Quote of the day

unseen on November 21, 2009 at 11:36 PM

Its always darkest before the dawn.

At the moment, I have reasonable hope we can retake the House in 2010. There are lots of very talented, attractive, and hard working candidates on our side. The Senate is much more difficult this year, but I believe we can significantly reduce the Democrat’s majority.

Then we will have to be careful and not do something that makes us look like we are nuts to the public, like shutting down the government or devoting a session to impeaching Obama. We will need to control our anger and think strategically to maintain and build a conservative led majority into 2012 and beyond.

Personally I think the dems just handed Palin the tools needed to build a major political movement tonight. If she takes it. The door she has been waiting for just opened. I think

While possible, the historical statistics are simply not good for an Obama defeat by any GOP nominee. And Palin may not want the nomination in 2012. She may be thinking the same thing and looking at 2016. Then, a GOP victory would be historically favored, if we can stay focused on fighting the opposition, instead of one another.

However, just as we can implode, the Democrats can throw away all their advantages by being too extreme. And since they seem intent on doing so, historic victories in both 2010 and 2012 are possible.

Loxodonta on November 22, 2009 at 12:05 AM

unseen on November 22, 2009 at 12:11 AM
beachgirlusa on November 22, 2009 at 12:13 AM

You may both be correct about 2012. I am only going on statistics, so I really have no idea. However, I do know that every hour that’s devoted to winning 2012, or promoting one’s preferred candidate for 2012, or trashing other candidates for 2012, is an hour not devoted to winning in 2010.

Also, even though running a successful presidential campaign is very complex, it is far less complex than running the hundreds of successful campaigns needed to win back the House. So, first things first.

Loxodonta on November 22, 2009 at 12:26 AM

If on the other hand a true leader emerges in 2009, 2010 with a clear easy to understand message the 2010 midterms become easier for the GOP to win. this is why the dems are attacking the leaders of the GOP as they emerge. Rush, foxnews, Palin, beck. They do not want people to coalase around one person or one theme. The Tea party is good but it is fractured still. If one leader comes and wraps it into a message the dems are done. IMO

unseen on November 22, 2009 at 12:32 AM

I can see the GOP nationalizing the 2010 elections around a theme and a new “Contract with America.” However, the notion that this campaign has to be led by “a leader” worries me. I have seen a lot of very bitter divisiveness on this site and other conservative sites about who the 2012 nominee should be. If that gets injected into the 2010 campaign, I fear for the outcome. There are already many Congressional candidates aligned with different potential candidates for the 2012 nomination.

Instead of “a true leader” emerging in 2009 to lead the 2010 campaign, I see the likely 2012 nominee emerging from the 2010 campaign. So, I would encourage Palin, Romney, Huckabee, GOP governors, the RNC, heads of conservative think tanks, et al, to all pitch in and campaign for 2010 without casting aspersions on one another or appearing to be positioning themselves for 2012. Then, whoever does the best for the most candidates, will very likely be the 2012 nominee, if she or he wants that position.

Loxodonta on November 22, 2009 at 1:17 AM

I don’t know what’s left to do but take up arms.

Midas on November 22, 2009 at 1:51 AM

You can’t have mine. I only have two and I need them to type. Also, how do you type with your arms up anyway?

Loxodonta on November 22, 2009 at 1:59 AM