow they were able to maintain
this balance with their peers. I'm not saying things were perfect
"back then" and there were many changes that needed to be made
and were as time progressed --slavery among these changes. I
think Lee made a good example when he prayed next to a former
slave after our very un-civil war. (I had ancestors on both sides).