"What happened to the GOP?" or "What is about to happen to the GOP."
About one month ago, I wrote an analysis of the 2006 race that I feel was accurate at the time.
Unfortunately, I posted the analysis a night or two before the Mark Foley scandal broke. And two weeks before the North Korean nuclear test.
It's amazing how quickly the game can change in politics. Despite the bad press and last year's Katrina debacle (which I believe still affects voters' view of the GOP and the Bush admin), the strong economy would have propelled the GOP to, at worst, minor losses in the House and possibly a pickup in the Senate. Had only Foley or North Korea broke, the GOP would have taken only a few losses but still maintained control of both houses.
But a total of four negative factors (Katrina, Iraq, North Korea and Foleygate) suggests to most voters that the country is out of control domestically, politically and internationally. The average voter looks at the landscape and sees a administration and Washington power structure that is more interested in buggering little boys than delivering relief services to Hurricane victims or protecting the nation from insane dictators armed with nuclear weapons.
The soaring Dow, low unemployment and record rate of home ownership is lost among these factors.
Please note - I think the Katrina relief probably went better than expected, and the major handicap was state and local corruption over decades - the federal government did what it could in the face of such a disaster. I think Mark Foley was an ethics challenged dirty old man and the GOP power structure was completely unaware of his actions. I think North Korea bumbled their test and is probably nowhere nearer to an effective nuke than they were a year ago, or five years ago. But the mind of the American voter is simple and sees things in black and white. This year, voters feel threatened by Mother Nature, by homosexuals and by Asian despots and will mindlessly vote to return a party to control that favors unlimited license for gays, foreign policy cowardice and mindless fear of the nonexistent global warming booger man. The one valid point the average voter has is that Iraq is a mess. Of course, it's the voters' fault we are in Iraq in the first place because 60% of them (and an overwhelming number of GOP voters, many of whom are now "tired" of the war) were all clamoring for action against Hussein in 2003.
But let's face it - the GOP could have mitigated these losses by showing leadership on a few key issues. They could have embraced fiscal responsibility. They could have voted to make the tax cuts permanent and even expanded them. They could have offered serious, enforcement oriented immigration control. But instead they did nothing, or at least nothing constructive. They catered to special interests groups and corporate donors and not to the average American. They ensured that you couldn't gamble online and made sure Fed stormtroopers could kick in the doors of medicinal marijuana users in California. They protected the flag and the sanctity of marriage, neither of which are threatened in the slightest. Basically, they completely blew it and have themselves to blame for what's about to happen.
To my partisan GOP readers - expect body blows next Tuesday. You will lose control of congress. You will see the end of major GOP names' political careers. Expect to fight off efforts to prosecute the president and his cabinet. Gird yourself for a big battle in 2008 - focus on retaining seats in Congress, maybe getting back control of a house or two, because there's no way you guys are getting the White House (I will discuss why this is such a total long shot now in a future post).The only good news is that the Dems won't have overwhelming leads in either House and probably won't be able to affect major change, merely roadblocks to goofball GOP and Bush admin proposals. Oh, and the other good news - Santorum will be voted out of office and if he party is lucky, George Allen. I honestly can't think of two worst Republicans and their defeat Tuesday - and an eventual, hoped-for purge of right wing moral majority types of their ilk - would ultimately strengthen the party.
To my partisan Dem readers - enjoy the fun while it lasts. Try not to wreck the economy that the Bush admin has done such an admirable job in restoring after the Clinton bubble burst and the terror attacks. You might try to embrace the tried and true supply side/capitalist economic policies that have resulted in consistent GOP success over the year and reject the socialist nonsense that you all usually espouse. Also try to remember that countries like Iran and North Korea are our enemies, no matter if they start telling you what you want to hear. Finally, if you want a blowout election in 2008, nominate Barack Obama for a Reagan-style landslide.
On to 2008 . . .
I don't think there's much to say about the GOP except "They are not going to win." Oh, and "Duncan Hunter will never be president."
Barack Obama is unstoppable - the only thing that blocks his run to the White House is himself. The only reason to drop out is if he doesn't really want to be president. I suspect that's what happened with Mark Warner, who would have been an excellent national candidate. I continue to be skeptical about Hillary's chances but after Tuesday all the Democrat candidates will be stronger.
A candidate as potent as Mark Warner dropping out is very good news for the Dems. It narrows the field of strong candidates, and the liklihood of a mob of Democrats splitting up votes and funding becomes a little less likely.
John Edwards is a middling candidate for the Dems in 2008, but you can tell his wife and he both lack political skills.
Al Gore is emerging as some sort of moral conscience for the far left wing of the Democrats, and I suspect he thinks he could be elected president. He won't be.
And what can be said about John Kerry? He's a fool and boor, and the reason there was such non-stop coverage of his gaffe last week was because not only is he hated by the GOP, the Democrats despise him too. Of course, these resentments are dwarfed by those of the media that has to cover him.
DEMS
Barack Obama (IL) 90 (+1)
Wes Clark (AR) 80
Hillary Clinton (NY) 45
John Edwards (NC) 44 (-1)
Bill Richardson (NM) 37
Tom Vilsack (IA) 34
Russ Feingold (WI) 22
John Murtha (PA) 23
Al Gore (TN) 14 (+1)
Tom Daschle (SD) 10
John Kerry (MA) 3 (-1)
GOP
Condoleeza Rice (CA) 80 (-1)
Haley Barbour (MS) 79
Mitt Romney (MA) 73
Tim Pawlenty (MN) 69
Tom Tancredo (CO) 46
Rudy Giuliani (NY) 31
John McCain (AZ) 25 (+1)
Fred Thompson (TN) 23
Chuck Hagel (NE) 21
Mike Huckabee (AR) 20
Duncan Hunter (CA) 20 (enters board)
Sam Brownback (KS) 19
Tom Coburn (OK) 17
Bill Frist (TN) 10
Unfortunately, I posted the analysis a night or two before the Mark Foley scandal broke. And two weeks before the North Korean nuclear test.
It's amazing how quickly the game can change in politics. Despite the bad press and last year's Katrina debacle (which I believe still affects voters' view of the GOP and the Bush admin), the strong economy would have propelled the GOP to, at worst, minor losses in the House and possibly a pickup in the Senate. Had only Foley or North Korea broke, the GOP would have taken only a few losses but still maintained control of both houses.
But a total of four negative factors (Katrina, Iraq, North Korea and Foleygate) suggests to most voters that the country is out of control domestically, politically and internationally. The average voter looks at the landscape and sees a administration and Washington power structure that is more interested in buggering little boys than delivering relief services to Hurricane victims or protecting the nation from insane dictators armed with nuclear weapons.
The soaring Dow, low unemployment and record rate of home ownership is lost among these factors.
Please note - I think the Katrina relief probably went better than expected, and the major handicap was state and local corruption over decades - the federal government did what it could in the face of such a disaster. I think Mark Foley was an ethics challenged dirty old man and the GOP power structure was completely unaware of his actions. I think North Korea bumbled their test and is probably nowhere nearer to an effective nuke than they were a year ago, or five years ago. But the mind of the American voter is simple and sees things in black and white. This year, voters feel threatened by Mother Nature, by homosexuals and by Asian despots and will mindlessly vote to return a party to control that favors unlimited license for gays, foreign policy cowardice and mindless fear of the nonexistent global warming booger man. The one valid point the average voter has is that Iraq is a mess. Of course, it's the voters' fault we are in Iraq in the first place because 60% of them (and an overwhelming number of GOP voters, many of whom are now "tired" of the war) were all clamoring for action against Hussein in 2003.
But let's face it - the GOP could have mitigated these losses by showing leadership on a few key issues. They could have embraced fiscal responsibility. They could have voted to make the tax cuts permanent and even expanded them. They could have offered serious, enforcement oriented immigration control. But instead they did nothing, or at least nothing constructive. They catered to special interests groups and corporate donors and not to the average American. They ensured that you couldn't gamble online and made sure Fed stormtroopers could kick in the doors of medicinal marijuana users in California. They protected the flag and the sanctity of marriage, neither of which are threatened in the slightest. Basically, they completely blew it and have themselves to blame for what's about to happen.
To my partisan GOP readers - expect body blows next Tuesday. You will lose control of congress. You will see the end of major GOP names' political careers. Expect to fight off efforts to prosecute the president and his cabinet. Gird yourself for a big battle in 2008 - focus on retaining seats in Congress, maybe getting back control of a house or two, because there's no way you guys are getting the White House (I will discuss why this is such a total long shot now in a future post).The only good news is that the Dems won't have overwhelming leads in either House and probably won't be able to affect major change, merely roadblocks to goofball GOP and Bush admin proposals. Oh, and the other good news - Santorum will be voted out of office and if he party is lucky, George Allen. I honestly can't think of two worst Republicans and their defeat Tuesday - and an eventual, hoped-for purge of right wing moral majority types of their ilk - would ultimately strengthen the party.
To my partisan Dem readers - enjoy the fun while it lasts. Try not to wreck the economy that the Bush admin has done such an admirable job in restoring after the Clinton bubble burst and the terror attacks. You might try to embrace the tried and true supply side/capitalist economic policies that have resulted in consistent GOP success over the year and reject the socialist nonsense that you all usually espouse. Also try to remember that countries like Iran and North Korea are our enemies, no matter if they start telling you what you want to hear. Finally, if you want a blowout election in 2008, nominate Barack Obama for a Reagan-style landslide.
On to 2008 . . .
I don't think there's much to say about the GOP except "They are not going to win." Oh, and "Duncan Hunter will never be president."
Barack Obama is unstoppable - the only thing that blocks his run to the White House is himself. The only reason to drop out is if he doesn't really want to be president. I suspect that's what happened with Mark Warner, who would have been an excellent national candidate. I continue to be skeptical about Hillary's chances but after Tuesday all the Democrat candidates will be stronger.
A candidate as potent as Mark Warner dropping out is very good news for the Dems. It narrows the field of strong candidates, and the liklihood of a mob of Democrats splitting up votes and funding becomes a little less likely.
John Edwards is a middling candidate for the Dems in 2008, but you can tell his wife and he both lack political skills.
Al Gore is emerging as some sort of moral conscience for the far left wing of the Democrats, and I suspect he thinks he could be elected president. He won't be.
And what can be said about John Kerry? He's a fool and boor, and the reason there was such non-stop coverage of his gaffe last week was because not only is he hated by the GOP, the Democrats despise him too. Of course, these resentments are dwarfed by those of the media that has to cover him.
DEMS
Barack Obama (IL) 90 (+1)
Wes Clark (AR) 80
Hillary Clinton (NY) 45
John Edwards (NC) 44 (-1)
Bill Richardson (NM) 37
Tom Vilsack (IA) 34
Russ Feingold (WI) 22
John Murtha (PA) 23
Al Gore (TN) 14 (+1)
Tom Daschle (SD) 10
John Kerry (MA) 3 (-1)
GOP
Condoleeza Rice (CA) 80 (-1)
Haley Barbour (MS) 79
Mitt Romney (MA) 73
Tim Pawlenty (MN) 69
Tom Tancredo (CO) 46
Rudy Giuliani (NY) 31
John McCain (AZ) 25 (+1)
Fred Thompson (TN) 23
Chuck Hagel (NE) 21
Mike Huckabee (AR) 20
Duncan Hunter (CA) 20 (enters board)
Sam Brownback (KS) 19
Tom Coburn (OK) 17
Bill Frist (TN) 10
posted by WinChoice | 9:20 PM
2 Comments:
I'm hoping Chuck Hagel runs for President in 2008. If the Republicans are going to have a shot at winning they have to show there has been a change in direction, particularly in terms of foreign policy.
I don't have a big problem with Hagel like a lot of GOPers do, but I think he would make too weak a candidate to defeat Hillary and would be demolished by Obama or Clark. If some sort of hell freezes over event occurs, such as John Kerry taking the 2008 nomination, I would be okay with Hagel. But Hagel's senate record is an albatross around his neck, as a number of Senator's records are. McCain is probably the strongest GOP senator in terms of popularity and policy record.
Post a Comment
<< Home