Just go an e-mail press release from Log Cabin where Executive Vice President Patrick Sammon blames the GOP loss on social conservatives:
Republicans lost this election because independent voters abandoned the GOP. . . . Social conservatives drove the GOP’s agenda the last several years. Their divisive agenda alienated the mainstream Republicans and independents who determined this election’s outcome. Social conservatives should take responsibility for this loss.
I disagree.
I do agree though with the better part of this statement:
Democrats didn’t win because of anything they stood for. They won because of Republican mistakes. GOP leaders lost sight of what brought our Party to power in 1994. Limited government, lower spending, high ethical standards and accountability, and other unifying GOP principles attracted a broad coalition of support including fiscal conservatives, social conservatives, mainstream Republicans, libertarians, and independents. Now we’ve lost the U.S. House because Party leaders turned their backs on the GOP’s core principles and catered only to social conservatives.
It wasn’t so much catering to social conservatives as it was catering to K Street. The GOP got too accustomed to being the party in power and sought to stay in power by ladling out the pork.
Twelve years ago, the Republicans ended forty years of minority status in the U.S. House by campaigning on a series of conservative principles, drawn largely from the vision of Ronald Reagan. But, by 2006, they weren’t running on much beyond holding onto power.
No, Log Cabin has it only half-right. The GOP didn’t merely cater to social conservatives. By 2006, congressional Republicans, by and large, no longer stood for much of anything besides clinging to power. And they lost that tonight.
I do not consider “compassionate conservatism” to be conservative. It is social conservatism mixed with fiscal liberalism.
On the other hand, Bush still has the veto. Maybe he’ll finally use it.
Yes, let’s hope he finally uses his veto pen.
I thought compassionate conservatism was social liberalism with fiscal conservatism. Then I lost faith in bush when i found out it was the opposite.
This blog is a friggin’ ghost town. Not surprising though.
America has awoken.
Finally.
GOD BLESS AMERICA!
Problem was the Republican party strayed from their original contract with America principles. And I hope someone like Newt Gingrich could help reconnect America with his original agenda.
I am glad that America is getting a cleaning out, however its going to harm our Iraq and immigration problems. Thats the only problem.
The Republican defeats will force the party to change its focus.
Well said, Matt.
MCCASKILL JUST WON!!!
Can we get Karl Rove’s genius card back now? 🙂
You gay JUDASES, you can’t even support your fellow citizens when they throw these corrupt creeps out. You sit there whining about phony conservative republican values instead of celebrating what tonight is: a victory for all of America.
You make me sick, you sell-outs!
I have to agree with you. It was not the fault of Social Conservative’s that caused the loss of control tonight.
It was the loss of vision on the part of the party leadership. I am overjoyed to see this happen, but very sad by it as well. Because, how long now will it take for the Republican Party to become the majority again?
I think the place we have to look is at the way all the “Pork” was doled out and the way in which the Leadership abused and used their office for private and personal gain.
(Can we say Haliburton or Carlyle Group?)
I only hope that in 2008, we will have a NEW opportunity to change Leadership and the Republican Party will bring to the stage, a man of real integrity, with real Consititutional Values and a Commitment to a Smaller Government, to personal Liberties and restoring our Freedoms.
Certainly this man, we call President has done one heck of a job at removing many of our civil liberties and if this new congress allows the introduction of a “National I.D. Card” for ALL U.S. Citizens, slated for 2008 by the USA PATRIOT ACT, then we are well on our way to a total loss of freedom as we’ve known it.
But, time will tell and who knows what the future will hold.
Only the Good Lord knows for sure.
So I will pray tonight, as always that God WILL Lead this Nation into the Light of Freedom, Integrity, Honesty and strong Moral Character.
Goodnight and God bless America!!
Ryan,
I don’t know that anyone here is a “Judas” as you assert.
I think we are disappointed in the republican party as a whole. And yes, I DO REJOICE at seeing these people thrown out. I couldn’t be happier.
I just hope that what we’ve brought in will be an improvement and a blessing, rather than a bigger nightmare than we already have.
Yea, and then I think of Iraq and the whole mess…
How much worse can it get. Maybe we’ll get the chance in 2 more years, to begin to re-establish our good name with the nation’s of the world. And they will forgive US for choosing GWB as President. And we will again have favor and grace in this world.
I pray for and hope for it to happen.
Will the Democrats go undefeated?
With the Democrats up (though just barely) in their 2 endangered House seats in Georgia, the Democrats have the real opportunity to make history.
For the first time in the post-war era, an American political party may successfully defend all it’s House, Senate and Governor seats.
As of right now, I can’t find a single Republican pick-up of any Democratic seat, in either the House or Senate or in a Governor’s race.
That would be quite an extraordinary feat.
Actually, Chase, GOP went undefeated in 1994–no Republican incumbent defeated.
The GOP did not go undefeated in 1994. Larry Sabato disscused just that on his crystal ball website just last week. Even in 1994, a couple House seats in Minnesota flipped.
I’m looking for that article.
I believe that statistic pertains to open seats too. The Minnesota seats may have been Republican held open seats.
The Democrats are running the table with not only all Democratic incumbents winning, but they are also winning all their open seats. That may be what Larry Sabato was talking about.
THAT has never happened before.
I think it’s kind of hilarious that Log Cabin is trying to blame “social conservatives” — when it’s obvious that the lion’s share of Democratic pickups were due to the fact that they ran social conservatives who weren’t Republican.
Now comes the interesting part; what happens when the campaign promises made by these social conservative Democrats run smack dab into the realities of life under Speaker Mussolini. It actually represents an interesting opportunity for Republicans; either Pelosi has to play nice, or these newbie “Democrats” are going to be facing an enraged electorate who has already demonstrated its willingness to toss incumbents.
Wow, a little clear, reality straight talk from Gay Patriot????
I don’t believe I’ve ever been witness to anything but extreme brown-nosing partisan rant from you guys.
Holy Cow, this thing has GOT to be good for America.
I miss Santorum already.
I think I agree.
Especially when you consider that much of the GOP blood spilled tonight wasn’t from social conservative members but the moderate members of the GOP.
And I am also curious to see how the newly elected socially conservative democrats do when the pushing and shoving starts-do they keep promises or play with Nancy for power.
At least the Left can stop calling the American people “sheeple” and idiots now. For a few months anyway. I just wonder if they have really taken a hard look at some of the Dems that got elected and what they stand for. If we don’t pull out of Iraq what is the point of being an anti-Iraq war candidate?
I’m hoping some of these new Dems will bring back an American soul to the national level of the party and allow me to trust them once again. I’d ask the hard core Republicans to realize the Left didn’t win, just the Democrats.
Dan, are you going to call out NorthDallasThirty for comparing Nancy Pelosi to a fascist? If Nancy Pelosi is Mussolini, then President Bush is Adolph Hitler. But I think both comparrisons are ludicrous and if you have any credibility Dan, you’ll call him out on it.
I’m a Log Cabin member here in NYC, and I’ve got to tell you I agree with Patrick on this one. I don’t know if social conservatives lost this election for us, but certainly suburbanites did not vote for the Republicans this year. Look at the races in Pennsylvania and Indiana. These were suburban areas where Republicans often get lots of votes. For some reason, the war on terror was not the most important issue for them as it was in 2004. It may be because our homeland has not been attacked for another two years, thus desensitizing us to the pain of 9/11. I’m not sure the answer, but I think Patrick may be on to something.
You know, I think it’s time for Sen. Collins of Maine to cross the aisle and join the Dems. Sen. Snowe too if she wants. That way, Reid can let Lieberman stew in his own juices without giving him a Chairmanship. If the Dems hold the Senate, Bush’s dream of packing the judiciary with wingnuts gets stopped in its tracks.
Dan, are you going to call out NorthDallasThirty for comparing Nancy Pelosi to a fascist? If Nancy Pelosi is Mussolini, then President Bush is Adolph Hitler. But I think both comparrisons are ludicrous and if you have any credibility Dan, you’ll call him out on it.
You make the assumption, Chase, that GPW particularly cares what you think about him and his credibility.
Personally, I don’t put much stock in your opinion; you’ve demonstrated more often than not that it’s political affiliation, not behavior, that drives your outrage over perceived slights. While I applaud your “Bush=Hitler=ludicrous” statement, the simple fact of the matter is that it only appears when you are trying to use it to frame other peoples’ behavior as bad — and never as a standalone statement.
I DO blame social conservatives. The reason that so many moderates lost their seats last night is because independent and Democrat voters in those districts decided they could no longer support even their favorite congenial Republicans.
I mean, Rick Santorum lost 59-41. That’s a huge loss for an incumbent senator.
If dislike of social conservatism is what made voters choose democrats then how do you explain those same voters approving amendments to ban gay marriages in seven or so states? Clearly, social conservatism was not the reason the republicans lost, especially when one considers that they had abandoned it in the past several years.
re Ryan and the Judas remark
Your feeling that gay men who support conservatism are betraying you is based on the false assumption that our sharing the same sexuality actually means anything. It has been my experience that gay men, through their everyday contact with each other, feel no obligation to consider the well being or safety of each other. On the contrary, one can say that they routinely put their pursuit of pleasure above their own and their fellows welfare. To try to put forward the idea that we are all members of a common community with a common interest is just ludicrous when one considers how gay men actully live. It is also insulting to tell other gay men that they should hold the narrow political interests of their group above those of the country as a whole. Many of us put the wellbeing of the country above the political agenda you desire. Many of us see your political agenda as damaging to the country as a whole and are steadfastly against it. Your emmotional reasoning and name calling only make you look like a silly…queen.
“Stay the course”
is probably one of the big reasons republicans lost. Whether or not one actually agrees that we should have done it one has to admit that the actuall invasion of Iraq was a brilliant military feat. We took the country quickly and with very few casualties. The problem is that it soon became apparent that we had to do much more than just take the territory. Pacifying the population required us to take action that nether Rumsfeld nor Bush were willing to take. They wanted to win a war and be considered nice guys at the same time. The problem the american people had with this is that we know it is not possible and we know more and more of our sons will have to die for a goal the leadership was unwilling to achieve . We’ve been told we cant afford to lose but at the same time we know that the leadership is unwilling to win. It became apparent to most that Bush’s decision to “stay the course” represented nothing more than a stubborn digging in of the heels to continue this situation in the hopes that some miracle could get him out of it. America doesn’t want to lose more men waiting for a miracle that is highly unlikely. Now of course, youo’d rather think the results of this election validate everything you believe in but I’m afraid that just isn’t so.
so ahksel, are you willing to win (by actually persuing war against the insurgents) so that Iraqis have a chance of peace ?
or are you willing to watch a nation slaughter itself just to get at a President you don’t like?
it’s strange…if everyone knows more troops was the answer, who says more troops insn’t the answer now?
I’ll take the former, but the latter doesn’t sound too bad to me either. More troops was only part of the answer. We should have pacified the country just like we pacified Germany after world war II.
By the way Rachel. I would have preferred to wake up today and heard that the republican’s had held onto the house and senate. If I don’t like Bush it is because he has not been a conservative in that he has fought this war like a school marm, he want’s to flood this country with millions of illegal aliens who will vote in elections and steal it right out from under our feet, and he wanted to let the saudis( through a Dubai front company) controll our ports. I think that’s plenty of reason’s not to like him, sorry if you have a problem with that.
i don’t have a problem with that ahksel. I have a problem with moral fraud. Both parties are guilty of it. and Iraq could suffer the consequences. Happy?
Arrogance like yours costs us lives – the obession with Dubya probably will destroy an inoocent nation more than what W has done – while you blame it all on him (while You gave him the ok in 2002) and then pretend like nothing has happened. I’m sorry, but I have too much conscience to fob it off on one “demon”. I’ve seen the true colors of my party (D) after 6 years and it’s left me sickened.
If Iraq’s a mess, it’s on both hands.By choice.
Which is the kind of thing your disagreeing commenters have been saying for a long time. Have you no shame?
Innocent nation?!!! Look dear, they want us dead. they want each other dead( shites and sunnis), they’ve wanted each other dead for hundreds of years, they’re whole culture is about killing and torture and brutality. This is the culture that produced saddam, this is the culture that produced bin laden, this is the culture that produced the current mad man in iran, this is the culture that has been killing hindus in india for hundreds of years, this is the culture that has been killing buddhists for hundreds of years, this is the culture that tried to conquer christian europe and has been capturing and killing/and or enslaving christians on the high seas for hundreds of years (read robinson crusoe sometime babe). This is the culture that had a genocidal slave operation in africa long before the europeans arrived. This is a culture where the victim of a rape is punnished instead of the rapist. This is the culture of “honor killings’ where a boy is dutybound to kill his sister if she is raped.
So they are back to killing each other because we took Saddam out and he had been preventing that by killing them himselves. BIG DEAL.Sounds like business as usual for them. If they didn’t want us in their neighborhood then they should have stayed out of ours. But they didn’t. They didn’t because we are the most powerful nation on earth and christian. They didn’t because the fact that they are nothing compared to us causes them shame, jealousy and envy. They did it because they have nothing else besides killing, no science, no scholars, nor authors, no artists, no entertainment, nothing. The only thing they have is oil and that’s only after WE built an industry there to exploit that rescource.
So yes, If we leave and all that happens is that they go at each others throats then I’d be verry happy with that. We’d alll be getting what we wanted. They’d get to kill and we’d be left alone and would have to fear a saddam with a nuke. My fear of course is that they wouldn’t leave us alone
If George Bush had done what many previous leaders would have done after 911, namely wiped out several middle eastern cities with “nook-you-ler”(sic.) weapons then I think I could guarantee you that the republicans would be in a much better spot today. It is his WEAKNESS, and his questionable ties to business profiting off this war which have cost the republicans. Don’t forget that somebody was going tto make a huge profit off of the Dubai ports deal. Apparently American’s didn’t forget. Yes we are frightened at what the democrats will do. But it seems to me that the only difference between the Bush republicans and the democrats is that whereas the democrats seem to want to give this country away the bush republicans are trying to sell it to the highest bidder. Perhaps in the end to many people the result would be the same and they just resented someone making a profit off their freedom.
-If dislike of social conservatism is what made voters choose democrats then how do you explain those same voters approving amendments to ban gay marriages in seven or so states?-
Most of the states with big turnover in Congress didn’t have a gay marriage ban on the ballot. The one that did (Arizona) defeated the amendment.
I say let they impeach him, perhaps they will drive him out of office before he can sign an amnesty bill and perhaps his replacement would veto it. Wouldn’t that be poetic justice for the dems’. So motivated by hate that they’d shoot themselves in the foot. I can guarantee you that won’t happen though. Bush won’t make any trouble for them, they’ll get whatever they want from him. The man has NO HONOR, he won’t FIGHT these next two years. He will give them what they want so he can go back to texas in peace. the man who supposedly always stood by his friends just fired Rumsfeld…..AFTER the election. Guess he really only is so loyall when the cost-benefit analysis permits. BTW, Rumsfled should have gone years ago, his policies are what led us to where we are now in Iraq.
re 36
7 states passed a ban on gay marriages. That’s a large chunck of the electorate. In fact in every state they have been proposed they have passed except arizona, this leads one tto believe that this is a rather universal sentiment among americans no matter what the turnover in their state was. As stated elsewhere on this blog, the Arizona ban affected heterosexual couples as well as gay couples. As stated elsewhere-re Ian- they already have laws in Arizona which make gay marriage illegal so the issue for the voters was it’s affects on the benefits of straight couples as the gay marriage aspect was redundant.
the dems have already brought change to Iraq!
Rummy is gone!
If the Repubs would have won, he would stay, and Iraq would suffer
Dan GPW, I predict that someday historians will determine that the dissatisfaction among moderate Republicans and Independents that led to the ouster of Republican majorities in congress had its birth in the widely resented attempt by President Bush and the congressional leadership to interfere in the Teri Schiavo case.
Excuse me, but with Republican rule in both the house, senate and white house, people discovered what democrats have known for years: Politically active republicans are all about catering to big business not to the citizens of this country. Look how Bush talked out of both sides of his mouth: tough on immigration, but dang if he didn’t want to let anyone in who would work for sub-standard wages for big compaines.
-. As stated elsewhere on this blog, the Arizona ban affected heterosexual couples as well as gay couples. As stated elsewhere-re Ian- they already have laws in Arizona which make gay marriage illegal so the issue for the voters was it’s affects on the benefits of straight couples as the gay marriage aspect was redundant.-
Many other amendments which already passed in previous years and this year had the same type of language. That this one failed was a very nice surprise, and hopefully a sign of the future.
Many people vote for this amendment thinking it is only about marriage. When people find out more, the amendment has a better chance of failing.
I believe that we must enlist the power of all gay republicans.If interested. Please contact me at :
Gene Ballard
20 Schoonman street
Danielson,Ct. 06239
Call: 860-779-2277