Wednesday, November 15, 2006

A Republican Will Be Elected President in 2008

The Democrats are having great fun this week. Flush with the “mandate” of an historically-average gain in the Midterm elections, the Democrats have convinced themselves of many myths. Inside of two years, however, the appeal of that fantasy will wear away to show the hollow core of the Democratic Party, a lie even in its name by now, and the nation will find its hope once again on the Right side of the aisle.

There are a number of reasons why this will happen. Part of this comes down to the devil’s deal the Democrats made, giving over their leadership to extreme Liberals – simple demographics prove that the American people have little interest in Leftist causes, and will not be quiet if/when the Democrats attempt to impose Socialism on them, as villains like Clinton, Pelosi, and Murtha have already hinted they mean to do. If you lie to take control as the Democrats did, by presenting yourself as “moderate”, you will find yourself hard-pressed to gain the trust of the people when your fraud is discovered.

Another part of this is apparent in the article I posted yesterday regarding Joe Trippi’s presumed field for the 2008 Democratic Nomination for President. This far ahead of the election, you’d expect a wide open field with a wide variety of ideas and policy courses to consider, but just as in past years, the Democrats have already begun to lock themselves into assumed choices; they love the box of conventional leadership, even if it means rehashing proven losers and candidates experienced only in posture and trash talk. By closing the door on any consideration of candidates not already anointed by the DNC, the Democrats not only reduce the scale of their approach to the people, but demonstrate a refusal to listen to the people whose voice will decide the matter in 2008. Certainly the Democrats may realize their mistake and correct it before the 2008 primaries get going, but their behavior now suggests they have committed themselves to the front-loaded process, even now that they know such a tactic leads to serious error and electoral cost.

Another part of this is simple history. One popular theory of why people vote for certain candidates or parties is called Voter Fatigue, and it is at least generally valid. The problems for Democrats are these – first, with the Democrats having grabbed the House and Senate, Voter Fatigue of the GOP has already been addressed and if it plays a role, it would be a reaction against the Democrats. But the historical example is also important. The White House changes hands between the parties, but most of the time there is a clear reason why it does so. In 1968, the Democrats had split against themselves and it cost them the White House; the Republicans did the same thing to a lesser degree in 1992, but with the same result. In 1976, the Democrats grabbed the White House but only an idiot would fail to understand that this was the result of clearly illegal actions by Richard Nixon – while extremists on the Left use the word “illegal” to describe Bush’s actions in office, they do not have legal support for their charges. If someone thinks that a Democrat vendetta against Bush, pursuing impeachment for his Iraq policies and decisions, would help them in 2008, I would remind the reader that while Bill Clinton later admitted to the truth of the charges in his own impeachment, there was nonetheless a political impetus as a result of the proceedings – in favor of Clinton and therefore the Democrats. Few people familiar with the evidence have any doubt that an attack on President Bush would end up hurting the Democrats.

In 1980, Reagan won the White House in a unique set of circumstances – double-digit Unemployment and Inflation, along with a sense that Carter had weakened American military strength and resolve. It is unlikely in the extreme that the Democrats could hope for a similar condition in 2008, especially since they now control the funding between now and then, and so would be blamed if the economy or the military collapsed from today’s present health.

Another thing which hurts the Democrats is the sense that they have gained the Congress, sort of “balancing” the scales. This would encourage many “moderates” to keep a Republican in the White House to make sure the Democrats did not get too much power – the Democrats are fooling themselves, if they believe that anger against the Republicans would equal blind trust in the Democrats. While Bush and Clinton both enjoyed elections with their party in control of Congress, Clinton’s re-election came with a GOP House. And historically, many Presidents have been perceived as a check on Congress – the public flat does not want a perceived extremist in the Oval Office – Dean, Pelosi, and Clinton have their fans, but they will none of them ever be President.

While I am thinking about it, I should also address the lie that President Bush’s approval poll numbers cost the GOP the election. First, while it is true that Dubya’s numbers were down in the fall of this year, they were rising for most of the late campaign, and most credible polls had the President around 40%; not impressive, but significantly better than approval numbers for either the Congressional Republicans or Democrats. While President Bush was not able to pull GOP candidates of the hole to re-election, they dug that hole themselves. It is therefore unreasonable to think that a “blame Bush” strategy by Democrats will bear much fruit in 2008, although I do expect all the Democrats to play that card at some time in their campaigns.

In the end, the only way the Republicans could fail to win the White House in 2008, would be if they completely lose their focus and nerve, and nominate some dolt along the lines of Olympia Snowe or Lincoln Chaffee – there are a number of salient avenues to the White House, though I sincerely pray that we will nominate a true Conservative and Reaganite, because no matter what condition we find the balance of power in 2009, the nation needs a leader whose backbone and vision are strong, and who will not play politics with the will of God. I trust the Republicans will once again make the right choice.

12 comments:

Charlie said...

The Republicans have an excellent shot at the White House in 2008, but I think it will depend upon who they nominate. It will need to be a fiscal conservative who can bring sanity back to the budget. It will also have to be someone who is strong on foreign policy and defense given our current position in the world.

Anonymous said...

I think that the political situation in 2008 will likely be so different from today that the present discussion is pointless! For example, what issues do YOU think will dominate the coming election, if any time prior to it: (a) Iran nukes Tel Aviv, (b) Iran nukes NYC, (c) Iran nukes Los Angeles, (d) Iran nukes Wash DC, (e) Iran nukes London, (f) North Korea nukes South Korea, (g) North Korea nukes San Francisco, (h) China attempts to conquer Taiwan, etc, etc. Do you seriously think World War 4 will be in the same situation it is today, come 2008? Mushroom clouds may actually drive the elections.

Anonymous said...

A Republican President in 2008: 1 name ... Mitt Romney!

knighthawk said...

Oh boy the next 2 years are going to be fun, all the positioning and jockeying around ...hehe I can't wait!

Great post though and I hope to god your right about the final result DJ.

Kamatu said...

DJ, you are making the assumption that somehow President Bush and the GOP will suddenly behave in a manner different than they have been. The appointment of Martinez shows otherwise. Good luck.

Liberal Chris said...

This reminds me of all the Dems who said Bush could never win a second term after the disputed 2000 election, that he would be so weak that the loss wasn't nearly so bad.

I just never buy this "losing this election actually helps us win the next election" line of thinking.

tony blare said...

I see that You are one of those Wingnuts who Aribtrarily decide to Capitalize words at Random, a trait not Uncommon among Republican Morons.

Robert said...

Well, At Least us republican Morons can spell "arbitrarily"! And not at random! Or at least they have enough sense to write a comment in a word processing application First and use Spell-Check.

Anonymous said...

The Liberals should win the 2008 election, besides the last two elections being stolen, its time for people to think for themselves and realize the whole focus of the republican message is a joke. morals, defense,low taxes. Come on!.. When has a tax break benefited the working class...and those morals?..shame that the lower red states contribute to the highest divorce rate and crimes in the whole country..The American people ...left or right should realize a major change is needed to promote the welfare and common good for all people...oh wait isnt that in the constitution , written largely by those "weak liberals"..

Anonymous said...

uhmmmm buddy i dont think that you are on the same page as any of us and who wants to pay taxes for other people to have welfare!!!??? (not me!!!) and education in america is free! a degree is pretty much given to you and i bet you that 90% of people welfare DID NOT finish high school!! and our defense is a joke????!!! are you serious? i bet if one of your kids, parents, ect. died in 9/11 u wouldnt think our defense is a joke!! were u alive during 9/11 did u fall and bump your head?? and if a liberal or a democrat gets elected we are going to get blown up!! because i bet that they follow us home!! and buddy you live in the USA so start acting like it!! dont talk about states being bad!! because every damn state has troops that risk there lives so you can wake up and complain so stop complaining!!

Anonymous said...

John McCain for 2008

I LOVE YOU said...

AV,無碼,a片免費看,自拍貼圖,伊莉,微風論壇,成人聊天室,成人電影,成人文學,成人貼圖區,成人網站,一葉情貼圖片區,色情漫畫,言情小說,情色論壇,臺灣情色網,色情影片,色情,成人影城,080視訊聊天室,a片,A漫,h漫,麗的色遊戲,同志色教館,AV女優,SEX,咆哮小老鼠,85cc免費影片,正妹牆,ut聊天室,豆豆聊天室,聊天室,情色小說,aio,成人,微風成人,做愛,成人貼圖,18成人,嘟嘟成人網,aio交友愛情館,情色文學,色情小說,色情網站,情色,A片下載,嘟嘟情人色網,成人影片,成人圖片,成人文章,成人小說,成人漫畫,視訊聊天室,性愛,性感影片,正妹,聊天室,情色論壇