Comments on: Gingrich Talking Tough to Republicans

By: BadIdeaGuy

BadIdeaGuy — Sat, 10 May 2008 15:21:10 +0000

It seems like Newt shouldn’t be lecturing the GOP on restoring the “brand” when he’s the one pimping single-payer healthcare and global warming.

By: deadcenter

deadcenter — Sat, 10 May 2008 10:24:54 +0000

Personally, I think it’s higher than 30%. Haven’t seen a poll since the surge started showing positive results, but the folks I know and have met that have spent one or more tours in the sandbox, all say the same thing, we’re having a positive effect on the lives the Iraqis. As long as their morale is high and they remain positive about the mission, I think we’re okay.

Remember, estimates about popular support for the Revolution were around 33%.

By: Sebastian

Sebastian — Fri, 09 May 2008 23:59:05 +0000

I don’t think Iraq can be discounted. 70% of the population, at this point, is opposed to the war. Iraq isn’t everything, but we can’t pretend its not everything.

And I should note that I support what we’re doing there, and it’s highly disappointing to me that only 30% of my fellow Americans seem to agree with me.

By: deadcenter

deadcenter — Fri, 09 May 2008 22:30:03 +0000

“Newt wants to restore the GOP brand, but I think that’s going to be difficult as long as Iraq is an issue. ”

My opinion, the dissatisfaction with the GOP is more due to the republicans spending money faster than the democrats could have possibly imagined, and accelerating the erosition of our civil liberties at a pace unfathomable prior to 9/11. Oh, and there’s the fact that in the mind of GOPs leadership McCain is the best candidate given his examples of bipartisan leadership that result in McCain-Feingold and the thankfully aborted but not forgotten McCain-Kennedy bills. But, maybe that’s just me.

By: Alcibiades McZombie

Alcibiades McZombie — Fri, 09 May 2008 20:59:42 +0000

Bull in a china shop? Busted… sort of.

By: Jim W

Jim W — Fri, 09 May 2008 18:29:18 +0000

Give it some time. Obama doesn’t have much to gain amongst black voters, but a lot to lose amongst white voters. As he further solidifies his identity as the black liberal candidate, McCain will gain ground.

Personally I’d feel much better about McCain if the republican party wasn’t such a trainwreck. It is increasingly looking like the dems are going to be making big strides in congress again this year. The last time we had an overwhelming Democrat control of the legislature and executive, we got the Great Society, a series of failed entitlement programs we haven’t even begun to pay for yet.

By: Bitter

Bitter — Fri, 09 May 2008 18:21:47 +0000

Don’t worry, Boehner will save us! He’s going to form a committee to advise the committee that’s supposed look at how the GOP can win.

By: Noops

Noops — Fri, 09 May 2008 17:24:35 +0000

Heh. Touche! Good points.

By: Sebastian

Sebastian — Fri, 09 May 2008 16:57:03 +0000

I think because Obama has shown weakness in states where Democrats have to win, and he’s a weaker overall candidate. Without Ohio and Pennsylvania, Obama can’t win, and McCain has never rubbed Pennsylvanians the wrong way like George B. Bush did. We’re familiar with stubborn, arrogant, RINO Republicans, since one of them is our senator.

By: Noops

Noops — Fri, 09 May 2008 16:50:39 +0000

So why do you think Obama is the easier candidate to beat? Most polls have Obama as better head-to-head against McCain. More specifically, most polls have him sitting much better with key swing votes, as he seems to be somewhat less divisive than Hillary to Democrats and various independents.

As for GOP, I agree. It’s tough. Right now the head of the Party has the highest disapproval ratings since disapproval ratings started. He’s even up to 60% disapproval among Republicans in some polls! That’s pretty unheard of. So McCain has to campaign for himself and distance himself from the President, while trying to keep the party aligned. It’s not just a loss of a positive thing. Bush has damaged the Republican brand, and because of it Democratic registration is up, swing groups are going Democrat, and Republican registration is down. A very tough place to be.

As for Heller, it still will hopefully set the bar a little higher for gun control. And maybe in Massachusetts and New York the Democrats are still gun grabbers, but out here in places like Oregon, even the hippies have guns. I’m joking a little, but my point is that a lot of the Democratic party in rural America doesn’t want to party to focus on guns. Because of that, I’m not sure a sweep in Congress DOES get a broad anti-gun coalition because of Dems like Jim Webb.

I think it’s even evidenced by the lack of focus on the issue. I actually have a friend who has been a political strategist for a few presidential campaigns, and he believes that most Dem pols in states other that Illinois, Mass, NY (etc), are afraid of getting punished on the issue. And so they should be I think.

I don’t mean to sound defeatist, but I think it’s relatively foregone that Dems will have the White House, the House, and the Senate. Unless something really big shows up on the radar.