Mission Statement: This blog reviews the news of the day in light of 242 years of American history. "Nationalism," a modern day pejorative, has been our country's politic throughout history, until 2008. Obama changed that narrative. Trump is seeking a return to our historical roots. Midknight Review supports this return to normality.
No article election update: WaPost has GOP up 11 points in generic polling. That total was "7" just before the 2010 wave election for the GOP.
To an extent, I agree with you. When low information voters do not vote, the GOP/Conservative has a better chance in SOME locals. But you can't control a nation when you lose the election cycle that gives you the nation's House of Representatives, its governors and its local officials. And "we" have occupied the presidency 20 years compared to the Dems 16 (including the next two years). Why do you think that will never happen again?
If you think Hillary is going to be another Bill or Obama, you haven't listened to the woman talk.
Personally, I actually want to like Hillary. I do not believe we will ever know the real Hillary, if she does not win the presidency. She is not an Alinsky - ite and if infinitely more intelligent that either Michelle or H Obama (I have read some of her papers). But that is the problem. She has no core values upon which she stands, at least, I have no idea what those "values" might be. She has traveled through time compromising who she is and what she is about. Her willingness to make a deal for her political life with her horn-dog husband, is no claim to fame. But the presidency, often, is not about qualified personnel or we would have never had Barack Obama, a no-nothing with no experience and not an ounce of commonsense.
I believe that our pool of presidential candidates should be limited to past and current governors . . . . period. Whether you agree or not, Hillary is not the vote magnet the Dems seem to think she is. She has a history as Secretary of State under the failed Obama Administration and she will have to answer for those do-nothing years.
You do know that "counting votes" has nothing to do with the article you referenced. In 2012, there were 12 Democrat controlled congressional districts in which more votes were cast than people who were registered, . If you all lose this election cycle, it will be due to the fact of Obama's monumental unpopularity, or maybe you will blame Bush for that. Geeeesh.
Good news for the GOP: not one single college student I've talked to is voting, not one.
ReplyDeleteThat is the best recipe for success for Republicans. That is what they've depended on. It's really their only chance. Won't happen in '16
To an extent, I agree with you. When low information voters do not vote, the GOP/Conservative has a better chance in SOME locals. But you can't control a nation when you lose the election cycle that gives you the nation's House of Representatives, its governors and its local officials. And "we" have occupied the presidency 20 years compared to the Dems 16 (including the next two years). Why do you think that will never happen again?
DeleteIf you think Hillary is going to be another Bill or Obama, you haven't listened to the woman talk.
Personally, I actually want to like Hillary. I do not believe we will ever know the real Hillary, if she does not win the presidency. She is not an Alinsky - ite and if infinitely more intelligent that either Michelle or H Obama (I have read some of her papers). But that is the problem. She has no core values upon which she stands, at least, I have no idea what those "values" might be. She has traveled through time compromising who she is and what she is about. Her willingness to make a deal for her political life with her horn-dog husband, is no claim to fame. But the presidency, often, is not about qualified personnel or we would have never had Barack Obama, a no-nothing with no experience and not an ounce of commonsense.
I believe that our pool of presidential candidates should be limited to past and current governors . . . . period. Whether you agree or not, Hillary is not the vote magnet the Dems seem to think she is. She has a history as Secretary of State under the failed Obama Administration and she will have to answer for those do-nothing years.
Doesn't matter who votes, only who counts the votes.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2014/10/chris_christie_stresses_desire.html
You do know that "counting votes" has nothing to do with the article you referenced. In 2012, there were 12 Democrat controlled congressional districts in which more votes were cast than people who were registered, . If you all lose this election cycle, it will be due to the fact of Obama's monumental unpopularity, or maybe you will blame Bush for that. Geeeesh.
Delete