October 05, 2006
Hastert Kills GOP? Nope.
Methinks I smell a dirty diaper:
House Republican candidates will suffer massive losses if House Speaker Dennis Hastert remains speaker until Election Day, according to internal polling data from a prominent GOP pollster, FOX News has learned."The data suggests Americans have bailed on the speaker," a Republican source briefed on the polling data told FOX News. "And the difference could be between a 20-seat loss and 50-seat loss."
Most GOP lawmakers have stood by Hastert, pending a full airing of the facts in his handling of the Mark Foley affair, in which the former Florida representative was caught exchanging salacious messages with teen pages in Congress. The new polling data, however, suggests that many voters already have made up their minds.
I'd be very curious to know who this pollster is, and what allegiances he may or may not have to any factions within the Republican Party, for the simple reason that this poll flies in the face of common sense, and reeks of Inside the Beltway hysteria.
People are going to walk into their polling pace and cast votes for the candidates on their ballots.
Have you ever gone to the ballot box and thought, "you know, Congressman "X" really screwed up. Even though he isn't from my district, I'm going to vote for someone with a radically different viewpoint than my own to teach him a lesson, even if I get screwed in the process."
What, you don't think like that? I don't think many other folks do, either.
Unless they live in his district, people don't get to vote for or against Denny Hastert, and they aren't going to radically shift their voting of their candidates representing their interests to spite themselves.
Allah may be right and Hastert very well resign tomorrow, but if he doesn't resign, the world will not end. The Republican Party won't lose by 50 seats, and it won't lose by 20 seats. It won't lose at all.
My prediction: If Hastert stays, the Republicans keep control of the House by six seats. Why?
A party with something—even an imperfect something—always beats a party of nothing, and that is something ever voter knows in his gut that they haven't created a poll to measure.
Lose the election, lose the war, not prepared to let that happen. Our brave troops deserve better than Conyers cutting off funds.
Posted by: tb at October 5, 2006 09:38 PMAllah works with Malkin and Malkin is pulling one of her homophobic rants. Just wanting Hastert out isn't going to make it so. She may think she has that much power, but she doesn't.
Hastert has done nothing to resign over. I'm not even sure Foley did anything he should have resigned over since everything was between consenting adults.
I was calling this a shits and giggles bit from the beginning with the IMs. No one participates in 52 IMs of the type these are and can call himself a victim. And the minute one of them decided to hit SAVE, it became a conspiracy to commit blackmail, IMHO. Those IMs were saved for a reason. These very bright, politically astute young men knew a good thing when they saw it. And Foley's alcohol problems and his inability to be openly gay played right into their manipulating hands. It is called having control and they were in control. I'd like to know how a college junior gets the job of Assistant Campaign Manager on a gubernatorial compaign half a continent away? Who is his political Sugar Daddy?
Posted by: Sara (Squiggler) at October 5, 2006 09:40 PMSince I can't get trackback to work, here is my post where I point out that an awful lot of voters don't know enough about the candidates or the candidate's positions on the issues to vote FOR one candidate or another. They don't bother because they use the (R) or the (D) as short cuts, as indicative of what a candidate stands for or against... and if this is so, the Republicans are going to lose big time.
Posted by: steve sturm at October 5, 2006 10:01 PMSteve, I'm so confident that you are wrong and Bob is right that I will bet you lunch ($5) that Repubs don't "lose big time" as you say. Put your money where your mouth is. You can pay me by PayPal when you lose the bet. Voters have made up their minds long ago in these hyperpartisan times. And one gay weirdo is not going to make a bit of difference in November.
Put up or shut up.
Posted by: Jeff B. at October 5, 2006 10:35 PMConfederate Yankee, October 3:
It's time we place Foleygate in its proper context as a sideshow and continue to press both political parties in America to deal with the very real and mortal threats facing other nations and our own.
Too many lives hang in the balance to do otherwise.
Confederate Yankee, October 5:
"FOLEY! FOLEY! FOLEY!"
Posted by: Captain Howdy at October 5, 2006 11:14 PMWen you have lemons, make lemonade.
The media and the far left are driving this to be much more of a story than it should be, and so you roll with the punches. That's the nature of blogging, and if you don't like it, you can always go somewhere else.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at October 6, 2006 12:23 AMI agree. I've been making a similar argument. I would also like to add that I'm bored with the story at this point. I switched radio stations every time the subject came up. I bet others are too. I never heard of Foley before this story. He's a perv but he's gone. I'm done.
I'm amused at his kitchen sink approach to defense-- "I'm a gay drunk who was molested by a Catholic priest." Puh-leese...
I also like the fact that the Dems are arguing that Foley's a gay man so people should have known he's a perv. So, I guess the ACLU will be withdrawing all of their Boy Scouts' litigation now.
Posted by: BlackRedneck at October 6, 2006 01:27 AMThe media and the far left are driving this to be much more of a story than it should be, and so you roll with the punches.
Dude, show some leadership. You're Confederate Motherfucking Yankee! Don't let the media lead you around by your Prince Albert -- get out there and stir some shit up!
Posted by: Jeeves at October 6, 2006 02:30 AMJeff B: sorry, but my betting on one of my negative predictions has been proven to be a sure-fire way of making sure that prediction comes true.. and, as I really don't want it to come true, I'll pass.
Posted by: steve sturm at October 6, 2006 07:51 AMI don't know. This whole affair reeks of Democratic sleazeball tactics: the IM text the didn't die, the fake blog outing pervs, etc. Pelosi et al stating that because there is one sick Repub that Congress would work better with 535 Dems. Right.
This tactic may have worked if the Dems sprung it 3 days before the election. Now there is still time for this thing to blow up in the Dems faces. After all, if we find undeniable Dem fingerprints (we'll just have to wait and see), wouldn't you imagine that would drive angry Repubs to the polls?
Posted by: nopundit at October 6, 2006 09:55 AM
