Why Kerry Failed

[Vince278]

I had thought that the "Southern Republicans" are Dems and that they were tired of being taken for granted by other Dems. If the Dems aren't careful, the same may happen to the minority votes they already seem to take for granted.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe


Thats what I was trying to say. Potentially converting some southern repubs back to Dems.

And the point of having two Republican parties is...

[Imran Siddiqui]

I had thought that the "Southern Republicans" are Dems and that they were tired of being taken for granted by other Dems.

You mean like "Northeast Republicans" or "Moderate Repubicans" who are tired of being taken for granted by other Republicans .

[Vince278]

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly
And the point of having two Republican parties is...

Friendly competition?

[Vince278]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
You mean like "Northeast Republicans" or "Moderate Repubicans" who are tired of being taken for granted by other Republicans .

Yes. Its bad for either party to take anyone in their power base for granted.

[Straybow]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
We (Americans) haven't liked our candidates since the 1870s. Why start now?

Speak for yourself and your commie friends. The vast majority of Republicans loved Reagan, and prolly the same applies to Eisenhower (dunno, wasn't alive then).

[Dis]

So why don't we have a thread titled: Why Bush succeeded?

I didn't vote for the guy, but he does have his good points. And he ran a pretty good campaign.

Again I use my St. Loius Rams example. It always pissed me off when they say they beat themselves. They act like they couldn't be beat. When the real reason they lost was their opponent played a better game.

Why can none of you admit Bush ran a better campaign? And he's a better candidate? (the second part is debatable I know- if I thought that, I would have voted for him)

[Vince278]

Originally posted by Straybow

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
We (Americans) haven't liked our candidates since the 1870s. Why start now?

Speak for yourself and your commie friends. The vast majority of Republicans loved Reagan, and prolly the same applies to Eisenhower (dunno, wasn't alive then).

Everybody liked Ike and Reagan (at least those who voted). Before Eisenhower got into politics both parties were courting him (similar to McCain). He really couldn't lose, he just picked a party and went for it.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Dissident
So why don't we have a thread titled: Why Bush succeeded?.....

A good idea in theory, but I think it would degenerate almost instantly into an insult-fest.

[Ned]

What is clear is that the Republican Party is the majority party in the United States today. The question is whether it continues to grow or whether the Dems begin making a comeback. The Republican Party will continue to grow if they obtain the allegience of the Hispanic vote and increase their percentage of the black vote. The Republican base are white men, married women, Catholics and the religious in general. The Democrat base today are unmarried women, blacks and Hispanics, and secularists. Catholics historically were part of the Democrat base. No more. The shift of Hispanics to the Republican Party seems underway, portending an even larger Republican majority.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly


And the point of having two Republican parties is...

What, your opposed to parties actually representing the interests and leanings of the greater portions of the populace?

Moreover what Imran said.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

One of the reasons why John Kerry failed.

Fun Hebrew Homonyms

A reader e-mails:

Have a good friend in NYC who's a hebrew scholar. He sent me the following about his dad wearing the button below. Kerry's campaign apparently "misfired" again. I'll let the story speak for itself:


"Did my father tell you about his Hebrew Kerry button? The democrats, trying to drum up more Jewish vote, printed campaign buttons with "Kerry" spelled phonetically in Hebrew. Unforturnately, no one told them that that spelling happens to be a Hebrew word. It means: "Seminal discharge"! Maybe we can save them for Clinton rallies..."

Apparently, there was a 'dishonorable discharge' after all ...

Link

[JohnT]

Originally posted by Straybow

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
We (Americans) haven't liked our candidates since the 1870s. Why start now?

Speak for yourself and your commie friends. The vast majority of Republicans loved Reagan, and prolly the same applies to Eisenhower (dunno, wasn't alive then).

That's what the slogan said: "I Like Ike"

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

I had thought that the "Southern Republicans" are Dems and that they were tired of being taken for granted by other Dems.

You mean like "Northeast Republicans" or "Moderate Repubicans" who are tired of being taken for granted by other Republicans .

We save one of your compatriots jobs and this is the thanks we get?

[Dis]

Originally posted by Ned
What is clear is that the Republican Party is the majority party in the United States today. The question is whether it continues to grow or whether the Dems begin making a comeback. The Republican Party will continue to grow if they obtain the allegience of the Hispanic vote and increase their percentage of the black vote. The Republican base are white men, married women, Catholics and the religious in general. The Democrat base today are unmarried women, blacks and Hispanics, and secularists. Catholics historically were part of the Democrat base. No more. The shift of Hispanics to the Republican Party seems underway, portending an even larger Republican majority.

The republicans will continue to get more and more hispanic voters. It's obvious they got many hispanic votes. Especially in my city. This allowed Bush to take my state.

Recent immigrants may favour the democrats. But I think once the become established citizens and live here for a generation or two, many are voting republican.