Republican party in chaos

evince

evince

Truthmatters
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008...4076956.shtml?source=RSSattr=Politics_4076956


GOP Leaders Warn Of Election Disaster

Shellshocked House Republicans got warnings from leaders past and present Tuesday: Your party’s message isn’t good enough to prevent disaster in November, and neither is the NRCC’s money.

The double shot of bad news had one veteran Republican House member worrying aloud that the party’s electoral woes - brought into sharp focus by Woody Jenkins’ loss to Don Cazayoux in Louisiana on Saturday - have the House Republican Conference splitting apart in “everybody for himself” mode.

“There is an attitude that, ‘I better watch out for myself, because nobody else is going to do it,’” the member said. “There are all these different factions out there, everyone is sniping at each other, and we have no real plan. We have a lot of people fighting to be the captain of the lifeboat instead of everybody pulling together.”
 
McCain was right.

Lately, we have increased the size of government in order to stay in office. And soon, soon, if we don't remember what we were elected to do, we will lose both our principles and our office, and we will leave as part of our legacy a mountain of debt and bankrupt entitlement programs that our children's grandchildren will be suffering from long after we have departed this earth. - John McCain
Click to expand...
 
Well Drudge has on his front page that 27% of republicans voted against McCain in N Carolina, and 20 something percent also voted against him in Indiana. These were not the republican cross-overs to Hillary, these are republicans who went out and voted for Huckabee, Paul, etc, and against John McCain.

A lot of very interesting statistics are getting lost in the whirlwind and excitement of the dem race.
 
There was no one they could run that would win.

If they are tied to the R party they lose. If they are a rebel like Paul to the party they lose.

They need to take a huge swath of the party members and start a third party if they want to win any time soon.
 
Haha. You reap what you sow.

Maybe in the future, they won't nominate an inarticulate flunkie and enthusiastically support him when he tells them we're going to war w/ a country that didn't attack us.

As it is, I'm loving it. They keep talking about Wright haunting Obama in the general, and electability & all of their other code-words for racism in America, but they're going to get a good arse-whooping in November. Dems will expand their majority in the Senate at the least, and take the White House easily.

Haha.
 
Desh said:
There was no one they could run that would win.

If they are tied to the R party they lose. If they are a rebel like Paul to the party they lose.

They need to take a huge swath of the party members and start a third party if they want to win any time soon.
Click to expand...
They won't need to do that. They will just need to restore a dedication to conservatism instead of a reliance on idiots that vote to keep gays from marrying while spending on populist idiocy.
 
I dont know Damo they republicans base has just snored or bailed instead of taking their party to task for its serving of the corporations instead fo them.

I dont know if its image is repairable. There is a shitload of dead weight the party will have to tell to go to hell and find someone else to pander to you.
 
Desh said:
I dont know Damo they republicans base has just snored or bailed instead of taking their party to task for its serving of the corporations instead fo them.

I dont know if its image is repairable. There is a shitload of dead weight the party will have to tell to go to hell and find someone else to pander to you.
Click to expand...
The only way to make them pay is for them to lose elections. It is ignoring what is happening right now to say that they are not paying for moving away from what they were elected to do.
 
The US has a history of partys dying. This may be the deathwatch of the republican party. Only time will tell .
 
Desh said:
The US has a history of partys dying. This may be the deathwatch of the republican party. Only time will tell .
Click to expand...

The Republicans have held the Presidency for 20 of the last 28 years. Up until two years ago they controlled Congress for 12 straight years (except for the time Jeffords switched party's and Daschle ran the Senate). So while they are having real issues now they are not in a "deathwatch".
 
well they had to cheat big time the last few elections and pretty soon those avenues will be closed. They are a dying party unless they massively overhaul and kick out the corporate control and start doing some of what they say they are going to do instead of taking office and doing everything to help only the corporations make more money at the peoples expense.
 
cawacko said:
The Republicans have held the Presidency for 20 of the last 28 years. Up until two years ago they controlled Congress for 12 straight years (except for the time Jeffords switched party's and Daschle ran the Senate). So while they are having real issues now they are not in a "deathwatch".
Click to expand...

Yep and the fact that they have been power and things are a mess is why they are going down.
But then I guess only dems have personal responsibility to pay for what they helped create ?
 
cawacko said:
The Republicans have held the Presidency for 20 of the last 28 years. Up until two years ago they controlled Congress for 12 straight years (except for the time Jeffords switched party's and Daschle ran the Senate). So while they are having real issues now they are not in a "deathwatch".
Click to expand...
You can't fault them for hoping. The reality is, the base is making the politicians pay for paying too much attention to a minority of the party to the detriment of what the majority stands for. So much so that often people think that "conservative" is the same thing as "religious radical".
 
Damocles said:
You can't fault them for hoping. The reality is, the base is making the politicians pay for paying too much attention to a minority of the party to the detriment of what the majority stands for. So much so that often people think that "conservative" is the same thing as "religious radical".
Click to expand...

Umm, no, that's not it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top