Vox Blogoli Part Two: The Midterms and The GOP
Part Two of Hugh Hewitt's invitation concerns the GOP in the upcoming midterms. To be precise, I'll allow Hugh to explain it in his own words:
I am also bringing back the Vox Blogoli to welcome the new features. Synchronized blogging this weekend on two subjects: Which is the most important race for the GOP to win this cycle (and please include a link to that campaign's website), and for those who don't like campaign blogging or just need more than one subject, what are your thoughts on Thomas Edsall's extraordinary string of observations about just how biased the MSM is?
Marcie did an outstanding job addressing Thomas Edsall this evening. Now, it's my turn.
I honestly don't think that the midterms can be boiled down to ONE race for the GOP. If it came down to that, wouldn't we just dump all the eggs in one basket? Maybe, but that doesn't change the fact that a thorough and sound defeat is necessary this time around, and it can be accomplished through a couple of significant races. First up is Bob Corker in Tennessee. Senator Frist is retiring, and I have heard a lot of Democrats proclaim that if they can take Frist's seat from the GOP, it's a turning point. Number one, they'll be able to show that Tennessee isn't happy with the GOP. Number two, they claim that this shows there are inroads being made to the south; a region of the nation where Democrats, right now, are weak. Harold Ford, Jr. is proving to be a tough opponent for Corker, and recent polls have both men within spitting distance of each other, and well within the margin of error. This race will probably come down to the wire, and a loss for Ford means he's gone from the House, as well. It's a two-fold move, and could strengthen the GOP in both ways. I think that Tennessee will lean towards Bob Corker. The 2004 election results showing a 300,000+ vote difference is enough to ensure this seat stays in GOP hands, but the fight still remains.
Mike DeWine is up next, and there is a reason I bring him up. We're not fond of the man. We don't like how he plays politics. He was a part of the atrocious Gang of 14 deal, and he joined Arlen Specter in sticking his nose into the NSA Terrorist Surveillance Program. Now, let's go to some different mental ideas here. Despite our differences, we do support the man. Why? Because 7 out of 10 times, DeWine gets it right. The Republicans are a party, and with that comes the fact that we may not always agree with these people. But this election isn't about individuals. And people have to start getting that through their heads. This year, it's about the party. We are in a war, and that is all that counts. Mike DeWine knows what it means to keep this nation protected. OK, so he sticks his nose in an issue or two we'd prefer he not, but it's his own view of this war that matters most. Nothing else matters except winning the war. If that isn't accomplished, then all other issues are a moot point. Sherrod Brown is his opponent, and like Harold Ford, Jr. he risks losing his seat in the House in this bid for DeWine's seat. Unlike Tennessee, Ohio's margin of victory for the president was slimmer; by about 118,000 votes. However, DeWine is a two term senator that has served the state well. Again, I predict a win for Mike DeWine. Just like the Tennessee race though, it's tight. The benefit that DeWine has is that he always finishes strong.
Next up is Rick Santorum, incumbant senator from Pennsylvania going up against Bob Casey. The good news is, in this race, is that Santorum has closed the gap. He is back by about ten points, and fighting hard. But this past week, Bob Casey openly refused to debate him, twice. Casey knows that if he does challenge him directly he is going to look stupid. The talking points of the Left isn't going to help him, and they're more likely to serve as his noose. President Bush lost Pennsylvania by just under 200,000 votes, and it's obvious that some in Pennsylvania might be thinking about giving up hope. They can't Santorum's in the leadership of the party in the Senate, and losing two leaders in the same year could be devestating to the party. And he would be a key proponent of the president's should social security reform come up again in the Senate. Amongst those I've discussed thus far, this is the one that has me worried. Like Ohio, the Democrats are throwing a lot of money and influence into the Pennsylvania race. They want his seat, and they're pulling out all the stops to get it. He has been a longtime spokesman for the party, and when it comes to the war, he gets it. He was the one who revealed the declassified National Archives memos showing we had found WMDs in Iraq when everyone else, including the preisdent, keeps saying that we didn't. He stood behind his vote then and now, and is not ashamed to have utilized that vote to defend this nation.
What else can I say about the next candidate in my review except that Michael Steele has the Dems scred sh**less in Maryland. I remember when this man addressed the RNC in 2004. Eloquent, factual, and dead-spot-on in his address of why President George W. Bush needed to be reelected. He was ruthlessly attacked by Democrat operatives. His image was phottoshopped on websites as "Sambo," and Democrat staffers from former candidates referred to the man as an "oreo." And if that were not enough, two staffers from Senator Schumer's office plead guilty to hacking Mr. Steele's credit reports in a blatant effort to dig up dirt. The digging doesn't bother me. Hacking his credit report does. This should show everyone that a black man like Michael steele, who is a Republican definitely has the Democrats worried. He has successfully served as Maryland's lieutenant governor since 2002; the first Republican elected since the position was created in 1970. He has the heavy backing of the black community who have grown to trust the man. He is an outspoken porponent of border enforcement, and a staunch supporter of the war on terror. The seat he would be taking comes from retiring Democrat senator, Paul Sarbanes, which makes this a very important race. The seat would be a pick-up for the GOP, and a key one at that. And if Michael Steele can overcome the odds (President Bush lost Maryland by almost 300,000 votes), it would be another nail in the current Democrat Party's coffin.
Last but certainly not least, or even a Republican, comes Joe Lieberman. Now I know a lot of fellow GOPers are scrathing their heads over this one. (I'm sure Hugh is, too.) Bear with me for a second. The Democrats pulled out every nasty, dirty little trick in their bag to defeat him in the primaries. And Lamont did a good job of that, with plenty of backing by the nutroots that can't seem to lay off insulting him (nice "blackface" in the Clinton photo) or his religion (WTG Jane Hamsher and those anti-Semitic comments). Because they did this, and alienated a fairly decent amount of the base in connecticut, their plan may have backfired. The momentum that Lamont was riding after the primary fight was over soon died. As of right now, Lieberman holds a virtually commanding lead over Lamont, and if Lamont loses, it's going to be disastrous for today's Democrats. The nutroots--the MoveOn.org kids, the Kos Kiddies, the Michael Moore-ons, and the Howling Mad Howie Deaniacs--think they have control of the party. And while I'll grant them a bit of self-aggrandizement (the mom-and-pop Democrats would prefer to not court these people but rather let them grow up) in organizing, they still fail to note the most glaringly obvious fact about Connecticut. Joe Lieberman's been their senator for 18 years, and him going independent--the predominant party in Connecticut--just reinforces their belief that he's right for them. That and the other obvious fact. No one really pays attention to elections until after Labor Day. The Connecticut primary was held on 8 August. Labor came on 4 September. Less than a month went by, and the first real polls rolled out, including a 12 September USA Today poll showing Lieberman 13 points ahead of Lamont. The plan for the Democrats, if it backfires, and Lieberman is returned to the Senate, will severely damage the nutroots. It'll also make them come completely unglued just in time for 2008.
Above all we must remember a couple of things about the GOP when it comes to this years elections. This is a midterm right before the exit of President Bush. Right now, with things going on in the Middle East the way they are, the issues of the war and national security are weighing on everyone's mind. With the recent news out of Pakistan that a deal has been reached granting Taliban and al Qaeda forces an area of "sanctuary" doesn't help matters, and Mahmoud "IWannaJihad" Ahmadinejad isn't going away. The Democrats have been weak in this area for some time now; going back to the heady days of Reagan in a refusal to confront Islamofascism when it appeared then. The war is everything this year, and the Democrats are campaigning on a withdrawal from Iraq, and possibly from Afghanistan, as well. If they regain power in Congress, expect them to try and pull out of both theaters; capitualtion, retreat, and defeat as it was in Mogadishu.
The other thing that we need to remember is that the party must stay focused and united. I said what I said about Mike DeWine for a reason. He has different views about different things than we do. But this isn't about single issue this, or single issue that. this is about staying on target. We WIN the war. I have said it numerous times that if we lose the war, the least of our worries will be confirming judges and cutting taxes. We will be in a fight for our survival, not that we aren't now. But things, if we run, will get more serious than before. That is why the party must stay together on this one issue, and the GOP must retain control of both houses. I'm not worried about the House. I'm predicting no less than a loss--if it happens--of about 5-7 seats. But I'm not predicting a loss. At best, I'm calling bothy the House and Senate races a push. The Democrats won't retake either.
Does the GOP have something to worry about this year? Sure. There are quite a few turned-off voters with the recent escapades by their own party. I cited with Mike DeWine the Gang of 14 deal, and the Senate's nose in the president's NSA program. But there is also John McCain's recent grandstanding over detainee treatment (which changed nothing; TY, Johnny. We do appreciate you wasting time and money); The dragging out of time for Samuel Alito's hearings, which only encouraged the attacks to come; Being seemingly unable to get the Patriot Act renewed on time; And hemming and hawing over the border issues. Republicans have a lot to be frustrated about.
Now, imagine if the Democrats were in power. Anyone in the GOP repulsed by that thought? Good. You should be because things will only get worse with them in charge. At least with the GOP we have a chance. They may take longer, and a couple may grab their soapboxes and make political hay, but 9 times out of 10, we're there when it counts most. This is election is about party loyalty, but not in the way the Democrats believe it to be. We're not "tossing" anyone under the bus. Even Lincoln Chafee is getting help from the local RNC chapter in Rhode Island, and from the national office, as well. No, party loyalty should be coming from the base. Stand with your party because now it matters most. We are five short years into this war; a war the president specifically said would take a long time. How long? Depends on how seriously we start addressing our enemy.
This election is about the future. The immediate one, and whether or not we show the world we still have the fortitude to handle this war, and finish the job we started. And on 7 November, we should resoundingly vote for victory because a vote for a Democrat is a vote for vulnerability. It is a vote for negotiations, capitualtion, retreat, and defeat. They don't have what it takes to stare this enemy down, and beat them. The Republicans do. And don't just support Michael Steele, Rick Santorum, Bob Corker, and Mike DeWine. Mark Kennedy in the house needs to be supported. Conrad Burns in Montana needs help. John Kyl might be knocking the snot out of Jim Pederson in the polls, but even he needs his help in Arizona. We supported him on the ground. More Arizonans can, too.
Support the GOP up for reelection, and back those that are first-timers. This year, we need all the help and support we can get. These candidates want to go to Washington to help the nation. They aren't going because they want power, like the Democrats. They know there's a job to do, and "retaking" power isn't one of them.
Publius II
Part Two of Hugh Hewitt's invitation concerns the GOP in the upcoming midterms. To be precise, I'll allow Hugh to explain it in his own words:
I am also bringing back the Vox Blogoli to welcome the new features. Synchronized blogging this weekend on two subjects: Which is the most important race for the GOP to win this cycle (and please include a link to that campaign's website), and for those who don't like campaign blogging or just need more than one subject, what are your thoughts on Thomas Edsall's extraordinary string of observations about just how biased the MSM is?
Marcie did an outstanding job addressing Thomas Edsall this evening. Now, it's my turn.
I honestly don't think that the midterms can be boiled down to ONE race for the GOP. If it came down to that, wouldn't we just dump all the eggs in one basket? Maybe, but that doesn't change the fact that a thorough and sound defeat is necessary this time around, and it can be accomplished through a couple of significant races. First up is Bob Corker in Tennessee. Senator Frist is retiring, and I have heard a lot of Democrats proclaim that if they can take Frist's seat from the GOP, it's a turning point. Number one, they'll be able to show that Tennessee isn't happy with the GOP. Number two, they claim that this shows there are inroads being made to the south; a region of the nation where Democrats, right now, are weak. Harold Ford, Jr. is proving to be a tough opponent for Corker, and recent polls have both men within spitting distance of each other, and well within the margin of error. This race will probably come down to the wire, and a loss for Ford means he's gone from the House, as well. It's a two-fold move, and could strengthen the GOP in both ways. I think that Tennessee will lean towards Bob Corker. The 2004 election results showing a 300,000+ vote difference is enough to ensure this seat stays in GOP hands, but the fight still remains.
Mike DeWine is up next, and there is a reason I bring him up. We're not fond of the man. We don't like how he plays politics. He was a part of the atrocious Gang of 14 deal, and he joined Arlen Specter in sticking his nose into the NSA Terrorist Surveillance Program. Now, let's go to some different mental ideas here. Despite our differences, we do support the man. Why? Because 7 out of 10 times, DeWine gets it right. The Republicans are a party, and with that comes the fact that we may not always agree with these people. But this election isn't about individuals. And people have to start getting that through their heads. This year, it's about the party. We are in a war, and that is all that counts. Mike DeWine knows what it means to keep this nation protected. OK, so he sticks his nose in an issue or two we'd prefer he not, but it's his own view of this war that matters most. Nothing else matters except winning the war. If that isn't accomplished, then all other issues are a moot point. Sherrod Brown is his opponent, and like Harold Ford, Jr. he risks losing his seat in the House in this bid for DeWine's seat. Unlike Tennessee, Ohio's margin of victory for the president was slimmer; by about 118,000 votes. However, DeWine is a two term senator that has served the state well. Again, I predict a win for Mike DeWine. Just like the Tennessee race though, it's tight. The benefit that DeWine has is that he always finishes strong.
Next up is Rick Santorum, incumbant senator from Pennsylvania going up against Bob Casey. The good news is, in this race, is that Santorum has closed the gap. He is back by about ten points, and fighting hard. But this past week, Bob Casey openly refused to debate him, twice. Casey knows that if he does challenge him directly he is going to look stupid. The talking points of the Left isn't going to help him, and they're more likely to serve as his noose. President Bush lost Pennsylvania by just under 200,000 votes, and it's obvious that some in Pennsylvania might be thinking about giving up hope. They can't Santorum's in the leadership of the party in the Senate, and losing two leaders in the same year could be devestating to the party. And he would be a key proponent of the president's should social security reform come up again in the Senate. Amongst those I've discussed thus far, this is the one that has me worried. Like Ohio, the Democrats are throwing a lot of money and influence into the Pennsylvania race. They want his seat, and they're pulling out all the stops to get it. He has been a longtime spokesman for the party, and when it comes to the war, he gets it. He was the one who revealed the declassified National Archives memos showing we had found WMDs in Iraq when everyone else, including the preisdent, keeps saying that we didn't. He stood behind his vote then and now, and is not ashamed to have utilized that vote to defend this nation.
What else can I say about the next candidate in my review except that Michael Steele has the Dems scred sh**less in Maryland. I remember when this man addressed the RNC in 2004. Eloquent, factual, and dead-spot-on in his address of why President George W. Bush needed to be reelected. He was ruthlessly attacked by Democrat operatives. His image was phottoshopped on websites as "Sambo," and Democrat staffers from former candidates referred to the man as an "oreo." And if that were not enough, two staffers from Senator Schumer's office plead guilty to hacking Mr. Steele's credit reports in a blatant effort to dig up dirt. The digging doesn't bother me. Hacking his credit report does. This should show everyone that a black man like Michael steele, who is a Republican definitely has the Democrats worried. He has successfully served as Maryland's lieutenant governor since 2002; the first Republican elected since the position was created in 1970. He has the heavy backing of the black community who have grown to trust the man. He is an outspoken porponent of border enforcement, and a staunch supporter of the war on terror. The seat he would be taking comes from retiring Democrat senator, Paul Sarbanes, which makes this a very important race. The seat would be a pick-up for the GOP, and a key one at that. And if Michael Steele can overcome the odds (President Bush lost Maryland by almost 300,000 votes), it would be another nail in the current Democrat Party's coffin.
Last but certainly not least, or even a Republican, comes Joe Lieberman. Now I know a lot of fellow GOPers are scrathing their heads over this one. (I'm sure Hugh is, too.) Bear with me for a second. The Democrats pulled out every nasty, dirty little trick in their bag to defeat him in the primaries. And Lamont did a good job of that, with plenty of backing by the nutroots that can't seem to lay off insulting him (nice "blackface" in the Clinton photo) or his religion (WTG Jane Hamsher and those anti-Semitic comments). Because they did this, and alienated a fairly decent amount of the base in connecticut, their plan may have backfired. The momentum that Lamont was riding after the primary fight was over soon died. As of right now, Lieberman holds a virtually commanding lead over Lamont, and if Lamont loses, it's going to be disastrous for today's Democrats. The nutroots--the MoveOn.org kids, the Kos Kiddies, the Michael Moore-ons, and the Howling Mad Howie Deaniacs--think they have control of the party. And while I'll grant them a bit of self-aggrandizement (the mom-and-pop Democrats would prefer to not court these people but rather let them grow up) in organizing, they still fail to note the most glaringly obvious fact about Connecticut. Joe Lieberman's been their senator for 18 years, and him going independent--the predominant party in Connecticut--just reinforces their belief that he's right for them. That and the other obvious fact. No one really pays attention to elections until after Labor Day. The Connecticut primary was held on 8 August. Labor came on 4 September. Less than a month went by, and the first real polls rolled out, including a 12 September USA Today poll showing Lieberman 13 points ahead of Lamont. The plan for the Democrats, if it backfires, and Lieberman is returned to the Senate, will severely damage the nutroots. It'll also make them come completely unglued just in time for 2008.
Above all we must remember a couple of things about the GOP when it comes to this years elections. This is a midterm right before the exit of President Bush. Right now, with things going on in the Middle East the way they are, the issues of the war and national security are weighing on everyone's mind. With the recent news out of Pakistan that a deal has been reached granting Taliban and al Qaeda forces an area of "sanctuary" doesn't help matters, and Mahmoud "IWannaJihad" Ahmadinejad isn't going away. The Democrats have been weak in this area for some time now; going back to the heady days of Reagan in a refusal to confront Islamofascism when it appeared then. The war is everything this year, and the Democrats are campaigning on a withdrawal from Iraq, and possibly from Afghanistan, as well. If they regain power in Congress, expect them to try and pull out of both theaters; capitualtion, retreat, and defeat as it was in Mogadishu.
The other thing that we need to remember is that the party must stay focused and united. I said what I said about Mike DeWine for a reason. He has different views about different things than we do. But this isn't about single issue this, or single issue that. this is about staying on target. We WIN the war. I have said it numerous times that if we lose the war, the least of our worries will be confirming judges and cutting taxes. We will be in a fight for our survival, not that we aren't now. But things, if we run, will get more serious than before. That is why the party must stay together on this one issue, and the GOP must retain control of both houses. I'm not worried about the House. I'm predicting no less than a loss--if it happens--of about 5-7 seats. But I'm not predicting a loss. At best, I'm calling bothy the House and Senate races a push. The Democrats won't retake either.
Does the GOP have something to worry about this year? Sure. There are quite a few turned-off voters with the recent escapades by their own party. I cited with Mike DeWine the Gang of 14 deal, and the Senate's nose in the president's NSA program. But there is also John McCain's recent grandstanding over detainee treatment (which changed nothing; TY, Johnny. We do appreciate you wasting time and money); The dragging out of time for Samuel Alito's hearings, which only encouraged the attacks to come; Being seemingly unable to get the Patriot Act renewed on time; And hemming and hawing over the border issues. Republicans have a lot to be frustrated about.
Now, imagine if the Democrats were in power. Anyone in the GOP repulsed by that thought? Good. You should be because things will only get worse with them in charge. At least with the GOP we have a chance. They may take longer, and a couple may grab their soapboxes and make political hay, but 9 times out of 10, we're there when it counts most. This is election is about party loyalty, but not in the way the Democrats believe it to be. We're not "tossing" anyone under the bus. Even Lincoln Chafee is getting help from the local RNC chapter in Rhode Island, and from the national office, as well. No, party loyalty should be coming from the base. Stand with your party because now it matters most. We are five short years into this war; a war the president specifically said would take a long time. How long? Depends on how seriously we start addressing our enemy.
This election is about the future. The immediate one, and whether or not we show the world we still have the fortitude to handle this war, and finish the job we started. And on 7 November, we should resoundingly vote for victory because a vote for a Democrat is a vote for vulnerability. It is a vote for negotiations, capitualtion, retreat, and defeat. They don't have what it takes to stare this enemy down, and beat them. The Republicans do. And don't just support Michael Steele, Rick Santorum, Bob Corker, and Mike DeWine. Mark Kennedy in the house needs to be supported. Conrad Burns in Montana needs help. John Kyl might be knocking the snot out of Jim Pederson in the polls, but even he needs his help in Arizona. We supported him on the ground. More Arizonans can, too.
Support the GOP up for reelection, and back those that are first-timers. This year, we need all the help and support we can get. These candidates want to go to Washington to help the nation. They aren't going because they want power, like the Democrats. They know there's a job to do, and "retaking" power isn't one of them.
Publius II
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 9:17 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home