« Welcome The MegaPundit | Main | Where's The Rest Of The Bin Laden Tape? »

Why Republican Partisans Should Consider Kerry

[I know this is long but you ain't allowed to comment on it unless you read the whole thing. This is NOT satire, take it at face value. If you don't understand what I'm getting at, keep reading. It will become clear. This was going to be part 2 of a 3 part series but Jay sorta wrote part 1 for me and who knows if I'll write #3.]

I have a confession to make.

I'm not proud of this fact but I have to admit it... A tiny little bitty part of me wants John Kerry to win. That would be the hopeless Republican hack part of me. Allow me to put on my partisan hack hat and explain.

To fully understand my deranged flirting with the occult, you must first appreciate the differences between strategy and tactics. Tactics are the methods used to win battles. ie: The Dems registering to vote under assumed names an registering multiple times. Strategy (AKA Startegery) is your plan to win the war. ie: Dems are using a combination of various type of voter fraud and their lawyers to "win" the election.

Once you focus on the big picture, Kerry seems an obvious choice. (If all you care about is the Republican party)

In the modern (post Watergate) era, we have only had two Democrat presidents. Both of them have helped the Republican party make tremendous strides.

Let's start with the greatest living President ever...

Jimmy Carter
We love to mock Carter with him hop-scotching the globe to coddle dictators and recently speaking out against the American Revolution. (How weird was that?!?) But we Republicans owe an enormous debt to Jimmy. Just a few years after Watergate, he gave us Ronald Reagan and the Reagan revolution. We went from a top tax bracket in the 90% range to the high 30's. We built a military that was feared and respected around the globe. We won the cold war without firing a shot.

Reagan spawned millions of conservative thinkers who serve as the base of our party today. If it were not for Jimmy Carter's abysmal failure as a President, we never would have had Reagan. That's why I call Jimmy Carter the greatest living President.

Which leads us to...

Bill Clinton
Clinton's rock star appeal among Democrats always bemuses me. Look what he did to their party... They had both the House and the Senate for 40 years when he showed up. In a single election cycle he gave them both to the Republicans and notwithstanding a back-room deal that lasted a few months, they have not given them back.

Perhaps as importantly, he (she) poisoned the well of socialized medicine. Her ham-handed attempt to confiscate one seventh of the U.S. economy and her wanting to throw you in jail for choosing your doctor set the case for socialism back years. And we have Billery to thank. Not to mention forever -shall we say- staining the reputation of their party.

The dems did get lucky in that Clinton was in office during the internet bubble but history is already showing that the Clinton economy was, like the rest of his Presidency, based on smoke and mirrors. He managed to squeak out the door just as the bubble was bursting. He loves to take credit for the economy but it was the over selling of the PC/internet revolution not any of his policies. The next major achievement he lists when he speaks of his presidential legacy? Americorps. What a legacy after 8 years.


So maybe now you understand why a Kerry presidency would not be a bad thing for Republican partisans. It might be a tactical loss but it would be great strategically.

Kerry is brewing a perfect storm of backlash. Riding the wave of a 9/11 era when people are more attuned to politics, Kerry has promised the world. His (nutball) wife even promised everyone would have heath insurance the day after the inauguration.

If Kerry gets elected it will largely be with the votes of people who have never before voted for a President. These people will be woefully disillusioned when "the plan" does not appear. Republicans can be counted to throw gas on that fire.

It is my great confidence that Kerry will out Carter Carer that makes the partisan in me want him. He will never be a strong President and a foreign policy crisis will render him impotent.

Further -and perhaps most importantly- Kerry must, in order to survive, never have a terrorist attack on American soil. He has exactly ZERO margin for error. If there is another attack, Bush's (knock on wood) 3 year perfect track record will be thrown in his face daily. In fairness to the poor guy, it is not a fair standard. Too bad, he applied for the job.

If there is another attack on his watch, his quotes about running a smarter, more effective war on terror will make up the sum total of the next campaign. With all these new voters watching.

Don't get me wrong -for the good of the nation- I want to see Kerry defeated. And I'm not hoping to change any minds and have people vote for him. But as a student of history, I know that looking at it strategically, a Kerry win would help the Republicans more than a Bush win. Bush can not help the Republican party any more than he has. Kerry has mountains of upside potential.

But I put the country before my partisanship. I'm still voting Bush.

[And because it is bound to be brought up by both people on the right and left, lemme just stomp on it now... No, I'm not getting ready for a Kerry win.(even though I have predicted it) This is just generic political punditry. (I've been known to do that once in a while you know.;-)

To my friends on the right, no, I have not seen horrific poll numbers and I am not preparing for the worst. Heck the only numbers I've seen are good.

And for the people on the left bound to pounce on this as "proof" I know Bush is going to lose and I'll tell you the same thing. I'll be disappointed if Bush loses. You'll still be able to gloat. But before you make any foolish replies to this, I'd remind you of the words of a GENERAL Clinton after the Battle of Breed's hill. In the battle, the Colonists took about 400 casualties and the British, by some accounts, took over 1200.

General Clinton said after the battle, "A few more victories like this will ruin us." That's where the Democrat party is in 2004.]


Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Why Republican Partisans Should Consider Kerry:

» The Spoons Experience linked with REPUBLICANS BETTER OFF IF KERRY WINS?

» Sortapundit linked with Waiting to Exhale

» murdoc online linked with Packers vs. Redskins

» Who Can Really Say? linked with Fan, Meet Blade

» Jeremy's Jeremiad! linked with Always Look On The Bright Side Of Life

» The LLama Butchers linked with The Monday Morning Roundup

» Joe Kelley's The Sake Of Argument linked with Which is Better Long Term?

Comments (49)

"He will never be a strong ... (Below threshold)

"He will never be a strong President and a foreign policy crisis will render him impotent."

If being married to THAT for however many years hasn't made him impotent, I don't know what will!

And with words like "moonbat" and "nutball" being thrown around, I'm really going to miss this election season!! *laugh*

Very insightful post. Howev... (Below threshold)

Very insightful post. However, do we really want another terrorist attack and 4 years of KERRY as president just so that conservatives can show that liberals are messed up in the head?

Also don't forget the stupidity of the average liberal voter. Theykeep voting for liberals while the politicians they vote in keep messing up.

I think the best thing for us is to have a hands-down vote. That is, for Bush to win by a huge margin, so huge that there is no doubt in anyone's minds.

We shall see, though. We shall see.

I have thought the exact sa... (Below threshold)

I have thought the exact same thought: would a Kerry victory be better in the grand scheme of things? If you're a Republican not particularly happy with the way things are going for the party in terms of ideology and practice, then a Kerry victory would hopefully make the Republicans rethink their stances on a couple of different issues.

If you really are worried about big government and and big spending, then a Bush victory would hardly dissuade him from continuing in that direction. So, if you are a Republican Bush supporter and you vote for Kerry in order to change the way your party thinks about itself, then that just seems like political expediency to me, and a good example of political expediency is when Kerry and Edwards voted against that $87 billion for our troops.

I think you have drunk the ... (Below threshold)
Remy Logan:

I think you have drunk the Buchanon kool-aid.

1) A single term president does no good for the Republican Party or the conservative cause. It just shows that we're losers.

2) As for foreign policy, Kerry is aligned with Carter. Kerry will not respond with force to terrorists, even if there is another attack on our soil. I would rather see another 4 years of Clinton than 4 years of Kerry.

3) The bulk of Kerry's support comes from the anti-war, hate-America left. If he goes against his base we will see the riots and violent protests of the 60s.

4) Bush will win, not because America has seen the light and is embracing conservative values, but because they fear a Kerry presidency in a time of war. If Kerry wins and then is ousted in 2008, it will be because of an anti-Kerry backlash, not a pro-Conservative wave that sweeps across America.

5) When the "true" Republicans ousted Bush 41 in 92, they thought they would regain the White House in 96. They were wrong. Remember it was Gingrich who lost the battle with Clinton, and it was Gingrich who resigned in disgrace and Clinton who left office almost as popular as Reagan.

Paul, you claim that ousting Bush is good strategy. I don't think you have a strategy, other than being upset with Bush and wishing for a Reagan dynasty. Not even Reagan lived up to the myth surrounding him that you guys have invented. Reagan's legacy was voodoo economics and destroying the Soviet Union and freeing hundreds of millions of people from tyranny. It took him 2 terms and a few more years to accomplish.

Bush's legacy will also be voodoo econmics and destroying Islamic terrorism, freeing hundreds of millions of people from tyranny. He needs 2 terms to accomplish this, plus a few more years of a president who will support the Bush Doctrine. A Kerry presidency will get rid of the Bush Doctrine and replace it with a doctrine of appeasment, blame, and defeatism.

Four more years of Bush is as important to America's future, as was a second Reagan term.

I believe that a Kerry pres... (Below threshold)

I believe that a Kerry presidency would be a disaster for the Democrats in the long run. I was hoping, though, that there would a be large Bush win and this would be a repudiation of the looney progressive wing of the Democrats. But I have become skeptical, the democrats slow loss of power hasn't woken them up. Even this Bin Laden democrat talking points tape won't wake them up. They are gonna go down in flames before they return to sanity. But its gonna take a decade before they realize this isn't the 60's anymore.

I don't care what anyone sa... (Below threshold)

I don't care what anyone says -- we've got to stop John Kerry. It goes beyond party affiliation. The man is a traitor. I'm in the midst of watching "Stolen Honor" on PAX-TV (on Time-Warner Cable). The man is a TRAITOR. I'll take Hillary or any other Lib lamebrain over this man who's a TRAITOR.

And I don't understand this... (Below threshold)

And I don't understand this need by some Republicans to shoot themselves in the foot in order to make themselves look ... well, intellectual.

Osama bin Laden could nuke ... (Below threshold)

Osama bin Laden could nuke the five largest cities in America and receive no greater response than a non-binding UN resolution telling him to STOP IT! -- and the Dembat base wouldn't figure it out. Instead they'll cook up "Republicans did it!" conspiracy theories.

If 9/11 didn't get through to them, nothing will.

What a stupid post. Your i... (Below threshold)

What a stupid post. Your idea is not taking into concideration the fact that the next pres will be putting at least 4 judges on the supreme court. We cannot have kerry the socialist, kerry the traitor or kerry the waffleing fool making up a court which will excelerate the europeanisation of the United States.

Yikes don't read more into ... (Below threshold)

Yikes don't read more into this than I wrote. (ahem, Remy) I don't want the guy to win. BUT I can also belive that and belive that if he does win it will damage the Dem party. In fact, it is common sense to believe both.

Why did you write:... (Below threshold)

Why did you write:

I'll be disappointed if Bush wins.

Plus, Spoons says you are predicting a Kerry win.

I don't know, Kevin. Lettin... (Below threshold)

I don't know, Kevin. Letting kids burn themselves on the stove in order to better appreciate the dangers of playing with fire is one thing. Letting them explode a brick of plastique in their bedrooms to learn the same lesson is entirely another. I just can't help but think that a Kerry presidency would break things so badly they couldn't be fixed.

Paul,I voted again... (Below threshold)
Greg D:


I voted against GHWB in 1992, and I do not regret that vote. Bush 41 was a lousy President, and a lousy Republican.

Bush 43 is a good President, and a great Republican. See 2002 Senate, House, and Gov races. For taking the fight to the enemy, and winning, he deserves to be reelected.

Think of the pluses (for Republicans) his reelection will bring:
1: Crushing the hopes of the moonbat left.
2: Huge blow to power and prestige of MSM.
3: No Democrat appointed Judges.
4: Chance to go after vote fraud good and hard.

Those are good enough to counterbalance any Carter / Clinton 1st term benefits.

My sympathies, Paul. On th... (Below threshold)

My sympathies, Paul. On the bright side, you only have to go through this for a couple days. I got this for over a year! :-)

"Plus, Spoons says you are predicting a Kerry win."

Whaddya mean "Spoons says." Don't blame me, HairyPundit. Paul predicted a Kerry win right here in this post.

And I don't understand this... (Below threshold)

And I don't understand this need by some Republicans to shoot themselves in the foot in order to make themselves look ... well, intellectual.

I think you forgot one othe... (Below threshold)

I think you forgot one other benefit of a Kerry Presidency-there would not be a Hillary run in 2008.

I think for the good of the nation and the GOP we need a strong two party system. I think that strengthening the GOP can be achieved with a Kerry defeat. I believe that there will be a Bush Landslide - a total repudiation of JFK as a candidate. This will awaken the Dems where they will t least realize that they need to field a candidate that mainstream America can consider voting for.

When they do that, that will force the GOP to field an equally electable candidate. The Dems will finally realize that the Liberal agenda can only be advanced using Conservative methods. I think I heard someone call that "Compassionate Conservatism".

The GOP benefits by capturing a larger portion of the Dem base (blacks, hispanics and Jews) - the country benefits because BOTH parties adopt the conservative methodology and we get TWO viable candidates for the highest office.

Greg D:A compellin... (Below threshold)

Greg D:

A compelling argument can be made that Bush 43 is a good President. Not great, but good, in a lot of ways. I believe he's better than the alternative. It's much harder to claim he's a great Republican, aside from the possibility of some double-secret-Rovian mind-game that, 20 years from now, makes clear his genius in somehow secretly having promoted conservative views such as free trade, fiscal sanity, and small government. He's been a great Republican party-builder, and faithful to the Republican politicians, but only a so-so Republican, based on everything we can see right now. The two are very different things, you see.

I'm with Cameron, on the plastique-as-character-builder metaphor. I don't believe that the cause of moderate conservatives will be advanced by four years of ineffective inaction by a Kerry presidency combined with a hostile Republican Congress. Not at this time in our history, anyway.

But I can understand arguments to the contrary, Kevin's and Spoons' included.

Jim:I guess they t... (Below threshold)


I guess they think it's some sort of rhetorical device to make the conversation interesting. Personally, I find it tedious and dishonest.

Crud. Sorry, not Kevin's a... (Below threshold)

Crud. Sorry, not Kevin's argument, Paul's. Sorry for the imprecision, folks.

"Why did you write:<p... (Below threshold)

"Why did you write:

I'll be disappointed if Bush wins."

That would be because I'm an idiot. If you read the rest of the piece, it is an obvious typo. Or I hope it was obvious. thanks for the heads up, i fixed it.

Greg all of those are good ... (Below threshold)

Greg all of those are good points. #3 will be the worst part

- Paul....I ran a piece wit... (Below threshold)

- Paul....I ran a piece with this same basic theme back three months ago...I seldom get very many comments on my stuff because I don't do a lot of editorializing. Generally I try to just "news it" along with common sense.... I think that to say people are emotionally involved in this election like never before would be a colossal understatement judging from the reactions...

- Personally I think in the end the fact we are at war will still decide the issue in the end....

- Of course that little Oktober thing this afternoon may have some effect too...but even without it I think Bush still wins....

We could write a similar po... (Below threshold)

We could write a similar post about many a disaster or fiasco.

For instance, we could observe that Hitler's luck in choosing correctly among competing plans for attacking the West in June 1940 gave him an overconfidence that led him to ignore advice and author strategic blunders that greatly hastened Germany's defeat. This does not mean that the Germans' routing the French and British and easily overrunning Europe was to be wished for or welcomed.

"Tactics?" "Strategy?" Let's reach for our common sense instead.

heeding your words...... (Below threshold)

heeding your words...

"A few more victories like this will ruin us." That's where the Democrat party is in 2004.

couldn't agree more.

Paul:Good thing I ... (Below threshold)
Remy Logan:


Good thing I decided to stop writing half way through my rant, which was written when you were still "disappointed if Bush wins." I took that statement at face value, and instead of evaluating it, I freaked out.

If your point is that the Republican party will survive a Kerry presidency, well yeah, of course it will. I do think the points I made are still valid. Kerry will not fight the war on terror, the Bush Doctrine will be thrown in the trash can, and the economy will tank.


Yes, a Kerry win could preclude a Hillary run, but even if she does have an open shot in 2008 I don't think she will win. Hillary is an unabashed idealogical liberal. Americans prefer those who live in the center, which is how Bill was able to win in 92. In other words, Hillary is no Clinton.

A Kerry presidency would be... (Below threshold)

A Kerry presidency would be destructive to Republicans because it would institutionalize the illegal voting tactics of the left. We won't recognize this country in four years if Kerry wins.

Click on The Final Two Objectives for comment on the two most important objectives we must accomplish in the next one and 1/2 days. Our focus has narrowed to these two items, and they are both achievable.

No, Remy, the economy will ... (Below threshold)

No, Remy, the economy will do well over the next four years regardless of who is President. The better argument is that the Democrats will get credit for the upturn when Kerry wins.

Spoons:I disagree.... (Below threshold)
Remy Logan:


I disagree. Kerry will raise taxes on the middle class, just as Clinton did in spite of promises of a cut. Fortunately for Clinton, the Tech bubble overcame the damage of the tax increase. In Hawaii, where the economy never benefited from the Tech bubble, the economy soured and did not begin to pick up until 2002.

Kerry's plan to increase taxes on those making over $200,000 will hurt small business across the nation, including the one I work for. On top of all that, is Kerry's desire to increase gasoline taxes. Kerry will abort Bush's economic recovery before we see any benefit. Then he will blame Bush for the bad economy.


I think that is an excellent point. We need to show the Dems, and all Americans, that cheating is not conducive to winning.

Quite honestly, your analys... (Below threshold)

Quite honestly, your analysis is completely preposterous on so many levels that I would overflow your comment limit if I tried to address it all.

Most notable among the flaws in your argument is the implied notion that Republicans are Republicans first, Americans second. If I have the choice between screwing the country or screwing the party, the party takes the hit. Period. Four years of Kerry will be catastrophically bad for the country regardless of the efforts by Bill Owens or Rudy Giuliani in 2009-2017 to turn the situation around.

Second most notable is your preposterous reversal of cause and effect: Carter did not get us Reagan; Reagan was the man he was before NIXON won in 1968, never mind Carter's election in 1976. Carter's personal malaise that he inflicted upon the country may have helped the COUNTRY realize it needed someone else, but the nation did not have a choice to pick Reagan in '76 (after he lost to Ford).

Really, this is a conceptual thread akin to wondering whether Bush secretly welcomed the bin Laden tape's appearance. It is unworthy conjecture of a type that has achieved prominence and some respectability since Clinton's Wag-The-Dog presidency. That does not make it right or legitimate. My party or my country? Forget the party, the country must succeed.

The Monk, I'm guessing you ... (Below threshold)

The Monk, I'm guessing you broke the rule about reading the whole thing before commenting.

Interesting idea, but I'm n... (Below threshold)

Interesting idea, but I'm not convinced. On the terror front, most certainly. On the domestic side, nah.

If Kerry wins with all of his outlandish, Santa Claus type promises, the spineless politicians of Republican ilk will most probably stampede to the left to cover their asses.

This is the same behavior that got us the disasterous Prescription Drug Benefit. Think an entire Senate of Arlen Specter wannabes.

Certainly we'll finally end up winning the war, but it will be at greater cost due to our 4 year vacation and domestically in 8 years we'll look much more like Europe.

Interesting idea, but I'm n... (Below threshold)

Interesting idea, but I'm not convinced. On the terror front, most certainly. On the domestic side, nah.

If Kerry wins with all of his outlandish, Santa Claus type promises, the spineless politicians of Republican ilk will most probably stampede to the left to cover their asses.

This is the same behavior that got us the disasterous Prescription Drug Benefit. Think an entire Senate of Arlen Specter wannabes.

Certainly we'll finally end up winning the war, but it will be at greater cost due to our 4 year vacation and domestically in 8 years we'll look much more like Europe.

Paul,The worst<... (Below threshold)
Greg D:


The worst part would be that the Republican Senators, ballless wimps that they are, wouldn't filibuster all Democrat judges the way the Democrats have done to us. :-(


You're right, I'm thinking of Bush's skills at building the Republican Party, rather than his BS "Compassionate Conservative" programs.

However, for all his moderate ways, Bush has been good about helping conservative Republicans get elected. That's going to pay off for a long time to come.

Never, never, never ... (Below threshold)

Never, never, never send politicians a message that (1) dishonesty will be rewarded, or that (2) incumbents who try to do what they say they'll do will be turned out of office.

Those are the messages of a Bush defeat.

As for helping the Democrats save themselves, I don't think they're worth saving. We can have a two-party system with one of the now-minor parties stepping into the smoldering crater that will be a repudiated Democratic Party.

I got sick and tired of people on my side of the aisle outsmarting themselves in 1996 when they campaigned to re-elect Clinton, whom they hated more than I did and for longer. If the same reasoning turned out to assist in electing Kerry, I'd have to conclude that my side of the aisle is a looney bin without walls.

Yes, the Republican senator... (Below threshold)
Remy Logan:

Yes, the Republican senators are "ballless wimps." Not because they won't fillibuster Democrat judges, but because they wouldn't smackdown the Dems that were doing the fillibustering these past few years. With a solid Republican majority in the Senate there shouldn't be a need for fillibustering. Allowing votes, and then voting down the judges is the best thing they can do.

Paul: BTW, if Kerry is elected he will submit the Kyoto and ICC treaties for ratification. If you think a W loss is acceptable then I can't figure out just what in the world you think a Conservative is. W would never submit these.

I found your comments thoug... (Below threshold)

I found your comments thought provoking....but like so much that I consider these days they are always framed by 9/11. I remember how PO'd I was when I saw the jubliation in the "Arab Street" after the destruction on our soil.

As much as I would hate to have to listen to the Liberal talking-heads gloat, it would wrench my guts to have to witness an "Arab Street" celebration for that hypocrite and his digbat foreign wife if Bush doesn't get in....

So your hypothosies aside, my stomach rules.........BUSH MUST WIN!

is it possible that clinton... (Below threshold)

is it possible that clinton is helping kerry because he knows that the swift boat info is true. That kerry was not honorablely discharged, that he was being run by hanoi? Does clinton calculate that the media will jump on this once kerry is elected, thus making it a walk for hillary in the dem nomination in 2008.

The only good thing ... (Below threshold)
John S.:

The only good thing about a Kerry victory is that Hillary is less likely to get a chance to destroy our health care system. Heíd be an extremely weak President because the only way heíll win is by a handful of Electoral votes stolen by 2 months of lawsuits. Hopefully a Republican Congress would keep Kerry in a box. But a Kerry presidency would be a frigginí disaster. Al Qaeda will be left alone to regroup, which means more attacks on U.S. soil. When the world sees that America again is doing nothing in the face of terror, Iran will explode a nuclear device. North Korea will invade the South. A military coup will put Saddam Hussein back in power. Al Qaeda will eventually assassinate Pakistanís Musharraf. Imagine Osama Bin Laden as the new Islamic leader of Pakistan. Do you have any idea how much damage a 5 megaton nuke could do to Manhattan? There could be 10 million less Blue staters by 2008. Iím sure the UN will pass a resolution of disapproval as itís being vaporized. But unfortunately, the entire Northeast that voted Kerry will be bathed in radiation, which will depress my property value. If Kerry wins, I start digging my fallout shelter Wednesday morning.

I understand where you're c... (Below threshold)

I understand where you're coming from in regards to strategic vs. tactical victories.

At the same time, try to think of this election the way I think of it: there are approximately 2.4 million people in the US armed forces right now, of which I am one. The Presidential election affects my life itself, to be melodramatic. No matter who the President, I will fight and die if necessary.

Think of the consequences of having a weak President, 'more Carter than Carter' as you say. Think of John Kerry leading our military and making our foreign policy decisions.

Then consider how much you are willing to sacrifice for theories and party politics. To me our nation and its people and their safety trump any benefits to a party.

So, if Kerry's elected, and... (Below threshold)

So, if Kerry's elected, and if we don't have healthcare nationally in place and available the day after he's in office, then we can void the election, right? Or, better yet, impeach Kerry for fraud? O.K.

On the bright side here, I'... (Below threshold)

On the bright side here, I'm assuming that Paul is going for a liferaft place in his projections, making ready an escape should things go surprisingly terribly in the next week/months, depending upon how long the Democrats draw out the voter results.

I anticipate a Bush win but a long and nasty fight about that by Democrats. No surprise there.

But, a Kerry use of the White House would be disasterous for our nation, and for the world. They'd put into place a lot of short term patches and break necessary barriers otherwise, and I worry that the country would never recover. It was very bad during Carter and even worse in much of Clinton's last term (if not the first one, despite all that glamor affiliated with him) and Kerry seems to promise destruction one way or another for most of America. As do Democrats, while promoting "victory" for Democrats otherwise.

I'm relying on faith tonight to believe that we'l have another Bush term decided soon. Since Gore revealed himself as a fire breathing emotionally disturbed man, I can imagine that Kerry will, too, soon enough (not that he hasn't already). So, be prepared.

Baloney. Clinton v... (Below threshold)
jack rudd:

Baloney. Clinton virtually defecated in everyone's living rooms in his first term, and yet in 1996 a plurality of idiots invited him to do it all over again.
There is no longer any level of Democrat depravity or stupidity that Democrat and swing voters will not defend and/or forgive.

Bad idea on the Republican'... (Below threshold)

Bad idea on the Republican's part. What if, Kerry actually does a good job and the economy turns around? What if he actually governs from the center and gets Moderate Republicans and Moderate/Conservative Democrats to advise him on the crucial issues of the day.

What if...

At the end of the day, you really have no idea (none of us do) we just have opinions based on our views of his philosophy.

Remember, we had opinions about how GWB would govern too and he governed significantly differently than he campaigned (good or bad - depending on your POV).

At this point 30 hours from now - we will just have to see.

BTW - Registering lots of new first-time voters and getting them to the polls does not equal stealing an election.

Dave, neither is ensuring t... (Below threshold)

Dave, neither is ensuring that people who vote are eligible to do so "voter intimidation."

This kinda reminds me of St... (Below threshold)

This kinda reminds me of Star Wars...

Tactically, Darth Vader defeated Obi Wan Kenobi.

Strategically, the Rebels were able to destroy the Death Star. lol.

McGhee,Yes but the... (Below threshold)


Yes but the following are:

Sending flyers into minority/Democratic neighborhoods threatening them with arrest and taking away their children if they show up at the polls

Sending false notices to voters about polling place changes.

Targeting minority voters instead of ALL newly registered voters (why do you think that just minority voters are fraudently registering - just as many stories of Republican registration frauds)

Sending registered mail from RNC and using as proof that they do not exist that they did not return the return receipt. I have been registered to vote since my 18th birthday and even if I had the time I would not send it back to the RNC, I would refuse too and be quite insulted.

Sending flyers to minority/Democratic voters that they are not registered or if they voted in the past year they are not eligible to vote again

Creating fake letters from the NAACP about voting

Challenging voters who you have no personal knowledge of voting fraud, just because they have been accused of the crime of "Voting/Registering While Black/Democrat"

Shame, shame shame!!!

But it is all backfiring, the rising tide is saying - no you will not stop my vote this time!!!!

Dave (the other one)

He has exactly ZERO marg... (Below threshold)

He has exactly ZERO margin for error. If there is another attack, Bush's (knock on wood) 3 year perfect track record will be thrown in his face daily.

Actually, if there's another terrorist attack in the U.S. we'll have hearings to determine how those terrorists got into the U.S.

If it turns out that Bush's Open Borders policies were to blame, then I guess that would be a tiny mark against the GOP.

Dave,Please show u... (Below threshold)
Greg D:


Please show us those "flyers". Otherwise take you lies elsewhere.

What we ALL see is Democrats doing their damndest to enable vote fraud. See, for example, Ohio.

Greg D.They are av... (Below threshold)

Greg D.

They are available on-line at DailyKos. Do you own research.

Dave (the other one)






Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links


Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright ¬© 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login

Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy