Quantcast

Reasons the Republicans lost the House:

Discussion in 'Legal' started by The Real Hawkeye, Nov 8, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. outofbattery

    outofbattery Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2004
    Messages:
    874
    Lieberman won't admit it and he will do nothing to return the favor but if the Republicans did not back Lieberman,he would have lost.If Lieberman had not lost so much favor for his pro-war stance,he would've easily again won the primary.He's a bit of an odd man out,but no mistake,he's still a very liberal Democrat regardless of the new found I beside his name.


    The commercials for Sheldon Whitehouse were amazing.ENTIRELY DISREGARDING Chaffee's voting record,they showed him as a strong supporter of the Republican party line with images of the Iraq war he voted against.Never underestimate the ignorance of the voting public.Very few people here in MA can tell you a thing about Deval Patrick but they voted for him by a big margin because they thought he looks nice.


    I can't add much to why the Republicans lost other than to simplify it down to sheer hubris.Bush and the Republicans have been horribly out of touch for years on issues of fiscal conservatism,limited government spread and invasion of privacy,true border security and so on.It hasn't been as if many conservatives haven't been jumping up and down waving our arms that things just haven't been peachy,we just got ignored.I had to LMAO at Bush all of a sudden saying that " it's never been our policy to just stay the course in Iraq".Good God,if there ever have been a groups of people who deserved to lose.Unfortunately,the alternative is even worse but what could anyone do?It wasn't as if Bush was listening to anyone besides Rove and Rumsfeld,certainly not the people who elected him.
     
  2. Bruce H

    Bruce H Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,624
    Location:
    North Mo.
    If you are going to act like a democrat why not have the real thing. What is really sad is the bloodbath should have been much worse.
     
  3. Nitrogen

    Nitrogen Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2005
    Messages:
    677
    Location:
    Sachse, Texas
    In my eyes, the Republicans pander to the very rich. the democrats pander to the poor.

    WHY THE HECK WON'T SOMEONE PANDER TO ME FOR A CHANGE! :what:
     
  4. RealGun

    RealGun Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2004
    Messages:
    8,281
    Location:
    Upstate SC
    The Republicans lost the House because that is the way the press wanted it.
     
  5. Lone_Gunman

    Lone_Gunman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    8,054
    Location:
    United Socialist States of Obama
    Did the press want Bush elected in 2000 and 2004?
     
  6. Biker

    Biker Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    6,108
    Location:
    Idaho
    The Pubs lost because they cast aside people like me - their base. Their hubris cost them and will continue to do so until they realize that their jobs depend upon my approval.
    Listen up Pubs: I will fire you if you don't perform to my expectations.


    Biker
     
  7. CannonFodder

    CannonFodder Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    218
    Why did they lose?

    Because they gave no compelling reason why they should remain in power while their foes were proclaiming multiple reasons why they should be removed from power.

    Oh, and the whole 'ignoring parts of the constitution when it suits them' bit.

    And, an unprovoked war of agression.
     
  8. lamazza

    lamazza Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2005
    Messages:
    1,081
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    There is no rebublican anymore.
    Republican is Democrats of 20yrs ago and Democrats are socialists. I have a very bad feeling that this country is unfixable until it collapses.
     
  9. RNB65

    RNB65 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2006
    Messages:
    4,056
    Location:
    Richmond, VA
    The Repubs lost because Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. both turned their backs on Reagan conservatism. Limited government, low taxes and strong national defense -- that was the essence of Reagan conservatism. The Bush's prefer big government, higher taxes, and have continued a process of military downsizing that began under Bush Sr. which has left us strained to the breaking point just to take the fight to a couple of little backwater hell-holes like Iraq and Afghanistan.

    If Jeb Bush ever hopes to be President, he better figure out real quick not to ask daddy or bro for advice.
     
  10. redneck2

    redneck2 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    13,914
    Location:
    Northern Indiana
    I think you're missing it

    The Republicans ran on a platform of...

    smaller government
    border security
    illegal immigration
    stronger ethics & morals
    lower deficit
    lower taxes
    better national security

    they did OK on taxes and national security, but they screwed the pooch in Iraq with the "let's stay there for 200 years and wear the other guys down" philosophy. Most Americans have a memory of about 30 seconds. If something's in the microwave more than 2 minutes, they're ordering a pizza because they're hungry and don't want to wait. 9-11 is a long distant memory that happened a thousand years ago.

    People that I know are real upset about the defecit and particularly spending. They're PISSED big time about the border. Don't give me lip service about how hard you work on national security when any Mexican can walk across at will.

    A few years ago the Dems looked like the party of the perverts. Now it's equal opportunity for the Republicans. They went into the swamp in DC to clean it up and ended up using it for their party hot tub.

    The money and power in Washington seem to corrupt members with even the best of intentions.
     
  11. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    24,039
    Location:
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    Land wars in Asia are fraught with unanticipated consequences.
     
  12. 22-rimfire

    22-rimfire Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2005
    Messages:
    11,749
    Location:
    TN
    The election results are typical of a two term president in the 6th year. After 6 years, the other party can sell the idea that little is getting done and the Iraq war (right or wrong) is part of the sale. I agree with them, but I don't like their politics. Not enough is getting done, but the reason things weren't getting done is because of the Democrats primarily. The right and wrong of the war will be decided as part of history.

    I find it interesting that the Democrats are talking a moderate line now that they have control. We'll see? As the one guy on TV said, sucessful politicians play between the 35yd lines.

    I do expect to see gun control legislation come up if they have both the house and senate. The first thing will be the renewal of the Clinton ban.
     
  13. cbsbyte

    cbsbyte Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,978
    Location:
    Cradle of Liberty
  14. johnster999

    johnster999 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2004
    Messages:
    207
    Location:
    Arkansas
    Yes, the biased media has helped demoralize the public. Yes, the left has blatantly used the struggle in Iraq to divide and conquer. None of that matters though. The situation is what it is because in the US our elections reflect the mood of the country.

    The GOP lost because the public simply cannot take the war anymore. The public is demoralized by the lack of success on the ground. They are ready for the war to end and kicking out the GOP is their way of ending it.
     
  15. 22-rimfire

    22-rimfire Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2005
    Messages:
    11,749
    Location:
    TN
    The public does not have the faintest idea of what leaving Iraq is going to do the the USA and Great Britain. It will alter our standing in the world.

    I really feel that we will be fighting terrors here. There will be domonstrations like England, then there will be events. The demonstrations are legal. But, it will be nice to know who the bad guys are. :)

    The US is a different kind of place and things could get out of control if there are lots of terrorist events here. A few, and people will just yell and scream and blame Bush or whoever is president.... lots of events..... and the people may begin to react personally with action that would generally be considered illegal in our country. It could be interesting. I dread it though.
     
  16. Flyboy

    Flyboy Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
    Messages:
    1,888
    Location:
    Oklahoma City, OK
    The Republicans lost the House because they gave it away to the Leftists years ago; this was just the housekeeping of transferring title.

    Ditto the Senate.
     
  17. Waitone

    Waitone Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    5,406
    Location:
    The Land of Broccoli and Fingernails
    Reasons why republicans lost are varied and subject to debate. What I think is interesting is this outcome could be seen coming down the track for at least 18 months. Bush betrayed the conservative base by nominating Harriet Meiers, a political flack, for a supreme court position. The base had worked hard for 40+ years and Bush just flipped off all that work in favor of a buddy. The base erupted and he backed down.

    A year or so later word gets out Bush and Co. agreed to sell 27 port facilities (that we know of) to an Arab country that served as the conduit for funding to the 911 terrorists. The base responded negatively and Bush figuratively responded by stomping his feet. He backed down, publicly,

    So here we have a president who was caught red handed by his base engaging in actions contrary to the beliefs of his base. His response was cave in action but he saw nothing wrong with his initial actions. In other words he tolerated the existence of his base as merely the cost of maintaining his position.

    Now we move to the immigration debate where he and the senate simply stuck his finger in the eye of his base and all Americans. He insulted those who did not want amnesty. He called Americans lazy. He played to the Mexican public and dissed Americans. He ran headlong into the opposition and only after being beat about the head and shoulders did he agree to a compromise (as half-assed as it was).

    No man in the presidency in my memory has worked as hard as Bush has to PO those who put him in office. Based on his past performance I don't expect him to do a group hug with his base. I fully expect him to shed whatever conservative camo he is wearing and show himself to be what he has been all along, a blue-blood, Rockefeller, country club republican. Bush came into office with an internationalist agenda. He got CAFTA through congress. FTAA is dead. Doha is dead. He'll shut up about US-European free trade agreement. Bipolar trade agreements will get quiet. He will not get fast track authority for trade agreements. SPP will proceed quietly. Whether or not the new congress wants to investigate his actions remains to be seen. Bottom line nuthin' get done and I am just giggly over the thought.
     
  18. aspen1964

    aspen1964 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2006
    Messages:
    168
    although I wanted to like the Bushs', the stark fact is that Bush Jr. will go the same way as a failure as Bush Sr......I knew pretty much watching Bush campaigning that important social issues that I wanted some action taken were going to be brought up by Bush when pressure got too great..and then only enough to ease that pressure a little...i.e.....border security or saving American jobs from becoming Indian jobs or Chinese jobs...he doesn't lie very welll..stammers & stutters and his face flushes a bit...but the only other winnable choice was Kerry the wingnut...fighting a war in Iraq without securing the US border is like trying to slow down the course of a river but not repairing the leaks in the dam holding it back...utterly stupid and counter-productive ..he deserves an F in his presidency legacy...and I haven't gotten into other issues yet..
     
  19. gc70

    gc70 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,212
    Location:
    North Carolina
    cbsbyte, as a generality, Democrats are urban and Republicans are rural, which is why the 2000 and 2004 Presidential elections were battles between the cities and the states. Or take a look at CNN's "votes by county" maps for senatorial contests; Missouri is a great example - the little blue spots in the sea of red are the cities.
     
  20. Geronimo45

    Geronimo45 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2006
    Messages:
    3,345
    Location:
    Phoenix, Arizona
    The Republican base didn't vote for them, while the Dem base turned out.
    Why didn't the GOP base show up? Because the GOP's had control of Congress for about a decade, and control of the presidency for 6 years. They've been spending money left and right on every welfare program that they can. They could have repealed the 86 MG ban. They could've dropped suppressors from the NFA list. They could've done a lot of things... only thing I know of that they did good on was to not renew the AWB.
    War on Terror and all that... I don't know. The Dems would've done much the same thing, I'm guessing.

    The GOP said all the right things and did all the wrong ones. The base didn't put them in power for free medicine for old folks, No Child Left Behind, and all that. They wanted a conservative agenda set up - which meant repealing a lot of laws, vetoing many bills.

    From my viewpoint, the GOP played Democrat. The only good things I can think of that they did? The things they didn't do - they didn't ban cars for the benefit of 'global warming'. They didn't pass the AWB.
     
  21. cbsbyte

    cbsbyte Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,978
    Location:
    Cradle of Liberty
    Thank you for the link to the map. But I will have to disagree with your generalites. Democrats are now in 2006 winning in rural states, and areas that where solid Republican. Hence the reason they took the House. Most of the population of Missouri is based in a small area of blue. The vast red areas have less people.
     
  22. Kowboy

    Kowboy Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2006
    Messages:
    60
    Bear:

    You hit the bullseye with your last shot:

    "Dumb issues -- The Terri Schiavo situation was a disgusting spectacle, for example. So was flag burning. All this stuff alienates as many people as it might ever attract."

    I was alienated enough to throw the bums out.

    The supposed party of less government sticks its nose into the most private of family affairs. But hey, we know who you should marry, who should live or die, when to bear a child - we're Republicans.

    Kowboy
     
  23. lbmii

    lbmii Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2004
    Messages:
    1,020
    Location:
    Overland Park, Kansas
    Well let's drag out lbmii's weekly paycheck and take a little look at real world numbers.

    I add up $405.55 taken out in various taxes in just one typical week. I am blue-collar middle class and every dime is hard earned. To take $400+ a week from my family and me is criminal. Now how long have the Republicans had the House, Senate, and Presidency, and even the Supreme Court? Income tax is a highly inefficient way to raise revenue and it is destructive to our ability to compete in the world economy. The Republicans had the ability to do something about it and did nothing. They do however, along with their Democrat friends, write special complex tax laws and exemptions for their special blue-blood buddies at the expense of everyone else.
     
  24. tcgeol

    tcgeol Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2006
    Messages:
    85
    The Republicans have never held the Supreme Court. We have tried, but never succeeded.
    (Well, not since the days of FDR, anyway)
     
  25. PinnedAndRecessed

    PinnedAndRecessed member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    Messages:
    1,541
    Hawkeyes original post is correct. Conservatives stayed away in droves because we're tired of ~30 million criminal immigrants living comfortably in within our borders. (This from a political action forum to which I subscribe.)

    Personally, I no longer consider myself a Republican. Not after the way Bush has prostituted the presidency. And not after the way Republican politicians on the national level have done likewise with their respective offices.

    Constitution party for me, I guess. Which means I'm through voting.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice