It's always darkest before the dawn . . . Bill Kristol exhorts in the Weekly Standard:
Republicans are downcast, depressed, and demoralized. Bush is unpopular. Cheney is even more unpopular. Scandals continue to bedevil congressional Republicans, and it's hard to see the GOP taking back either the House or Senate in 2008. History suggests it's not easy to retain the White House after eight years in power (viz. the elections of 1960, 1968, 1976, and 2000). And the Republican presidential candidates seem problematic, each in his own way.Meanwhile, the Clinton coronation proceeds apace. Normally sensible commentators discourse on her Hamiltonian qualities and on today's liberals' Burkean ways. (If Hamilton and Burke weren't so used to having their memories misappropriated, they'd be spinning in their graves.) The American people, it's presumed, are too befogged by the mainstream media to see through pathetic Democratic stunts like rolling out a not-poor 12-year-old to read a radio script making the case for government-provided health insurance for allegedly poor children. And then Al Gore wins the Nobel Peace Prize. It's too much to bear.
* * * * *
Here's what's likely to happen: When the nominees are selected next year, the Republican will be behind--just as the GOP nominee trailed, at various times, in the 1980, 1988, 2000, and 2004 campaigns. Then the Republican will rally and probably win. Look to 1988 for a model: a tired, two-term presidency, a newly invigorated Democratic Congress causing all kinds of problems for the administration, an intelligent, allegedly centrist Democratic nominee, and a bruising Republican primary with lots of unhappiness about the field of candidates. This resulted in a 17-point early lead for Michael Dukakis over George H.W. Bush, but an eventual Republican victory.
Read his whole column at the link above. It's good to remember that opinion polls can change rapidly, and that, in the actual election, people will have to pull a lever for Hillary or Obama, knowing all it entails - or at least enough to give them pause.
It doesn't say much for the Republican Party that it's most effective argument to win votes is they aren't Democrats - but the argument may still be enough, in the end.
Permalink | Send To A Friend | Linking Blogs | Digg this!
Filed under:
2006 Senate Race, Commentary, Republican
Tags: analysis, presidential campaign, Republicans
Comments (15)
Peter Paul, Peter Paul, PET... (Below threshold)1. Posted by kim | October 15, 2007 6:55 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Peter Paul, Peter Paul, PETER PAUL.
==================================
1. Posted by kim | October 15, 2007 6:55 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 15, 2007 06:55
2. Posted by kim | October 15, 2007 10:37 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
OK, I'll make it easy. Google 'Peter Paul' and Hillary.
==================================
2. Posted by kim | October 15, 2007 10:37 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 15, 2007 10:37
3. Posted by bryanD | October 15, 2007 2:17 PM | Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
The RW side of the political blogospere is disappearing except for its various stylesheets with the names on top. And some time-neutral posts about last vacation, bringing up Gnat, Rush porn, and other Peggy Hill posts. NRO' kiddie Corner is intimating giving weekends over to Star Trek discussions. Instapud is revivifying the transhumanist thing. BoingBoing plus TCS = "Help!"
As Jed Clampett would say: "Pitiful. Jus' pitiful." As Bedford Forrest would say, "Fresh meat!"
This is the malaise Bill addresses from his armored train.
3. Posted by bryanD | October 15, 2007 2:17 PM |
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on October 15, 2007 14:17
4. Posted by kim | October 15, 2007 4:03 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Ah, a closet Lileks fan.
========================
4. Posted by kim | October 15, 2007 4:03 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 15, 2007 16:03
5. Posted by bryanD | October 15, 2007 10:12 PM | Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
"The American people, it's presumed, are too befogged...to see through pathetic... stunts..."-kristol
Speaking of pathetic stunts, read this neocon agit-prop(!):
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=7169C0C2-D529-4B93-B83A-8C9ECEB455D5
They're kkkrakkking up, I tellz ya!
5. Posted by bryanD | October 15, 2007 10:12 PM |
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on October 15, 2007 22:12
6. Posted by kim | October 16, 2007 9:36 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
What's the attraction to that slaveholder's phallic symbol?
======================================
6. Posted by kim | October 16, 2007 9:36 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 16, 2007 09:36
7. Posted by bryanD | October 16, 2007 3:15 PM | Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
Neocon Lynn Cheney expositing on Wonder Woman and Sparkle Plenty on MSNBC. Right now! (Hurry!)
NEWS ALERT! "Dick" and Barack Obama are 8th cousins via "deVaux(sp?) of Mary Land".
kim= as usual: what the fudge are you talking about? And i'm not touching your phallic symbol!
Forrest? Fine commander, but I'm a Longstreet man! He had the correct strategy for prevailing in the War of Northern Aggression. iE Stay out of the North (PA). Let the Copperheads and moderates dis-elect Lincoln.
Of course he was correct. G'burg was the turning point, Hindsight, etc.
7. Posted by bryanD | October 16, 2007 3:15 PM |
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on October 16, 2007 15:15
8. Posted by kim | October 16, 2007 6:57 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
And if I'd been feelin' better, I would've whupped ya. That's Grant surrendering to Lee at Appomattox.
Granted, the War Between the States was anything but Civil, see Point Lookout, & A'ville. But had Gettysburg gone for the Gray, think of the turning point that would've been. Grant would not have had the opportunity to appear so Thurberesque.
Oh, Washington's Monumental Thang. Didn't you read the article you linked?
=================================================
8. Posted by kim | October 16, 2007 6:57 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 16, 2007 18:57
9. Posted by bryanD | October 16, 2007 8:04 PM | Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
"But had Gettysburg gone for the Gray, think of the turning point that would've been."=kim
Wow, I would expound on that, but I would have to bill Wizbang $25 for an associate editor's fee.
Easy answer: no turning point that the south would want to face. Defeat would have eventually come and would have been more complete, and Reconstruction would have extended beyond the Hayes administration. Probably to the Cleveland administration.
Other answer: France from Mexico and Britain along the Canadian-US border might have invaded the US on the side of the CSA. A true Twilight Zone alternate reality would have ensued. Cotton for opium.
9. Posted by bryanD | October 16, 2007 8:04 PM |
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on October 16, 2007 20:04
10. Posted by demomoke | October 18, 2007 12:07 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Getting back to the original subject...
Didn't we hear these same things around this time last year? Things like "well, the economy is doing so well", "Iraq isn't as bad as the media makes it out to be", and "Voters will wise up when they realize the Democrats might actually win this thing!"
Please. It didn't happen then, and it won't happen this time next year.
10. Posted by demomoke | October 18, 2007 12:07 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 18, 2007 00:07
11. Posted by kim | October 18, 2007 5:20 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Where would the Dems have been without Foley and homosexuals to sacrifice conflating homosexuality and child predation. A cheap and dirty trick won the last election. What ya' got for next year?
===================================
11. Posted by kim | October 18, 2007 5:20 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 18, 2007 05:20
12. Posted by kim | October 18, 2007 7:51 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Mort Kondracke has a nice article about Bush at Roll Call. Find it through RealClearPolitics.
============================
12. Posted by kim | October 18, 2007 7:51 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 18, 2007 07:51
13. Posted by The Florida Masochist | October 18, 2007 6:25 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
What is Bill Kristol smoking? His magazine employs one of the lowest scum in the blog called Michael Goldfarb, you can judge a person by who they employ.
Seriously, this Don't worry be happy attitude is out of touch with political reality. Unpopular President, Unpopular war, Dumb GOP Political moves like vetoing S-Chip, maybe up to a dozen GOP senate seats in play next year(ME, NH, NC, GA, NE, NM, AK, CO, VA, WY, TN and even ID if that clown craig doesn't leave office can be lost)and Dems hammering house candidates over the S-Chip vote. Sound rosy for Republicans? Not in any way.
Don't paint me as a pessimist Jim, you did that last year when I warned beforehand of the 2006 debacle.
Bill
13. Posted by The Florida Masochist | October 18, 2007 6:25 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 18, 2007 18:25
14. Posted by Jim Addison | October 19, 2007 1:24 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Bill ~ I assume you're right on the Senate, simply because of the 22-12 disadvantage Republicans have in seats at risk. North Carolina? What - is Erskine Bowles gonna try again? Gimme a break . . . Georgia? Unless they imported half a million votes from New Orleans, that's not going anywhere, either. Nebraska? Bob Kerrey won't run. He likes the big city life too much, and would Norman Hsu tattooed on his forehead in the campaign.
Now, if the election were held today, Democrats would probably win the White House and retain the House. The election, thankfully, is not today. A year is several lifetimes in politics . . . recall 1991, where by this time all the Democratic heavyweights - Cuomo, Gore, Gephardt, etc., - had declined to run in 1992 because George H.W. Bush was just too darned popular?
But yeah, you were right in 2006 . . . ;-)
14. Posted by Jim Addison | October 19, 2007 1:24 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 19, 2007 01:24
15. Posted by kim | October 19, 2007 10:27 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Presidents popularity rising, War in Iraq won, Dumb Dhimmi moves like the Frosts. They may have something special in the water in Florida.
======================================
15. Posted by kim | October 19, 2007 10:27 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 19, 2007 10:27