Thread: Why I believe Republicans are in trouble this year.

W,
Right on the money! It is amazingly pathetic how bad the Republicans have squandered their leadership role. It really has been sad to see they are no different than the Left - power-hungery and have no desire to actual solve problems in our country. The question is, "What do we do now?"

Originally Posted by ALIPAC

Friends,

I have been studying the polling data, talking to consultants, and divining the entrails of a goat to do my best to figure out what is happening here.

It is true that Republican candidates across the nation and in NC are in real trouble. There is about a 5% to 10% lag in their support levels from what one would usually expect. That's a big problem considering that so many races are decided by less than a 10% margin.

Just a question here. Is it more important to get Republicans elected? Or is it more important to stop illegal immigration?

I can't help but see an extreme partisan bend here. A majority of rank-and-file Democrats want illegal immigration reduced or completely stopped. Meanwhile a Republican Congress and Senate have not done anything to stop illegal immigration since they took control.

How is re-electing the same illegal immigration-enabling Republicans going to help? We know the Republicans will do everything possible to increase outsourcing of jobs to foreign labor markets, because of their desire to provide Corporate America with cheap labor. So what would make them "change" course and stop the flow of cheap labor into the United States? It would be completely inconsistent with their general policy of helping Corporations increase their profits by driving wages down. Why would Republicans change course when it comes to providing cheap labor thru illegal immigration?

The only Republican I'd ever vote for would be Ron Paul, and possibly Tom Tancredo. The rest of them are completely owned by Corporate America, who'd like nothing more than to have completely open borders to increase the labor supply and drive wages down even further.

unlawflcombatnt

EconomicPopulistForum

EconomicPopulistCommentary

This is not a partisan leaning.

The fact is that we can't hardly find any Democrat candidates that are serious about immigration enforcement. Believe me, we have been looking and looking.

The fact is that the best allies of the public on this issue are within the Republican Party among those that are opposed to the immigration plans of the Presidents and the sellouts at his side.

Anyone here has been welcome for the past several weeks to find us good candidates.

So far, we have only been able to find 5 out of our 115 endorsements.

We have excluded any Democrat or Republican that supports amnesty or Guest Worker.

The facts are that many more Republican candidates are willing to stand with the public on this issue than Democrats at this time.

Those are the facts of the matter.

How is re-electing the same illegal immigration-enabling Republicans going to help?

We have targeted the illegal immigration eneabling Republicans and Democrats we are aware of for removal from office. Please see our blacklists on the endorsement page.

http://www.alipac.us/modules.php?name=C ... age&pid=30

There are many more Democrats than Republicans on the blacklists because there were many more Democrats than Republicans enabling illegal immigration in the US House and Senate.

W

Election 2006
Pew,WP,Gallup: Dems+4,+6,+7
Time,Newsweek: Dems +15,+16
RCP Chart Average: Dems +9.6
Updated House Ratings
Updated Senate Ratings
All the Latest Election '06 Polls
Gallup Senate Polls
RI: Whitehouse (D) +3, 48 - 45
TN: Corker (R) Up 3, 49 - 46
NJ: Menendez(D)* Up 10, 50-40
MO: McCaskill (D) Up 4, 49 - 45
VA: Allen (R)* Up 3, 49 - 46
MT: Tester (D) Up 9, 50 - 41
Mason-Dixon Senate Polls
RI: Chafee (R)* Up 1, 46 - 45
TN: Corker (R) Up 12, 50 - 38
MD: Cardin (D) Up 3, 47 - 44
MO: McCaskill (D) Up 1, 46 - 45
VA: Webb (D) Up 1, 46 - 45
MT: Burns (R)* 47, Tester (D) 47

Jim Geraghty
Gallup is out; Dem generic poll advantage narrows from 13 to 7
11/05 09:34 PM
The Gallup poll is out; in two weeks, the Dem's advantage on the generic ballot has narrowed from 13 points to 7 points.

Highlights:

"Based on history, a 7-point lead among likely voters still suggest Democrats will take enough votes to win a majority of seats in the House," says Frank Newport, editor-in-chief of the Gallup Poll. What gives some analysts pause, however, is the sophisticated redistricting over the past decade that has made most congressional districts less competitive...

Pew Research Center survey released Sunday also showed that an 11-point edge for Democrats on the congressional ballot two weeks ago had narrowed to 4 points among likely voters. "It's gone from a slam-dunk for Democrats to take the House to a pretty good chance," says Andy Kohut, director of the center.

The survey of 1,362 likely voters, taken Thursday through Sunday, has a margin of error of 3 points.

The president and the war in Iraq remain at the center of this election: 36% of likely voters saying that are casting a ballot for a candidate to send a message that they oppose Bush; 20% to send a message that they support him.

What's shifted is the determination of Republicans to vote. The Democratic advantage among registered voters was 11 points, but Republican voters were more likely to be judged as sure to go to the polls, making the edge among likely voters smaller.

A month ago, the Democratic margin among registered and likely voters was identical.

It's not what Ken Mehlman would have liked to see in in the final Gallup poll, but it is a big shift in a two week period, and it suggests the GOP has the momentum. We will see whether that's enough to keep control of the House and Senate.
http://tks.nationalreview.com/

unlawfcombatnt,

It may seem we have an 'extreme patrisan bend' here. However we recently sent surveys out to all the congressional candidates and by far the Reps came back stronger re illegal immigration. Did you review the candidates ALPAC has endorsed based on the survey responses?

http://www.alipac.us/modules.php?name=F ... forum&f=25

Agree, most Reps are owned by corporations.

But most Dems are for amnesty which was obvious from the way they voted in the House and Senate when they each submitted their immigration bills.

I understand your frustration with the Republican party. As a party they are split and I blame the president mostly for this.
In a nutshell, Reps want cheap labor for their corporations and Dems want votes and see a large potential voting bloc.

Personally I believe this country is ripe for a new political party. Most people are fed up with most Republicans and Democrats.

unlawflcombatnt wrote:

Just a question here. Is it more important to get Republicans elected? Or is it more important to stop illegal immigration?

Do a little research and you'll find that they are pretty much one and the same. Without a Republican controlled U.S. House we have little hope of preventing an amnesty (path to legalization for illegals) and new guest worker programs for the illegals already here. Additionally, you can probably forget necessary border fence funding and support of other programs to enhance border security. Plan and simple, the majority of Democrats feel as President Bush does - and that is that the only way to get control of the illegal immigrant situation is through amnesty and guest worker programs.

More than likely, a Democrat controlled House would pass a bill favorable to illegal immigrants that would include amnesty, an increase in guest worker programs, in-state college tuition (DREAM ACT), driver's licenses for illegals, etc. The Senate has already proven that they desire such a bill by their passage of the Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill (S. 2611).

Unfortunately, we have to dance with the devil if we're to have any hope at all. Please do a comparison of the Republican and Democrat voting records for a better understanding of what I'm talking about. I guarantee, you'll not find more than a handful of Democrats in the U.S. House or the U.S. Senate that don't support a path to legalization for illegal (amnesty) already in the United States or increased guest worker programs.

Oh, and for the record unlawflcombatnt, I do hope Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R-RI) losses his seat in the senate! Of course he is just a Republican in title only.

Originally Posted by MW

Oh, and for the record unlawflcombatnt, I do hope Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R-RI) losses his seat in the senate! Of course he is just a Republican in title only.

Don't forget Mike Dewine too. I want that swine outta here.

The simple fact is that in most cases, a vote for the Democratic candidate is a vote for amnesty and against meaningful immigration enforcement. Yes, there are a disturbing number of Republicans who are also in the illegal immigrant camp, but we're playing the numbers here.

The safest bet is to simply vote based upon the illegal immigration stances and/or voting records of the candidates. Something better than 9 times out of 10, that will mean a vote for someone other than the Democrat candidate.