A New York Times scoop! Republicans are very, very sad to find that cheerleading a disaster can have consequences.
Reader Interactions
17Comments
Comments are closed.
by Tim F| 17 Comments
This post is in: Politics
A New York Times scoop! Republicans are very, very sad to find that cheerleading a disaster can have consequences.
Comments are closed.
Myrtle Parker
Most telling quote:
Other than that not much self-reflection amongst Republicans. They really see this as reality conspiring against them.
Dave in ME
Digby concluded a recent post by saying:
and I would have to agree. They are beholden to a world that does not exist, except for in their imaginations. Now that Democrats have a foothold in Congress and can exercise true oversight, the Republicans are finding it tough to persist when the opposition party does not buy into their version of “reality”.
You will know the nightmare is over for Republicans when they throw Bush, Cheney and the rest of the neo cons to the sharks, but it may take a while yet. Imagine being a Republican Congress critter right now – you choice is to continue blindly following the clearly delusional president and veep, or strike out on you own and call for a change. What do you do? See Collins, Susan for a prime example of confusion on this issue.
Jake
George Bush, the black hole of political aspirations.
Yep. If people are too chicken shit to come out in strong opposition to President Event Horizon they will have a tough year. Perhaps I’m missing something but this seems pretty simple to the opportunistic political animal:
The President’s policies are unpopular.
People who oppose the President’s policies are gaining popularity.
Therefore you can increase your popularity by opposing the President’s policies.
And not lying about your life as a hardy man-o-the-woods.
If you do support the unpopular policies, that’s your right. But don’t whine when you get your butt kicked at the polls.
Rome Again
Their momentum is finally waning, yea!!!!!!!!! ::claps hands:: That was quite a show, wasn’t it? I am just concerned about if the rest of society will still be intact once we leave this movie.
Rome Again
BJ doesn’t like exclaimation points now? Over use gets big red x boxes?
cleek
GOP = PARTY OF NO!
still, what were the Dems’ prospects in 4/03? 4/05? pretty grim, IIRC.
Chad N. Freude
The Democrats own all of the winning issues. The Rublicans only hope is to become Democrats.
Rome Again
Aha, my cat is learning to say no, he must be a Republican too! That’s it, I’m withholding his dinner tonight unless he confesses.
ThymeZone
No shit, Sherlock. Maybe trying to make other Americans out to be the “common enemy” wasn’t such a great idea?
Like I said the other day, $100 bet:
Dems = 58 Senate seats, and 250 House seats in the 2009 Congress. Takers?
Jake
Altered for truthiness.
p.lukasiak
The Scoop is that the New York Times is actually publishing a story that says that what is happening might be bad for Republicans.
The usual story is that, whatever is happening, its bad/risky for Democrats, and good/presents opportunities for Republicans.
So, while the story itself is “dog bites man”, the meta-story is “man-bites-dog”
Jake
Or perhaps: “Bush Bites”
grumpy realist
What’s surprising to me is given the boat-anchor popularity of Bush et al. and their seeming determination to continue on the same path no matter how unpopular it becomes, that more Republicans haven’t been going against them.
Are they all that beholden to Karl Rove? Makes one wonder what pictures are stored on those RNC servers…..
stickler
I think I can answer this:
What you “do” is crap your pants. Because the last time the GOP “did the right thing,” that is, turn on the sitting Republican President, was 1974. And the fall elections that year were a disaster for the GOP. I guarantee you that the memory of that meltdown is still vivid.
And it leads to only one, doomed conclusion: to abandon the President, no matter how badly he’s screwing up, is impossible. So they’ll stick with him and trust to Fate. The Germans call this kind of fatalistic solidarity Schicksalsgemeinschaft. One suspects that the Democrats call it Schadenfreude.
Rome Again
Pictures of orgies between abducted run away children and powerbrokers at Bohemian Grove? Just a guess!
Cyrus
Unfortunate, yes, but I can’t say I’m too surprised. My guess is that it’s for one reason: primaries. With at least 28 percent of the country still willing to say they support Bush (and presumably some non-negligible number of wackos like Pat Buchanan who disagree with him because he isn’t corrupt and conservative enough), running against him would be a bad move in most primary elections. After that, candidates are hoping to win the general elections on mudslinging, incumbency, party loyalty, hoping for a pony in Iraq or maybe even that some pretense for a “change of heart” pops up, or just plain running against what they said in the primaries.
Chad N. Freude
Somebody call me? One is right. At least in my case.