GOP confident of an '06 mandate despite liabilities

WASHINGTON -- Republicans on Capitol Hill looking ahead to the 2006 elections acknowledge they have liabilities: real and perceived scandals in their party, a war abroad that continues to incur U.S. casualties and a president whose poll numbers seem stuck somewhere south of not good.

Democrats and liberal pundits have expressed hope that next year will be a mirror-reverse of 1994 -- the election in which, for the first time in 40 years, Republicans took control of both houses of Congress.

"Neither Iraq nor the scandals are a problem for 2006," says Carl Forti, chief spokesman for the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC).

Rep. Lamar Smith, Texas Republican, says the first task for his party is "to push the reset button on our agenda and emphasize what we have accomplished and where we want to go."

http://www.wpherald.com/storyview.php?StoryID=20051207-114243-6937r

If we cannot do something about voting machines we are doomed, doomed I tell you! :grr:

I'm inclined to agree with them, but not for the reasons cited by the Repugs quoted in the article above. Although the popularity of Congressional Repugnicans have hit rock bottom, the one difference between 1994 and now is that the Democrats do not have a clear, unified campaign strategy.

Say what you want about Newt Gingrich, he engineered the Repugnican takeover of Congress, and it worked. The Contract with America, as disingenuous as it was, was a political masterstroke. The Repugs caught us with our pants down, and we've not been able to recover since.

We need "our Newt" - someone who can lead a common campaign against the Repugnicans, and play to the public dissatisfaction with the Repugnican-led Congress. Sad to say, although we have plenty of bright lights on our side of the aisle, I don't see a real leader taking charge and coming up with a workable plan to get these bastards out of power.

Nothing to worry about. Hillary is coming. She can be "our Newt". :sarcasm:

Gyre

NOT!

:sarcasm:

Maybe Dean?

you forget that the Contract with America wasn't reveled until September of 1994

to vote against.

Trying to lure voters to vote "against" anything is just wasting time. The strategy has got to be a positive statement - it must respond to something people want, not something they're opposed to. That has become crystal clear here in VA - where the republicans lost the recent Governor's election by exactly that process - instead of offering a positive platform, responding to specific needs (education, transportation, etc.) they devoted all their effort to running AGAINST the democrat - consequently, the democrat won (thank goodness!). And this is in a state where the republicans have enjoyed the advantage since 1970.

They are openly terrified of 2006 right now. You can put a stamp on that.

to get an ear full in their districts and will be a bunch of scared puppies. The Bugman will be the first one to suffer from their new found religion when they kick him aside and choose a new majority leader.

I'll just keep in mind that everything is opposite what the rw says.

have the complete fix in on voting machines. Don't we have our own groups of daring dos who can go in and .... oh right that's only on tv. Somehow we have to make that the biggest issue in the world. Before the end of the war and everything else, because this is the whole enchilada. No real vote no change.

edited for typo

How in the HELL can you have a Democracy with these republican-owned, republican-programmed, secret code voting machines? You CAN'T!! It's just not possible.

And republicans KNOW this. Why else would they continue to push these outlandish policies, and still KNOW they will be re-elected? They KNOW the fix is in.

....and Americans are asleep to the whole nightmare.


:kick::kick::kick:

Pretending that liabilities are opportunities is a common M.O. for this bunch. That "we have already won" stance is getting old.

If they were to compare what was written in the "contract on America" from 1994 to what was actually done since that time - the shame would crush them. Or should.

Just what is it you folks HAVE accomplished?

Senate-- we took back all the easy seats from them in 2000, leaving us with more entrenched incumbents in more traditionally Repbulican areas. And it wouldn't be a bad thing if we only made minor gains in the Senate, because if we did major ones, we'd have a dearth of seats to defend during the 2012 Presidential election compared to maybe a handful of Republicans we could knock off.

That said, I'm pretty sure we'll take out at least 2 Senators. The House, maybe we can take 10 seats, more if the Abramoff ring widens and more Republicans retire.

The real gains to be made-- and which should be concentrated on-- are in the State Governor races. Gaining two or three there will have effects all felt all the way down at the 2014 and 2016 elections, because then we'll have a voice in redrawing district maps-- meaning more competitive seats, meaning opening the door for more Democratic wins in a decade. I know that's a long time away, but we must think in the long term.

the more indictments that are coming to lawmakers in the Abramoff probe. I have a feeling this will widen to not only the extent that will gain the Democrats a good number of seats, but something that will devestate the Republican House shortly before the 2006 Election. I like to plan for the long run, but in the short run, if justice is going to be done to these criminals inpower, we're gonna need to at least take control of one house of congress. That way investigations can be carried through to their fullest potential and we'll start seeing some of these thugs behind bars.

Winning seats in 2012 will be nice, assuming we're still the same party; but the short term really does affect so much that we need to worry about that as well as the things people care about...

Conservative Estimates:

Senate: 50 (GOP holds control)
House: 226
Gov: 27
State Leg: 55%

a larger majority in the number of state leg. seats we hold. currently, we lead the Republicans by 10 seats, and we're 7 seats away from holding an actual majority in seats.

"Neither Iraq nor the scandals are a problem for 2006"?

Democrats MUST make Iraq AND the scandals a GOP problem for 2006.

why worry how badly they are doing? The fix is in.
Des

...that's why they're confident of having a '06 man-date. :evilgrin:

:eyes:

The GOP is deep shit trouble.

In Philips R. Cox, the board of directors, and the 14000 employees of Diebold they trust.

http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/news/113403461250230.xml&coll=2

. No paper trail, no accountability
. Partisan voting machine manufactures
. Malfunctioning voting machines
. Election tampering

Will we ever see the day when we have true and honest elections....

banned, the republicans would NEVER win a race.

:kick::kick::kick:

GOP slogans:

"In the sheeple we trust."

"What, me worry?"

"Neither Iraq nor the scandals are a problem for 2006," says Carl Forti, chief spokesman for the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC).

Their side owns the voting machines.

Then the democratic party really, really sucks.

...they been testing out here in Florida.

Just go outside and sniff the air and you get the sudden urge to turn on Fox News.

Bill Clinton, on the eve of the election in 1992.

:rofl: