PDA

View Full Version : The Republicans are still in the race


Frogger
10-31-2007, 07:46 AM
Despite the crowing of some Democrats and the gloom and doom of some Republicans the results of the next presidential election have not already been decided.

Glimmers Of A Republican Victory
By: James G. WIles, For The Bulletin
10/30/2007

While the Democrats and their media allies search for some way to pin the California wildfires on George Bush and the Republicans, something far more significant is happening.
It's beginning to occur to the Democrats that they can lose the 2008 elections. Two months ago, this was unthinkable. But now, the trend on the ground in Iraq has reversed. And, second, with the administration and the California Republican state government's competent response to a major national disaster and Louisiana voters' election of a Republican governor, the ghost of Katrina may be dissipating.
There go the Democrats' two most winning issues.
In hindsight, New Orleans was sui generic. A corrupt and incompetent city government and a corrupt and incompetent state government combined to inflict a disaster on the Crescent City's most vulnerable citizens - whom the Democrats claim, uniquely, to serve. This reality hit home with voters because of the stark contrast between the images on cable TV this week and the nightmare of two years ago.
Then there's the marked difference between the recovery efforts in Mississippi and Louisiana. In Mississippi, Gov. Haley Barbour and the Republicans have substantially rebuilt the Gulf Coast. In New Orleans, recovery efforts have floundered amid Democrat corruption, criminality and incompetence. With a year to go until the national elections, incoming Louisiana Republican Gov. Bobby Jindal can do a great deal to help the GOP.
Mr. Jindal is the GOP's new rock star. If successful, it's easy to picture Gov. Jindal giving the keynote speech at the Republican National Convention, just as another new actor on the scene, Barack Obama, did at the Democrat Convention in 2004.
If, as expected, Hillary Clinton secures the Democrat nomination, she's far from unbeatable. Newt Gingrich has given Republicans some valuable advice: Personal attacks on Mrs. Clinton won't work. Voters already know all the negatives about her. And, despite that, she's leading her closest Democratic rival by 30 points.
So acting like Bob Dole in 1996 and asking, "Where's the outrage?" is a recipe for GOP defeat. The way for a strong GOP candidate to beat Mrs. Clinton is on the merits:
* At a time when the nation needs to be brought together, Mrs. Clinton is the most divisive and polarizing figure in American politics.
* If Mrs. Clinton 44 is elected, the presidency will have been controlled by the same two families for potentially 28 years. Do we really want dynasties in this country? Is America really like Argentina where, for the second time, a president's wife has just been elected to succeed him?
* The policies that the Democrats and Mrs. Clinton advocate don't enjoy the support of the American people.
Fought this way, and with victory in Iraq, Mrs. Clinton's triumphalism will evaporate. There are, however, at least two caveats to this scenario.
One, of course, is Iraq and the wider war with Islamic jihadism. The war remains a conundrum.
So far, Bush and the Republican minority in Congress have held on to frustrate the Democrats' efforts to lose Iraq. By next November, this will be perceived as either a profile in courage or suicidal folly. Which way the public's judgment will go will be dictated by results on the battlefield.
What helps Republicans is that the American people prefer victory. If current trends in Iraq continue, in 2008 the electorate will remember Harry Reid's pronouncing the Iraq war as "lost." And Mrs. Clinton's telling Gen. David Petraeus that his report required the "willing suspension of disbelief."
Lately, the leading Democratic presidential candidates have begun hedging their bets. However, Republican candidates can just say: "Let's go to the videotape" - if conditions on the ground in Iraq allow it. And, as in Spain in 2004, expect Osama's boys to try to influence the American elections.
That said, it's unlikely that President Bush's political standing will rebound until after he leaves office. The most President Bush can hope for is that, like Harry Truman, his reputation will grow with time.
But if the Republicans succeed holding the presidency, the GOP will have achieved something neither national party has done in wartime since the Second World War.
Consider:
* In 1952, in the midst of the Korean War and with the lowest poll ratings in history (still so today), President Truman lost the New Hampshire primary to Sen. Estes Kefauver and dropped out of the race.
* In 1968, LBJ dropped out of the race after nearly losing the New Hampshire primary to Sen. Eugene McCarthy in the wake of the Tet Offensive.
* In 1992, after smashing Iraq in the First Gulf War, Bush 41 nevertheless lost to Bill Clinton.
Bush 41's loss to Clinton 42 is the other caveat. Like Winston Churchill after World War II, a victorious leader lost because of a recession in the economy. This is the alternative scenario that today most threatens GOP prospects in 2008.
So, in this winter of Republican discontent, here's a recipe for good cheer: competence, no new taxes, no activist judges, smaller, honest government and victory.
Don't count the R's out yet!

http://www.thebulletin.us/site/news.cfm?newsid=18970072&BRD=2737&PAG=461&dept_id=576361&rfi=6

Mr. Shaman
10-31-2007, 08:30 AM
http://content.answers.com/main/content/img/webpics/Miss_Cleo.jpg

Despite the crowing of some Democrats and the gloom and doom of some Republicans the results of the next presidential election have not already been decided.
Gee.....how profound. :rolleyes:

Freethinker
10-31-2007, 11:42 AM
......now, the trend on the ground in Iraq has reversed.

Yeah. Right.

I guess it's time the Reichwing dug their little banner out of mothballs and unfurled it yet again................

http://msnbcmedia2.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/061004/061004_mission_vmed_12p.widec.jpg

:rolleyes:

Travh20
10-31-2007, 11:45 AM
seems liberals are some of the most unimaginative people around.

DarkFantasy96
10-31-2007, 12:24 PM
Giuliani may have a chance, depending who he's up against. I'm hoping for Ron Paul but he'll never win the primary, unfortunately. I don't think any of the other Republicans would have a chance at winning against either Hilary or Obama.

The Praetorian
10-31-2007, 12:41 PM
In the primaries I'm gonna vote for Mitt Romney, but ultimately, I'll probably wind up voting for Giuliani.

Time will tell what happens. :)

BorgHunter
10-31-2007, 01:23 PM
In the primaries I'm gonna vote for Mitt Romney
Why would you vote for that assclown?

Frogger
10-31-2007, 01:31 PM
If I thought Romney had a chance I would probably vote for him. I like what he did in Massachusetts. If a person can improve that hell hole imagine what he could do for the nation.

I honestly do not see a single Democrat candidate I could vote for. Each and every one of them espouses views I find to be anathema. In my opinion the worst Republican candidate is better than the best Democrat candidate running.

I don't dislike all Democrats, just the vast majority of them. I liked Harry Truman and I like Breaux and Miller. Other than that I can't think of any others.

Mr. Shaman
10-31-2007, 01:33 PM
seems liberals are some of the most unimaginative people around.
Yeah.....how fortunate, for the Country, we've got a Presidunce with an over-active imagination.

Whew!!! At least he's only got the DTs.....and, there's no SEX involved!!! :rolleyes:

Frogger
10-31-2007, 01:36 PM
Shut up, Shaman.

Decka
10-31-2007, 01:57 PM
agreed... shut up shaman LOL

I think people here really overestimate how "successful" the name of "Hilary Clinton" really is. Everyone knows it, sure. But many people know it because of how much they dislike her. I would not count a Giuliani out against any democratic candidate.... based on media coverage. Who am I pulling for? I don't give a damn yet really.

afinertouch5
10-31-2007, 03:13 PM
seems liberals are some of the most unimaginative people around. "A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who,however,has never learned how to walk forward." Franklin D. Roosevelt

Freethinker
10-31-2007, 03:15 PM
Ah well......at least if Giuliani loses, he can always make a living taking over the roles Divine used to play in the John Waters movies.

http://www.nightcharm.com/imagesblog/102505_waters4.jpg

http://blogs.nypost.com/movies/rudy.jpg

A match made in.......errm........Hell?

:smile2:

smartmouthwoman
10-31-2007, 03:17 PM
"A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who,however,has never learned how to walk forward." Franklin D. Roosevelt

"A liberal is a man who will give away everything he doesn't own." Frank Dane

F. de Marzipan
10-31-2007, 03:35 PM
Interesting.

I guess you forgot about the part back in 2000 when one of those horrible liberals not only balanced our nation's budget (the first time that's happened since 1969) but also created a huge surplus, which was then raped and pillaged by the current Republican administration with the apparent intent of pissing away everything away that we don't own plus BILLIONS more, just for good measure.

:rolleyes:

smartmouthwoman
10-31-2007, 03:37 PM
"Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has no heart; and any man who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains." -- Winston Churchill

(I suppose that covers women, as well.)

;)

sassyrunner
10-31-2007, 04:09 PM
Interesting.

I guess you forgot about the part back in 2000 when one of those horrible liberals not only balanced our nation's budget (the first time that's happened since 1969) but also created a huge surplus, which was then raped and pillaged by the current Republican administration with the apparent intent of pissing away everything away that we don't own plus BILLIONS more, just for good measure.

:rolleyes:

It's amazing how they ALWAYS ignore those facts.

The Praetorian
10-31-2007, 04:32 PM
"A liberal is a man who will give away everything he doesn't own." Frank Dane
EXCELLENT!!!! LOL!

Mr. Shaman
10-31-2007, 05:15 PM
Shut up, Shaman.
Whew! You "conservatives" certainly are quite the artists at witty-retorts.

I'm sure most Jr.-High-students are extremely envious of your unique-abilities. :rolleyes:

Mr. Shaman
10-31-2007, 05:22 PM
I think people here really overestimate how "successful" the name of "Hilary Clinton" really is.
Whatever it takes, to get Bill Clinton back in the Whitehouse!!! :banana:

Our worldwide-reputation could use a little boost (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/1376462.stm)!

*

"Richard Gregory, chairman of the convention, said: "The Yorkshire International Business Convention has always been synonymous with world-class speakers, attracting delegates from around the globe.

"We promised that this year's event would be the best yet - Clinton is still the biggest name on the world stage."

*

You'll never hear The Idiot Son described, as such. :rolleyes:

Mr. Shaman
10-31-2007, 05:28 PM
Interesting.

I guess you forgot about the part back in 2000 when one of those horrible liberals not only balanced our nation's budget (the first time that's happened since 1969) but also created a huge surplus, which was then raped and pillaged by the current Republican administration with the apparent intent of pissing away everything away that we don't own plus BILLIONS more, just for good measure.

:rolleyes:
....And, still.....they call it Fiscal Responsibility (http://www.lafn.org/politics/gvdc/Natl_Debt_Chart.html). :rolleyes:

afinertouch5
10-31-2007, 05:28 PM
Ah well......at least if Giuliani loses, he can always make a living taking over the roles Divine used to play in the John Waters movies.

http://www.nightcharm.com/imagesblog/102505_waters4.jpg

http://blogs.nypost.com/movies/rudy.jpg

A match made in.......errm........Hell?

:smile2: What a horrible insult to Divine!!! :)

Mr. Shaman
10-31-2007, 05:30 PM
It's amazing how they ALWAYS ignore those facts.
Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.....they prefer "....can't recall....." those facts. :rolleyes:

Mr. Shaman
10-31-2007, 05:59 PM
I would not count a Giuliani out against any democratic candidate.... based on media coverage.
Yeah.....he makes such convincing-arguments (http://www.politicstv.com/blog/?p=3575#respond) about Presidential-policy. :rolleyes:

BorgHunter
10-31-2007, 06:10 PM
I honestly do not see a single Democrat candidate I could vote for. Each and every one of them espouses views I find to be anathema.
I feel that way about pretty much every person in the race, regardless of party. I actively like Paul, Gravel, and Kucinich; I maybe could swallow my pride and vote for Giuliani, Obama, or Richardson; and I loathe Clinton (populist; she scares me), Romney (panders way too much to social conservatives, plus the man is a snake), Thompson (he'd just continue Bush's legacy of incompetence, I think), and Hunter (I disagree with him on just about everything). The rest I find to be typical asshole politicians and they aren't worth expending energy to like or dislike.

DarkFantasy96
10-31-2007, 06:16 PM
I actually agree with you mostly Borg, although I don't know very much about Gravel or Richardson. If it comes down to Giuliani vs. Clinton I'd vote for him, but if it's Giuliani vs. Obama I'd probably go for Obama.

MeskDXB
10-31-2007, 07:23 PM
If I thought Romney had a chance I would probably vote for him.


Isn't there something wrong with this statement? I mean you gotta vote for who you like, not who can win!!

dharmabum
10-31-2007, 09:06 PM
"Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has no heart; and any man who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains." -- Winston Churchill



An British conservative would be considered a liberal by American standards.
Even the most conservative British politician thinks John Edwards Health Care plan is too conservative for him.

gmsisko1
10-31-2007, 09:46 PM
Well my friend,

I don't like many of the Republicans.

I can't stand Clintax.

If I liked someone form a third party.......... I still could not vote for them because they could not win. I don't want Clintax to win, so I have to go with the GOP.

Isn't there something wrong with this statement? I mean you gotta vote for who you like, not who can win!!

truthout
10-31-2007, 09:57 PM
Really, are there any Republicans still running?

Seriously, none of the seven dwarfs left in the Republican race stand a chance in the general election.

Joe Biden got Rudy right...as being even less competent than George Bush... and every sentence he uses has a "noun, verb, and 9/11." Not much substance in any thing Rudy says.

But Dennis hit a home run here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ds0sAxFjVuQ

Jester
10-31-2007, 10:22 PM
If I thought Romney had a chance I would probably vote for him.
Looking at Iowa and New Hampshire, I think Romney actually has a pretty good chance. He currently leads in both those states, and winning the primaries there can really propel a candidate to the front.

Frogger
10-31-2007, 10:25 PM
Is that the same Dennis who see UFOs?

The Praetorian
11-01-2007, 03:32 PM
Why would you vote for that assclown (Romney)?
Cherry picked from Wikipedia:

He is a former CEO of Bain & Company, a management consulting firm, and the co-founder of Bain Capital, a private SpamSpamSpamSpamSpamSpam investment firm.

Mitt Romney graduated from the Cranbrook School in Bloomfield Hills (now Cranbrook Kingswood School). After attending Stanford University for two quarters, Romney served in France for 30 months as a missionary for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

He transferred to Brigham Young University, where he was valedictorian, earning his B.A. summa cum laude in 1971. In 1975, Romney graduated from a joint JD/MBA program coordinated between Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School. He graduated cum laude from the law school and was named a Baker Scholar for graduating in the top five percent of his business school class.

After graduating from Harvard, Romney went to work for the The Boston Consulting Group, where he had interned during the summer of 1974. From 1978 to 1984, Romney was a vice president of Bain & Company, Inc., another Boston-based management consulting firm. In 1984, Romney left Bain & Company to co-found a Bain & Company spin-off private SpamSpamSpamSpamSpamSpam investment firm called Bain Capital. During the 14 years he headed the company, Bain Capital's average annual internal rate of return on realized investments was 113 percent, making money primarily through leveraged buyouts. He invested in or bought many well-known companies such as Staples, Brookstone, Domino's, Sealy Corporation and The Sports Authority.

In 1990, Romney was asked to return to Bain & Company, which was facing financial collapse. As CEO, Romney managed an effort to restructure the firm's employee stock-ownership plan, real-estate deals and bank loans, while increasing fiscal transparency. Within a year, he had led Bain & Company through a highly successful turnaround and returned the firm to profitability without layoffs or partner defections.

Romney left Bain Capital in 1998 to head the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympic Games Organizing Committee.

He and his wife have a net worth of between 190 and 250 million dollars.

As governor:

Romney was sworn in as the 70th governor of Massachusetts on January 2, 2003. Upon entering office, Romney faced a projected $3 billion deficit, but a previously enacted 1.3 billion dollar capital gains tax increase (not that I'm a fan of that, but hey, it needed to be done) and $500 million in unanticipated federal grants decreased the deficit to $1.2 billion.

Through a combination of tax and fee increases and spending cuts the State had a $700 million surplus by 2006. Romney supported raising various fees by $500 million per year, including raising fees for driver's licenses, marriage licenses, and gun licenses. Romney increased the state gasoline tax by 2 cents per gallon, generating about $60 million per year in additional tax revenue.

The state legislature with Romney's support also cut spending by $1.6 billion, including $700 million in reductions in state aid to cities and towns.

On April 12, 2006, Romney signed the Massachusetts health reform law which mandates nearly all Massachusetts residents to buy health insurance coverage or else face a substantial penalty in the form of an additional income tax assessment. The bill also establishes means-tested state subsidies for people without adequate employer insurance and who make below an income threshold by using funds previously designated to compensate for the health costs of the uninsured. He vetoed 8 sections of the health care legislation, including an employer assessment and provisions providing health coverage to senior and disabled legal immigrants not eligible for federal Medicaid.