Let's not be too quick to rejoice about the Republican split from Bush over immigration.

[razorman]

I work in a job where I meet all kinds of people. Many of my friends and acquaintances are conservatives and Republicans (and no, they don't all kick puppies and eat babies). What I hear from virtually all of them is anger at President Bush over the immigration bill.
I get the impression that aside from the president, and the Republican high mucky-mucks on capitol hill, almost no one on their side supports this comprehensive bill. It seems to me that if they throw Bush over the side, and make him a truly lame duck, it might only serve to unite their party to find a new, supposedly more conservative leader.
If this happens, it could make it much harder to beat them in 2008, depending, of course on who each party nominates. How about some input?
Am I way off base?

[LBJDemocrat]

1. definitely

They view Fred Thompson as their more conservative leader. They believe Fred Thompson is anti-immigration, though I don't know if he really is or not.

[TwilightGardener]

2. They are already trying to find a more conservative candidate for '08--

Rudy McRomney is considered "RINO"--that will make it easier for us to beat them, IMO. The farther right they run, the less chances they have--I don't think America is trending MORE conservative, I think it's trending LESS conservative. We've figured out that we have many more important things to worry about than tax cuts, women having abortions and gays getting married, AND the R's want war with Iran--the rest of America doesn't have the appetite for more war. I HOPE they don't nominate a moderate.

[dmosh42]

3. I agree with your perception...

I consider myself 'liberal' on most domestic issues, but this 'illegal' thing is hard to swallow. I know it's not popular on DU to be against this surge of illegal immigration, but I do believe that if we criticize all these jerks in the Bush administration for disobeying our constitution, then disregard of the laws when we see fit, will be the downfall of this Republic. I have three important agendas on my shortlist. I agree with the Dems on Iraq, or at least they seem to be trying. On trade, they have been a big disappointment, pandering to the corporations. ANd immigration, I find myself with most independents, and conservatives. Hopefully, we'll come to our senses, eventually.

[amandabeech]

4. I could never have put it better.

I often feel like my party has moved somewhere else, but it's not to the left.

To your list, I'd add the environment and judicial appointments. IMHO, the dems are consistently better on both these issues.

However, when it comes to issues of concern to those in the lower 40-50% of the income brackets, neither party is any good, because both are beholden to their corporate donors. It seems that most dems at the top, save Edwards, for example, have no clue what it's like to be in a financial pickle with no end in sight because your entire industry has gone overseas or been overtaken by low-wage immigrants and visa holders, legal or illegal.

And I doubt that few of them really know any blue collar types who are constitutionally completely ill-suited to going to college or working at a desk. My dad, two of my uncles and most of my neighbors growing up are or were like that, and they need jobs, too.

Really, I think that what we're talking about is a class division, not a political division, at least at this time.