さっきホットエアを読んでいたら、これまでカカシが書いてきたことをうまくまとめているのでそれを参考に私自身の考えもまとめてみよう。ブッシュの新作戦はまだ２週間もたっていな…

“Yes I am, nice to know I am missed.”

It’s like missing not having the black plague.

“Seems even retirees such as myself don’t have as much free time as “consultants” do.”

Too busy spending your welfare check down at the bingo parlor?

Isn’t it curious that I would have said just the opposite: “Republicans want to fall in love, Dems want to fall in line.”

Well the point is, at least from my POV, that either is problematic. Falling in love is not a rational process, falling in line is perhaps too rational a process. Just thought it was interesting.

Theworldisnotenough on February 26, 2007 at 3:35 PM

I think you’re correct on the marginalizations. But will the marginalized on both sides just sit out the election, or feeling the expression of their committment so necessary, will they come up with 3rd party challenges from one or both directions? (If it were both, that’s where my “chaos ensues” comment came from)

Someone made an interesting comment on one of the Sunday AM talkfests, re how the parties pick their candidates: “Democrats want to fall in love, Republicans want to fall in line”.

Great quote, on its face, light-hearted. After a bit of thinking, quite insulting to both parties. With just enough truth to be provocative.

honora on February 26, 2007 at 1:34 PM

Isn’t it curious that I would have said just the opposite: “Republicans want to fall in love, Dems want to fall in line.”
We’re all hoping for another Ronald Reagan while the Dem faithful just seem to walk in lockstop with whomever the Party elevates, regardless of their platform or ideology.
All you need to do is look at Kerry, Murtha, Pelosi or even Oscar Boy.
Dems will support candidates happily that advocate abortion on demand, big government, high taxes, amnesty for illegals and anti-American appeasement foreign policy while Conservative and Republican voters are pretty consistent in what they want in a candidate–Lower taxes, smaller government, border controls and muscular American defense, to name just a few.
The last election showed us how this worked, which was very badly, but the independents that had come over with RR and even GWB, fell back into line and voted for the Dems even though very few of them supported what these voters wanted–more war and more immigration control.
Because the Dem candidates hid or disguised their platforms, they made it easy for the faithful to join the march of the lemmings over the cliff and here we are.

honora on February 26, 2007

Oh look. The plagiarist troll is back!

georgej on February 26, 2007 at 3:33 PM

Yes I am, nice to know I am missed.

Seems even retirees such as myself don’t have as much free time as “consultants” do.

I do not have any data on turnout either. My main disagreement with those statistics even if they are accurate is that you have to take into account Republican turnout in response to the Democratic candidate, and this is a Presidential election. Alot more is on the line and two years of the Blue dogs ankle biting Bush has to have some effect on Republican turnout.

Tancredo can’t spoil a thing now. Was he not given to alarmist hyperbole, and actually articulated his position effectively he could run a decent campaign. His soundbites from the past year put him on the fringe. Same with Murtha.

The netroots only hope is Silky Pony and we know he’s not going anywhere, not with Hollywood backing Obama. The Christian rights only hope does not exist; Tancredo is not going to carry the Christian rights flag, no way no how. I used to only see the fringe left and blue dogs being marginalized, but now the furhter right groups are going to get squeezed out as well.

Oh look. The plagiarist troll is back!

…the people had largely aligned against Al Qaeda militants operating in the region. They said most of the young men in the village, between Fallouja and Ramadi, were employed in the police and the army — unusual for Al Anbar province, long a hotbed of insurgent activities.

Actually there have been “red on red” battled being fought in Anbar for more than a year. Check out Roggio’s archives.

SouthernDem wrote: “there are some of us left who have the ability to anticipate the damage to our country if we leave w/o stability in Iraq.”

Sadly, SD, none of you are running your party. Your leaders are far too deep into swamp fever to be rational anymore. Nancy Pelosi is a specific case in point.

The rest of your argument is a plausible scenario. My later point was – what if the right convinces perhaps Tancredo to make an outside spoiler run (I don’t know if he would), and the KosKids convince someone (who…Murtha?) to be the anti-Hill or Oby candidate? Chaos ensues.

eeyore on February 26, 2007 at 2:23 PM

I believe if you look at recent history, the actual candidate who got the nomination was way down in the polls at this stage–Clinton, Dole for sure.

…The stay at home vote I beleive to be a myth. Unless you can show me some statistical data…
Theworldisnotenough on February 26, 2007 at 1:11 PM

Following the ’06 election, I accepted the analysis of Michael Barone, who has an encyclopedic knowledge of nationwide voting stats, sometimes going back generations. What I remember him saying was than in some of the closest races, Rep turnout was further below average Rep turnout than the Dem margin of victory. I admit I simply take Barone at his word when it comes to stats. Add your point on the persuadable conservative center and you have a lock.

The rest of your argument is a plausible scenario. My later point was – what if the right convinces perhaps Tancredo to make an outside spoiler run (I don’t know if he would), and the KosKids convince someone (who…Murtha?) to be the anti-Hill or Oby candidate? Chaos ensues.

Great quote, on its face, light-hearted. After a bit of thinking, quite insulting to both parties. With just enough truth to be provocative.

The stay at home vote I beleive to be a myth. Unless you can show me some statistical data that points to a drop in conservative turnout rather than the conservative center voting for conservative Democrats that ran on conservative issues. Advantage Rudy.

Wouldn’t a left fringe opponent play into Rudy’s hands? Let the furthest right section do what it will. The conservative and even left center wants nothing to do with Hillary. Obama’s support from Hollywood types makes him distasteful to the conservative center.(the Grammys and Oscars saw to that)And then theres the Bradley effect. Who was the last President that won without a single conservative southern state? Advantage Rudy.

You are right we have a long way to go. From what I can see Rudy’s camp is playing it very deftly. He does not have a serious contender on the right. McCain for some reason wants to alienate himself while Rudy is putting potential supporters at rest with his statements about judges. McCainwent from corpse mode on one interview to a totally different style in another interview. His camp seems weak and unsure of the image they want to portray. If these trends continue Rudy walks into the nomination. The general election is only close if Obama can get the nomination with as little mudslinging as possible AND Obama must court southern states, and shamelessly so. It is the only way to overcome the Bradley effect. Advantage Rudy.

…The Christian right is not going to throw the baby out with the bath water…
Theworldisnotenough on February 26, 2007 at 11:58 AM

I’m not so sure. To my eyes and ears there have been even more “If it’s [Romney] [Rudi] [McCain], I’m staying home…” than there were in ’06. And statistically, in the close races, the stay-at-home Repubs were indeed the deciding factor.

On the left, they seem even more demanding of an anti-war absolutist than the right is a strong social conservative. This far out, the tides will change several times before selections are made, but I actually wouldn’t be surprised to see independent runs on both the left and the right.

Exit question: Is the GOP headed for a civil war itself?

No.

The Christian right is not going to throw the baby out with the bath water. Rudy seems to be on track to take the nomination, which James Dobson will certainly not like, but what choice does he have? The Christian right has two issues: Gay marriage (Not controlled by the President)and Abortion. Rudy already came out in support of originalist judges. Can they really complain? I’m a Christian and Rudy’s support for originalist judges put me at ease. He can be pro gay marriage as much as he wants to no Federal bill to support or legalize gay marriage will make it through Congress. I am confident that the anti-federalist in Americans will keep that from happening. The Christian right is not going to pass on an opportunity to replace a LC justice with an originalist, that just is not going to happen. Oh and Rudy will make his appearance in front of the Christian right at the right time, when it helps him get the nomination (which he doesn’t seem to even need), and won’t hurt him in the general election. *That was a long winded no, heh.*

Exit question: Is the GOP headed for a civil war itself?

got my fingers crossed.

As for the Christian conservatives, someone needs to tell them that the best they can hope for is a gov’t that doesn’t try and wipe out all religious references. Everyone is disappointed with the choices but there are enough to have some variety. We just need to find our Obama. A young, clean, articulate conservative who can get on the cover of Seventeen.

Ah, so there isn’t a Shiite monolith ready to slaughter the Sunnis and annex Iraq to Iran at the first opportunity.

that’s good to know.

Can’t tell if you’re being snarky here or not, but yes, the Shiites are not monolithic and neither are the Sunni’s. Never have been, particularly in Iraq, but it’s only become obvious and reported on in the press recently.

Internecine conflict is getting worse but I’d be very hesitant to say it’s because of the surge. The surge is probably a factor, but correlation =/= causality, and interfaith groups, particularly among the Shia, have been building toward open conflict for some time now.

SouthernDem on February 26, 2007 at 10:08 AM

I think the logical democrats will think that way, they know stability is utmost. Just wading through the extremists takes its toll on the political system.

Lehosh on February 26, 2007 at 10:21 AM

These two posts are from the opposite political spectrum, but they say the same thing. Extreme groups cannot be allowed to control either party. The extreme religous right has lost its power because of “overplaying” there hand, and the left is going through that now. It just take time for the Dems (as it did for the Rep) to began to realize that those factions do more harm than good.

Uhh, no.

Ah, so there isn’t a Shiite monolith ready to slaughter the Sunnis and annex Iraq to Iran at the first opportunity.

that’s good to know.