Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

OT- Merci! There's that "L" word again.

5 views
Skip to first unread message

risky biz

unread,
Oct 26, 2008, 1:30:28 AM10/26/08
to
"Republican fears of historic Obama landslide unleash civil war for the
future of the party

Senior Republicans believe that John McCain is doomed to a landslide
defeat which will hand Barack Obama more political power than any
president in a generation."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/barackobama/3260074/Republican-fears-of-historic-Obama-landslide-unleash-civil-war-for-the-future-of-the-party.html

--- 
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com

risky biz

unread,
Oct 26, 2008, 1:34:02 AM10/26/08
to
On Oct 25 2008 10:27 PM, risky biz wrote:

> "Republican fears of historic Obama landslide unleash civil war for the
> future of the party
>
> Senior Republicans believe that John McCain is doomed to a landslide
> defeat which will hand Barack Obama more political power than any
> president in a generation."
>
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/barackobama/3260074/Republican-fears-of-historic-Obama-landslide-unleash-civil-war-for-the-future-of-the-party.html

Not to mention the even more important "centrifugal tendencies".

------- 
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com


risky biz

unread,
Oct 26, 2008, 1:37:19 AM10/26/08
to
On Oct 25 2008 10:31 PM, risky biz wrote:

> On Oct 25 2008 10:27 PM, risky biz wrote:
>
> > "Republican fears of historic Obama landslide unleash civil war for the
> > future of the party
> >
> > Senior Republicans believe that John McCain is doomed to a landslide
> > defeat which will hand Barack Obama more political power than any
> > president in a generation."
> >
>
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/barackobama/3260074/Republican-fears-of-historic-Obama-landslide-unleash-civil-war-for-the-future-of-the-party.html
>
> Not to mention the even more important "centrifugal tendencies".

Oh, sweet Jesus- this is delightful:

"Mr Frum argues that just as America is changing, so the Republican Party
must adapt its economic message and find more to say about healthcare and
the environment if it is to survive.

He said: "I don't know that there's a lot of realism in the Republican
Party. We have an economic message that is largely irrelevant to most
people.

"Cutting personal tax rates is not the answer to everything. The Bush
years were largely prosperous but while national income was up the numbers
for most individuals were not. Republicans find that a hard fact to
process."

------ 
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com

Bryan Kimmes

unread,
Oct 26, 2008, 2:54:51 AM10/26/08
to
On Oct 25 2008 11:34 PM, risky biz wrote:

> "Cutting personal tax rates is not the answer to everything. The Bush
> years were largely prosperous but while national income was up the numbers
> for most individuals were not. Republicans find that a hard fact to
> process."

I want to believe they are not that inept, but look at the last week. They
used 'joe the plumber' to finish themselves off. Georgia and Indiana in
play?!

They FINALLY stopped saying 'spread the wealth around' every 45 seconds on
FoxNews. Obama handed them the hammer, but they pounded the nails in the
coffin. Did they really want to win? At some point they decided, "we are
going with the bush tax policy, the american people will not notice."

See the post titled "ot: fools" for an example of this working.

Lynx

unread,
Oct 26, 2008, 3:38:19 AM10/26/08
to
Obama may win by a landslide, and the Republican Party may be in for some
sort of schism.

However, the article you linked to really missed the boat. If there is a
schism, it will be between the wealthier better educated libertarian party
members and the poorer less educated social conservatives within the
party. How are the social conservatives going to respond to the fact that
they can no longer run their own candidate, or if they do, that candidate
will be unelectable?

The last paragraph makes it clear just how ludicrous the article is:

"He said: "Win or lose, there is a ready made conservative candidate
waiting in the wings. Sarah Palin is not the new Iain Duncan Smith, she is
the new Ronald Reagan." On the accuracy of that judgment, perhaps, rests
the future of the Republican Party."

The future of the Republican Party is NOT going to be based on Sarah
Palin. Sarah Palin has no future as a presidential candidate. I'm not
saying she'll never reside in the white house. I'm saying she'll never
even be a candidate. She more closely resembles a less intelligent Dan
Quayle than she does Ronald Reagan. Once this election is over, outside
of Alaska, she's washed up, particularly after the massive defeat her
ticket is about to experience.

---- 

risky biz

unread,
Oct 26, 2008, 3:43:13 AM10/26/08
to

Don't tell me. Try to convince the psychopaths in le Parti Républicain.

This is going to be better than anything that was ever on the History
Channel.

------- 

Mark Stringer

unread,
Oct 26, 2008, 10:59:00 AM10/26/08
to
risky biz wrote:

> "Republican fears of historic Obama landslide unleash civil war for
> the future of the party
>
> Senior Republicans believe that John McCain is doomed to a landslide
> defeat which will hand Barack Obama more political power than any
> president in a generation."

The Reps deserve an arse kicking and I'm pretty certain they're going
to receive one. However, if the Dems believe this is an indication
their ideas are being embraced as opposed to a rejection of what the
GOP has become, they're marks.

If they wander too far from center, Barry is going to be a one and
done Prez and the Dems advantage in the Senate and House could
disappear in a hurry too. The question is, is there enough reason
amoungst the party powerful to keep them near the center. It should
be interesting to see.

Kyle T. Jones

unread,
Oct 28, 2008, 11:06:27 AM10/28/08
to

They may be happy simply using him up over a quick but dramatic four
years to push through legislation that will make the center shudder.

The stage has been set by the (R)s. Is there any limit to Presidential
powers these days?

Cheers.

0 new messages