Home > Thinking Right > Archives > 2007 > October > 04 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USTo unite GOP, bring on Hillary
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
An NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll released Wednesday night reveals that 48 percent of Republicans prefer a candidate who takes a “different approach” from that pursued by President Bush. That’s up from 41 percent in April. Back then, 50 percent wanted a candidate with a “similar approach” to the job. That’s now 38 percent.
New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani tops former Sen. Fred Thompson 30 percent to 23 percent in the primary poll, with Sen. John McCain third at 15 percent, followed by former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney at 10 percent. Giuliani’s support is strong among all groups except core conservatives, the pollsters said. He’s especially strong among women.
Democrat Peter Hart who conducted the poll with Republican Neil Newhouse said the advantages Giuliani has are that he’s popular and appealing, has answered the question about how he would handle a crisis, and supporters believe he could beat Hillary.
Giuliani sought to shore up that view, comparing Hillary’s proposal to give a $5,000 savings bond to every U.S.-born baby to 1972 nominee George McGovern’s proposal to send $1,000 to every U.S. resident. “It’s interesting that Hillary is taking something from the George McGovern playbook,” Giuliani said Wednesday. He also criticized her for faking a Southern accent when speaking in Selma.
Two points here. One is that questions like whether Republican voters prefer a candidate similar or dissimilar to Bush, while entertaining, mean nothing to me. Most of the Republicans I know find fault with Bush — but it’s mostly because they think he’s failed to check spending or has failed in some meaningful way to confront Democrats. They grumble but, as with the Democrats’ Iraq withdrawal agenda, will stand with him if it matters.
The other point is that Republicans and Democrats alike will pick a candidate they think best able to defeat the other party’s nominee and take the White House. I’m not yet convinced that is Giuliani, though given the top concern of Republicans — security and the war on terrorism — it’s not surprising that a guy with his profile and visibility after 9/11 would poll well. On this particular issue, any of the top tier of Republicans appeal over any of the likely Democratic contenders. (By the way, any early favorites among those here likely to vote in the Republican primary?)
Republicans are disgruntled — but be assured that if Democrats nominate Hillary — you couldn’t keep one at home on Election Day.
Comments
By Jeff
October 4, 2007 8:50 AM | Link to this
There is only one Republican for me (and only one Presidential Candidate in general):
Dr. Ron Paul
And that is the vote I will cast in the Republican Primary.
By Joel
October 4, 2007 8:55 AM | Link to this
I’m voting for Newt Gingrich.
By jbmlaw
October 4, 2007 8:56 AM | Link to this
Good morning all. Unlike Republicans, I would describe myself as generally gruntled. While I would have to be counted among those who desire an approach different than that pursued by President Bush, the approach I desire is a traditional or libertarian conservative one, not a “compassionate” conservative approach. I am tired of big spenders – obviously the democrats are not a real alternative there – so a Republican in the style of McCain, Thompson, or Romney would be my first choice.
I think I am parroting Jim’s perspective. Nevertheless, I don’t have a real problem with Rudy – as Jim aptly notes, fear of the Hilldebeest will motivate the conservative majority to vote for our guy, whoever that is.
By TW
October 4, 2007 9:01 AM | Link to this
The right wing voter turn out will be the same no matter who the dem candidate. The same smear machine that has chewed on Hillary since ‘92 will have 8 mos to feed on ‘Breck Girl’ or ‘Osama Obama’ if the nomination goes to one of them. The right is scared of Hillary, hence your column today, Mr. Wooten. That said, who’s gonna beat her? Jeffs Romney? The PRO-abortion cross-dresser from NY? Hollywood ‘Thompson the LOBBYIST’?
‘08 is over for the right…and rightfully so.
By Joel
October 4, 2007 9:04 AM | Link to this
Is Clarence Thomas running? I’ll vote GOP if he runs. Now there’s a man we can trust to be who he is. His VP choice should be C. Rice, or Anita Hill. The Paparrazi on that alone would keep the terrorists away.
By getalife
October 4, 2007 9:28 AM | Link to this
Geez, I wonder if the wingnut base will vote for pro choice Rudy and Hillary to win in a landslide?
By Truthifier
October 4, 2007 9:28 AM | Link to this
Yeah, that Hillary Clinton is bad news and is no friend to conservatives. When her husband cheated on her and humiliated her in front of the world, did she divorce him as many women would have done and would have been entitled to do? No, she maintained her marriage vows and stuck it out and saved her family. When George Bush wanted to go to war with Iraq, did she go soft and oppose him? No, she voted for the war, and despite the efforts of those on the left to get her to disavow her vote has consistently maintained that she did what she thought was right and would not support a withdrawal from Iraq that would cause an expansion of the civil war there. When Republican candidates talk about Christian values but have to admit that they never attend church, what is Hillary doing? To my knowledge she is sitting in a pew on Sundays as she used to do when I would see her at church every Sunday in Washington when I lived there. Yeah, that Clinton woman is a direct affront to all good God-fearing Americans even if she does embody the values that others only talk about.
By Dennis
October 4, 2007 9:31 AM | Link to this
Mr. Wooten writes, “…any of the top tier of Republicans appeal over any of the likely Democratic contenders.”
Even if that was true, Mr. Wooten, that’s not saying much.
And if the proof is in the pudding, no doubt, like a good Republican, you can explain away why the Democrats are now holding (albit with shakiness and clumsiness) two houses of Congress.
But realistic Republicans, just like Democrats, now know and admit that GWB has been ruinous for this nation. And only an idealistic, disillusioned person can miss that.
You don’t have to be a blind conservataive not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.
By haha
October 4, 2007 9:32 AM | Link to this
Let’s see the only candidate of the five main repuplicans running that still has their original wife is the one who’s religion used to allow more than one. Mitt Romney must be the only one with true family values.
By Craig
October 4, 2007 9:38 AM | Link to this
For a good reference on Jim’s sterling ability to predict election outcomes, let’s remember his predictions for the Senate and House results in 2006….
By Truthifier
October 4, 2007 9:44 AM | Link to this
Just realized that “bring it on” must be a favorite Republican phrase! Jim, I’d be careful if I were you. Remember what happened the last time someone uttered that famous phrase!? The results for the GOP could be just as disastrous in 2008.
By Joel
October 4, 2007 9:47 AM | Link to this
Americans are sick of Iraq, and pretty much ignore the news about it. I wonder what’s happening in Iraq now. Camera to convoy ready to patrol at 6am….
“Okay, squad leader one, squad leader one, the company is ready, let’s roll”
“If you say lets roll one more time…”
“Alright, what did I say about chatter and yelling in the mic? Stop yelling in the mic. Gadz”.
“Maintain distances, people. You’re too close Red Swan back off.”
“sorry, I have a problem with left lane bandits”.
“Bandits? WHere?”
“no, i was just saying, you know, like….nevermind”
“Stay off the mic unless you see something, people”.
“Hey, what’s that? That wasn’t there last night. Stop the convoy! Check out that VW bug, Blue Checker.”
“Why me? I checked out the souped up plymouth belvedere yesterday, it’s not fair”.
“Somebody fire a round into that bug.”
“I’m not discharging my weapon, there’s too much paperwork. Who do you think we are, Blackwater Mercenaries?”
“Come on guys, that bug is obviously a bomb. Just shoot it. It’ll go off and we can get some breakfast.”
“Alright, I’ll use my good-luck derringer my grandfather gave me….hold on…..POP….BOOM!”
“there, was that so hard? Now lets roll…..Sorry! Forgot again.”
Camera to convoy heading to a newly-opened McD’s as things are really quite normal in the 51st state of the USA, New Alabama.
fini
By Craig
October 4, 2007 9:58 AM | Link to this
And now we find out that even as the Bushies were telling us they didn’t torture, they were secretly in fact authorizing it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/04/washington/04interrogate.html?hp
more lies from the Bush administration. It will take us years to erase the stain of these people from our country.
By getalife
October 4, 2007 9:58 AM | Link to this
As usual, this gop hack is dead wrong.
Wingnuts will form their own party if Rudy is nominated or stay at home.
Rudy is liberal. Pro choice, anti gun and cross dresses.
He has been married three times, his kids hate him, real heroes, the firefighters hate him and he is running on the worst terrorist attack in history with OBL granted amnesty.
President Clinton cleaned up daddy Bush’s mess and the Clintons will clean up w’s disasters.
It will be a landslide for the dems especially after w’s veto and gop support of hating poor sick children.
Then there is the Iraqi holocaust.
By Dennis
October 4, 2007 10:08 AM | Link to this
By Craig October 4, 2007 9:58 AM “And now we find out that even as the Bushies were telling us they didn’t torture, they were secretly in fact authorizing it.”
Not that we didn’t know it anyway. But watch the Republicans ignore it, including Jim Wooten.
You don’t have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.
By Joel
October 4, 2007 10:11 AM | Link to this
This whole idea of a civil war in Iraq has never been analyzed. people just say, “its a civil war”.
I dont think any of you have any idea what you’re talking about, do you?
Especially not sir cheeksalot.
By Truthifier
October 4, 2007 10:21 AM | Link to this
Joel, I think we all know what a civil war is, but since you’re not clear here is the definition:
American Heritage Dictionary -
A war between factions or regions of the same country.
Kernerman English Multilingual Dictionary - (a) war between citizens of the same state
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - –noun a war between political factions or regions within the same country.
By MELO
October 4, 2007 10:29 AM | Link to this
To say Hilary will lose simply because of the hate vote, is garbage. She is the most cerebral and will win people’s hearts thru argument, not hate speech like the Repugnants. Thats where they will lose the plot. If u think the hate vote will come in full force, consider the underground women vote too in her favor. Repugnants are faling from the chandeliers like cockroaches, thus the Jim Wooten early scary tactics!! They wont work. The white house is a lock. What Republican worth their salt will vote for a pedigreed polygamist- pseudo Christian or a gay friendly playboy with multiple divorces or an elderly playboy actor.Viz a loyal wife faithful to her vows of untill death do us part!! Yu fools are kidding, right?
By getalife
October 4, 2007 10:29 AM | Link to this
In Latest Poll, Good News for Both Clintons Senator Has 8-Point Lead Over Giuliani
It is early and the smearing of Rudy and Hillary has not begun.
The Iraq ethnic cleansing is nearly complete with most Iraqis leaving and the rest have formed their own states like the Biden plan.
By TimeForChange
October 4, 2007 10:30 AM | Link to this
If Hillary is nominated in the primaries. Republicans will come to the poles and vote Democrats and Hillary Clinton for President. They are tired of the Republicans and Bush lies and incompetence.
By YouDontSay
October 4, 2007 10:31 AM | Link to this
Hot Dang, that 10:21 post from Truthifier sounds like there is a civil war going on in Iraq. Who knew?
By Jake
October 4, 2007 10:44 AM | Link to this
PLEASE, remove RUDY to the back of the PACK, Heaven forbid that he ever takes the leadership reins. If I had to vote GOP I would vote for Mc Cain BUT I prefer Hillary over all,
Jake
By Peter
October 4, 2007 10:47 AM | Link to this
I think it will be interesting if Hillery wins the Democratic nomination…….
I actually think it will be more about is America, and the rest of the world ready to see another WOMAN as president.
The first being Margret Thacher, who apparently did a good job…..
BUT the kicker here is how will the rest of the world, ESPECIALLY the Muslim world interpret her leading the strongest country in the world.
We all know the Muslim distain for woman doing anything but being in the home. I think that the negotiations with the Muslim world would be more difficult at best.
That could lead to a new world change, and perhaps change the way Muslims look at woman, or go the opposite way, and create a situation where they would really like to challenge her power and create allot of havoc.
Of course here in America, folks will have to realize it is not just about Hillery being President, but the fact a WOMAN is leading this country……
Is America ready for a WOMAN President…..that seems the question….
No matter who the Republicans send to the challenge, they will have their own issues to combat….especially the fact that they are part of this current, and soon to be ugly past of the non accomplishing Republican Party.
By Ernie Logman
October 4, 2007 10:51 AM | Link to this
I plan on voting this way
ABTD
Anyone But the Democrat
By Freddy K.
October 4, 2007 10:58 AM | Link to this
Bill needs some new poontang so elect Billary so he can lie and embarrass us again.
By AmVet
October 4, 2007 11:03 AM | Link to this
11:00 in the morning and already a plethora of great replies to our esteemed columnist’s veiled attempts at rallying the disarrayed, disillusioned “faithful”.
One could rightfully argue this statement - “that 48 percent of Republicans prefer a candidate who takes a “different approach” from that pursued by President Bush.” is merely a euphemism for “even half of the GOP now admits that this administration has been a complete train wreck”.
Why the other half is so damned intransigent is beyond me.
On this particular issue (security and terrorism), any of the top tier of Republicans appeal over any of the likely Democratic contenders.
And if you think you heard 9/11 mentioned a billion and seventeen times by the fear-mongering GOP last time around, you ain’t heard nothing yet.
It is ALL they have to run with.
On every other single issue - social, fiscal, domestic and even foreign policy issues - the neo-conservatives are going to get hammered. And based on their “results”, rightfully so.
And that is why even if Rudy does pull off the upset over the other New Yorker, unless he is a closet neo-con, which is highly unlikely, that failed and for the most part, repudiated political ideology will be officially toast.
The King is dead, Long live the King!
By Aquagirl
October 4, 2007 11:04 AM | Link to this
To clear the stench emanating from 1600 Pennsylvania, a lot of people will vote this way:
ABTR
By Peter
October 4, 2007 11:05 AM | Link to this
HEY HA HA ……. interesting point you make……..
“Let’s see the only candidate of the five main republicans running that still has their original wife is the one who’s religion used to allow more than one. Mitt Romney must be the only one with true family values.”
It will be interesting to see if the Republicans actually use that slogan again…… seems like that was never a reality !!!!!
By JP
October 4, 2007 11:11 AM | Link to this
I figured I’d drop in and see what the Wootbag had to say about Hillary.
Ernie..you remind me why I don’t bother with this forum/column much anymore. The question, “any early favorites among those here likely to vote in the Republican primary?” Ernie’s answer: “Anyone but the Democrat.”
Good luck, are you SURE you can pull that off Ernie? Brilliant!!
As for me, I say - good luck Ron Paul. Finally a sensible Republican.
By joyce
October 4, 2007 11:15 AM | Link to this
Don’t let the “dumbing down of America” asinine emails deter you Mr. Wooten. Surely there are enough intellectuals left in this country to elect the best MAN for the job of president next year. HOPEFULLY…
By Peter
October 4, 2007 11:17 AM | Link to this
Here is what the Republicans will be bringing to the table………
Weak economy, WAR, nothing resolved with Health care, or Social Security…….largest debt ever, largest Government ever….and SCANDAL in the White House, and in Congress…….
Please read todays headlines…..
Factory Orders Drop by Biggest Amount in 7 Months Reflecting Widespread Weakness
WASHINGTON (AP) — Orders to U.S. factories fell in August by the largest amount in seven months, reflecting weakness across a wide swath of manufacturing.
The Commerce Department said that orders dropped by 3.3 percent last month, even worse than the 2.8 percent decline that had been expected. It was the biggest setback since orders fell 4.2 percent in January.
The fall-off was led by a huge plunge in demand for commercial aircraft, which fell by 39.9 percent. However, orders were also weak in a number of other industries, from autos to industrial machinery and home appliances.
Orders for durable goods, items expected to last at least three years, fell by 4.9 percent, while demand for nondurable goods, items such as food, clothing and gasoline, fell by 1.6 percent.
Economists are worried that the steepest housing slump in 16 years and the biggest credit crunch in nearly a decade could push the country into a full-blown recession.
In other news, the Labor Department said that the number of newly laid off workers filing claims for unemployment benefits shot up by 16,000 to a total of 317,000. The gain was the largest one-week rise in four months and was bigger than analysts had expected.
Here you have it WRONGS…… King Bush has driven us into recession…. we cannot take care of our own, ALL the Money spent on WAR !!!!!!!! Oh Yes and allot going to the Buddies of the guys making WAR !!!!!
By AmVet
October 4, 2007 11:21 AM | Link to this
BTW, I wonder how that reasoned and reasonable, not to mention classy, oracle of the right wing, Ms. Coulter feels about Rudy being popular with the female types?
Wasn’t one of her countless erudite comments something to the effect of reconsidering the 19th amendment as there is, according to her, an abundance of “stupid women voters” in this country?
No matter how this election plays out it is going to be nearly hysterical watching the more rabid in the GOP practically eat each other in their demented, continued, albeit failing, quest for self-righteous domination.
By getalife
October 4, 2007 11:27 AM | Link to this
Dobson Makes It Official: Religious Right Leaders Will Back Third-Party Challenger Against Rudy
w fooled them twice and IRS should tax these wingnuts.
By Buy.Danish
October 4, 2007 11:31 AM | Link to this
Getapile: shortbus and helmeted is no way to go through life.
By Hellbent
October 4, 2007 11:33 AM | Link to this
Freddy K: I think I’d rather be embarrased about a President who lied about gettin’ a piece-o’-tail than I would about a President who has lied to the world about everything he’s doing. Has completely ignored the Constitution, and written his own agenda…all in the name of “religion”.
By 'Splain it to me
October 4, 2007 11:35 AM | Link to this
I’m perplexed as to why men hate Hillary so much. Here is a woman who did NOT hire the best divorce attorney money can buy, take her husband to the cleaners and destroy his life after he went elsewhere for his ..um… needs. After listening most of my adult life to men WHINE and COMPLAIN ad nauseum about their cold compassionless wives and cruel, merciless exes…. I wonder why y’all haven’t nominated this woman for SAINTHOOD! Hello????
By Shame me once
October 4, 2007 11:42 AM | Link to this
Buy.Danish, your 11.31 post was so funny, I cant stop laughing. I showed your comment to my boss and all the members of the board at the monthly meeting and they all fell out of their chairs. You are just funny, and smart, and everything you write is gold, as opposed to the smell-warts who stink this blog up all day long and nobody even reads their putrid spew.
Keep up the good work.
By abortalllibs
October 4, 2007 11:44 AM | Link to this
Boy, must be a designated blogathon day for the idiots at doofusunderground or moveit.commie .
The true reality is that half the country wouldn’t vote for Hillary even if she cured cancer, and the shame of it that the current crop of GOP candidates is the best that they have to offer, which isn’t saying much.
By Dems Raise Taxes
October 4, 2007 11:46 AM | Link to this
I just love it when liberals try to make a point about the economy. All of a sudden they are interested in a factory orders datum. It’s the “factory orders” stupid.
Any Democrat elected will raise taxes on the rich (which Obama states is anyone making over $97K/yr.). With less of our own money to spend, how will that impact “factory orders”?
The Democrat party doesn’t understand economics. Their solution: raise taxes….doesn’t matter what the question is.
By jbmlaw
October 4, 2007 11:47 AM | Link to this
After surveying the morning notes, it seems our leftist friends are all bitter about something – not that there is anything unusual about that. Please keep presenting that bitter and angry face to the undecided public – we Republicans will need your continuing help to take back the legislative branch next year. So far you have accommodated us nicely:
supporting the Move On slander of a patently honest military man
initiating a slander of the military’s favorite talk show host
raising federal spending on and adult and middle class health spending by a factor of six
ensuring the largest tax increase in the history of the world
You guys frightened me a little last week when all three of your major candidates affirmed that they were unlikely to take any meaningful steps to remove our military from Iraq. Harry the moonbat is trying to help us overcome that temporary burst of sanity, however, with new efforts to constrain the performance of our noble military. The best thing you could do for us is to tie President Bush’s hands so much that there is another successful attack on the country – then we would take 80% of every vote. So keep plugging away, guys.
By JustMe
October 4, 2007 11:50 AM | Link to this
Hillary was RIGHT about the medical and insurance industry mess years ago. It was the stupid conservatives that stopped her then.
The Bill Clinton years were the best this Country has seen in decades. And, I don’t care about arguing whether he was the cause or not because the basic fact remains the same. I hope that Hillary can bring back our honor, reduce our debt, and fix everything else that 8 years of republican rule has brought on us.
By Dems Know Best
October 4, 2007 11:50 AM | Link to this
“The Democrat party doesn’t understand economics. Their solution: raise taxes….doesn’t matter what the question is.”
You should tell that to Warren Buffet who is a self-proclaimed Democrat. He seems to do pretty well financially and thinks the Dems know better than the Republicans. But maybe you’re not impressed with his billions.
By Homie at Home
October 4, 2007 11:51 AM | Link to this
Wooten’s assertion that Hillary will unite the GOP is nonsense. The GOP will hire Blackwater Mercenaries to take over portions of Washington DC and cause a constitutional crisis, yes, but they wont use the ballot box to effect change, they dont trust it after they rigged the last two elections. The GOP now means Gay Ornery Pirates, and we may have some accessorizing to do.
By JustMe
October 4, 2007 11:52 AM | Link to this
Hillary was RIGHT about the medical and insurance industry mess years ago. It was the stupid conservatives that stopped her then.
The Bill Clinton years were the best this Country has seen in decades. And, I don’t care about arguing whether he was the cause or not because the basic fact remains the same. I hope that Hillary can bring back our honor, reduce our debt, and fix everything else that 8 years of republican rule has brought on us.
By DemDems4Ever
October 4, 2007 11:53 AM | Link to this
On Hillary:
The Clintons have a very obvious marriage of convenience. No love, no faithfulness, nothing similar to that which a marriage should be.
Hillary is a Socialist and has been since college. That is the reason any American with a brain should oppose her.
You liberals may very well elect Hillary and then will you have problems: socialized medicine, higher taxes and a runaway federal bureaucracy.
Do any of you really believe Hillary would be accepted in a Muslim country?
If Hillary will vow to close the borders, defeat the Muslim terror threat and support the military then she would appeal to a broader cross-section of the American public. Of course then she would not be the good little commie.
By jbmlaw
October 4, 2007 11:54 AM | Link to this
Dear AmVet @ 11:21, thanks for reminding me, conservative friends, Chairman Ann has a funny essay this morning about “Phony Vets.” Our leftist friends ought not bother, you will only be offended.
Dear getalife @ 11:27, great argument, please push that idea – if the conservative Christians understand the left’s desire, they will vote strongly with us.
By Hellbent
October 4, 2007 11:54 AM | Link to this
jbmlaw: Get off the short bus! Of course we’re angry, our Constitutional rights have been sh@t upon and nobody seems to mind. Keep your head buried in the sand. However, when your world falls apart because of your apathy and mis-guided “patriotism”, don’t come whining to us!
By JustMe
October 4, 2007 11:54 AM | Link to this
Hillary was RIGHT about the medical and insurance industry mess years ago. It was the stupid conservatives that stopped her then.
The Bill Clinton years were the best this Country has seen in decades. And, I don’t care about arguing whether he was the cause or not because the basic fact remains the same. I hope that Hillary can bring back our honor, reduce our debt, and fix everything else that 8 years of republican rule has brought on us.
By Abomi Nation
October 4, 2007 11:57 AM | Link to this
Yes, Republicans just gave us a $600,000,000,000.00 worthless war but Hillary is going to raise your taxes.
By Peter
October 4, 2007 11:59 AM | Link to this
Wow…… this makes the election even more interesting and really much harder for the Republicans…..
getalife brought this to the table today, but to all the WRONGS … you might want to read this……..
Dobson Makes It Official: Religious Right Leaders Will Back Third-Party Challenger Against Rudy By Greg Sargent - October 4, 2007, 10:14AM
Recently it was reported that around 50 pro-family leaders gathered behind closed doors to discuss what to do if a pro-choice politician — read: Rudy — won the GOP nomination. The reports were a bit vague as to what happened, suggesting that the group said they would “consider” nominating a third-party challenger.
Now, however, one of those leaders, Focus on the Family head James Dobson, has published an Op ed piece in The New York Times clarifying exactly what happened: The group voted almost unanimously not just to “consider” backing such a challenger, but to definitely do so. In other words, Dobson made it official, saying that if a pro-choicer wins the GOP nomination, these leaders will be going third party. Dobson wrote:
After two hours of deliberation, we voted on a resolution that can be summarized as follows: If neither of the two major political parties nominates an individual who pledges himself or herself to the sanctity of human life, we will join others in voting for a minor-party candidate. Those agreeing with the proposition were invited to stand. The result was almost unanimous.That’s pretty definitive. The group also discussed the possibility of creating a third party themselves, though there was no consensus on that question. Still, according to Dobson, they will almost unanimously endorse a third-party challenger. This could obviously have a major impact on the race by splitting the GOP vote.
Indeed, a new poll out from Rasmussen today says that more than a quarter — 27% — of Republicans would vote for such a pro-life third-party challenger. What’s particularly interesting about this poll is that it offers GOPers this choice while explicitly naming Hillary and Rudy as the major party nominees — suggesting that even the specter of a victorious Hillary wouldn’t dissuade many Republicans from going third party.
SO they way I see this…….. with a possible 3rd party candidate that is going to represent the extreme Religious Right REPUBLICAN, then we end up with a similar situation we had when Ross Perot took votes from George Senior, which lead to Bill Clinton’s election…….
How interesting…… the Republican party becoming fragmented……thus another Clinton being the beneficiary!!!!
You have to love all those that continue to want to mix Religion with POLITICS…….
Gee that stance is NO different then that of Osama Bin Laden !!!!
He may have different crazy ideologies, but it is still playing politics based on Religion FIRST !!!!
By getalife
October 4, 2007 11:59 AM | Link to this
ambulance chaser,
The wingnuts will not vote for pro choice liberal Rudy.
Run him.
By Dems Raise Taxes
October 4, 2007 11:59 AM | Link to this
On September 27th, Democrat Congressman John Dingell proposed a “carbon tax” that would raise the price of gasoline by 50 cents and would raise the price of nearly every product that consumers purchase. The measure would take an estimated $180 billion from taxpayers.
Dingell’s proposal also calls for the elimination of the mortgage deduction for homes more than 3,000 sq. ft. (Only rich people would have a home THAT large, right?)
Another example of why Democrats can’t be trusted on the economy.
By Freddy K.
October 4, 2007 11:59 AM | Link to this
Hellbent, And that makes him different from the rest how?
By jbmlaw
October 4, 2007 12:00 PM | Link to this
Dear JustMe @ 11:50, it would be highly beneficial to us conservatives if you would use your influence to persuade Hillary to push her healthcare plan before the election.
By Dems Raise Taxes
October 4, 2007 12:03 PM | Link to this
WASHINGTON (AP) - Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton said Friday that every child born in the United States should get a $5,000 “baby bond” from the government to help pay for future costs of college or buying a home.
“I like the idea of giving every baby born in America a $5,000 account that will grow over time, so that when that young person turns 18 if they have finished high school they will be able to access it to go to college or maybe they will be able to make that downpayment on their first home,” she said.
The New York senator did not offer any estimate of the total cost of such a program or how she would pay for it. Approximately 4 million babies are born each year in the United States.
Another $20 Billion+ tax increase proposed by a Democrat presidential candidate—proving once again that Democrats cannot be trusted with the economy.
By jbmlaw
October 4, 2007 12:08 PM | Link to this
Dear HB @ 11:54, I think your post would be more accurate if you used the term “mad” instead of “angry.” “Crazy” is even more accurate than “mad.” By the way, what Constitutional right did you say you were deprived?
By Larry
October 4, 2007 12:09 PM | Link to this
The only persons bringing up the gay agenda or sodomy or causing deficit spending or big government is the Right.
When Clinton stained Monica’s dress, the Right made sure that even second graders heard about it and understood about the anatomy of the act. The Right is responsible for child abuse on a vast scale in this country.
Jbmlaw: Accessorize! You’re gonna need it to impress your fellow-renegades in sodomy-blogging.
It’s a fact that jbmlaw’s ilk would rather destroy the country and surrender it to terrorists than have a democratically elected president.
No backs. No vice-versas. no changies.
By jbmlaw
October 4, 2007 12:10 PM | Link to this
Dear getalife @ 11:59, what makes you think I would not vote for Rudy? Of course I would. Even though I am an anti-abortion Christian ultra-right winger.
By Dems Raise Taxes
October 4, 2007 12:11 PM | Link to this
Rep. David Obey of Wisconsin, chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, has proposed a war “surtax.”
The plan, unveiled by Reps. David Obey, D-Wis., John Murtha, D-Pa., and Jim McGovern, D-Mass., would require low- and middle-income taxpayers to add 2 percent to their tax bill. Wealthier people would add a 12 to 15 percent surcharge, Obey said. (Remember Obama said wealthy people are those making >$97k/yr.)
Obey, the Democrat, was the one who was going to end the dastardly practice of earmarks by openly disclosing them. And then he didn’t.
Besides Tax Increases and social programs, what do Democrats offer?
(Obey’s proposal will sure hurt those factory orders numbers.)
By Hellbent
October 4, 2007 12:11 PM | Link to this
jbmlaw: I will not argue with a fool. Have some more Kool-Aid.
By Ed
October 4, 2007 12:14 PM | Link to this
Four years ago it was Michael Moore that galvanized the right to go out and vote based on his not so accurate bashing of President Bush. In 2008 it will be Hillary because we have 16 years of documented BS that will surface when the time is right. Remember it wasn’t that long ago that democrats were trying to get as far away from the Clintons as possible. By the way do we call Bill Clinton the first husband or the first pimp.
By Dems Raise Taxes
October 4, 2007 12:17 PM | Link to this
“….Obama has suggested imposing the 12.4 percent tax on all income above $97,000 per year…”
Obama’s idea would raise more than $1 trillion over 10 years by subjecting income of more than $97,000 to a 12.4 percent tax.
If you earn $97K/yr., do you consider yourself rich? Democrats do. Obama’s $1 trillion tax increase would certainly affect “factory orders”, wouldn’t it.
Democrats don’t understand economic issues but they do understand tax increases.
By Peter
October 4, 2007 12:17 PM | Link to this
More silliness today by the WRONGS read below……
“By Abomi Nation
Yes, Republicans just gave us a $600,000,000,000.00 worthless war but Hillary is going to raise your taxes.”
Wow I guess every Republican thinks the American Treasury HAD the cash just siting around collecting interest…….and then Bush decided to spend it……… HA HA HA HA HA HA……….
Nice to SEE a REPUBLICAN admit to this being a WORTHLESS WAR!!
Remember George’s DAD…..”Read my lips I will not raise taxes!”
If you WRONGS don’t think we have to raise taxes to PAY for this WAR you are all nuttier than I thought……
Come on folks our economy is BASED on Americans spending their money daily and GETTING into DEEP Debt……
When that stops……. then what…..get a clue folks….. we are up to our Collected A$$’s with debt we owe to CHINA……BECAUSE of this WAR…….
If we don’t get rid of that, we will be the United States Territory of China !!!!!!!
OH YES we certainly can TRUST the BIG Government Republicans…….BIG DEBT Republicans !!!
By Tim Smith
October 4, 2007 12:21 PM | Link to this
During the Clinton years America had the most robust economy in history and a budget surplus. And don’t say it was because of Reagan. Then W came and messed it all up. We need to put the Clintons back in the White House in 08.
By getalife
October 4, 2007 12:22 PM | Link to this
Of course you would fake wingnut.
You have no morals or principles, you are an ambulance chaser.
You are a fraud like dusty.
Geez.
By Jackie
October 4, 2007 12:25 PM | Link to this
Dubya continues to make political moves that is literally destroying the GOP and any chance it has of winning the White House in ‘08. Pete Domenici (R-NM) has/will announce his retirement; Larry Craig (R-ID) continues to his charade and will be thrown out by the Repubs. Dubya and Norman Podohertz are trying to find justification and means to attack Iran. The Israelis attacked Syria at our behest; Hunt Oil made a secret deal with the Kurds, in violation of the Iraqi constitution. The British are trying to find a way out of Iraq. Dubya vetoes the SCHIP bill that has Repub support. These are the folks that we will ask us to lead the nation in ‘08? Is this scenario written by Tom Clancy?
By jm
October 4, 2007 12:32 PM | Link to this
The depressing thing about this lot is that this country is in sore need of a Roosevelt (either one), a Truman, an Eisenhower (less for his abilities but more for right man at the right time) or even a Reagan and this is what we have to choose from.
The best one can hope is that whoever gets the prize will grow into the job. Judging from what I have seen so far, my hopes are not that high.
By Larry
October 4, 2007 12:34 PM | Link to this
Because porn causes sex which causes children who eventually will need healthcare, you can fight SCHIP with the V-chip.
By Abomi Nation
October 4, 2007 12:37 PM | Link to this
((Yes, Republicans just gave us a $600,000,000,000.00 worthless war but Hillary is going to raise your taxes.))
Hey Peter, I’m not a Republican. I’m glad you think that kind of logic is absurd. Great post btw!
How much has the worthless war cost the average taxpayer “Dems raise taxes”? The Highway Bill? Medicare Part D? No Child Left behind? The Department of Homeland Security? The massive deficit? Abstinence Only program?
HILLARY IS GOING TO RAISE YOUR TAXES!! LMAO!
By JustMe
October 4, 2007 12:39 PM | Link to this
You all (republican) idiots so concerned with ANY democrat plan that costs $20 billion or so…. why the heck aren’t you worried like crazy over the ridiculous cost of this war? Oh yeah, it is because you all are hypocrites in the worst way!
Do you really think that this war will not eventually require an increase in taxes? How do you think that we will pay for it?
The idiot short-term Bush approach is to just be in debt. Yeah, that’ll work.
It kills me how stupid and narrow minded conservative republican really are. You all have on blinders and only see what you chose to see - selective sight.
By Dems Raise Taxes
October 4, 2007 12:39 PM | Link to this
In addition to Hillary’s $20B “Baby Bond” tax, she already voted for raising taxes by another $1.35 trillion by not voting for the permanent repeal of the Death Tax.
Prior to President Bush’s tax cuts in 2001, a family wishing to pass along a family farm or small business to the next generation faced a Death Tax of up to 55 percent. Under the 2001 tax cut, Death Taxes will be completely eliminated by 2010.
But if Democrats fail to extend that tax cut, the rate will return to 55 percent in 2011. It sounds crazy, but it’s true: Under current law, if a small business owner dies on December 31st, 2010, the owner’s family will able to carry on the business without paying additional taxes. But if the owner lingers on through the night and dies on January 1, 2011, the family could owe over half the value of the business to the federal government in taxes.
Unless they extend the death tax relief, Democrats will be saddling our economy with a $1.35 trillion tax hike.
On on Jun 8, 2006 Hillary Clinton voted “nay” on (permanently repealing the death tax (vote number 2006-164). Why do Democrats want to tax someone just because he dies? The dead have already paid taxes on everything they’re leaving to their heirs.
Talk about your impact on “factory orders.”
By AmVet
October 4, 2007 12:41 PM | Link to this
Even Newt knows all is lost for this “new” GOP.
And he was the very creator of it!
In the past under his tutelage, the most vile tactics were extremely effective and the idiots on the far left responded in kind.
12 years later the nation, at least the centrists and moderates, are nauseated by this vitriol, even though the trickle down theory still remains, albeit on the lunatic fringes, as evidenced by the modus operandi of some here.
But like it or not, reactionaries, times have changed.
And it is unlikely that the smear machines will be nearly as effective this time.
And as alluded to here earlier, the hate vote is probably not going to carry the day next November.
So perhaps, the country will be forced to make decisions actually based on issues, rather than on spin and mischaracterizations as advanced by professional henchmen like the disgraced Mr. Rove.
At least I can dream, can’t I?
By JustMe
October 4, 2007 12:41 PM | Link to this
You all (republican) idiots so concerned with ANY democrat plan that costs $20 billion or so…. why the heck aren’t you worried like crazy over the ridiculous cost of this war? Oh yeah, it is because you all are hypocrites in the worst way!
Do you really think that this war will not eventually require an increase in taxes? How do you think that we will pay for it?
The idiot short-term Bush approach is to just be in debt. Yeah, that’ll work.
It kills me how stupid and narrow minded conservative republican really are. You all have on blinders and only see what you chose to see - selective sight.
By JustMe
October 4, 2007 12:43 PM | Link to this
You all (republican) idiots so concerned with ANY democrat plan that costs $20 billion or so…. why the heck aren’t you worried like crazy over the ridiculous cost of this war? Oh yeah, it is because you all are hypocrites in the worst way!
Do you really think that this war will not eventually require an increase in taxes? How do you think that we will pay for it?
The idiot short-term Bush approach is to just be in debt. Yeah, that’ll work.
It kills me how stupid and narrow minded conservative republican really are. You all have on blinders and only see what you chose to see - selective sight.
By Captain Freedom
October 4, 2007 12:43 PM | Link to this
THE Captain is relieved that a True Belief Shining Star (and not our wobbly Mr Wooten) has recognized the danger that a Don Vito Giuliani candidacy poses to the safety of millions of blastocyst-Americans. Mr Wooten should be ashamed of promoting the babykilling, cross-dressing, h0mo-loving Rudy.
THE Captain is a solid acolyte of the Godly James Dobson. This Man is a shining light of Truth and Clarity in an age gone mad. THE Captain has been especially grateful for Rev Dobson’s tips on dog training, and has applied the belt and cudgel to great effect. THE Captain is only sorry that His seed has fallen on barren soil, and that He has no sons upon whom He can implement the Godly Dobson approach to raising strong and healthy White Christian Males.
THE Captain especially regrets no being able to use the technique of bringing His (sadly, unconceived) young son into the shower with Him and displaying the Glory of His Manhood to ensure that the son does not become a Godless Sodomite.
(I understand that poor Sen Craig’s father failed to dangle his diddly in the young lad’s face, leading Sen Craig to spend a lifetime trying to fill this void in public restrooms. a tragedy that could have been so easily avoided.)
So, please, Mr Wooten, enough with these Godless Dagos and hom0-loving Mormontology cult candidates. Right Thinking Americans need a candidate we can depend on.
Really in the end, it comes down to Alan Keyes, a True Belief Conservative who is unafraid of the insults (bonkers, bat$hit crazy, etc) that inevit ably follow his public pronouncements. He proves himself worthy by his willingness to publicly slander and disown his lesbian daughter for her ungodliness. This is Man we can Trust, even if he is one of Those People. But as Justice Thomas has so admirably proved, a compliant Darky can be very useful to White Christian America. They’re just happy to sit at the table.
Alan Keyes for President. It is the Right Thing to do.
By MELO
October 4, 2007 12:50 PM | Link to this
Joyce,Surely there are enough intellectuals left in this country to elect the best MAN for the job of president next year And since u are no intellectual Republican woman urself, u agree to be reduced to a domestic cookie maker.Pathetic Repugnant brainwash.Are u a Mormon woman?
By Captain Freedom
October 4, 2007 12:52 PM | Link to this
The Islaministofascists continue to whine about the cost of Our Leader’s Just and Good Permanent War. This is simply misguided, ignorant pansy lib handwringing that shows a clear lack of understanding about how wars are funded.
To help these dopey liberals (pardon the superfluous redundant repitition), I offer the words of Sen Lindsay Graham (who is almost certainly NOT a homosexual):
“You pay for the war by winning the war,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC). “This is not an accounting exercise. How did we pay for World War II? Everybody rolled up their sleeves and did the best they could.”
So there, libs. This is not about accounting, or even spending any money at all. If you win, the cost magically disappears. Conversely, if we leave and give up without winning, we would actually need to pay for the war with real money. Can you imagine what such expenditures would do to the economy of Our Great Nation?
This yet one more reason we must stay there and get the job done. It is the Right Thing to do.
By Peter
October 4, 2007 12:57 PM | Link to this
No problem Abomi Nation……. Now for more BAD news………
I guess if you are a WRONG………
WASHINGTON - Public approval for President Bush and Congress has sunk to the lowest levels ever recorded in The Associated Press-Ipsos poll.
Only 31 percent said they approve of the job Bush is doing, according to the survey released on Thursday. Though his positive ratings have hovered at about that range since last year, his lowest previous approval in the AP-Ipsos survey was 32 percent, which was recorded several times, most recently in June. That is virtually even with the latest reading.
Amid a major credit crunch and a weak housing market, a record low 34 percent said they approved of Bush’s performance in handling the economy. His prior low in the poll was 37 percent.
Bush also hit a new low with 31 percent approving of his work on domestic issues like health care, just below June’s 32 percent. The poll was taken as Bush was about to veto a measure adding $35 billion to children’s health coverage.
Here you go WRONGS…….add a fragmented Party because of the Right Wing Religious folks….. Wow…….it will be MORE than an up hill battle…….come election time….. Hillery or whomever…..
Now how to make America a better place….. ANY thoughts out there????
My question is how do we Pay for this WAR and Immense Debt… AND NOT leave the Bill for the Younger generation to PAY….??????
Any thoughts from the Republicans on this BLOG ????
By Shar
October 4, 2007 1:02 PM | Link to this
jm@12:32 - I’m with you. Senator Clinton, while favored by the Democratic faithful, has too many negatives and too little executive experience to win the White House. I am horrified and deeply ashamed by the unending parade of incompetance, imperialism and vicious self-interest oozing out of the White House, and I know that the next President will have to focus much more on repair (fiscal, domestic, foreign affairs, military) than on initiatives. As much as I want to “throw the b-tards out”, I would not be able to bring myself to vote for Sen. Clinton. Eight years of arrogance, inexperience and close-minded self righteousness has driven us to the brink. We can’t afford any more.
Given the God-awful, shameful, debilitating performance of the Republicans, it is an indictment of the Democrats that they can’t walk away with the ‘08 election. The candidate with the most executive experience and the best chance of appealing to moderates, Bill Richardson, cannot compete in the glamour stakes dominated by Sens. Clinton, Obama and Edwards. Unless Mr. Dobson et al self-destruct and do form a third party, we’ll have a strongly Democratic Congress and a Republican President. Perhaps the resulting gridlock is the best we can hope for from this sorry group.
And yes, there will have to be a tax increase, regardless of who is in office. In fact, there already has been. Debt is just a delayed tax increase made worse by interest costs. Just because Mr. Bush is too cowardly to call his deficit a tax increase doesn’t change the fact that it is. Shifting the blame will not shift the responsibility.
By Jackie
October 4, 2007 1:02 PM | Link to this
@By Dems Raise Taxes
Your 12:39 statement was “Prior to President Bush’s tax cuts in 2001, a family wishing to pass along a family farm or small business to the next generation faced a Death Tax of up to 55 percent. Under the 2001 tax cut, Death Taxes will be completely eliminated by 2010.” Could you please give one example, name, county, state of this event happening? I believe there is no documentation indicating that taxing one out of their inheritance ever occurred.
By ObamaPlease
October 4, 2007 1:08 PM | Link to this
Obama for president! And I rarely ever vote democrat. Please people, no Hilary! Bill was enough of a disgrace for one lifetime. Bush is the second!
By Dems Raise Taxes
October 4, 2007 1:11 PM | Link to this
This week Democrats tried to hoist another tax increase on productive citizens (Republicans). Though President Bush supported an increase of 20% in SCHIP spending, Democrats wanted more. They want to raise SCHIP eligibility to 400% of the poverty level (currently $82,600 for a family of four). That move would qualify no less than 71% of American children for public assistance.
Using children as a cover, Democrats want to use the back door to accomplish what they couldn’t achieve through the front door: Socialized medicine. Democrats use children, judges, and other willing or innocent stooges to raise taxes on working people since they know their proposals wouldn’t pass muster with the public. The result if their proposals are enacted? A slower economy and a lower standard of living for Americans. Republicans tried to copy the Democrats by using tax dollars to buy votes. We all suffered. But based on what Democrats have already proposed (prior to gaining the presidency) in the area of tax increases, we ain’t seen nothing yet.
(Another blow to the “factory orders” numbers.)
By biggydawwg
October 4, 2007 1:14 PM | Link to this
I would like to state I would vote for Fred Thompson, as I believe he would be the strongest to debate Hillary(the virtually assured Democratic nominee) and would more likely guarantee election with a running mate of Condeleeza Rice or Colin Powell or someone similar. As far a Bush failing at anything, I would like to state that the tax cuts have done more good than harm and should be made permanent, especially the death tax. I do not want to have to employ a law firm in order to pass along to my children, nor do I want anyone else to have to do that no matter how much money they are worth. I think too many people have forgot that success and the money that comes with it is the American Dream. Don’t be jealous of those already blessed with it whether they use it for good or not. Do you think you would be in favor of the taxes if it was you in their position? Lastly, the only way to be fair on taxes is to go to a national sales tax, with a sliding scale based on the goods and services taxed,(i.e. food and medicine on the lowest end of the scale and luxury goods on the highest). That would bring everyone onboard no matter how they make their income(even those who make their money illegally would be forced to fund the very agencies after them). As it is only 50% of Americans pay income tax because those in the lower thresholds don’t pay any. I would also set a corporate tax rate of a flat 18% with no exceptions. Our government would have more money than they would know what to do with. So much for my Ramble.
By Larry
October 4, 2007 1:21 PM | Link to this
If you dont support W, then you support the 911 conspirators, it’s that simple.
I’m ashamed to blog with terrorists. ASHAMED!
Now, either you all blog these words in five minutes, or I call the FBI: Blog this: “I was a dirty bird, Bush is not grungy, he’s b***’”
You now have 4 minutes andn 57 seconds….56…55…etc (I’m dialing…..)
By MrLiberty
October 4, 2007 1:23 PM | Link to this
Ron Paul is the only GOP candidate that can beat Hillary. The sooner the establishment clowns recognize this and get behind him the better.
By Peter
October 4, 2007 1:24 PM | Link to this
Well here is some really fun stuff……
“By Captain Freedom
The Islaministofascists continue to whine about the cost of our Leaders Just and Good Permenent War. This is simply misguided, ignorant pansy lib handwringing that shows a clear lack of understanding about how wars are funded.
To help these dopey liberals (pardon the superfluous redundant repitition), I offer the words of Sen Lindsay Graham (who is almost certainly NOT a homosexual):
“You pay for the war by winning the war,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC). “This is not an accounting exercise. How did we pay for World War II? Everybody rolled up their sleeves and did the best they could.”
So there, libs. This is not about accounting, or even spending any money at all. If you win, the cost magically disappears. Conversely, if we leave and give up without winning, we would actually need to pay for the war with real money. Can you imagine what such expenditures would do to the economy of Our Great Nation?
This yet one more reason we must stay there and get the job done. It is the Right Thing to do.”
Gee we were attacked in WWII by the Japanese…….. did we go after the Chinese ????
This WAR WE started…..with No plan, and currently NO results……
OK another thought….. “we are going to roll up our sleeves and do the best we can…..”
IS THAT THE PLAN……. WOW….. Now that sounds allot like the Plan to Invade Iraq to me……???????
YES no plan is the PLAN !!!!! Roll up your sleeves folks…… that is the PLAN !!!!!
HAHAHAHAHA……. gosh….. then what??? Invade Iran ????
Well of all the things written about the war this must definitely take the cake…..
“Our Leader’s Just and Good Permanent War.”
Well of all the things folks…..
Here we see War is Good…. WAR is Just, and more importantly folks war should be PERMANENT…..
OK no wonder they do not want to leave Iraq….
WAR should be permanent…….!!!!!
WOW what a statement….. F the budget…… let’s get another war going say the Chicken Hawks !!!!!
I also like the homosexual line as well….. “almost certainly not a homosexual”……so we are really not sure are we?????
Gee that must be a headline in accordance with “Family Values”…..
“We are almost certain that most Republicans are Not Homosexuals”
HA HA HA HA HA ……..
Oh by they way….. our writer never did tell us how war’s were funded did he ?????
By Deborah
October 4, 2007 1:26 PM | Link to this
It’s about time we had a President that isn’t “Pale, Male and Stale”.
Also, I believe the increase in taxes Mr. Obama is referring to is about fixing the problem with Social Security and the impending crises that will occur when the Baby Boomers are all retired. If that’s incorrect, someone please set me straight. He has proposed taxing income above the $97K cap to keep SS solvent for the generations following the Baby Boomers.
By Larry
October 4, 2007 1:27 PM | Link to this
Remember, write, “I was a dirty bird, Bush is not grungy, he’s beechin”
By Jack
October 4, 2007 1:34 PM | Link to this
I might vote for a dem if they would implement the fair tax.
By getalife
October 4, 2007 1:48 PM | Link to this
Judge denies Criag’s withdrawal of guilty plea.
Another gop pervert is history.
By rarringt
October 4, 2007 2:00 PM | Link to this
Afternoon all,
Just wanted to say I admire the relatively civil discourse on the blog today. Interesting discussion from both sides of the aisle.
I guess the folks at the looney bin are on lockdown today….
By AmVet
October 4, 2007 2:11 PM | Link to this
“Pale, Male and Stale”.
Deborah, that is one of the funnier things I’ve read in a long while!
You go girl!
But hey! Wait a minute! Granted, he fits the last two characteristics, but Alan Keyes isn’t pale!
And whoever wrote that Colin Powell might be induced by large Fred to run as his Veep is stretching the limits of believability!
I would think the General has had enough of the neo-conservatives for one lifetime!
By Play that Funky Music Whiteboy
October 4, 2007 2:17 PM | Link to this
The only times in recent history that a Republican was elected President, starting with Reagan, was when that candidate enjoyed an overwhelming majority of the (pardon my use of this Mr. Reed) Moral Majority or Christian Coalition type vote.
The rumblings have already be