Does anyone else find it odd that Rocketman95 has yet to chime in on this discussion? He seemed to be doing quite a bit of talking about Ron Kirk, John Sharp, and Kirk Watson, but strangely I haven't heard anything from him today. Seems just a little bit weird that someone who followed the race so closely before the elections has completely lost interest..... I wonder what could have happened? Oh! I have an idea! THEY ALL LOST. Ron Kirk lost in a LANDSLIDE.
Sadly, yes . Kirk was the Democratic candidate who I liked best, in state, and Cornyn the candidate I liked the least. But why the taunting? More people agree with you... but that doesn't mean you're right concerning such a short-term matter as an election.
I wouldn't be tapdancing quite yet TJ. I am thrilled how well the Republicans did last night and I think it could be a sign of things to come. But if the Republicans screw it up by going overboard with the ideology, we'll lose EVERYTHING in 2004. 55 to 43 isn't a landslide. A landslide was when Reagan destroyed Mondale in 1984.
And I'm positive that you'd have been in here if it had been the other way around. I was wrong, what else can I say? I hold out hope for 2004...the Republicans weren't dead in 1992. Thanks for being a good sport about it though. Not that I really expected anything else from an egotistical ******* like you.
I have to admit that I liked Kirks advertisments. The ones I saw didn't seem as muddy as every other candidate on the ballot.
Originally posted by Refman I think they will try to get their economic package through because they feel it is right for the country. The American people are grossly overtaxed...nobody try to convince me otherwise...you'll only be wasting your keystrokes. Agreed. That's the main reason that I'm a Republican. I do not think that we'll see more people like Ashcroft. He has been an embarrassment to the administration. I have been disappointed in him also. If there wasn't an al qaeda, I don't think that he'd be AG right now.
I understand where you are coming from. I think that if the Republicans play their cards right and the economy turns around...then the Dems will be in BIG BIG trouble come 2004. The Dems put on a competitive race this go around. For what it is worth I thought the Cornyn-Kirk race was the cleanest one I've seen in a while.
We'll see. I think this will be a big wake-up call for the Democrats, but there's so much time between now and November 2004 that anything could happen. All I care about, unlike other posters here, is the good of the nation. If a Republican agenda that I disagree with works, then I'll be happy, and happy to say I was wrong.
Question: Which hurts worse? A) Losing to Oklahoma B) Losing to the Republicans I can honestly say that I feel better today than I did after any sports victory ever (excluding the Rockets championships).
OK...so we agree. We agree on a good many things. If there is ever a big cc.net get together I look forward to discussing these things over a tasty libation.
I hope that you will have the opportunity to say you were wrong. I am a Republican because I believe the Republican agenda to be good for the country. NOT the fringe elements of the party...but the mainstream party view.
FYI: Winson Churchill did say this, but he didn't make it up. It's apparently a saying that's been around for a long time. Here is a link to someone who did some research on the subject: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/5952/unquote.html Not that it matters! Most people attribute it to Churchill.
You can disagree with Newt Gingrich's opinions, but his "Contract With America" campaign in 1994 was a masterstroke. He and the Republicans made a list of what they were for and never lost sight of that (at least until after they were elected, anyway). Those were issues that people could, in general, relate to. And it showed that they believed in something (whether they really did or not). I haven't read this whole thread, but I agree with this entirely. The Democrats need to come up with a strategy of what they believe in and promote it both locally and nationally in a unified form. They need to give people a clear choice. In the process, they are going to have to, at least to some extent, alienate many centrists (like myself), but it'll energize the base. With turnouts in the 30-40% range, they can afford losing centrists if they can re-excite their liberal base.
