Republican party ; a vital faultline?

Hellm0

What is unfolding up in NY at the moment is quite interesting. The social conservatives and the radical anti-federalists are uniting to elect a third candidate, this Hoffman fella. What I am hoping is that this leads to a split in the republican party on a national scale; this has potential, I believe, as figures like Sarah Palin are getting involved who will draw enough attention to the division to widen it. With an aging, defeated and inflexible leadership in place, the GOP might not have the strength to keep these nutjobs under the party banner.

Any thoughts?

Black Swan

Two major contenders for Republican presidential candidacy in the 2012 primaries could be middle-of-the-road former speaker Newt Gingrich vs right-wing conservative "Tea Party" Douglas Hoffman? And if either won the bid, how would they ensure that they could unify their party by election time?

The other problem they have is that in the 2008 presidential, approximately 35 percent of voters were registered Republican, the smaller of the two parties in registration. If this continued up until 2012, they would have to draw both Independents and some Democrats to win?

The 2010 mid-term elections should give the pulse of the US electorate in terms of Obama's Democrat party's performance since January 2009, as well as if the Republicans have made any gains or losses in position by seats (won or lost in US House and US Senate)?

The US stock market appears to be recovering (which should hurt the Republican cause a bit with investors), although unemployment continues to be quite troublesome, and the specter of a credit card bubble bursting could result in a double-dip recession (which I believe would give the Republicans many seats in Congress at mid-term, heralding the old saying why politicians often win "It's the economy stupid!")?

JohnMc1

Just like this past Pres election the Rep candidate is as much of a liberal [oops. Progressive is the new buzzword] as the Dem candidate so ofcourse people are going to turn against him.

bobbyjoe

JohnMc1 wrote: »

Just like this past Pres election the Rep candidate is as much of a liberal [oops. Progressive is the new buzzword] as the Dem candidate so ofcourse people are going to turn against him.

Do you thinkk that the far right side are alienating people from the republicans?

JohnMc1

bobbyjoe wrote: »

Do you thinkk that the far right side are alienating people from the republicans?

No its the reverse actually. The Reps pandering to the far left is driving people away from them. People want an actual choice in elections. Screw all this liberal vs. liberal light nonsense [That's why the reaction to Obama vs McCain was "You have got to be kidding me."].

If you claim to be a Conservative be a Conservative.

Manic Moran

The elections tend to always revolve around the independents. What if we don't want to be conservatives?

NTM

JohnMc1

Manic Moran wrote: »

The elections tend to always revolve around the independents. What if we don't want to be conservatives?

NTM

Then don't vote for Reps. My last sentence was more about me feelings towards the Politicians who claim to be Conservative when it suits them [ie. McCain claiming to be one when when he won the Nomination] and then as liberal [Progressive, whatever the new word of the month is] as the Dems.

Both parties have been hijacked by clowns that want to do nothing more than give lipservice to the community.

Hellm0

Honestly I have come to the conclusion that they are two sides of the same coin (Rep vs Dem). In terms of "policy" they are the same on core issues and only differ on high visibility social / pseudo economic points.

It makes sense when you look at it from a power perspective. Two parties give the illusion of choice. A comparison I like to draw is the Betty Crocker Cake Mix "Just add an egg" ploy, supposedly thought up by Edward Bernays. The concept being that people think they have input into government, when in fact the governmental cake mix always comes out the same. *

When this is taken into account, I am very happy that the socially conservative right is chaffing at the bit. Should they abandon the "republican" party, all that will be left are the free marketeers and corporatists in the pay of lobbying groups. Seeing as American politics is based much more upon what ideology you define yourself in opposition to, I am hoping this will lead to an push in the democrat party away from those policies. Of course both sides are already mired in big business, but with someone to point the finger at maybe the democrat party will move away from that kind of politics in an effort to attract votes.

* Just to clarify, I am not suggesting collusion/conspiracy between the parties(though that may be the case) but rather a situation which is mutually beneficial, one which has lasted long enough that it may not need central guidance to be self sustaining.

JohnMc1

Hellm0 wrote: »

Honestly I have come to the conclusion that they are two sides of the same coin (Rep vs Dem). In terms of "policy" they are the same on core issues and only differ on high visibility social / pseudo economic points.

It makes sense when you look at it from a power perspective. Two parties give the illusion of choice. A comparison I like to draw is the Betty Crocker Cake Mix "Just add an egg" ploy, supposedly thought up by Edward Bernays. The concept being that people think they have input into government, when in fact the governmental cake mix always comes out the same. *

When this is taken into account, I am very happy that the socially conservative right is chaffing at the bit. Should they abandon the "republican" party, all that will be left are the free marketeers and corporatists in the pay of lobbying groups. Seeing as American politics is based much more upon what ideology you define yourself in opposition to, I am hoping this will lead to an push in the democrat party away from those policies. Of course both sides are already mired in big business, but with someone to point the finger at maybe the democrat party will move away from that kind of politics in an effort to attract votes.

* Just to clarify, I am not suggesting collusion/conspiracy between the parties(though that may be the case) but rather a situation which is mutually beneficial, one which has lasted long enough that it may not need central guidance to be self sustaining.

I would say that the vast majority of Americans are traditionalists [maybe 70-80%] and the rest is the fringe on both sides. The extreme groups aren't as big as we are meant to believe.

Wanted to see one Political party die off is stupid and reeks of bias. Neither Dems or Reps represent the majority anymore. People need to stop seeing Dems and Reps as their favorite sports team [ I had to laugh last night on another message board when a poster said we when referring to the possibility of the Dems losing seats next year]

Black Swan

Manic Moran wrote: »

The elections tend to always revolve around the independents...

The only place to be if you want to increase your choice and opportunity to actually participate in the process, provided that the electorate is relatively small (city, county, and some small population state elections).

When populations are large, like the California or presidential elections, political cliques, PACs, and special interest lobbies with large bank rolls make decisions in smoke-filled rooms as to whom will be the primary candidates. They then buy mass marketing expertise and media to entertain the population, and sway them into voting for their unreal comic book action hero, allowing for unknowns like Obama or Palin to suddenly appear, look like they can walk on water, and turn such water into wine.

Manic Moran

Then don't vote for Reps. My last sentence was more about me feelings towards the Politicians who claim to be Conservative when it suits them [ie. McCain claiming to be one when when he won the Nomination] and then as liberal [Progressive, whatever the new word of the month is] as the Dems.

That's fair enough. As long as you also accept that the chances of winning the next election are reduced accordingly.

When populations are large,

When it comes to getting involved in the process, you have a bit of a point (I don't agree with you that it goes that far, though). When it comes to the importance of independents in winning, I think it applies just as much (if not more so) in the large states as the small ones.

NTM

JohnMc1

Manic Moran wrote: »

That's fair enough. As long as you also accept that the chances of winning the next election are reduced accordingly.

Absolutely. The Ind candidate has been considered a vote syphon [or if you really want to be a pessimist a waste of a vote] The voters need to get out of this stupid idea of acting like the Reps and Dems are their favorite sports teams and thats when a valid third party will emerge. One can argue that there is a desperate need for one now.

Manic Moran

The voters need to get out of this stupid idea of acting like the Reps and Dems are their favorite sports teams

Probably fairer to say that they act like the Reps and Dems are their greatest rivals, and vote for the person with the best chance of defeating the enemy.

NTM

JohnMc1

Manic Moran wrote: »

Probably fairer to say that they act like the Reps and Dems are their greatest rivals, and vote for the person with the best chance of defeating the enemy.

NTM

Either analogy actually works. They have this sill idea that whoever wins actually effects their personal lives [maybe tax wise but thats about it] As my friends father always says "Regardless of who wins you still got to go to work tomorrow."

Pocono Joe

The reports of our demise have been greatly exaggerated! Barack Obama and his administration have done more to invigorate the Republican party (well at least the Conservatives) than any Republican "leader" could ever have hoped to in such a short period of time.

JohnMc1

Pocono Joe wrote: »

The reports of our demise have been greatly exaggerated! Barack Obama and his administration have done more to invigorate the Republican party (well at least the Conservatives) than any Republican "leader" could ever have hoped to in such a short period of time.

Yeah the Dems have set themselves up for a fall with their need to be stupid. The Controversy of Van Jones, Anita Dunn admitting to admire Mao Tse Tong [or however its spelled] and then Pelosi, Reid, Dodd and Frank just being themselves. The Reps are poised for a comeback even though they haven't done anything to deserve it just sit by and watch the Dems implode. I guess the old saying of "Give a fool enough rope and eventually they'll hang themselves." is true.

jank

How about we just wait and see what these elections actually bare as everything else is just mindless speculation. Anyway..

The Dems will still control both houses after the next mid term but their filibuster majority wont be there any more. Not really a big shift. The big thing for the GOP is that their party doesn't have a leader and they don't know what to do to attract new votes. There is obviously a bit of a civil war in the gop as where to go in the future. Stay right or go left. The Hoofman issue is a sympton of this.

White rural votes are declining all the time, while urban latino votes continue to be attracted by the Dems.

Don't forget also that 80% of stimulus money is going to be spent in 2010. Personally I think Obama is a shoe in for a new term as there is nobody else out there that can challenge him. I just cant see him being defeated.

Welcome back PJ.

Black Swan

jank wrote: »

Welcome back PJ.

Well, if PJ can come back, maybe there's still hope for the Republicans?

Pocono Joe

jank wrote: »

How about we just wait and see what these elections actually bare as everything else is just mindless speculation. Anyway...

Geeezzzzz… there’s no fun in that.

The Dems will still control both houses after the next mid term but their filibuster majority wont be there any more. Not really a big shift. The big thing for the GOP is that their party doesn't have a leader and they don't know what to do to attract new votes. There is obviously a bit of a civil war in the gop as where to go in the future. Stay right or go left. The Hoofman issue is a sympton of this.

White rural votes are declining all the time, while urban latino votes continue to be attracted by the Dems.

Maybe, maybe not. A lot depends on if the Dems (and some Reps) can get get illegal alien reform and attain the goal of making us Mexico North.

Also, as the old saying goes… The problem with socialism is you eventually run out of other peoples money. When the new Europe-lite socialistic system totally fails and comes crashing down, folks with finally come back to their senses and start to put conservatives in office in order to correct all the misguided, but well meaning, doomed programs.

Don't forget also that 80% of stimulus money is going to be spent in 2010. Personally I think Obama is a shoe in for a new term as there is nobody else out there that can challenge him. I just cant see him being defeated.

Maybe, history shows us that when a President experiences a financial crisis early in their term and it gets better, that incumbent usually wins re-election, but jobs might just be his Achilles heal.

And what money? Have we convinced the Chinese to finance our insurmountable debt yet, or will we just keep printing it and drive interest rates through the roof, which will make our debt unsustainable? Hopefully American’s will wake up before Depression 2.0 hits.

Welcome back PJ.

Thanks, but never really left. Sorta like the Ayatollah Khomeini, have been living in exile until I noticed a regime change. Always kept up on the reading though, laughing at jank’s tales from the darkside, watching Overheal’s evolution into a moderate and hopefully Conservatism (does anybody else see a future Congressman in the making?). Then there’s always the moden day gladiator - Manic Moran’s attempts to interject a voice of reason into the conversations (stay safe), and JohnMc1’s never ending flirtation with mod warnings and bannings. And always enjoyed Blue Lagoons fantasy novelettes, and always wished Sand-the-knowledgeable would post more.

jank

Pocono Joe wrote: »

Geeezzzzz… there’s no fun in that.

Oh, Of Course!

Pocono Joe wrote: »

Maybe, maybe not. A lot depends on if the Dems (and some Reps) can get get illegal alien reform and attain the goal of making us Mexico North.

LOL, Well the US is in the Americas after all.

Pocono Joe wrote: »

Also, as the old saying goes… The problem with socialism is you eventually run out of other peoples money. When the new Europe-lite socialistic system totally fails and comes crashing down, folks with finally come back to their senses and start to put conservatives in office in order to correct all the misguided, but well meaning, doomed programs.

There has been a bit of socialism in the US since the new deal but didnt see anyone complaining until Obama went into office.

Pocono Joe wrote: »

Maybe, history shows us that when a President experiences a financial crisis early in their term and it gets better, that incumbent usually wins re-election, but jobs might just be his Achilles heal.

And what money? Have we convinced the Chinese to finance our insurmountable debt yet, or will we just keep printing it and drive interest rates through the roof, which will make our debt unsustainable? Hopefully American’s will wake up before Depression 2.0 hits.

Well the Chinese do want ye guys to keep buying all that crap they make. Chimerica as a Neill Fergusan calls it.

Pocono Joe wrote: »

Thanks, but never really left. Sorta like the Ayatollah Khomeini, have been living in exile until I noticed a regime change. Always kept up on the reading though, laughing at jank’s tales from the darkside, watching Overheal’s evolution into a moderate and hopefully Conservatism (does anybody else see a future Congressman in the making?). Then there’s always the moden day gladiator - Manic Moran’s attempts to interject a voice of reason into the conversations (stay safe), and JohnMc1’s never ending flirtation with mod warnings and bannings. And always enjoyed Blue Lagoons fantasy novelettes, and always wished Sand-the-knowledgeable would post more.

Good to have you back and judging by your recent post you have been turned into a Glenn Beck advocate. I suppose you when you were taking time out from boards.ie you were catching up on his latest weeping session.

liberal

It's going to be Huckabee as the nominee in 2012 the big question is who shall be his running mate, I think Jindel maybe

And Huck will win :eek:, Obama's rating is so low and let's hope he doesn't get a surge from a 9/11 type sceanario like GWB did

JohnMc1

liberal wrote: »

It's going to be Huckabee as the nominee in 2012 the big question is who shall be his running mate, I think Jindel maybe

And Huck will win :eek:, Obama's rating is so low and let's hope he doesn't get a surge from a 9/11 type sceanario like GWB did

Huck and Rommney are probably the favorites at this time. I don't think they will need a 9/11 [or an economic disaster in Obama's case] to win big. The "Anybody but Obama" could easily carry them.

jank

I disagree, once you step back from the very vocal but ultimately small right wing fox news demograph he is not as unpopular as you may think. He will be very hard to beat. The fact that independants would rather cast their protest against the dems to other independants shows the trouble the GOP are in.

http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/article/20091031/NEWS09/910319997

JohnMc1

jank wrote: »

I disagree, once you step back from the very vocal but ultimately small right wing fox news demograph he is not as unpopular as you may think. He will be very hard to beat. The fact that independants would rather cast their protest against the dems to other independants shows the trouble the GOP are in.

http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/article/20091031/NEWS09/910319997

I suppose its Fox news responsible for these numbers then:


http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/obama_approval_index_month_by_month

jank

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091101/ap_on_el_ho/us_ny_special_election

LOL What is going on in the GOP is anyones guess.

jank

JohnMc1 wrote: »

I suppose its Fox news responsible for these numbers then:


http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/obama_approval_index_month_by_month

LOL, Nice one post the worst poll and say its the average.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval-1044.html

People in glass houses shouldnt throw stones. The numbers are not much different from many other ex presidents. Better than some, worse than some Meh..

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-presapp0605-31.html

Once Health care is passed (and it will but probably a watered down version) and unemployment starts to drop next year the numbers will improve. But only ones that matter are next year in november and 2012.

JohnMc1

jank wrote: »

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091101/ap_on_el_ho/us_ny_special_election

LOL What is going on in the GOP is anyones guess.

LOL. You changed the subject quickly. :rolleyes:

Scozzafava is like McCain. A liberal [excuse me. Progressive is the new term] Plus the Dems aren't as inclusive as they want you to think. My friend [a Moderate Conservative] was running for City Council in Queens and they sabotaged him every chance. Thankfully the candidate they did want didn't make it.

So spare me the Reps are exclusive while Dems are inclusive bull****.

jank

JohnMc1 wrote: »

LOL. You changed the subject quickly. :rolleyes:

Scozzafava is like McCain. A liberal [excuse me. Progressive is the new term] Plus the Dems aren't as inclusive as they want you to think. My friend [a Moderate Conservative] was running for City Council in Queens and they sabotaged him every chance. Thankfully the candidate they did want didn't make it.

So spare me the Reps are exclusive while Dems are inclusive bull****.

Well first of that link is directly linked to teh subject matter at hand. I never said anything about the GOP not being inclusive. All I am saying is that there is a bit of a civil war for the conservative votes in the country.

Overheal

watching Overheal’s evolution into a moderate and hopefully Conservatism (does anybody else see a future Congressman in the making?).

Im sorry I couldnt hear you over the sound of my own fantasy with that cute girl dressed as a german beermaiden last night.








So yeah, you might have a point.

Thanks, but never really left.

Welcome back to the Table, then.

@Liberal: Huckabee could possibly be a contender. I mean, John McCain didnt let 2000 stop him. And I do kinda like Huckabee. But, one of the things he started alluding late into the nominations was the suggestion that he held the Constitution in a less than honored regard - a document that could be easily rewritten I think he put it. Wasnt sure how serious he was about that. But I think it was silly of him to even joke about it. Constitutionalism is something I do look out for.

No Im starting to wonder if 2012 isn't going to be the year when a new Third Party emerges with enough momentum.

jank

I think a 3rd party would be great. It would break the duopoly for Red Vs Blue.

CPT. SURF

The Morman thing is never going to go away for Romney. There are all kinds Mormans in jail now for sexual abuse of minors, even some of the higher ups. The Republicans count on the southern states, and baptists, Presbyterians, and non-denominational Christians are not down with John Smith and his secret underwearing gang of child molesters.

Pocono Joe

jank wrote: »

There has been a bit of socialism in the US since the new deal but didnt see anyone complaining until Obama went into office.

True, but the attitude of folks now might just be shifting and reflective in the immortal words of Popeye the Sailor Man: “That’s all I can takes, and I can’t takes no more.”

Good to have you back and judging by your recent post you have been turned into a Glenn Beck advocate. I suppose you when you were taking time out from boards.ie you were catching up on his latest weeping session.

How so, pray tell? Like most Conservatives, I work for a living and don’t get the opportunity to watch or listen to Glenn Beck?

Overheal wrote: »

Im sorry I couldnt hear you over the sound of my own fantasy with that cute girl dressed as a german beermaiden last night.

So yeah, you might have a point.

See, spoken like a true politician... you don’t really knows what he means by what he says. And stay away from the Brünnhilde types, it will only haunt your future political career.

Black Swan

Overheal wrote: »

No Im starting to wonder if 2012 isn't going to be the year when a new Third Party emerges with enough momentum.

Rather than growth in a third party, methinks that there will be a steady growth in Independents fueled by increasing information access found on the web, and the constant factual debunking of both Democrat and Republican platforms and candidates, exposing many of their leaders as silly cartoon action heroes created by biased media talking heads and party spin masters with large bank rolls.

Overheal

We can dream.

Manic Moran

Blue_Lagoon wrote: »

Rather than growth in a third party, methinks that there will be a steady growth in Independents fueled by increasing information access found on the web,

Doesn't solve the root problem. The Independents will still be forced to make a choice between either a D or R candidate.

NTM

Overheal

What did I see on CNN tonight there was a Republican, A Democrat and a Conservative on the magic wall. What did I miss?

Anyway, seems like the Republicans stole back Virginia.

jank

Looks likes the Dems won NY race. Thats the issue of splitting the vote, the other guys usually win.

kev9100

first post in a while be kind



the reason Hoffman lost is that he was a TERRIBLE candidate. He made Palin look good on the issues The republican party has no future if they think that hoffman, palin and Limbaugh are the future of the party.

jank

So where now for the GOP?

Pocono Joe

kev9100 wrote: »

first post in a while be kind

the reason Hoffman lost is that he was a TERRIBLE candidate. He made Palin look good on the issues The republican party has no future if they think that hoffman, palin and Limbaugh are the future of the party.

You asked to be treaded kindly and then go on to post that kind of nonsense… are you kidding me!

Well okay . So why do you feel Hoffman was a terrible candidate, other than the fact he’s not a politician and had an un-politician style? Is it because he ran out of conscience because he was fed up with what was happening to our country? Because he was fed up with the out-of-control spending, taxes, and government regulations on individuals and business? Because he thought somebody had to step up and do something about it? Or is it becasue of something else?

Here is where he stood on the key issues in the campaign… doesn’t sound too terrible to me as a Conservative.
http://www.doughoffmanforcongress.com/issues.html

He also had been endorsed by former House Majority Leader Dick Armey, Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, Sen. Jim DeMint, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, former National Republican Congressional Campaign chairmen John Linder and Tom Cole just to name a few. The complete list of Hoffman endorsers is a long one, and seems to include nearly every Republican except Newt Gingrich and Dede Scozzafava. Not bad, not bad at all!

(That wasn’t tooooooooo rough was it?)

JohnMc1

kev9100 wrote: »

first post in a while be kind

Not going to happen.

the reason Hoffman lost is that he was a TERRIBLE candidate. He made Palin look good on the issues The republican party has no future if they think that hoffman, palin and Limbaugh are the future of the party.

For a guy who never held a Political office ever to lose by a close margin the guy must have done something right.

Pocono Joe

jank wrote: »

So where now for the GOP?

Lets see, jugding by New Jersey and Virginia... back into office?

jank

Well judging what happened in NY it look like the party doesnt know what way to go. Go right you scare moderates and independant, stay centre right you pi$$ off the tea party guys.... Not exactly a way to win national elections.

kev9100

Pocono Joe wrote: »

(That wasn’t tooooooooo rough was it?)

no that was just fine:)

I`m sorry but hoffman lost a seat that the republicans had held since 19th freakin century and to a democratic candidate that frankly was pretty poor himself. If the Repblican party wants to be taken seriously again they must get rid of the Palins, Vitters, Coulters and Limbaughs and start attracting moderates.

Pocono Joe

NY23 had more plot twists than a Shakespearean comedy. I don’t think you can use it to gauge anything.

Personally speaking, a lot of the time it seems when Republicans run as moderates, they lose. When they run as Conservatives, they win.

And before you start dancing a jig on the grave of the GOP, read this:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horseraceblog/2009/11/my_favorite_postelection_meme.html

kev9100

fair enough ny 23 was not a normal race but the fact is that the republicans were almost certainly going to win until the loony toons came to town:D and started pushing for hoffman. The same thing is happening in Florida in the primary race between Crist and Rubio.

Black Swan

From the Real Clear Poltics link by PJ, this statement has been often key to a Republican win in past elections: "the GOP's divisions - whatever they may be - are utterly, totally dwarfed by the continuing divisions in the Democratic Party."

But a Republican Congressional sweep in the 2010 mid-term elections is probably no more than a fantasy, especially if this July 2009 to present trend continues:

"For the third straight month, the number of Americans identifying themselves as Democrats inched up while the number of Republicans fell slightly. In October, 37.8% of American adults considered themselves Democrats. That’s up three-tenths of a point from September and a full-percentage point since July..."

"Still, there are more Democrats than Republicans. A total of 31.9% now claim an affiliation with the GOP. That’s down a point-and-a-half since July 2009 and the lowest number of Republicans since July 2008."

"The number of unaffiliated adults [Independents] held steady in October at 30.3%..."

"Democrats now enjoy a 5.9 percentage-point edge over Republicans. That’s up two-and-a-half points since July and confirms other recent polling that suggests Democrats fell to low levels of support in July but have gained back some of their losses since then."

Source: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/partisan_trends

If the USA does not experience a double-dip recession between now and the mid-term November 2010 elections, but rather continues to improve economically (especially if unemployment starts to improve beginning mid-2010), there will be no recapture of the US House or US Senate by Republicans as occurred half-way through the Clinton presidency. Rather, the Democrats will retain control, benefiting from the old saying: "It's the economy stupid!"

Manic Moran

Blue_Lagoon wrote: »

there will be no recapture of the US House or US Senate by Republicans as occurred half-way through the Clinton presidency. Rather, the Democrats will retain control, benefiting from the old saying: "It's the economy stupid!"

Never forget the ability of the Democrats to martyr themselves on some pointless cause, such as happened half-way through the Clinton presidency.

NTM

Black Swan

All the partisan political rhetoric between the talking heads of the Republican and Democrat parties will be meaningless should the below recovery trend of the Dow Industrials continue between now and the mid-term elections November 2010. If the Dow does continue to recover, the Democrats will claim credit and be rewarded, even though the recovery would probably have occurred no matter whom was in control of the Presidency and US Congress.

---

DJ-30.gif

LostinKildare

Manic Moran wrote: »

Never forget the ability of the Democrats to martyr themselves on some pointless cause, such as happened half-way through the Clinton presidency.

NTM

Which pointless cause was that -- the right to an extramarital BJ? You gotta fight for your right to paaaarrrrty!

Pocono Joe

Most everything BL stated is unfortunately true. Yet New Jersey happens! It just goes to show voter attitudes sometimes defy conventional political wisdom. It also shows Barack Obama’s popularity is not transferable, and this worries Democrats up for election. The likes of Pelosi, Reed, Dodd, and Frank are in their mid to upper 60’s and won’t mind sacrificing minions in their final quest for the Holy Grail – a far left progressive agenda. But moderate democrats in republican strongholds and Blue Dogs might not be willing to throw themselves on their swords if voter attitudes sour towards the Left’s far reaching agenda. And rather than singing “You gotta fight for your right to paaaarrrrty,” the tune sung by voters come 2010 might be “We won’t get fooled again.”

If the Democrats fail in their attempt to nationalize illegal aliens into their party, and unemployment remains above 10% regardless of growth numbers, I think we just might see a transformation of the House and Senate, led by Independent voters.

And what pointless cause could the Democrats decide to martyr themselves on? Could it be:

• The House Health Care Bill's $1.5 trillion-dollar price tag (yep that’s right… because the final version of the House bill lacked the doctor payment fix, because Democrats didn’t want to add several more hundred pages to the bill and another $250 billion to the cost of H.R. 3962. A separate bill that would replace the sustainable growth rate (SGR) formula is expected to come to a vote next week). A bill which not only fails to address health-care costs, but will diminish Americans’ control over their health care decisions, reduce seniors’ Medicare benefits, place far too many jobs in jeopardy, and slow our nation’s economic growth. Or could it simply be the Public Option or Abortion components?
• Cap and Trade?
• Card Check?
• Another stimulus package for old school social pork, which will again do nothing to create private sector jobs?
• Expanding federal powers?
• Or some other yet to be determined Obama bait and switch program?

Then again 2010 might just simply boil down to "It's the economy stupid!"