MS-01 Open Thread

By Moe Lane Posted in | Comments (184) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

UPDATE: Well, at 370/462 it's 51/49 Childers, with 1,000 vote difference; I think that it may not shift at this point (the Clarion-Ledger agrees with me). Ach, well: better luck next time; woe, woe, woe, we're all going to die; and I expect that Travis Childers will be endorsing Barack Obama for President within the next 24 hours. Only fair, given all the work that his online support has given him.

UPDATE: OK, at the rough halfway point 54/46 Childers, about 3,500 vote margin. Good news for Childers, but this one may take a while.

UPDATE: With the Clarion-Ledger reporting 153 out of 462 districts, it's 53/47 Childers. We'll see how it goes, obviously.

The Greg Davis and Travis Childers runoff: this will be redone in November, but people are going to be reading a lot in this one's entrails. Results as soon as they come in and I find a good source.

Also: our colleagues from the Other Side are going to be stopping by to try to drink our pain if it turns out that Childers disassociated himself from them sufficiently, so if that happens, be sure to give 'em a good show. You know: weeping, wailing, grim proclamations of how we're all going to die, the usual. I wouldn't bother with the threats to leave the country, though: even they won't buy something that over the top.


« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims?Comments (2) | Hillary meets Barry on the Senate floorComments (9) »
MS-01 Open Thread 184 Comments (0 topical, 184 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »

I think this is where I was following the results three weeks ago

http://www.djournal.com/pages/election2008.asp

And, while if we lose tonight we shouldn't jump out of windows, it would be, uh, not good. Like very not good.

"Livin' the dream. I'm going to Disney World." Super Bowl XLII MVP, Elisha Nelson Manning

And we can do everything up to jumping out of windows if we lose, 'kay? :)

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!

And if we win, then we've proven Obama is poison in GOP leaning areas. So we got that going for us (maybe), which is nice.

"Livin' the dream. I'm going to Disney World." Super Bowl XLII MVP, Elisha Nelson Manning

According to some links from over on Kos, turnout was up around the district, but may have been up as much as 50% in DeSoto County, where we have to run up our margin. Could be good news, which is nice, cause we need good news.

"Livin' the dream. I'm going to Disney World." Super Bowl XLII MVP, Elisha Nelson Manning

Where these numbers are coming from on Kos, or what counties they're from within the district...

Results for the Mississippi First District special election, filling the seat of Senator Roger Wicker.

5% of Precincts Reporting

Travis W. Childers (D): 57% (1804)
Greg Davis (R): 43% (1335)

"Livin' the dream. I'm going to Disney World." Super Bowl XLII MVP, Elisha Nelson Manning

I didn't go and see Bill Clinton when he was stumping for his wife yesterday here in town (local school about 1 mile from my house) because I didn't want to have to wait 3 (4 really because he's always late) hours just standing there, doing nothing. It would have been cool to see a President in person, guess it'll have to catch him another time.

___________________________________
Just like PayPal, except it's free and a $25 bonus to sign up!

but as far as living here in Corvallis, we're getting Democrats.... Maybe McCain comes to the next town over (Albany), but that's about it. Besides, I think it would be pretty cool to see a president, whichever party he/she belongs to.

___________________________________
Just like PayPal, except it's free and a $25 bonus to sign up!

But still really early

Special Election

Precincts Reporting: 8%

Candidate Votes Percentage

Miscellaneous

TRAVIS W. CHILDERS
3,666 60%
GREG DAVIS 2,474 40%

"Livin' the dream. I'm going to Disney World." Super Bowl XLII MVP, Elisha Nelson Manning

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2008/by_county/MS_Page_0513...

"Livin' the dream. I'm going to Disney World." Super Bowl XLII MVP, Elisha Nelson Manning

Who knows which precincts these votes are from, but it's never good to trail 60-40.

Childers is kicking Davis' a** in Lee County, 55-45. In 2004, that county went for W 66-34. This doesn't look good.

7 of 38 precincts in. Davis 74-26. He'll have to keep that margin as the rest of the county comes in.

Forget it I am calling it another GOP loss and most importantly the Obama tactic did not work (so the coattails affect is thrown out)

One does have to ask why Davis brought in VP Cheney the day before the election? Bad move!

I am truly getting scared for our party because we actually had an elected official here in the strongest Bush district so far and he still is losing.

Why? Wait until the end.

...and Davis losing by a wide margin in all but two, I'd have to agree with you. If these results hold up, Davis is done for.

Gingrich has said to anybody who would listen, that running a purely negative campaign against Obama and Reverend Wright is going to flop. And he has been pleading for the Congressional Republicans to have an emergency meeting and hammer out a positive, forward looking agenda to take to the public: Something like a "Contract With America 2008". The 1994 Contract worked splendidly for the Republicans, so why not a revised version for 2008?

http://tinyurl.com/6q6kjr

But the GOP leadership is strangely indifferent to the idea. I just don't understand it. Is it because they don't dare propose anything that could be seen as breaking with Bush-Cheney? Or that they just don't want to take advice from Gingrich anymore?

Or, if you want to be real conspiratorial, is it that Gingrich's pro-environmentalist stand on things like global warming is turning off oil companies, who are big contributors to GOP candidates?

What is the GOP message? What are Republicans promising Americans they will do for the country, if the voters keep them in power?

Can the GOP promise even One Big Thing that would excite the public? Remove the fear of losing one's health care if you get laid off? Simply income taxes so you can fill them out on a proverbial postcard? Blow Osama bin Laden to hell once and for all? Something? Anything?

Gingrich is a smart guy, but lets not forget that B. Clinton smoked him in '96 and '98. And I still don't think the Contract was all that important in '94 - people voted against Clinton that year, and ignored what the Republicans said. The same thing is happening this year, except reversed - the people are so angry at Bush for Iraq that they vote against his party regardless of what stupid things the Democrats do.

Our comeback will only come, I suspect, when Bush is gone. Most likely in 2010 (although things could change when McCain takes center stage after the convention).

the people are so angry at Bush for Iraq that they vote against his party regardless of what stupid things the Democrats do.

That doesn't explain why McCain is running 15 points ahead of a generic Republican, and in fact has a decent chance to win the election.

Evidently the people aren't so angry at Bush that they're prepared to clobber McCain too. Why is that, do you suppose?

I keep asking this: What is McCain doing right, that most other Republicans are not? How is McCain managing to appeal to more voters than other Republicans?

Four alternatives that I see - any one, or any combination of the four could be true:
@ McCain is a longtime GOP opponent of Bush - for seven years - who can't be transformed into the normal loyal Bush Republican.
@ McCain benefits from the fact that he is running for President, where foreign policy/defense matters, while these other Republicans are running for the House and Senate (where the average person votes based on parochial issues).
@ McCain is running against two very unnattractive Democrats for his office. Hillary is shrill, obnoxious, and corrupt, while Obama is too young, inexperienced, and too obviously naive.
@ McCain's positions on campaign finance reform, climate change, and/or earmarks is helping him (I think this is the least likely possibility).

McCain is seen as being not very Republican, and he's doing everything he can to distance himself. He's not doing anything to help the brand, because he's seen as only a marginal member of it.

Loundes County, 56-42 for W in '04, going to Childers 59-41.

About ready to call this one gone.

Loundes County is now 50-50.
Overall race has narrowed to 53-47, Childers, roughly a third of the vote in.

The remaining counties not reporting are they going to all go for Childers probably?

It's getting quite a bit closer:

County Precincts T. Childers G. Davis
Total 153/462 15,570 53% 13,670 47%

That's only a third of the votes counted -- based on the trend, Davis is looking good, but I have no clue about which precincts are out. (And even if I did, I'd be informed but clueless!)

Yes but DeSoto is half out and it will on tie him with Childers and all those counties not reporting will go to Childers and he will win by less then 2,000 votes

Just did a quick comparison of the larger counties still out, vs. how they went in '04. Most were strong W counties. The ones to worry about are Clay(went 52-47 Kerry) and Panola (50-50 in '04). Both have nothing in yet.
Davis has some biggies still out, too. This one will be close.

He still has a chance then?

and Panola is going for Childers with 57% now

Would be nice to win this outright.

Calling in Cheney was not a stroke of genius.

"History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it"-Winston Churchill

You've got a point there.

But look, calling in Cheney was Dumpster-diver dumb. Voters are angry at the political class in Washington, and are looking for change with experience. That's why guys like Crist and Jindal are popular. It was about as smart for Davis to do as conducting a campaign appearance at a Church Social with a really drunk Department Store Santa.

OTOH, I would like to see the total turnout numbers for this special election. I wonder how many voters are turning out for a Special in May. My guess is 40%.

November could be different. Everything will be ramped up by then.

Of course, we're talking about the House Republican Conference and the McCain Campaign, which walks around the Country wearing a hair shirt and a "Kick Me" sign. So "ramped up" may be a relative term, here. I see nothing, and I mean NOTHING from the McCain people or the RNC that matches the BC 2004 72 Hour Operation.

BTW, it's not generally recognized that the 72 Hour Plan saved our butts in 2006. We could have lost 70 seats. Are we doing that this year?

I don't see any sign of that. But I do hear that the Obambi people have a huge turnout operation underway.

"History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it"-Winston Churchill

Maybe McCain would have been more of a vote-getter than Cheney.

I wonder how long it will take for the GOP to realize that, in the current political climate, McCain is a model for the type of Republican who could actually get elected, whereas Bush and Cheney are the model for the type of Republican who may get clobbered this November.

It's not the war. McCain is just as hawkish as Bush (if not more so), yet McCain is way more popular than Bush and roughly on a par with Obama in the polls.

Why? Because McCain is viewed as a centrist pragmatist who isn't tied to a rigid right-wing ideological orthodoxy. His stance on global warming proves it.

It's the same reason why Rudy Giuliani is also viewed favorably, especially by Independent voters.

What is ironic (and sad) is that the three most popular national Republican figures today--Schwarzenegger, Giuliani and McCain--are also the three most despised by conservatives as apostates from the true faith. While Bush is beloved, with a national popularity rating among all voters of only 30%.

You don't send in Maverick and then find out Davis is a Dog Candidate. Then it makes Mac look like a Dog Nominee.

"History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it"-Winston Churchill

It is precisely because we have a maverick nominee and a lack of leadership that our party is flailing about.

McCain is running as McCain, an INDIVIDUAL who loves his country, has some conservative ideas, has some liberal/moderate ideas, etc. If I am a hopeful Congressional freshman, I am not sure how McCain can help me win an election. I can't transform myself into a war hero with years of DC experience. In terms of policies, the lines are blurred on many issues (being a centrist pragmatist and all).

One reason we will not have a Contract for America this year is that a McCain driven contract will be at odds with too many parts of the GOP, and a conservative contract will be at odds with at least some of McCain's policies.

In the November 2006 election, the GOP got a wake-up call from the voters.

But then the GOP went right back to sleep.

2007 was the time for the GOP to have regrouped. To say to the public "We hear you, and if you return us to power, here's our new 'Contract with America' that we will implement for you."

They didn't do that. All they did was go into obstructionist mode, reflexively opposing everything the congressional Dems were proposing.

They didn't even try to clean house either. We just got another scandalous congressman, Fossella, being a kind of bigamist with two families. That came out just one week before this Childers-Davis election.

If the GOP has any more scandals like that lurking in their closet to be outed this October, the GOP is toast.

I don't agree with everything McCain is proposing either. But at least he has proposed a positive comprehensive national agenda. The congressional GOP has not.

Perhaps that's because Republicans are used to taking orders rather than taking the initiative. They seem to be lost without Bush or Cheney setting the agenda for them, and they don't trust McCain enough to set one. Gingrich was a lucky exception to that.

The graverobbers at the NRCC just wanted your money, they didn't want to "rock the boat".

A new Contract would have required the House Leadership to ignore the White House and sit down with Mike Pence's crowd and listen to the voters for a change. This is John Boehner we're talking about.

Gingrich's actual record against Bill Clinton isn't quite promising. He had one good election, 1994. It was all downhill after that.

"History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it"-Winston Churchill

All of the Contract's proposals died in the Senate. The GOP Senate leadership left him out to dry. All he could do after that was play prevent defense in the House. The whole government shutdown didn't seem to help either.

With about 50 % of the precincts in. I see a trend. I think Childers will take this.

The House Republican Conference strikes again!

"History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it"-Winston Churchill

Half out and Childers has increased his lead to more then 3,700

We lost. This sucks.

"Livin' the dream. I'm going to Disney World." Super Bowl XLII MVP, Elisha Nelson Manning

If we lose this race, I suspect that some Republican House members who are currently planning to run for re-election will instead choose to retire. Perhaps Kuhl in NY. This will greatly exacerbate our problem, since the open seats are what are going to kill us in 2008. If not for all the open seats, we still might have been able to break even in the House.

bit like a turnip-truck driver. One of the problems is getting good recruits in these districts to run in an environment where you're liable to have your backside thrashed. I know down-home works a good deal, but the Dems have the money & Cheney is no longer a box-office draw.

Davis ran great race in that one county but he seems to have done little any where else. He can't win race on 1 county

Only 11 counties left in DeSoto

Which is in Davis' neck of the woods. There are a ton of heavily GOP counties out, which maybe Childress carries, maybe he doesn't. And 1/3 of DeSoto is more than enough votes to close the gap. It's unlikely, but it isn't over yet.

http://www.myelectionanalysis.com

Regardless of how this turns out, this should have been an easy win for the GOP. The brand is damaged, and until the Republicans can craft a positive message and get the public to believe that they will carry it through, they're going to keep losing. Waiting for the Democrats to screw up isn't enough.


Does that work for you Moe?



Now also found at The Minority Report

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!

Is that your child and you in the YouTube video simpson316?

did a search for cring



Now also found at The Minority Report

and none of Clay

and with all of DeSoto out Davis is still down by less then 700 votes

Another nominal GOP county.

50-50 now.

By 5,000 or so. Prentiss, Childres's county, is still all out.

"Livin' the dream. I'm going to Disney World." Super Bowl XLII MVP, Elisha Nelson Manning

This loss is decisive. It spells nothing but doom.

I am now convinced of the following:

1. Obama will win by the presidency by at least 15 points. He may even win Mississippi. His message of hope and change is no match for our message of fear and bigotry.

2. The Democrats will have a 2/3 majority in the House and a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.

3. Conservativism cannot win ever, except among in-bred back-country, racist folk like me.

4. Even with a moderate like McCain, any resistance to liberalism is hopeless.

5. The only way for a second party to even begin to challenge the Democrats is to embrace progressive politics.

6. Since that prospect makes this redneck sick to my bigoted stomach, I think I'll go out and gnash my tooth. I'm done with politics.

7. Hope you enjoyed this, visitors. In truth, McCain will defeat Obama by at least 5 points, and Democratic gains in Congress will be marginal. So no, sorry liberals, 2008 will not usher in the dawn of the age of Aquarias, where our military retreats before terrorists, and a radical-majority on the Supreme Court continues to give you victories you never could get through either democratic elections or honest reading of our Constitution.

"People will not look forward to posterity who never look backward to their ancestors." -Edmund Burke

back to 51% for Childers

back to 51% for Childers and all of DeSoto out

AP called race for Childers

I think you mean all of DeSoto is "in" - this means that all of DeSoto's votes have been counted. :)

This confused me earlier when you first said it.

Certainly been interesting to watch this one.

I have been respectful, no?

No point in beating anybody up. Its obvious you guys understand that there's nothing good about this, from your perspective.

My merlot is more than satisfaction enough.

We'll undoubtedly get a few drive-bys who'll need to be excised, so no harm in letting you have a small, throaty chuckle.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!

If we lose, find a better candidate, don't send in the same guy to lose again.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

If there is a better candidate, I agree. But this is a good candidate. If the Rs lose with a good candidate, where do they start pointing the finger?

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

that Rs aren't losing just b/c candidates stink. It's a scapegoat answer to a deeper problem.

As I said, if there is a better candidate then run him. But Rs had a good candidate and I'm not aware of "better" ones.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

I suggested a concrete thing we can change to try to react to a loss tonight.

If you agree with my suggestion then we have no quarrel.

Yes, I'm just outright dodging our usual argument #2. I hope you're not bothered. :-)

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

I just don't want this to be another "Rs lost because they had a bad candidate" because it's becoming tautological.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

I think its the message.

As a national party, we are flailing about like chickens without heads. Between Bush being a lame duck, McCain being a maverick, and the lack of leadership among the elected leaders in Congress, we are getting crushed.

We need another Contract with America to get everyone on the same page. Otherwise, everyone is going to try to save themslves, and in the aggregate, sink the party even further.

I have concluded that it will be a long road back to a conservative majority and that many Americans are going to have to re-live the late 70s.

They are almost here.

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

Proven loser? You mean like Johnny Isakson? Dianne Feinstein? Maria Cantwell? Gordon Smith? John Ensign? Denny Rheberg? Sharrod Brown? Ted Strickland? Bill McCollum? Haley Barbour? Mike Huckabee? Mitt Romney? Rudy Giuliani? Jim Bunning? John Thune? Bill Nelson? Stephany Herseth? Norm Coleman?

All these people have something in common: They have all lost high-profile races, and all are serving/have recently served at a high level AFTER their loss, some of them at a higher level then the originally ran for, a few lower, several for the same office.

I'm not saying he should be renominated, I am saying that simply saying he's a "proven loser" is silly. Losing is often a prerequisite for winning.

"I will look for people in the cast of John Roberts, Samuel Alito, and my friend the late William Rehnquist – jurists of the highest caliber who know their own minds, and know the law, and know the difference." - John McCain

Good call.

"I will look for people in the cast of John Roberts, Samuel Alito, and my friend the late William Rehnquist – jurists of the highest caliber who know their own minds, and know the law, and know the difference." - John McCain

A proven loser in this race against this Democrat. Happy? :-)

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

I followed this race pretty closely and it seems to be that aside from the general repulsion independent voters have for the Republican party, the war in Iraq was the issue that really did in Davis. Americans hate the war. I don't care about the substantive arguments. If John McCain goes into November committed to the Bush policy, he will lose. Its that simple.

McCain gave a big distancing himself from Bush today, and what was the issue? Global Warming! Nobody cares about global warming. He needs to move away from Bush on Iraq. Otherwise, get ready for the unified Democratic rule with big majorities in both chambers.

Crackerjack campaign team. Just caused unknown upheavals on Wall Street in a vain attempt to pick up all the Green Voters who are going to vote for Obama anyway.

Yup. Gotta hand it to Johnnie Mac!!

"History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it"-Winston Churchill

The problem here is that the way the special election and the primary for November worked they were held simultaneously. Davis and Childers both won a plurality in their party races (making them nominees for November) and of course the folks that voted for them also voted for them in the special - so they finished 1-2 and made this runoff.

The only way to avoid these special election/general rematches (and we'll have them in IL and LA as well) is to postpone the primary for November until after the special election - but no state wants the expense that comes from holding election after election. Not to mention the fact that turnout goes to crap.

My question is how turnout in these special elections compare to the what can be expected in November. I would expect that these districts will still go for McCain by margins similar to those for W in 2004 - and that will probably lead to some coattails for folks like Davis and Jenkins. In a rematch, changed turnout figures could create different outcomes.

Another race lost by GOP and the Obama tactic failed. There will be no coattails here folks

"People will not look forward to posterity who never look backward to their ancestors." -Edmund Burke

2008 = bloodbath

if repubs don't recover significantly from this we are finished(the nation, its ideals, etc.) Think about the next 4 yrs of non stop "War on Global Warming" rhetoric.

shiver

In my lifetime, the following happened:

In 1974 the Democrats won MASSIVE majorities in Congress. And then forced us into utterly abandoning our friends in Indochina to death, torture, or "reeducation." A disastrous decade in many ways. But no, America didn't end, nor did the Republican Party fold up its tent and go home.

In 1982, Democrats won huge margins in the popular vote and reversed Republicans' 1980 gains in the House. End of the Reagan Revolution, it was said, etc., etc.

In 1992--for me the darkest of times--the American people elected a draft-dodging, adulterous President, with large Democratic majorities in Congress, with a seemingly popular plan to socialize medicine.

In 1998, Democrats made modest gains in Congress despite the flagrant perjury of their party leader.

So no, a Democratic victory in November will NOT spell the end for America nor for the Republican Party. It may be bad in many ways, but not "the end."

But you know what, we will retain the White House and only lose a few seats in Congress. (Please quote me only if it actually happens). :)

On the other hand, come 2012, the Dems will be back in the White House.

"People will not look forward to posterity who never look backward to their ancestors." -Edmund Burke

if McCain is potus and has huge Dem majorities in congress and they force him to withdrawal from Middle East and everything that goes with that. Then the media pins the results on McCain the GOP i'm guessing.

...the Dems won't have huge majorities. And besides, what the Democrats were unwilling to do against a President Bush with a 30% approval rating they won't dare to try against a President McCain with a 55% approval rating.

Maybe after the 2010 midterms--but if things aren't going well in Iraq by then, it will be hard to convince even hawks to have our military help nation-build.

"People will not look forward to posterity who never look backward to their ancestors." -Edmund Burke

...Childers is a very conservative Democrat. Same for the guy who won in LA.

We lost the Dems now have 17 seat majority in Congress. We are not heading in right direction. What does this say about other MS open house seat race and AL ones?

If you're going to go around doing your darned best to talk down Republicans, at least stand up and say it rather than just ask leading questions.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

What?

I am tired of some trying to spin these special elections lets get real and stop pretending everything is peachy.

Look, don't take this the wrong way - but rereading this thread? You were almost as darkly gleeful about Davis losing as the most stereotypical netrooter.

I'm not telling you that you can't be. But people aren't going to react well to that, and you're going to very quickly become one of those people who the rest of us sort of skim past when you post if you keep that up.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!

How can one not be gloomy when we can't even hold this seat? How are we supposed to take back the swing districts we lost in 2006?

I admire the commitment of you and others to stay positive, but at certain point you have to face reality. This is tough defeat. But fortunately there is a lot of time between now and November, so things could change.

It says that scarce resources will have to be spent on districts which had hitherto been considered safe. This will minimize the ability of the party to regain some of the seats it lost in 2006.

Obviously, you don't take the time to read the daily posts I have on Congressional races. I am one of the posters who tries to have posters focus on these races.

You have a lot damn nerve

Uh, what? Was that meant for Moe?

Chill guys. Let's not go nuts here. I agree things look bad. And I think there is now virtually no chance of winning back either House (unless 100 Dem incumbents start calling their opponents "macaca"). But there is always 2010. (The Dems had to wait twelve years to win the House back.)

Structurally, 2006 was a good year for us. We should have made Senate gains and pushed for 60. But we threw it away.

2008, on the other hand, was to be structurally bad year for us in both houses. In the Senate, we had a natural regression to the mean coming after having the big year in 2002. In the House, we were going to suffer the raft of retirements that comes with losing the majority, just like the Democrats had after 1994. Heck, we're lucky we didn't get a series of party shifts like they had after 1994.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

What about all the Senate Races out there. Right now McCain is doing rather well against Obama (barely edging out if on a good polling day). If Democrats unite and if something about McCain comes out or he says something really stupid then Republicans are in even worse trouble.

All those house members retiring in swing districts can just be put in the Dem column at this point.

P.S. - Back in the last loss in LA a bunch of people somehow thought that those Obama ads actually helped, well again I hope this finally ends that theory.

-----------------------------------------------
Notice to All - I am an independent who has voted for Senator Bayh (Democrat) and Senator Lugar (Republican) along with over 60% of my state. You may take what I say with a grain of salt at your own party'

So let me get this straight the people at Kos are indifferent about tonight?

Lets be realistic say this guy votes just 50% of the time with Democrats that is still 49.9% higher than the Republican would of. I know it is late but wake up

-----------------------------------------------
Notice to All - I am an independent who has voted for Senator Bayh (Democrat) and Senator Lugar (Republican) along with over 60% of my state. You may take what I say with a grain of salt at your own party'

They won a race. That's what you get to do when your team wins a race: celebrate.

But tomorrow is another day, and we come right back to this in six months' time.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!

Congressional Campaign committee is still low on money. RNC is probably going to have to financially support McCain. So where is the help going to come from?

-----------------------------------------------
Notice to All - I am an independent who has voted for Senator Bayh (Democrat) and Senator Lugar (Republican) along with over 60% of my state. You may take what I say with a grain of salt at your own party'

There are basically three threads right now over at Kos. Celebrating the win in MS-01, celebrating the win of the candidate that most support in the Nebraska senatorial primary and commenting on the fact that West Virginia went more or less as expected...

Also, I think the race that most closely mirrors this one is the MA-5 special election. Like this one, the candidate from the challenging party was viewed as a closer in views to that of the party currently holding the seat, but the choice for the National Party was someone who would vote with you 30-50% of the time, vs the person looking to hold onto the seat who would vote with you less than 5% of the time...

Childers is a backbench weenie.

He'll do what Wasserman-Schultz tells him to do or he won't get so much as a new set of postage stamps for his district! Capiche?

He's a D. They win. We lose.

Best,

Chris

"History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it"-Winston Churchill

Also, I am calling for New GOP House Leadership. Our leader has been a failure he has shown zero PR skills and has done nothing to craft GOP message

One one side, we are linking Democrats to Obama, but on the other side, conservative writers such as Peggy Noonan, Bob Novak, etc., are praising Obama every other day. What's the message being sent to voters? That Obama is great.

The media, even the conservative media, has been very benevolent to Barack Obama so far.

WHY KEEP BRINGING BACK UP OBAMA

Stop blaming other people. The media has nothing to do with this. The fact is that independents, moderate Republicans, and conservative Dems think the Republican party has really nothing to offer.

Honestly name 1 new thing that is new that has been said in this campaign season by the leadership that could help reduce oil prices for the long term or deal with healthcare or home foreclosures or blah blah blah blah.

The answer is NOTHING
Then you got the President threatening to veto popular Democratic bills that pisses off people even more. I know he doesn't have to run again but you think the Republican leadership by know would say it is time to save the party.

-----------------------------------------------
Notice to All - I am an independent who has voted for Senator Bayh (Democrat) and Senator Lugar (Republican) along with over 60% of my state. You may take what I say with a grain of salt at your own party'

If warning voters about him doesn't sway them, then well, they are complicit in Obama's message of hate, and America is in for some trouble.

But we need to try.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

why do people think it will work in the MS-01 election?

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

Because McCain already tried to pull those ads. He neutralizing that tactic already

-----------------------------------------------
Notice to All - I am an independent who has voted for Senator Bayh (Democrat) and Senator Lugar (Republican) along with over 60% of my state. You may take what I say with a grain of salt at your own party'

OK, here we go, argument #2, on cue.

Did Childers run as a Democrat against a Republican? If so, then tying him to the Democratic standard bearer should work, and this loss could be used as evidence of being Republican being a problem at the moment.

If not, though, and he ran as a southern center-rightist without mentioning party, then yes, trying to tie him to Obama is sure to fail. But it also means this election is no proof that Republican is a bad name, because if he wasn't running on it, then I don't see how it meant anything.

So it can't be both ways. Either tying him to Obama is a good idea, or this is a sign of brand trouble. One or the other.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

"Either tying him to Obama is a good idea, or this is a sign of brand trouble. One or the other."

The first is irrelevant (i.e. doesn't affect many votes) and the second is obvious to anyone watching.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

is pretty battered at the moment.

What are you suggestions to actually move the electorate in a rightward direction?

This isn't about left/right. Rs have been and still are acting like corrupt, pork-barreling stereotypes of out-of-touch. That's not a left attribute or a moderate one. It's non-ideological.

When Rs stop thinking they deserve power and taxpayers should pay to keep them in power, they will start the long walk back to being considered seriously. But they haven't even acknowledged the problem. That's what is frustrating.

The anti-moderate efforts of some conservatives has made it easier for moderates to jump ship, but I don't think it's the main cause.

I think it's an entitlement mentality that has crossed into scandal and corruption on a widespread scale. Some have crossed the legal line, but most have crossed the ethical line.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

or rather the politicians.

Most of your comments pertain to persons, not policies.

but why should anyone trust him to fight special interests? The other Rs who said they would have turned around and become porkers. If your buddies are corrupt pork-barrelers, it hurts your claim to not be one.

Dude could run as an R and say "I will fight pork" and no one will believe them. And it's hard to argue with that. It's not like the current GOP leadership has changed their tune or stopped their corrupt practices.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

Intuition often fails.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

I can't say I'm sure you're wrong, Adam. I just can't know that you're right, and I can't just accept the claim without more evidence that rules out other explanations.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

Party ID, right/wrong track, Rs in congress approval vs. D approval, no lean-D districts are competitive, a slew of lean-R districts are competitive, decent regular R loses in R+10 district, national Presidential polls have an inexperienced uber-liberal beating a War Hero by 1-5 points.

I'm not sure what more you could have. I'm guessing it will take the coming beat-down in November with 55-59 D Senators and 250 D Congressmen to "prove" the problem to some people.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

Childers' party affiliation is only half the equation. With Cheney's visit on Davis' behalf the Republican party put its brand on the line and came up short.

I would agree that 1 special election is "no proof that Republican is a bad name" but 3 special election defeats in GOP districts in a 2 month period ought to be startling.

Its time for the national GOP to realize that merely identifying yourself as Republican and calling the other guy liberal is insufficient to win in the current environment.

That can support both our claims, heh.

Adam will say that candidates running as Republicans and losing proves that Republican branding is the problem.

I can say that this proves our candidates are lazy and being outworked. Democrats are running on issues, Republicans are running on party ID, and the issues are winning the day.

In either case though, it's obvious that re-running Davis is silly. Adam I think would suggest we need a candidate less plastered with the Republican label, and I'd say we need a candidate who can take on the Democrat on substance, not on partisanship.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

Besides keeping taxes low, I'm not sure what message Republicans are running on. The message is definitely weak, or even non-existent.

would probably carry Davis over the top in NOV.

...but Childers did distance himself from the current Democratic front-runner as much as he dared. So while the question of whether it did work has been answered, the question of whether it could have worked might still be open.

Might.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!

There is more stupidity than hydrogen in the universe, and it has a longer shelf life. - Frank Zappa

Please by all means please keep going with that message because obviously it has worked.

You somehow think voters haven't heard the Wright stuff yet. Guess what they have and they either

A) Don't Care
B) Care but not enough to vote for a Republican
C) Are already voting for the Republicans

Either way not good

-----------------------------------------------
Notice to All - I am an independent who has voted for Senator Bayh (Democrat) and Senator Lugar (Republican) along with over 60% of my state. You may take what I say with a grain of salt at your own party'

Bingo!

That flap may matter, but I cannot see that it can get any more meaningful exposure than it already has.

Most people have kinda-sorta heard, but the vast majority are simply not that interested in politics.

Watch what will happen:

Obama will continue to rise in the polls--I'm guessing he'll have close to a 10-point lead before the Dem convention, and a 15 point lead after. (his lead now is about 4 points). Now how will you explain that? Umm, cause many voters only begin to really think about this stuff until the months before the election.

Then the Republicans will have a convention, and lo-and-behold, McCain will become competitive again into the fall?

Why am I so confident?

Well, in late May 2000, Bush was ahead of Gore 54-40 in one poll. http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/05/26/president.2000/poll/

http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/08/11/cnn.poll/index.ht...
Stayed far ahead until the Democratic convention.

Then Gore was ahead, then behind after the debates, then came back to a virtual tie.

In June 1992, Bush was leading Perot and Clinton 32 to 30 to 24.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE2D9123EF930A15755C0A...

A month later, Perot bailed, and Clinton was up 30 points. He only won by 5. (And in fact, Bush had pulled even close the week before, but lost traction once the "independent" prosecutor decided to indict Bush allies the Friday before the election, just by coincidence).

What happens? Well, first people get excited about the new guy--and the press especially if he's a liberal. Then the other party rallies to make a "surprising" comeback.

And yeah, that happened as much in 2000 for Gore, in 1992 for Bush, as it did for Bush in 1988 (even though only the latter time did the insider manage to win).

And recall, in 1988, Dukakis was far ahead of Bush AFTER Gore had used the Willie Horton incident. Its re-use by Bush, when people were actually paying attention, proved much more effective.

Watch. Obama will go sky-high in the polls. Then fall back to earth. And unless he's leading McCain by more than 20 points in August, expect a "surprise" McCain rebound and lead come September.

"People will not look forward to posterity who never look backward to their ancestors." -Edmund Burke

What did they ever do to you?

"History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it"-Winston Churchill

How is Obama going to reduce oil prices? Have you ever heard about personal responsibility as pertains to a mortgage? Why should the gov't do anything to solve the foreclosure "problem" that less than 5% of current mortgages are in? What "popular Democratic bills" are you referring to?
Tim Schieferecke

Thanks for the D point of view.

Some of us don't think that there should be a "foreclosure" bill. And some of us think that the energy crisis should be solved by 1) more drilling, 2) more refineries, and 3) more use of nuclear power.

Maybe Republicans are just unpopular. The War is very unpopular and associated with the Rs. The Rs are corrupt, earmarking big spenders who have never apologized for throwing away tax payer money on their own re-election bids via pork-barreling.

If Ds neutralize the social issues and Rs are unpopular even in R+10 districts on foreign policy and fiscal policy, why do Rs expect to win? Do people think tying a guy to Obama will overcome all of those problems?

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

If Ds nominate pro-life, anti-tax, anti-spending people, then they just gave in to two major factions of our party.

You can't fight that. You can't beat that any more than the Democrats could have beaten Rudy Giuliani.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

I didn't know that. I agree that finding social conservatives has helped the Ds. That doesn't make them unbeatable unless Rs are only appealing to people on social issues. I think that has been part of the problem with the party.

The pork-barreling corruption has killed any appeal on fiscal issues. It's the first hurdle. If you're corrupt with taxpayer money, no one listens to your SS reform, your tax reform, etc. Why would they trust you with the big things if you can't stop yourself from dipping into the slush fund.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

I'll look up Childers now.

OK, he didn't run strongly anti-tax. He ran as pro-balanced budget, and pro-tariff, but with support for "middle class tax reform".

So he's still getting a lot of fiscal Rs with talk of spending discipline, and of course being anti-abortion and anti-gun control keeps those factions of our party from caring.

Just like Republicans can win anywhere if we choose to nominate pro-abort, anti-2nd Amendment, pro-tax, AGW worshippers, so too can the Democrats win by adopting half our platform.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

"Just like Republicans can win anywhere if we choose to nominate pro-abort, anti-2nd Amendment, pro-tax, AGW worshippers"

Where? I count Arnold and that's it and that was b/c of an odd election and he didn't even run on that as his platform.

I haven't seen any non-incumbent Rs win on that platform... in, well, since I started following such things.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

That's the thing. Party-wise, the Democrats are more adept at compromising whatever it takes to win. That's how they held the Congress so long.

That's also how 'bipartisanship' came to be: Democrats were so diverse there were always some who could work with Republicans of any stripe.

Republicans not so much. We don't play the game. We don't rally behind candidates who run that far out of our comfort zone.

It's certainly a partisan failing, but I don't know if I can fault us activists for not getting excited for people who are against what we stand for :-)

But yeah, Schwarzenegger is proof. And remember, he won re-election. He could never win a primary, but that's not my point. I'm not saying that pro-abor, pro-tax, pro-gun control Rs could win primaries anywhere they tried. Oh no no no no. I'm saying that center-left Rs could win the general most anywhere, just as center-right Ds can win the general most anywhere.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

I've been listening to Ken Mehlman say the Republican party is a big tent.

But the Democrats have a much, much larger one, that overhangs ours quite a bit.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion

If the only difference on the issues was Childers' support for withdrawal.

Tariffs and SCHIP probably. But if Davis was talking about Republicans and Democrats, and not how taxes and spending of the kind Davis supports would hurt his constituents, then that's bad on him.

He has to make the case. Did he?

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

I was painting with an overly broad brush.

IMO, conservative media is way too 'nice' and "politically correct" compared to the Dems. They accomadate way too much and in the process make it appear that the Dems aren't insane. Take Ron Paul, the strategy was to ignore him and what he was saying(repeating far left talking points), meanwhile clueless and uninformed voters were listening to something different.

sometimes you have to get down and dirty, take out the trash, etc.

Obama is not the reason Childers won. If anything, he had to win despite Obama.

The clueless GOP leadership, and to a large extent Bush and Cheney, are why Childers won.

In November 2006, the voters sent the GOP a wake-up call: "We don't like the way you're running Congress. We don't care much for the way Bush is running the country either."

Did the congressional GOP heed that message? No. They haven't done one damned thing to prove to the voters that they should be returned to power. They didn't even clean up their corruption act. In 2006, we had to deal with Vitter and Craig. Now we just had Fossella outed, a week before this special election.

I'll ask the same question again: What is the GOP message this year? What is the GOP platform this year?

Obama's doctrinaire liberalism may hurt him nationally. But in that case, the public will elect McCain with a strongly Democratic Congress, like the one Nixon had to deal with.

"Obama's doctrinaire liberalism may hurt him nationally. But in that case, the public will elect McCain with a strongly Democratic Congress, like the one Nixon had to deal with."

That might be the best case scenario if nothing changes between now and November.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

This is probably what will happen. And I think that McCain might want to try and play up the idea of electing him to prevent the Dems from getting full control. The American people tend to like divided government.

The Republican brand in the House is just awful. Trying to get a bunch of worthless motions to recommit is not going to get us back the majority. We need a real conservative leader and he ain't it. There is no message, no messenger and nobody giving us any direction. Earmarks? Give me a break! Let's go back to our roots. Less government. Lower taxes. Strong national defense. John Boenher is incapable of carrying this message. He just doesn't have it in him.

I agree and I rarely see him doing any PR for the House GOP. We need some new passionate leader who give our party a new voice.

What more do you want him to do? Boehner is a solid conservative.

“.....women and minorities hardest hit”

Thats not point here. He is great Conservative yes but what House Republicans need is a LEADER and he has not proven to be a LEADER.

He has not done anything about crafting a GOP House message since disaster of 06 and that was supposed to be his job.

We have 99 problems. I don't think Boehner is one.

"Livin' the dream. I'm going to Disney World." Super Bowl XLII MVP, Elisha Nelson Manning

Is the most conservative member of the house that I can think of. If you look at his platform of small, limited government, it captures what the GOP (used to) stand for, and he doesn't just say "I'm anti-earmark," he actually practices what he says he believes in, which is the main reason that we got defeated in '06.
"A man can be destroyed but not defeated" - Ernest Hemingway

Just like we were in 2000 when we nearly lost LA-06, or in 2002 when we lost TN-04 and LA-05, and nearly lost AL-03, and in 2004 when we lost special elections in SD-AL and KY-06 and then lost LA-03 in the general . . .

Oh wait, that's not right. We we're doomed. It's just that conservative Democrats have always been able to win in the South, except in 1994.

Oh well.

http://www.myelectionanalysis.com

I'd agree with you if that was the only data. I made a similar argument after the OH-02 "close race" that Rs won in 2006.

But this isn't the only data. Every recent head-to-head poll has Obama ahead of McCain by 1-5. Clinton by 2-6. Back when other Rs were polled the margins were closer to 8-12 for Romney/Huck.

The generic ballot is much worse than 2000, 2002 or 2004 and even worse than 2006.

The party ID is worse than 2000, 2002, 2004 and ever worse than 2006.

What will it take for people to accept that maybe there is a problem. Because admitting a problem is the first step. And it seems a lot of people haven't taken that step yet.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

Oh, I agree there's a problem. A very, very deep problem. But I think that in diagnosing the problem, one has to look at the bigger picture. Namely that:

(1) Local factors still matter in special elections, a lot, and that with better candidates in IL-14 and LA-06, they probably would have turned out like OH-05 (or was it -04)
(2) This is what happens when you hold the Presidency for two terms. Bush's losses are actually mild by historical reference.
(3) A large portion of the problem owes to our inept President, who appeared to utterly give up on fighting for his point of view after the social security debacle and
(4) According to Pew, the public is still as conservative as it was in 1987. Unfortunately, the GOP isn't viewed as being traditional conservatives, which I think is the real problem, especially against a blue dog Democrat in the South who neutralizes the social issues.

And also, I'm not sure your analysis was wrong re Hackett et al. Absent Foleygate, I'm not sure we would have been shellacked nearly as badly, and that was a last-minute deal.

http://www.myelectionanalysis.com

I agree with all of that, but it strikes me that the central challenge for the Republican party this fall are the numbers above.

The Democrats now hold 236 seats in the House. The Republicans have not won that many seats since 1946.

OTOH, the Democrats won 258 seats in 1992, and we know what happened two years later.

Nothing is immutable.

"A large portion of the problem owes to our inept President, who appeared to utterly give up on fighting for his point of view after the social security debacle ..."

Exactly. The Bush II Presidency has taught me a valuable lesson. Never again will I support a candidate 1) who is inarticulate, and 2) who is not inexhaustable and unrelenting in his willingness to fight. Bush even gave up fighting for his good name - see the Bush lied, people died meme.

It seems that what the GOP needs is a Republican Bill Clinton (with better morals).

PS: Bush is a bigger problem than Cole, who I think is incompetent, and Boehner, who I think is a good leader. But there isn't much we can do about Bush, while Cole is another matter.

We need to identify what the problem is. I think there are people who would say that the problem is we're not being "conservative enough," others that we're being tone-deaf to believe that running to the right is what will sell.

I don't think anybody here believes that being in love with pork projects and profligate spending is a good platform, but I don't think that you would get much agreement on what exactly the problem is.

That leads to a kind of denial. People seem to want to deny that there's a problem because they have no answer of their own - they don't like what they perceive to be your answer, so they'd rather pretend there isn't a problem at all. For the "true conservative" bunch, they deny the problem because they seem to believe that to admit a problem is to inherently admit that the answer is to be more "moderate" about certain issues. They seem to believe that admitting that there's an electoral issue is somehow to say that conservatism is not viable any more. That's something that should probably be discarded so we can actually work on a set of ideas that can be sold to the public.

We need a positive message. Certainly the message of "we suck less" has a place in a campaign - you want to remind people of how bad things can (and will) be if you elect the other guys, but it can't be the only thing you run on.

"We suck less" is a relative message, a message that maps where the Ds and takes an R position that sucks less.

To me, that is exactly what moderate Republicans want to do.

the reason Republicans are getting the carcasses handed to them is the same reason football teams lose playing a 'prevent' defense...we're more afraid of losing than we are of being bold and decisive.

Of the many examples I could give, the fact that our presidential nominee and numerous prominent GOP senators are embracing AGW and trying to distinguish 'us' from the socialists by concocting 'less onerous' methods of dealing with it, rather than crying from the rooftops about the devestation it will cause our economy is but one example.

If the argument is about who will give you more 'security' and more 'money', we lose everytime to the thieves. If it's about the onerous arm of the government stifling your life vs freedom....we win everytime.

"Moderates" think we can win the game on their turf. History proves we can't.

"All that need be done for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

Unfair. Unbalanced. Unmedicated. -- IMAO

For the "true conservative" bunch, they deny the problem because they seem to believe that to admit a problem is to inherently admit that the answer is to be more "moderate" about certain issues. They seem to believe that admitting that there's an electoral issue is somehow to say that conservatism is not viable any more.

There is a vast difference between proposing conservative solutions to important modern issues, vs. a stance that denies that those are even important issues.

Republicans just don't have the same priorities on issues that the rest of the public does anymore. Back in 1980, if you polled Republicans, Democrats and Independents, you would have at least found agreement on what the most important issues were, even though they disagreed on the solutions. Everybody realized we needed to control stagflation and high interest rates, and so on. So that when Reagan came along with his program to deal with stagflation and high interest rates, voters gave it a hearing.

Today, Republicans just don't even seem to care about the same issues as the rest of the public. Polls show that a major issue for most voters is health care; but not for self-described Republican voters. They just don't even care to discuss it, or else they treat it as some low-priority afterthought. Polls show that another major issue for most voters is the collapse of housing prices; but Michelle Malkin is giving away bumper stickers that say "SUCK IT UP!"

It would be terrific for the GOP to propose conservative solutions to issues. But they had better be the same issues that the rest of the electorate thinks are important.

If I believed that there were any major issues that could only be solved through socialism, I wouldn't be a conservative. But unlike those die-hard doctrinaire conservatives, I don't go around in denial pretending that health care, collapsing housing prices, the environment, global warming, and the disaster in Iraq are not even legitimate issues. They definitely are.

And our challenge, as conservatives, is to prove we can solve them better than the liberals can. Because we can't bamboozle the public into forgetting about them.

What will it take for people to accept that maybe there is a problem. Because admitting a problem is the first step. And it seems a lot of people haven't taken that step yet.

This may be the last chance the congressional GOP has to wake up and smell the coffee.

If they don't take drastic action now as Gingrich has been demanding, then you can write off the GOP in Congress. It will be a blowout at least as bad as 1974, and possibly as bad as 1964.

Let's see if they take action now. If not, then they're not worth saving anyway.

If you have a Republican congressman, CONTACT HIM. Tell him he had better get on the ball and start making changes.


“.....women and minorities hardest hit”

...so let me get my last thought on this out. We lost this race. We actually lost it a couple of weeks ago, but got a do-over because of a quirk in the rules; we tried shifting some stuff around, which didn't work.

Well, Hell. I guess that we'll just have to try something else then and see if that works better, six months from now.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!

disaffection with the R brand is not equivalent to disffaction with the R policies. We have seen 2 elections in La and now Ms go to very conservative Ds who were pro-gun rights, anti abortion and at least in the MS case, anti tax.

Had the Dems had the brains to nominate a reasonably ordinary, conservative to moderate Dem (normally that means a southern white guy) for President, they would win.

Luckily for us, they did not have the brains to do that. They are nominating the ultra left wing Obama or the only slightly less left-wing Clinton. Had they gone with Edwards or Bayh or any normal, moderate-to liberal Dem, they would already have won.

I think McCain will bring a few of these seats back to us in November.

This is worse news for the Republicans than it is for the conservatives. It's not good news - we know already that Childers will not buck his masters - but if the Democrats can put a conservative in that seat, so can we.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!

It will be different in Nov, when Childers actually has to run next to Obama, and the national Democrats and their platform will be on full display. It will be hard if he is contradicting 80% of Obama's platform, with whom he is running with.

“.....women and minorities hardest hit”

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

I guess. But I'm still bummed.

"Livin' the dream. I'm going to Disney World." Super Bowl XLII MVP, Elisha Nelson Manning

Seems like we heard a lot of that in 2006. All these new D's ran as being conservative in everything but wanted us out of Iraq. Then as soon as they got in, they pretty much toed the party line.

Say one thing back home, and toe the party line in Washington. I thought Thune had killed this, but I guess not.

Is that why their agenda keeps stalling?

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

Goodnight folks...

“.....women and minorities hardest hit”

President Bush recorded an automated message sent to thousands of districtwide voters. Cheney appeared with Davis on Monday night. Popular Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour and Wicker campaigned alongside Davis.

Desperate for a win, aides at the NRCC have fired off automated calls from first lady Laura Bush, Arizona Sen. John McCain and Barbour to Mississippi voters to encourage them to turn out.

“In these closing hours, we need to go that extra mile to turn out the vote … and to remind everybody in the 1st District of what’s at stake when they go into the voting booth tomorrow,” Cheney said in his election-eve appearance. “What we need in Washington is a strong conservative congressman from Mississippi — not another Democrat going to bat for Nancy Pelosi

and this all failed

They probably shouldn't have used President Bush or VP Cheney. They should have just limited themselves to Laura and Gov. Barbor.

 
Redstate Network Login:
(lost password?)


©2008 Eagle Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved. Legal, Copyright, and Terms of Service