Have the Republicans lost 2006?

[Fade the Butcher]

I hope so.

WND (http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=49310)

Bush's job approval is now at 37 percent and even lower for his handling of Iraq. And by 50 percent to 37 percent, the nation prefers Democrats in charge of Congress. Is the GOP headed for its own Little Big Horn?

So it would seem.

Eight months from now, the party will almost surely lose House and Senate seats, governors' chairs and legislative seats in state capitals. The only questions are: How great will the losses be, and will the GOP lose control of one or both houses of Congress?

There is another mounting problem for Bush and his party: the national press.

"The Hun is always at your feet or at your throat," Churchill said. And our Huns, the national press, are at Bush's throat. When he was riding high at the time of the fall of Baghdad, they happily rode behind him. Now, they have joined the posse to run him out of town. . . .

[BaronBloodSpawn]

hopefully the Republicans will lose 2006:D:D even better if to one of the independent parties, and even better if one of the parties decides to play dirty and bully the competition alittle

[Sulla the Dictator]

I would have thought Fade would have stopped making political predictions by now. Sulla: 2, Fade: 0.

[Niko Bellic]

I love Pat Buchanan. In 2000, when I was living in Phoenix, AZ, I stood in front of grocery stores with petitions, in 100 degree heat, to get him on the ballot, but to be totally honest, he has a long list of political failures.

This prediction, along with many others he has made, will be wrong. The republicans will gain seats again, because the average American voter doesn't see the democrats as a good alternative, with good reason. Republicans make the average voter feel safer.

[President Camacho]

Just because the Republicans 'lose" doesn't mean the dems win.

[Niko Bellic]

Just because the Republicans 'lose" doesn't mean the dems win.

Realistically, what alternative is there? Like it or not, this is a two party system. Third parties only harm the left/right party they more closely identify with.

[President Camacho]

Realistically, what alternative is there? Like it or not, this is a two party system. Third parties only harm the left/right party they more closely identify with.I know that.... my point is that the democrats are always too stupid to capitalize on the republicans' shortcomings.

[Niko Bellic]

I know that.... my point is that the democrats are always too stupid to capitalize on the republicans' shortcomings.

In the current situation, it isn't a matter of being too stupid to capitalize on it, it's that they CAN'T get the job done. If democrats were honest about the things they believe, they'd lose every time. It wasn't always like that, and it won't always be like that, but that's the way it is now. That's why Hillary Clinton is drifting to the right when she speaks on the record. If she was honest, there's no way she'd ever have a chance.

[Heimdall]

The Democrats are incompetent as a party, there's no way they can win as long as they keep straying from their populist roots and keep making illegal immigrants and homosexuals their priority and fail to take a stand anywhere else.

Even if the Reps implode and split into a big business party and a blood & soil party, the Dems still wouldn't be powerful enough for squat.

[BaronBloodSpawn]

The Democrats are incompetent as a party, there's no way they can win as long as they keep straying from their populist roots and keep making illegal immigrants and homosexuals their priority and fail to take a stand anywhere else.

Even if the Reps implode and split into a big business party and a blood & soil party, the Dems still wouldn't be powerful enough for squat.

thats where the Reform Party comes in to clean house:D

[Jofreidr_1488]

The Democrats are incompetent as a party, there's no way they can win as long as they keep straying from their populist roots and keep making illegal immigrants and homosexuals their priority and fail to take a stand anywhere else.

It is probably more because they are a loose coalition of conflicting special interest groups (The Democrats are nothing but jewish trial lawyers, nigger snivel rights pimps, mean faced feminists, taco nigger border jumpers, and overweight (Soviet) Union labor commisars) that is IMPOSSIBLE to keep disciplined in any politically successful manner.

[A. Radek]

The Democrats are incompetent as a party, there's no way they can win as long as they keep straying from their populist roots and keep making illegal immigrants and homosexuals their priority and fail to take a stand anywhere else.

This is true. The 'Gay marriage' debacle in some 12 states drew fundies out of the woodwork to defeat them in the last election.

Even if the Reps implode and split into a big business party and a blood & soil party, the Dems still wouldn't be powerful enough for squat.

This is wrong. Record numbers of voters turned out in 2004 for both parties. The Republicans barely beat them, and had to rely on Florida, where they have control of the voter rolls and thus able to rig them yet again, to bail them out. The fact is the Republicans can't win straight up fights without ballot rigging and controlling the State House in Florida. All those so-called 'red states' aren't all that 'red' when you look at the underlying numbers.

Hillary Clinton and the DNC are not 'leftists', despite the BS claiming they are; they are middle of the road centrists mainly, and the Clintons lean more to the right than the left on most issues. They are not popular with any 'leftists' I know or read, and in fact are hated by many of them.

Yes, it is a two party system, as ugly stated, but that is only because of the stupid reasoning that voting third parties is not 'winning'. Trust me, when some 10%-30% of registered voters who actually vote turn out for 'third parties', you'll see some amazing changes in Congress and government in general, whether they actually occupy seats or not.

Many 'independent' Republicans and Demos will come out of the woodwork, and will not toe the RNC-DNC line, nor owe the party apparatniks a thing. Money is nice, but if you can't elected, it means exactly diddly to pols on the local levels. Lots of big spenders get handed their asses every few years.

What Republicans spent versus the election results they got shows a definite trend of diminishing returns on their $100 million or whatever it was they spent to the Dem's $30 or $40 million.

[Jofreidr_1488]

Hillary Clinton and the DNC are not 'leftists', despite the BS claiming they are; they are middle of the road centrists mainly, and the Clintons lean more to the right than the left on most issues.

Sorry to burst your bubble put Billarys plan to socialize Health Care would have expanded the Government to Soviet proportions, she is rightly described as a leftist and I think the term Bolshevik fits nicely as well.

[Kodos]

The senate maybe congress not likely( until the hispanic flood takes it toll) the districts have been gerrymandered to ensure that incumbents almost never get thrown out.

[Niko Bellic]

The senate maybe congress not likely( until the hispanic flood takes it toll) the districts have been gerrymandered to ensure that incumbents almost never get thrown out.

That's always the case until the ruling party does something so outrageous that enough people turn. Interestingly, it was the actual threat of nationalized health care that won congress for the republicans in 1994. Everyone is familiar with gov't beauracracy, and they don't want the kind of people that they have to deal with every year at The Dept. Of Motor Vehicles to have any say at all in their health care.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Jofreidr_1488 again.

[Fade the Butcher]

The booboisie will still come out for their man Dubya. 9/11 MUST NOT BE FORGOTTEN!