Repubs are the better team, when it comes to politics

[sampsonblk]

Time for us to admit it. Our party is more popular, and represents the interests of common Americans. But the GOP is more skillful when it comes to getting their way.

Its kinda hard to vote for a congressman or senator based on whether or not that candidate will improve our team. There are more important things to consider. And yet here we are, with a team of leaders that can't find their heads from their asses.

They don't stand for much of anything as a group, and the things they do claim to stand for are still just options - not deeply-held beliefs. So in a pinch, they will sell out on almost any issue in favor of an expected gain in another area. And in so many cases, it never pans out in the end.

I have no idea what the answer is except to vote for the people we agree with and keep bugging them to do a better job and quit worrying about their chances of re-election.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071207/ap_on_go_co/democrats_disunity

[DrDan]

1. absolutely - particularly when they have a very smart weasel like

KKKarl Rove driving their political agendas and direction.

We pale in comparison.

[melody]

2. All sociopaths are more skilled at getting to the top ... they don't win in the long term, however

Thank heavens.

[OHdem10]

3. Ihave thought often about this very thing . The GOP had to

wander in the dessert for 40 years "finding themselves" .

I hope it does not take the Democrats that long. If we
lose enough elections hopefully the elites will at some
point recognize what they have been doing is not a winning
combination.

First we have to become a real party, not just a cottection
of groups each with their own agenda(interest).
The biggest and most serious weakness is we do not
have an overarching philosphy and belief system.
This is there no matter who a candidate is.
Fairly or unfairly, we can be described of not having
core beliefs or principles. This is a serious problem.

[sampsonblk]

4. 'no overarching philosophy and belief system' - Nail on the head.nt

[flying rabbit]

7. They never "found" themselves

They basically found a way to win at the expense of the soul of their party. Co opted by interests that rode them to the top. Hope it doesn't happen to the Dems...

[gratuitous]

5. Nonsense

And it will show in 2008, when the GOP doesn't enjoy a 3-1 or 4-1 funding advantage. In fact, for the first time since I've paid attention to politics, the Democrats are in position to outspend the Republicans in a general campaign.

The GOP wins because of political acumen, no doubt, but that playing field is far more level than they'd like folks to believe. Certainly, there are always stories about how this development or that revelation is invariably "good news" for Republicans and "bad news" for Democrats. So I'd give the nod to them for PR work. But Democrats have it all over Republicans when it comes to the ground work, organizing, volunteers, etc. And with the money even, or nearly so, their PR edge will be blunted considerably.

With hard work and good follow-through, the Democrats should mop up the floor with the GOP. If we resist the temptation to be afraid of our own shadows and ignore the "good news for the GOP" bandwagon barkers, 2008 will be every bit the watershed 1932 was.

[sampsonblk]

8. I'm talking about their woeful performance in office, not in campaigns-nt

[gratuitous]

9. Absolutely

When it comes to running government, the party of "government doesn't work" for some reason doesn't work too well.

But I think a BIG part of the GOP's electoral success since 1980 has been the massive amounts of money they always have on hand. When the propaganda can be catapulted in so many venues, in so many ways, it's hard for the opposition to keep up. But the Republican funders, from the national party to the official campaign committees for Congress and the Senate, are cash-strapped heading into 2008. While all three organs have some cash on hand, their debts are bigger than their assets, which means they're going to have to pick and choose where they spend their money.

Any guesses on where, say, a million dollars is going if the choice is between an ad buy for Mitch McConnell (who has to be feeling a little vulnerable in Kentucky right about now) and a shot in the arm for some promising but struggling newcomer in Texas?

I don't dispute the GOP's political acumen. I just think it's been exaggerated by all the money they've had at their disposal. We'll see how well the Republicans do when they have to conduct their politics without that advantage. I think they'll still have the usual media mouthpieces providing them an echo chamber, at least nationally, but they're not going to have the bucks in a lot of local races to buy up all the available air time as they previously have.

[blm]

6. Because they used the 80s and 90s to buy control over most broadcast media and

spent the last 7 yrs buying up whatever print media becomes available.