yourdomain.com

[David R Gold]

It will get bloody. There will be a battle between the crowd which believes it's best to move to the Middle. The "Schwarzenegger Model." This will be very tempting. As I have pointed out, the GOP is now seen as out of touch in the Suburban Northeast and Midwest. The House losses yesterday show that well. Losing Weldon, Nancy Johnson, the open District in New York State, and seats in Ohio show this well.

On the other hand, others will urge the GOP to get right with its base. Rededicate the Party to small Government principles,low tax principles and a robust national defense. Libertarians will emerge to urge far less government and isolationism. Paleo-Cons will have their say, but they are few in number.

Bush will be shunned. Just as candidates shunned him during the campaign he will be shunned as a "Lame Duck" and a pariah by many in the GOP.

There must be a change in course in Iraq. The President gave a "down payment" on that score today by firing Rumsfeld. The logical, and face saving, out will be the "Baker Commission" recommendations.

One thing is certain. It's gonna get ugly. But it's also healthy.

[Eclypse]

Whats that age ole saying?

Things will get worse before they get better?

[David R Gold]

The MSM will be pushing the idea of moving to the "mushy Middle." Here is a good example.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-assess8nov08,1,5490264.story?coll=la-headlines-politics

ANALYSIS
GOP ceded the center and paid the price
By Ronald Brownstein
Times Staff Writer

November 8, 2006

WASHINGTON — For six tumultuous years President Bush has provoked intense opposition while mobilizing passionate support for an ambitious conservative agenda.

On Tuesday, that perilous strategy crumbled — and triggered his party's abrupt fall from power.

Republicans lost control of the House, and teetered on the edge of losing the Senate as well. The widespread losses will present Bush and the GOP with a sharpened challenge from congressional Democrats eager to command attention for their policy priorities, such as raising the national minimum wage, and to investigate the administration's performance on Iraq, global warming and other issues.

In the long run, the reversals raise fundamental questions about the viability of the strategy Bush and his chief political advisor, Karl Rove, have pursued to build a lasting Republican political majority.

Bush and Rove placed their main emphasis on unifying and energizing Republicans and right-leaning independents with an agenda that focused squarely on the goals of conservatives.

But Tuesday's broad Democratic advance underscored the risks in that approach: In many races, Republicans were overwhelmed by an energized Democratic base and a sharp turn toward the Democrats by moderate swing voters unhappy with the president's performance.

"The story line really is that the Democrats are winning the middle," said Democratic pollster Al Quinlan.

Veteran GOP pollster Bill McInturff said: "Iraq is front and center of this election, and people voted for change. The GOP base held — was motivated and voted — but the margins among independents and moderates [for Democrats] was too much to overcome."

The National Election Pool exit polls conducted by Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International showed that 80% of voters who disapproved of the Iraq war voted Democratic for Congress, while 80% who approved voted Republican. But only about two in five voters approved of the war, while nearly three-fifths disapproved, according to figures posted by CNN.

*

A mirror revolt

Tuesday's election may represent a bookend to the historic Republican landslide in 1994.

In that election, Republicans captured the Senate by gaining eight seats and won the House for the first time in 40 years by gaining 52 seats. The engine for the GOP advance was a widespread backlash, both among its core supporters and independent swing voters, when Democratic President Clinton veered left on several key issues after promising to govern as a centrist.

Republicans have controlled the House since then, and the Senate for all but 18 months. But on Tuesday, a political uprising that looked like the mirror image of the voter revolt against Clinton broke the GOP's grip on the House and left Democrats within reach of a Senate majority, depending on final results in Virginia and Montana.

The election saw Democrats strengthen their hold over the regions in the country where they are already strong, with Senate victories in Maryland, New York, New Jersey and Rhode Island, and House gains in Pennsylvania, Connecticut and New York.

At the same time, Democrats pushed into Republican territory with a big Senate win in Ohio, a pick up of three House seats in Indiana, as well as gains in the interior West.

The Democratic successes in such places chipped away at one of the most powerful patterns of the last few decades: a tendency for each party to consolidate its control of House and Senate seats from states it usually carries in the presidential races.

Republicans continued to enjoy strong support from their core supporters, based on the results from several key races and exit polls.

In Virginia's tight Senate race, for instance, Republican Sen. George Allen stayed nearly step-for-step with Democrat Jim Webb partly by capturing nearly 60% of the vote in Chesterfield County, a traditional GOP stronghold outside Richmond, and running slightly better than he did six years ago in Chesapeake, a conservative military-influenced community in the state's far southeast corner.

Republicans also held hotly contested GOP-leaning districts in Florida and Virginia and mounted strong challenges against Democratic House incumbents in Georgia.

But in many places, that wasn't enough to overcome strong turnout from Democrats and widespread defection from independents.

The determination of the Democratic base to strike a blow against Bush was evident in the large turnout in party strongholds like Philadelphia and Cleveland.

At the same time, Democrats registered gains among two groups of swing voters.

*

Swinging to the left

The results suggested that socially moderate, upscale voters were breaking clearly for the Democrats.

In Pennsylvania, Republican Sen. Rick Santorum six years ago carried all three of the large suburban counties outside Philadelphia by a combined total of nearly 100,000 votes. But on Tuesday, the overall victory margin for Democrat Bob Casey Jr. in these counties exceeded 120,000 as he cruised to victory.

The same trend was evident in Virginia. Webb pulverized Allen in the affluent suburbs outside Washington, amassing imposing margins that gave him a slender lead at night's end.

Democrats also made gains among more socially conservative, economically strained swing voters, who have provided critical votes for Republicans in recent years.

In Indiana, Democrat Brad Ellsworth convincingly defeated Rep. John Hostettler in a heavily rural district where Bush captured over three-fifths of the vote two years ago.

Beaver and Westmoreland counties in Pennsylvania's southwest corner, considered strongholds of blue-collar conservative "Reagan Democrats," split about evenly in Santorum's reelection six years ago. But Casey carried them by nearly 25,000 votes on Tuesday.

John C. Green, a political scientist at the University of Akron, said the erosion Republicans faced among affluent and working-class swing voters underscored the risks of Bush's decision to push an agenda opposed by nearly half the country on even his best days.

"The Bush people chose to put up with a very high level of conflict," Green said. "They didn't try to build a large consensus majority."

Bush wasn't on the ballotTuesday, but he loomed as a decisive factor. Attitudes toward Bush powerfully shaped the results.

In Missouri, for instance, site of Democrat Claire McCaskill's nail-biting win over Republican Sen. Jim Talent, the exit poll showed that almost 90% of those who approved of Bush's performance backed Talent, while nearly 85% of those who disapproved backed McCaskill.

That was a key to McCaskill's victory because the majority of Missouri voters disapproved of Bush's performance.

In other states such as Ohio, Rhode Island, New Jersey and Maryland, exit polls found much more lopsided majorities than in Missouri disapproving of Bush's performance — a trend that created large hurdles for GOP candidates.

Especially ominous for the GOP may have been the reopening of the gender gap. In 2004, Bush used security issues to narrow the traditional Democratic advantage among women.

But with surveys for months showing women especially dismayed over the course of the Iraq war, Democrats ran up decisive margins with female voters in Missouri and other states, according to the exit polls.

[Orin]

Back to where they should have been, fiscally conservative.
_________________
Voodoo Economics with Zeb

"Now, if you're so stupid as to think we didn't have a surplus, you're not going to believe the GAO figures either.... " as he tries and pass off PBGC budget as the national budget. Twice and in Red nonetheless.

[David R Gold]

Right you are Orin. The Pork ladeled out by people like Sen. Ted Stevens helped defeat the GOP. Sen. Tom Coburn fought Stevens. He should be the vision to the future. Instapundit
SOURCE
TOM COBURN'S OFFICE sends his statement on the elections. Big line: "This election does not show that voters have abandoned their belief in limited government; it shows that the Republican Party has abandoned them. In fact, these results represent the total failure of big government Republicanism."





Dr. Coburn Statement on Mid-Term Elections

Says election shows “total failure of big government Republicanism” and a hunger for “honor and dignity” in Congress


(WASHINGTON, D.C.) – U.S. Senator Tom Coburn, M.D. (R-OK) released the following statement tonight regarding the outcome of the mid-term elections:


“Although this election represents a short-term setback for Republicans, it could be an important turning point for the Republican Party and, more importantly, the country. Every incumbent was reminded that the American people, not party establishments, hold the reins of government. Throughout our history, when the American people rise up and force change our country benefits. In our system, the wisdom of many individual voters still outweighs the wisdom of a few,” Dr. Coburn said.


“Many factors contributed to these election results. The American people obviously are concerned about the conduct of the war in Iraq. Members of both parties have an obligation to work together to offer creative and constructive solutions that will help our troops accomplish their mission.


“The overriding theme of this election, however, is that voters are more interested in changing the culture in Washington than changing course in Washington, D.C. This election was not a rejection of conservative principles per se, but a rejection of corrupt, complacent and incompetent government.


“A recent CNN poll found that 54 percent of Americans believe government is doing too much while only 37 percent want government to do more. The results of this election reflect that attitude. Among the Republicans who lost their re-election bids a surprising number were political moderates who advocated a more activist government. Several Republican members of the appropriations committees, which have been on a spending binge, also were not re-elected. On the other hand, the two Republican senators who pulled off the most impressive victories were unapologetic conservatives, Jon Kyl (R-AZ) and John Ensign (R-NV). It is also notable that the Democrats who won or who ran competitive races sounded more like Ronald Reagan than Lyndon Johnson.


“This election does not show that voters have abandoned their belief in limited government; it shows that the Republican Party has abandoned them. In fact, these results represent the total failure of big government Republicanism.


“The Republican Party now has an opportunity to rediscover its identity as a party for limited government, free enterprise and individual responsibility. Most Americans still believe in these ideals, which reflect not merely the spirit of 1994 or the Reagan Revolution, but the vision of our founders. If Republicans present real ideas and solutions based on these principles we will do well in the future.


“What Republicans cannot continue to do, however, is more of the same. Our short-term, politically-expedient, bread and circus governing philosophy has failed. Iraq is an important issue in the minds of voters but it is not the only issue. Our majority was severely weakened by a long series of decisions that pre-date the public’s current concern about Iraq.


“Republicans oversaw a seven-fold increase in pork projects since 1998. Republicans increased domestic spending by nearly 50 percent since 2001, increased the national debt to $9 trillion, passed a reckless Medicare expansion bill and neglected our oversight responsibilities. While some of these decisions may have helped secure specific seats in the short-term the totality of our excess did not secure our majority, but destroy it.


“There should now be less doubt about whether overspending and pork projects are bad policy and bad politics. This year, in particular, pork did not save our vulnerable incumbents but helped drag them down. The challenges facing our country are too great and complex for members of Congress and their staff to continue to be distracted by endless earmarking.


“Some have said that Republicans and Democrats now need to govern from the middle. I disagree. We do not need to govern from the center as much as we need to govern from conscience. When politicians have the courage to argue their convictions and lose their political lives in an honest battle of ideas the best policies will prevail.


“The American people do want civility but they also want real debate. Civility does not mean an absence of conflict, but a return of honor and dignity in our politics. The great debates in American history like the Lincoln-Douglas debates or the debates about the Constitution were intensely confrontational, but no one feels soiled after reading them. That same quality of debate is possible today if politicians put their country first and party second. The problems facing our country are too great to not have these debates. Voters are bored and tired of partisan role playing in Washington. The answers to securing Iraq, winning the War on Terror, and preventing the impending bankruptcies of Medicare and Social Security will not be discovered by portraying the other party as the focus of evil and corruption. If we don’t debate these issues with honor and agree on solutions we will be the first generation of leaders that left the next generation worse off, and we will see our relative power in the world diminish.


“One of the great paradoxes in politics is that governing to maintain power is the surest way to lose it. Republicans have the ideas to solve our greatest challenges. If we focus on ideas, our majority status will take care of itself,” Dr. Coburn said.

[David R Gold]

And the mushy Middle RINO Specter. AP



Specter urges GOP to re-evaluate priorities after election losses

PATRICK WALTERS
Associated Press

PHILADELPHIA - Sen. Arlen Specter, the moderate conscience of Pennsylvania Republicans, on Wednesday urged the party to re-evaluate its priorities in the wake of nationwide election losses and called for a more progressive agenda that changes the strategy in Iraq and puts more emphasis on education and health care at home.

Democrats took solid control of the House in Tuesday's elections, while control of the Senate - and possibly the future of Specter's leadership position as Judiciary Committee chairman - rested Wednesday on an extremely close race in Virginia.

"We have just witnessed a seismic earthquake," Specter said in an address to the Committee of Seventy, an election-watchdog group, at the Union League in Philadelphia. "There will have to be a fundamental re-evaluation of what is going on in Iraq."

President Bush and Congress will have to find a way to stabilize Iraq, Specter said. "The Iraqis have to know we can't be there forever," he said.

In addition to the war, which he called a key factor in the losses of fellow Pennsylvania Republican Sen. Rick Santorum and others, Specter said his party will have to become "a lot more progressive and a lot less ideological."

Specter commended Santorum for his candor, but said Pennsylvania's junior senator paid the price at the polls.

"Rick took a lot of controversial positions," Specter said. "You saw the results yesterday."

He blamed close Senate races in Virginia and Montana, as well as the loss of Missouri Republican Sen. Jim Talent, on the party's opposition to stem-cell research. Specter, a cancer survivor, strongly supports federal spending on such research.

On other issues, he said Congress needs to take a closer look at how it spends federal dollars, noting that he is "one step away" from becoming chairman of the Appropriations Committee. More money needs to be spent on cancer research, infrastructure, health care and education, he said.

He also called for more compromise in Washington, from both Congress and Bush. He criticized Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., who would ascend to the chairmanship of the House Judiciary Committee and has said he would investigate whether to impeach the president.

"I think that would be unfair and unwise," Specter said of an impeachment proceeding. "If there is to be an impeachment process, and I hope not ... it would really be disastrous for the country."

[David R Gold]

I think this will be a long thread. Human Events
SOURCE
We Did Not Just Lose Our Majority, We Lost Our Way

by Rep. Mike Pence
Posted Nov 08, 2006

Election Day 2006 will be remembered as a turning point in American political history. Twenty-five years after the Reagan Administration came to Washington with a conservative agenda of limited government, the American people chose a different course.

It is the duty of the losing party in a free election to humbly accept defeat and to acknowledge that the people are sovereign in the People's House.

As we examine the results of this election, it is imperative that we listen to the American people and learn the right lessons.

Some will argue that we lost our majority because of scandals at home and challenges abroad. I say, we did not just lose our majority, we lost our way.

While the scandals of the 109th Congress harmed our cause, the greatest scandal in Washington, D.C. is runaway federal spending.

After 1994, we were a majority committed to balanced federal budgets, entitlement reform and advancing the principles of limited government. In recent years, our majority voted to expand the federal government's role in education, entitlements and pursued spending policies that created record deficits and national debt.

This was not in the Contract with America and Republican voters said, “enough is enough.”

Our opponents will say that the American people rejected our Republican vision. I say the American people didn't quit on the Contract with America, we did. And in so doing, we severed the bonds of trust between our party and millions of our most ardent supporters.

As the 110th Congress convenes next year, Republicans must cordially accept defeat and dedicate ourselves to advancing our cause as the loyal opposition knowing that the only way to retake our natural, governing majority, is to renew our commitment to limited government, national defense, traditional values and reform.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[David R Gold]

The Lib E.J. Dionne makes good points here. Conservatism as well as the GOP need to find their way. Wash Post

SOURCE
Identity Crisis

By E. J. Dionne Jr.
Tuesday, November 7, 2006; A21



One verdict from the 2006 election was obvious before a single vote had been counted: The Republican Party no longer has a coherent governing philosophy. Republicans who care about advancing a consistent set of ideals are already at each other's throats and are likely to stay there. True, most Republicans still describe themselves as "conservative." But it is no longer clear what that word means.

When they have nothing else to say, Republicans will always accuse Democrats of harboring secret plans to raise taxes. But the tax issue just sits out there, unhinged from any logical approach to how revenue and spending should fit together in a sensible budget.

Then there is Iraq. Republican foreign policy realists saw the war as a disaster going in. Neoconservatives who supported the invasion increasingly blame the Bush administration for botching the job. The administration's approach to Iraq is an orphan -- only President Bush and his closest advisers claim it as their own.

That is why we can know how Republicans and conservatives will spend the last two years of the Bush presidency. They will fault philosophical adversaries for what went wrong, purge various actors and ideas from the movement, and insist on contradictory forms of ideological purity. My God, they'll sound like Democrats, won't they?

At the beginning of the 2006 campaign, the most popular charge in punditry was that Democrats were going to the voters with "no ideas." As the election closes, it's clear that the Republicans won the "no ideas" contest. In race after race, they tried to win by saying how horrific their Democratic opponents were -- and, in many cases, Republicans started touting their own independence from Bush. The Republicans have no coherence on immigration; no plausible plans for fixing the mess in Iraq; and little to say about economic insecurity, health care or the budget.

The lesson of 2006 is that the past five years have aggravated every contradiction on the right to the breaking point: religious conservatives against libertarians; neoconservatives against foreign policy realists; pro-immigration conservatives against immigration critics; big business against working-class conservatives; compassionate conservatives against . . . hmm, how do you describe the other side on that one?

In Congress, conservatives who voted for big budget deficits now blame figures such as Tom DeLay for forcing them to do it. Some Republicans who condemn the cost of the prescription drug benefit under Medicare were once happy to brag about it to seniors. Incumbents attack congressional "earmarks" for special spending projects, all the while boasting at home about the bacon they've put on their constituents' tables.

Add to all this the remarkable display of backstabbing among House Republican leaders over who did or didn't do what (and when) about the Mark Foley scandal. Political solidarity is not much of a value anymore in the Republican family.

That is why the most interesting battles over the next two years could take place not between the parties but within them. After a miserable year, Republicans have a lot of scores to settle. And conservatives, many of whom know they've lost their way, will be devoting a lot of energy to figuring out exactly who they are.

[Fox]

What a pack of nonsense. The GOP needs to learn to fight instead of rolling over all the time. The GOP lost because the other side lied through its teeth and the media carried the water for them. The GOP failed to fight back. Instead, they resigned and ran like a bunch of pansies everytime the Dems and the media turned up the heat.

The RINOs like McCain, Hagel, Snowe, Chafee, and Graham were killing us. If you want to point blame at any Republicans, you can start right there. Thank God Chafee is gone.

The plan for the future is to go after the RATs coalition and start picking off the DINOs. By doing so we can frustrate the Pelosi wing of the party. Remember, the RATs ran on change and for some who voted for them that means immediate withdrawal from Iraq and for others it means increasing the number of troops.

President Bush should be aggressive and prepare to go on the offensive. Ronald Reagan did not cry when he lost seats in Congress. He stayed committed to winning the Cold War. He took his case to the people. President Bush needs to learn to use the Bully Pulpit better.
_________________
Our war on terror begins with al Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated. (Applause.)

[Derick]

[nagash]

People are mad. They're angry about the situations in and around their home. They're angry that their kids are overseas and getting killed for no clear-cut reason (I'm not saying we shouldn't be over there but I am saying that this was was mismanaged from day 1).
When people are fed up with things going wrong, they switch the system. They get rid of the party in power and give the other one a chance. This happened in 92' with Clinton winning and it happened again after his two terms were over.
Look at the situation in MA. I'm dreading this. For the first time in 20 years a dem holds the corner office. They've held the house and senate for all this time and now they get the governors chair. A lot of things I would've liked to see are going to disappear for good.
And yet, look at everything that has gone wrong for the reps here in MA. The acting governor, a certain presidential candidate named Romney, has been AWOL for the past 2 years while campainging across the nation. He wasn't here to attempt a promised dismantling of the turnpike authority. Even worse, it took the death of a motorist to get him back here and to finally give him the leverage to oust the head of said turnpike authority. Then, when it comes time for his Lt. governor to campaign, he doesn't show up. If he'd given the speach he made at the concession speach say, 6 months ago, then we'd have a good chance at having a rep governor right now, but he kept his mouth shut, and now the dems completely control the state.
Granted, I do not vote strictly along party lines. I've never voted all reps or dems. I vote for who I think will do the job better. That's more important to me than someone being rep, dem, or indy. For all the people that are now out of a job as they did not get elected, use the time wisely. Don't be arrogant. Be humbled and ask poeple what they think. Don't say that people should do x, but listen to them and form the plan around their thoughts and feelings.
And above all, stop the smear campaigns. That destroyed the rep candidate running for governor here in MA. It wasn't that the ads weren't true, but they were really nasty (below the belt types) and people grew really sick of them really fast. The dem candidate ran a clean ad campaign and refused to sling any dirt at anyone else. I don't care if you're dem or rep, you can learn a thing or two from how Patrick, the new governor elect of MA, ran his campaign.
_________________
As I am, so shall ye be.

[Derick]

[pbrauer]

[Derick]

[pbrauer]