pan6467

I had to listen to him today. I am interested in hearing what others have to think about what he had to say today.

I'm digesting what he is saying (the conservatives didn't lose, the people were duped into voting for Dems., the conservatives were too scared to run against Bush policies, etc.). Nowhere did he even say maybe, just maybe this election were the people telling the GOP and the politicians they had gone too far right.

America is a penduluum and for the past 12 years it swung right and now it topped out, it's on a downward leftward swing and that will go for maybe a decade then the swing will start back to the Right.

But give me your thoughts on Limbaugh's show today.

Be civil, I don't want attacks on Limbaugh as a person, or his show. I want a review of what he said and YOUR opinion on what he said.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Amaras

I'm sorry, but if I can't attack Limbaugh, then I have nothing to add!
Just kidding. Hey, he is trying to "rally the troops morale". The only positive
thing I can say about him is that he doesn't give up.

__________________
Propaganda is to a democracy what the bludgeon is to a totalitarian state.
-Noam Chomsky
Love is a verb, not a noun.
-My Mom
The function of genius is to furnish cretins with ideas twenty years later.
-Louis Aragon, "La Porte-plume," Traite du style, 1928

dksuddeth

well, I can't speak on limbaugh because I didn't hear his show, but I heard Tom Delays stupid excuse by blaming the voters saying that their 'base' didn't stick with them by 'sending a message'.

I always thought that the politicians were supposed to do the peoples will, not have the voters support their off party views.

__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

NCB

You would have a fair point if not for the fact that the Dems who were elected (Tester, Webb, Shuler, ect..) are conservative in nature, not liberal.

__________________

Superbelt

Tester is a conservative?
Tester the pro-choice candidate? Tester the guy against a anti-gay marriage amendment? Tester who is a 'hollywood' farmer (organic)?

Shuller, and Webb are Conservative. Sure But don't look to Tester for a trend.

And hell, those are very few. MOST of the Dems elected are liberals. Just because a few are more moderate or mildly conservative, doesn't mean the movement as a whole wasn't significantly liberal.

You also have to look at who those 'conservative' Dems knocked off. It's still a net gain of liberalism.

MuadDib

I really wish that I'd had the chance to listen in today. He's right and wrong all at once if what you say is correct. Then again, that is about par for Limbaugh. Republicans were to scared to run against Bush policies and that undoubtably would've saved at least some seats and thereby the Senate and maybe the House. The error is that this doesn't mean Americans were 'duped' nor does it mean that conservativism wasn't rejected. In fact, this was a rejection of conservative handling of government as of late. But that also doesn't mean that it was for liberalism. There is a middle ground, and though I wouldn't call these newly elected Dems conservative, as NCB has, I will say they are moderates with occassional dashes of conservative and liberal belief on a variety of issues. What matters here is that this election wasn't about issues or ideology so Limbaugh is partially correct in so much as he is saying that America is not rejecting conservative ideology, however they did reject this conservative Congress and its handing of government. To that effect, Pan is right. America is saying that Dems better represent the middle at this point in time, and if you are a political realist that means that the Repubs are too far right, but lets be clear that its not by much and not acrossed the board. Conservatism is far from dead. After six years America wasn't happy with government overall and wanted to see if what the other guy could do.

__________________
"The courts that first rode the warhorse of virtual representation into battle on the res judicata front invested their steed with near-magical properties." ~27 F.3d 751

NCB

Yes, Tester is a conservative from the libertarian mold. Low taxes, pro-gun, strong on border security. Youre foolish to believe this was an election for liberalism. The homosexual redefinition of marriage referendums will tell you otherwise.

__________________

pan6467

You lost how many House seats, Senate seats and Governor's mansions?

It's the swing. I think for Limbaugh to deny this or to look for other excuses will cost you the WH in '08.

Limbaugh is heavily underestimating what message people are sending.

I didn't say this was a "liberal" vote, I said it was a drive more towards center, the penduluum swung too far right and is being corrected and now swinging left.

Penduluums do not go from way right to way left over night. It swings sometimes slowly but builds momentum, it swings sometimes fast and slows down because of a change to weights, but it downswings and that is what it is now doing.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Superbelt

Tester is for repealing the Bush Tax cuts taht are disproportionate to the wealthy and creating a new cut for the middle class. That's a liberal stance.

Tester is not Northeast socially liberal. But for the midwest he is right up there. It's an entire different dynamic, but conservative, this man is not.

I understand though. You need to think this to make yourselves feel better.

And, libertarian is not conservative. Libertarian is libertarian.
Though, it's entymological route is liberal.

stevo

I don't get to listen to limbaugh at work.

__________________
"If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser

pan6467

Tell ya what Stevo, you figure out something to get me for Christmas (something heartfelt) and I will subscribe you to Rush 24/7 for a year.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

MuadDib

I'm a solid Dem, but I think you're overstating the message as well. Clearly Limbaugh is underestimating the message. That's his job and he's paid very well to do it. What's important is that Democrats like us don't get carried away in the "Oh who won that election? Oh yeah it was acrossed the board!" kind of attitude. If we get carried away with this then we're going to end up sounding like Bush crying mandate in 2000. The American people have not given the liberals a mandate here, they have given the Democratic Party the opportunity to show them what we've got. We have a change to act moderately and responsibly where the American people felt that the Republican Party at large could/would not. If we, as Democrats, start talking like this 'landslide' had more to do with us then it did with them we will seriously jeopardize our potential in '08 and, worse, lose a brilliant opportunity to really prove ourselves as the party of the middle class, the party of economic responsibility, and the party of responsible government. Those are things we have been touting since Clinton, now isn't that time to run with our win, but buckle down for some serious work. Let's stop talking about liberalism and conservatism and instead thank the American people for giving us the chance to prove ourselves then lets do it.

__________________
"The courts that first rode the warhorse of virtual representation into battle on the res judicata front invested their steed with near-magical properties." ~27 F.3d 751

pan6467

Don't get me wrong, this is in no way to say that we are going to mandate with our agenda. It's just a sign that the penduluum is swinging left... in order to keep that momentum naturally, the Left needs to move the speed of the people (penduluum), when you try to speed up the penduluum or you add too much too soon, you'll find you scare the people and the natural progression will be stalled, halted or reversed.

No you can not be over confident..... you need to look at what is being said, pay attention to what people are truly saying and allow the penduluum it's natural progression.... which right now is towards the left.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Bill O'Rights

Try...liber...ty.

__________________
"I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires." - Susan B. Anthony

"Hedonism with rules isn't hedonism at all, it's the Republican party." - JumpinJesus

It is indisputable that true beauty lies within...but a nice rack sure doesn't hurt.

dc_dux

Most of the Dems who won are not liberal, in the old Dem sense. They are more like the DLC Dems.., centrist and pragmatic, and not so rigidly ideological.

Many of the Repubs who lost were the moderate Repubs, particularly in NY, PA, NH, CT, OH....leaving the Repubs more conservative as a party.

For me, that portents a good future for the Dems, with more and more Indepedents, who ultimately control the balance of power between the two parties, leaning to the Dems.

__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

Superbelt

Yeah, sorry, you're right. Both Liberal and Libertarian derive from the latin word for free.

MuadDib

I think we essentially agree, but I am not ready to say it's a move to the left. All I'll say is that it's a move to the center. Is this symantics? Maybe. But to me it's a very important distinction. A move to the center means we feel the Dems best represent the center now and its not a left vs right issue.

__________________
"The courts that first rode the warhorse of virtual representation into battle on the res judicata front invested their steed with near-magical properties." ~27 F.3d 751

pan6467

I whole heartedly agree, it is a definitive move toward center not left.

But a caller just now stated what my point is. That the Dems went center to get the votes, then the center moves left....

Limbaugh says he see warning signs but that the people are conservative and throws out a poll that people believe the GOP is big government... Limbaugh's excuse 6 years, new entitlement, not running the government on true conservativism.... etc.

But he concedes that McCain is going to run as "the Conservative" and McCain is a moderate.... so yes, even Limbaugh sees that the penduluum is swinging.

He is all about "Bush saving his approval ratings getting them up and going back to Crawford with a 65 approval rating".

This will definately be a very interesting 2 years. My true hope is that there is less confrontation, more compromise and that the parties listen to the people and give the people what they want without positioning for power.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

aceventura3

I heard him say "keep living your life" don't change as a rsult of who won. I heard him be accepting of the Republican defeat. He was not saying anyone stole the election, etc, etc.
I also think he realizes that the Democrats will get some of the things they want. I heard him say that the media may have a different tone about the outlook of our nation. I think we are seeing that already.

P.S. I heard Rangle, from NY, say that the Bush taxs cuts are up for discussion, meaning they may be kept under the right "conditions", I bet the Democratic base won't like that.

__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

pan6467

Perhaps, Rangle is speaking and planning to use them as a bargaining chip for compromise.

We have the oppurtunity to have true compromise and doing what's best for the country, NOT the party's best interest.... Let's hope we see it.

I'm more optimistic and believing that we are finally on the right track, but it's up to the parties (BOTH OF THEM) to do what is best for the people, we can't have 1 out for just themselves... because the penduluum will swing the opposite way the party that is power hungry wants. IE the Dems get too liberal and make unreasonable demands and refuse to compromise will shift voters right again. The GOP is in the same boat.

Limbaugh is trying hard (and probably will) to downplay compromise that it is all now a popularity contest and the "conservatives" will sell out to be popular.

Perhaps, Rush, but again, I don't think so, I think it's the natural progression of the nation. And if you preach compromise as not what America truly wants, and that hate speak isn't going to sell as well now.... then I believe you won't last the next 2 years.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

MuadDib

Fair enough, as the one actually listen to Limbaugh here I have to defer to you on this one.

I think Limbaugh is mincing words the same way we are in our discussion of left and center. I am hoping this won't become the Repub party-line though. I mean, as a Democrat if that's how they want to play it then fine, we'll be happy campers in '08. But there's a reason Limbaugh is a conservative radio icon and not a politician; because he lives in his own little world and it makes some people happy to hear it. He's just reassuring his listeners and that's all fine and well, but if they take it to heart then they'll pay in 2 years.

__________________
"The courts that first rode the warhorse of virtual representation into battle on the res judicata front invested their steed with near-magical properties." ~27 F.3d 751

ratbastid

Okay, but I don't see the distinction. The center is left of where we've been. A move toward the center is also a move toward the left. Nobody's claiming that today's election result jump-shifts us into Sweden territory, but it's certainly a liberalizing result, to coin a phrase.

pan6467

I agree it is a move to the left no matter how you look at it and the natural progression is to the left but how far left and how fast left we move needs to be watched. We move too fast and or to far left it's over. And the Right will capitalize on it and take the penduluum farther right next time.

Look at it as liberalizing but not a mandate for liberalism.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

MuadDib

You know what? You're right. I guess my issue here (I'm not sure if I discussed it here or in another thread; sorry I've been extremely active over the last 24 hours) is that I am not comfortable with the framing of the discussion. Everyone out there claiming left, or even liberal, is correct. My caveat is that this isn't the way we ought to be framing this discussion. The assumption behind this kind of rhetoric is that democrat=left. Incorrect? No. But not entirely correct either. My fear is that if this election gets characterized as a leftward movement and not a responsiveness/accountability/responsible movement then we lose the votes that gave us our win. Can we <b>please</b> focus on right; on being the party that heals, the party that fixes, the party that rights the wrongs and not bog ourselves down in the politics as usual nonsense that lost us the support of this country in the first place and, in turn, lost the Republicans the support of this country yesterday. Let us rise above and say that Democrat is not defined by your swing on a constructed political contiunuum, but that Democrat is instead defined by good, clean, and responsible government.

__________________
"The courts that first rode the warhorse of virtual representation into battle on the res judicata front invested their steed with near-magical properties." ~27 F.3d 751

Elphaba

Pan, is this the audio of Rush's program today?

Limbaugh

He is saying that he feels liberated to no longer need to support those that weren't worthy of his support. Whoa.

ratbastid

Yeah, I saw that on Olberman today.

Part of me wants to be righteously indignant he's now admitting that what he said during the campaign was full of crap. Bush said the same sort of thing today (I obviously had to lie you about Rumsfeld before the election, the Democrats are suddenly also committed to the safety of America, I know what happens when the campaign is over and governing begins, etc). At the same time, it's so obvious, it's almost not worth getting in a twist about.

How nice would it be if you could actually believe something a politician said before the election is over?

pan6467

I think out of all this what we will see is those Right Winged talking heads who didn't truly believe in Bush and rode Limbaugh's coattails and said what they thought was the populist view, change their tunes fast.

People like Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, most of Fox News and so on, will all of a sudden not be so Right. They may not go totally Centrist but their stances will soften, their way of talking will lighten up and the change will be very noticeable.

Those are the people that did what they did for the money. And Bill O'Reilly will be back on "A Current Affair" hawking gossip.

Limbaugh will be the only one that stays true to his cause and will sell. But even he will be softer and easier to take, kind of like how he was back in the very early 90's before he became such a hate monger.

Anne Coulter..... well she's just crazy and she'll end up doing walk ons in sitcoms paroding herself because she'll need the money.

Drudge, will be Drudge, claiming he knows more and the true pulse of America but his show will lose ratings fast.

From Rush's show and just listening to other shows.... I think maybe we are coming out of the politics of hate era.

How long it will last and if it is just a placid response for the time being to the election, we shall see.

I do however, believe that America wants the hate gone and politicians that just fix the problems regardless of party, but I also believe the people have stated the country has gone too far right and needs to come back now.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

shakran

Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot.

Got that outa the way

Rush is wrong, as usual. That's no surprise. The surprise is that Bush was right yesterday. The Dems didn't win, the republicans lost. You're correct in your analysis Pan. Look at how the gay marriage bans went and (in the states that had them) the death penalty votes. Straight republican sentiments are what carried the day. The people didn't vote for the democrats because they like left-wing views. They voted for the democrats because they're tired of the scandal and corruption the republicans have (again) brought to the political landscape. And they voted for the dems because, while they're not left wing, they're not right wing either. Most people are solidly in the middle, and the republicans in power have lately been so far out on the right that they're off the wing entirely.


Here you may be wrong. The dems have 2 years to show the public that they can govern and govern well. If they do good work in these 2 years and help the country heal and grow, then they'll stay on the swing. If they don't, then they don't deserve the power any more than the republicans do.



In the end, what REALLY lost this election for the republicans was Rumsfeld. I'm convinced that if Bush had fired the hawkish SOB 2 weeks ago the dems wouldn't have made nearly as many gains as they did. I'm betting a lot of republicans are PISSED after yesterday's firing, too late to mean anything for their party.

mixedmedia

For me, this just supports my theory that those who are making big bucks off the right/left conflict are all talking out of one side of their mouth - at least on occasion. Their job is theater not commentary.

__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus
PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

roachboy

shakran echoes what i have been seeing from the right's talking and writing machines---conservatism is ok, the bush administration lost.

tactically, this is the move one had to expect from there.
the logic itself is not yet a positioning, it is a separation that will enable positioning.
so it is not yet clear which way conservativeland will move in response to these elections, the position from which the process of differentiation is going to restart.


it seems logical, based on this move, that you would see the conservative apparatus position itself rightward.
i have seen polls (in this mornings nytimes for example) indicate that the republicans got about 70% of the white evangelical vote, and lost about 30% so shoring up the far right base would make some sense.
but the problem for the conservative apparatus is the center, not the right.

if the machine shifts right, then the assumption would have to be that moderates are like a lumpen-factor that shifts whichever way the political winds blow.
so the interpretation of the elections would be: tend to the extreme right base, and hope that the way in which iraq continues to devolve (for example) can be pinned on the democrats in such a way as to reverse the winds that blow the moderates around.

insofar as iraq is concerned, this tactic would presuppose that the far right base is wholly deluded about what is happening in iraq such that problems can emerge now and be pinned on attempts to adjust the american position there. which is kinda crazy, but who knows.

thing is that nobody has much room to manoever within this new set-up. the bush administration is still there. power is split in the senate. the house looks like a weak counter to the administration, its inverse, but weaker.
the iraq disaster is still there as well, to be worked out in a context that provides a very narrow margin for manoever.
so i am not optimistic.

but it is the tightness of the political game that makes me think that the conservative apparatus will shift rightward, simply because by doing that the ideology could till foreground differences in political position as differences of identity ans differences in informational context as different camps in the war against Evil etc.

while i hope that the conservative machine fucks up and finds itself sliding into a richly deserved oblivion, it makes little sense to expect it. these are not stupid people. never underestimate the adversary. never overestimate the adversary. wait and see what the move is.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

ratbastid

... Which will illustrate the falsehood of their assertion that Fox is news and not propaganda.

Kali

__________________
"According to the map we've only gone four inches" -Dumb and Dumber

Marvelous Marv

Personally, I think it was the conservative base telling their elected officials that they had gone too far left.

So many Republicans had been spending like drunken sailors that their constituents were disgusted with them. I'm not downplaying Iraq, scandals, and the rest; I'm just adding a different slant.

__________________
"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money."
Margaret Thatcher

shakran

Back to poly-sci 101 for you. Out of control spending is not a party issue. Clinton was infinitely more fiscally responsible than either of the Bush's or Reagan. The republicans have been fooling the public for decades now claiming to be fiscal conservatives, and "proving" it by cancelling humanitarian programs left and right. That saves a lot of money, but they waste it anyway by pumping it straight into the military whether its needed or not.

host

hmmm....I'm kinda surprised that I have to post the following, again....this denial of the details from marv, reminds me of the "there were too WMD and active WMD programs found by US weapons inspectors in Iraq"....

......If you decide to vote in the poll, please post a justification for the poll choice that you select. How do republicans jusitfy opinions that the democrats are the "party of big spenders"?

How do libertarians justify opinions that there is no clear difference between the two major parties, and that it is better to consistently vote for libertarian candidates, even if the result, as it clearly was in 2000, and in 2004, is that the party with the dramatically poorer record of budget management and growth containment of the government, retains power? How long do libertarians think that it will take, even if they somehow manage to elect a libertarian POTUS, and a one house congressional majority, to reverse the effect on the dramatic increase in US treasury debt, and in the growth of the federal government, that are the fallout from the "spoiler" effect of their 2000 and 2004 vote, against democrats?


I made the argument in the <a href="http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?p=2143414#post2143414"><b>"1st Phone Call"</b></a> thread, that one major party's elected officials, during times in the past three decades when they held the office of the US presidency, and at least one house of the congress, achieved dramatically superior control of federal debt accumulation and growth of federal employment, than the other party, during the times that it held power.....

My argument was met with this response:
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthr...29#post2143829
seretogis.... since all lobbyist firms, beginning in 2001, had to hire only republicans, and dismiss democrats on their staffs, and since....beginning in 2001, all budgets were drawn up solely via the participation, in the house, of the republican caucas, after submission of a budget proposal by the republican POTUS, and with no democrat chairing and house committee, how do you support your claim:
....and, while you wait for your libertarian third party to grow large enough to eclipse one of the other two parties, why do you concede to the folowing mismanagement? Haven't the debt accumulation and the federal government growth of the past six, years, set your libertarian agenda signifigantly farther back, than if you had managed to gain control of the government in 2001, or in 2005? Aren't many of the fiscal options for reversing the tide. gone, now that the deficit grows by more than $550 billion annually, compared to just $18 billion in 2000, and just $32 billion, in 2001, and now that the total treasury debt is $8500 billion, instead of 2001's $5764 billion?

Why do you favor leaving the control of the budget in the hands of a party that has no plan to reduce additional $500 billion deficits, or to end "wars of choice"? Isn't it much harder now, even if you were to gain power, to achieve swift and signifigant reversal of the current course, than if you did not serve as "spoilers" in the 2000 and 2004 elections? Why do you not consider voting "defensively" for democrats, especially if your goal is smaller government and dramatically less spending? Won't the debt service burden...hundreds of billions of addtional budget dollars spent on annual interest payments resulting from nearly $3,000 billion in recent new debt, hamper your plan to swiftly implement "reforms" on some (possibly distant), future date?

pan6467

Unlike my fellow Dem brothers Shakran and Host, I think you raise an interesting point.

I think there is a certain conservative base that felt like you and did send a message. I think that was one thing Rush was trying to say, and did but in a round about way.

Do I think that it was the deciding factor? No, I think it did cost a few seats and perhaps the Senate, but I don't think it truly had much affect on the House as a whole.

The problem with having all the power, you have to sell your soul to keep it, and that's what the GOP did. And in doing so, they lost the more truly conservative base they needed.

Overall, I truly believe it was because the populace saw the country going too far right. The nation is, I believe socially liberal (in areas like education, healthcare, social services) but wanting accountability and fiscal responsibility in government. During Clinton, that was what we had and we boomed. During Bush, we didn't we had gluttony in the wrong areas.

The Dems. in the past (and hopefully they have learned a lesson) were gluttons the other direction, welfare, unemployment, pushing very bad agendas such as Affirmative Action, etc.. And I believe if the Dems. can control the radicals and keep the bureaucracies from choking programs (bureaucracy = excessive amounts of needless spending...), we'll see true financial growth across the board.

Time will tell.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

dc_dux

Disgruntled conservatives may have been responsible for a few Repub losses, but IMO, it was the Indepdendent voters who made the difference in most races, as they haved in every recent election. Some exit polls had the Independents voting 2-1 for Dems.

If, as a result of the election, the Repubs go back to the base that they "abandoned", as their conservative constituents want (ie Limbaugh, Pat Buchanan, Richard Vigurie, James Dobson, etc), the Dems will surely benefit in 2008 with these Indepdendent voters.

__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

aceventura3

I now understand why Air America is doing so poorly, all you guys are listening to Rush.

__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

mixedmedia

I think the election results can be attributed to all of the aforementioned factors. Which can all be summed up by the umbrella factor of CHANGE. I mean, really, there were a variety of issues to choose from that motivated great enough blocs of voters to vote for "the other guys." Whether your concern is the war, the economy or the scary "morality brigade" and the dozens of other sub-issues associated with them. There was no shortage of reasons not to vote republican in this election.

__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus
PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce