RUN AWAY! RUN AWAY! GOPers

[radfringe]

I didn't watch the NH republic debate, I did read the transcript and articles covering the debate.

One striking difference between this 3rd debate and the other 2 was the repositioning of the candidates from avoiding mentioning bush to bashing bush. The Monty Python scene of the knights in retreat yelling "run away run away" kept popping into my head...



Could it be the GOPer candidates have woken to find the bush/cheney mis-administration is a cement block around their necks? The GOP money machine recently fired and shut down their US based telemarketing phone banks (rumor has it they have/are contracting the phone bank to some outfit in SOUTH AMERICA. The "official" GOP reason for closing it down is that the equipment is antiquated and would cost too much to upgrade - but if you read http://www.newswithviews.com/Ryter/jon175.htm :

The head of the RNC's small donor phone bank system reluctantly admitted that grassroots contributions were off 25% to 40%, but attributed the decline to their aging phone bank equipment that they said would cost too much money to update. And even though a spokesperson for the RNC denied there was any decline in grassroots fundraising contributions, saying that their records suggested they had outraised the DNC's grassroots fundraisers by a two-to-one margin. In reality, they didn't. The reverse was true. The GOP is feeling the brunt of some very serious donor backlash. Several of the fired telemarketers noted that most of the potential GOP donors they have called recently were angry over President George W. Bush's immigration reform policy. Bush, on the other hand, accused immigration bill foes—most of whom are close political allies who fought shoulder-to-shoulder with him on several other policy issues since 2001—of using scare tactics to alienate the support of conservative voters who stood with him for six years.

Iraq may have been the issue for the Dems in '06, but it seems immigration is the big issue among Republicans, and there are scattered mentions buried in articles that many registered republicans are now unregistering themselves as Republicans. So when you read a poll saying x% of registered republicans still support bush, you have to ask how many republicans are left.

Attempts at spinning this as a "normal situation" of a presidency winding down doesn't hold water. ( 593 days remaining ) people do not leave a party or withhold support just because a particular presidency is coming to an end - they leave a party or withhold support because they are upset by the direction of a party.

And the Dems best take heed - people are also not too happy with what is seen as caving in to bush on the Iraq funding. With no sitting president/vice-president running for office in '08 - the field is open for a real new direction and that new direction may mean voters tossing alot of incumbents, Dems and republics, out the window. The elongated campaign season may also contribute to this as voters become weary of the same rhetoric and no action or worse - more of the same.

Conventional wisdom is leaning towards the '08 presidential seat is the Dems to lose, and assumes the next president will be a Dem. Maybe, if the voters only see a "credible" choice between a dem or a republic. Perot garnering 17% of the vote back in 1992 keeps coming to mind.

Talking to a friend of mine who is a political science professor and specializes in presidential campains maintains that there is no way a 3rd party would win under the current political system. Maybe not, but then again credible 3rd party candidates do make an impact on the outcome if enough voters are disgusted with the dem/republic slates.

[fasttense]

1. Who was it that predicted the repukes were going to

run against their own president? He said something to the effect that the repuke party would then run against their own party leader. He said it back in 2000 or 2004.

[radfringe]

2. not sure

I've been trying to track down a quote I heard yesterday on Bill Press show where someone high up in the republic party said they have to make it clear that bush is not the republic party... i.e. run away run away

I'm finding it interesting the sudden flurry of articles claiming that bush really a liberal in disguise... http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/4164/george_w_bush_is_a_liberal.html

George W. Bush is a Liberal
In this day and age of Republican dominance of the American political system, the term Liberal has become a label for the Conservative-Right to bash and insult the political opposition. It is the first defense mechanism of any Conservative Republican when describing one with an opposing viewpoint.Our current president plastered the term “Liberal” all over every electronic medium during the 2004 elections to describe his presidential opponent, John Kerry.

sounds to me like they are going to attempt to hang bush around the "liberal" dems

[salin]

5. because the policies rammed down our throats by jr, and approved

for six years by GOP in the House and five+ years in the Senate - were SO embraced by liberals. NOT!

This will only work with the diehard base.

[Pyrzqxgl]

8. Maybe Fox will mistakenly label Bush as a Democrat.

[Hubert Flottz]

3. The Go Go GOPers can run, but they can't hide.

The country will be paying for Bush's rampage for the next 50 years! If we still have a country after the bastard is gone.

[KharmaTrain]

4. Third And Fourth Parties Anyone???

Recently I ran into a so-called "Independent"...he admitted voting twice for boooshie boy but fell out with him over...well I'm quite sure. When we talked about Iraq, this dude still aped the 9/11=Saddam crap, but said the war sucked...he was all wound up about "illegal Mexicans" (his term) but when I asked him if he'd support either boycotting businesses that hire "illegals" or if he'd pay more for products now made by outsourced or illegal labor...the pause said volumes. Then there's the economy...where we both agree thinks suck royal...but he claims its others (not sure who) that are raising oil prices and screwing with our economy...and that the Repugnicans aren't in favor of lowering taxes anymore. All the right positions with all the wrong answers.

To think that these "independents" will come running to vote for Democrats is both foolish to believe and would be our worst nightmare. It'd be handing the party many of us have stuck with through thick and thin and cater to the same asshats who voted twice for this inept and corrupt regime. Here's hoping these people go their own way.

I've long stated I see a third party candidate coming out of the Repugnicans...Ron Paul is one exit way...as I think he'll bolt into a third party bid...maybe Liberatairan or even the old Perot party. There's also the "religious conservatives" who aren't too happy with their choices of Rudy McRomney. These are the ones looking at Gnewt or some other "christian" to lead even more to the exits.

Yes, the Democrats are in the position not to win in '08, but more in a "no-lose" situation as the GOOP will continue to schism as the residue of the booosh era continues to stick all over their faces and smells up the '08 election.

[radfringe]

6. the only way out for republics

would be to support at the least a censure of bush/cheney, at best an impeachment

just saying you don't approve of whatever bush/cheney means nothing if you still vote for the bushit

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

7. It's the immigration thing.

Because of his stance on immigration, it's now safe to bash him with the base, even on other issues.