Sep 21 2006

Clear Republican Momentum Appearing

Published by at 9:19 am under 2006 Elections,All General Discussions

The reminder of our perilous threat in the news of the foiled UK Airline Terror Plot, followed by the President’s work on the stump to argue his positions on Iraq and the War on terror, combined with much better economic news, has created measurable momentum for the Republicans coming into the home stretch for the November elections. Take a look at this LA Times assessment which is very optimistically wriiten for Republicans (which nominally would be expected to be biased so far left one would swear it was Carville-Begala ghost written) :

Democrats hold a lead in the poll, 49% to 39%, when registered voters are asked which party they intend to support for Congress this year. But that advantage may rest on softening ground: On virtually every comparison between the parties measured in the survey, Republicans have improved their position since early summer.

In particular, Republicans have nearly doubled their advantage when voters are asked which party they trust most to protect the nation against terrorism — the thrust of Bush’s public relations blitz in recent weeks.

To give credit were credit is due, much of this is has to do with the politically suicidal strategies from the left to attack our anti-terrorists efforts, to run from Iraq as we progress with our new ally in stabilizing them and in their continued claims Bush is more dangerous than any terrorist (talk about losing focus!). Bush would not look so darn good if the left did not look so darn crazy.

But this is not the only poll to see shifts over the last few weeks. And this is not the only measurement of the shifting tides. The other measurement is money, the life blood of campaings, and here the Dems are really hurting:

The Republican National Committee has amassed a significant fund-raising advantage, according to campaign finance records filed Wednesday, feeding Democrats’ fears about remaining competitive in the intense final weeks before the midterm elections.

The new fund-raising reports show that at the beginning of September, Republicans had $39 million in the bank, compared with $11 million for Democrats.

That is nearly a four to one advantage. The parties need grass roots support, not nutroots. The democrats have isolated themselves be limiting their appeal to their radical base, a base so radical it has a negative effect on the broader electorate. It is clear that the left made huge mistakes when they called stalwart defenders of this country, like Bush and Leiberman, turncoats and near terrorists. It is not just the ludicrousness in calling people clearly concerned about America and the threats upon her. But worse is how the pure childishness of these kinds of comments illustrate why the Democrats are not ready to lead this country. Silly rants are easy, and we all know that. Serious pragmatism in the face of tough challenges is hard. And those promoting serious pragmatism, left or right, will have the votes of the American people.

11 responses so far

11 Responses to “Clear Republican Momentum Appearing”

  1. luc says:

    AJ it seems that the MSM is starting a NEW tactic: Completely ignore an event.

    “As world leaders convened for the second day of the United Nations General Assembly, tens of thousands of supporters of Israel gathered across the street from United Nations headquarters to protest President Ahmadinejad of Iran and to call for the unconditional release of the Israeli soldiers kidnapped on July 12.” –The NY Sun, September 21, 2006.

    No MSM source reports the event mentioned in the NY Sun. I think this will probably be the final nail in their coffin as the tactic goes way beyond the old-style communist propaganda of distorting the news. Even the commies did not sink this low!

  2. Ken says:

    Nothing “crazier”, AJ, than calling the deteriorating conditions
    in Iraq “progress.”

  3. For Enforcement says:

    Ken, same song, second verse

  4. Ken says:

    http://www.juancole.com/2006/09/over-6000-killed-in-july-august-75.html

    you betcha, FE, and the hubris of uncaring shown by most on this site for the wanton slaughter in Iraq let loose by the neocons is
    evidence that the US has no right to intervene again in the Middle East.
    Iraqi Sunnis of course overwhelmingly prefer Saddam’s stability when polled. But the Shias say also, we should have left the
    very week he was overthrown and what has happened since
    is unforgivable. They will not be our allies when the dust is cleared,
    much to Iran’s benefit.

  5. The Macker says:

    Ken,
    •Instead of Juan Cole’s sick anti American rants and apologia for Hugo Chavez, Khatami and Islam, broaden your sources.

    •For another perspective on civilian casualties see:
    http://www.logictimes.com/antiwar.htm – which reports:
    “Saddam Hussein became president of Iraq on July 16, 1979 and was deposed in April of 2003. Over that twenty-four year period, Saddam Hussein killed between 600,000 and 1,000,000 Iraqi civilians, was responsible for the deaths of between 250,000 and 550,000 Iraqi military personnel and over 700,000 Iranians and Kuwaitis”
    So, you might think in terms of “lives saved.”

    •And also on a positive note, check out:
    http://www.mnf-iraq.com/index.php? option=com_content&task=view&id=5761&Itemid=109 -for the unreported good that is happening,

  6. MerlinOS2 says:

    Ken

    I have noticed a trend of your posts getting shorter and snarky.

    Have you reverted to typing with one hand?

  7. MerlinOS2 says:

    Ken

    I am not trying to belittle you, but even though I don’t know any of the other regular posters here personally, I have looked at a lot of their other posts throughout the blogsphere and sites some of them have and they are impressive. They present a consistent and compelling world view. In fact some are quite spectacular.

    You however , in my own opinion don’t come close to that test.

    Read back to a few days and weeks ago and you will see how someone much more accomplished than you gave up.

    This was not a win. We don’t play that here.

    We wish for constructive debate to draw the most informed conclusions. We accept all valid input , no matter what the source. We are open to being convinced. If you can do that fine. It will be welcomed.

    But please , anything less will be recognized for what it is, and even you should accept that.

    Please consider this.

  8. Ken says:

    I am tired of the neocons on this and other sites who excuse Bush’s illegal and botched Iraqi invasion resulting in bloodshed condemned by Shia and Sunni alike, regardless of their opinions about Sadddam.

    Your hubris and arrogance discards the vast majority of Iraqis opinions, ignores the fact that Hussein was markedly weakened , and implicitly exonerates any excesses by Hussein from 1979-1992 when he was our “ally.”

    The US helped him against Iran,;any losses of Iraqi or Iranian blood there are in part culpably passed to US intervention.

    Further,this site ignores the latest figures indicating a stronger than ever insurgency which effects thereof extrapolated hypothetically
    and exponentially for a length similar to Hussein’s rule would result in gaurgantuan casualties dwarfing his.

    Merlin, if among your “informed conclusions” are that America can still acheive a political victory in Iraq, they are uninfomed. And if
    you rely on some of the other “spectacular” bloggers to garner
    that opinion, check back to what they were posting in 2002
    about the war’s prospects and you will find your estimation
    of their wisdom doubtlessly should be modified

  9. Barbara says:

    You know, you can explain facts to a liberal until you are blue in the face and refute all his beliefs as the garbage they are but you get nowhere. Talk about a closed mind. They are not listening to you. They do not believe this stuff, but think if you give up trying to talk to them that they have won somehow. You can shoot down all their theories, but on their next post they are saying the same thing they did before you opened your mouth. It is all truly disgusting and I wonder why they come here. It is certainly not for lucid discourse.

  10. Ken says:

    http://counterpunch.org/patrick09222006.html

    How about this fact, Barabara, (asked this conservative?)

    The above link quotes a neutral observor of high office asserting Iraq’s government is employing more and worse torture now, than Saddam’s Baathist regieme did. All you site frequenters who
    exonerate Bush’s botched occupation by comparing it to Saddam’s
    cruelty are checkmated once again.