One year out, polling says, trends favor Democrats

The race that really matters is that for president and history shows that party affiliation often goes out the window in choosing between two persons. Issues of experience, capabilities, personal likability, and character triumph when voters decide on whom they wish to lead the country. Otherwise, Clinton would not have been president when the Congress was heavily Republican and Reagan would not have been president when the Congress was controlled by Democrats.

What about Huckabee in the polls?

In some polls he is second.

Huckabee may very well upset Romney in Iowa, and derail Romney.

Come November 2008, things will change and it will be the Republicans who win. Why? Because the Democratic party largely supports illegal immigration at all costs, cookies and crumpets for terrorists, higher taxes and more spending. The majority of Americans will wake from their media-induced slumber to realize Guiliani and the Republicans are their only hope.

If the Lizard King is our only hope, things are pretty hopeless.

John D,

Guiliani refused to join the 9/11 panel when he was asked. He preferred a high paying job at a firm. How would he answer to the American people about his priorities if he is such a 911 guy?

Three words: "Noun. Verb. 911."

OK, John D., let's take these things one by one...

1. Illegal immigration: Republicans were more likely to support illegal workers than Democrats. Why? Illegal workers are cheap labor.

2. Terrorists: Democrats oppose torture because frankly, it turns the entire Arab world against us, including those who were (until now) neutral or indifferent toward Americans. You would start hating someone too if they tortured your brother, cousin or father. Torture only puts American soldiers in greater danger overseas. It's bad policy.

3. Higher taxes and more spending: You mean, for example, spending $3 million every month on a war that's unwinnable? Or perhaps you mean shifting the tax burden heavily to the middle class?

There's a reason everyday people are highly disgruntled with this Republican president and Republican congressmen: They're out of touch with our needs, and our values. It's "favor your rich cronies at all costs" and "who gives a fig about middle America. If they're struggling, that's their fault and their problem."

The Democrats, on the other hand, favor policies that benefit the widest possible range of people.

I am looking forward to having a Democrat in office next time around.

John D -

I disagree. Sure, immigration is a big issue to republicans, but republicans know they controlled all three branches of government for six years and nothing was done about it.

Immigration is a wedge issue that threatens to drive apart the GOP. The pro-business part of the GOP (the part with the money) needs illegal immigrants to keep the price of their goods down. The anti-immigration part of the party (the part with the votes) hates immigration, mostly because they are xenophobic.

In the long run immigration is big loser for the GOP, and they know it. Bush always did his best to pander to the Latino community. Rove knew that should the Latinos vote go to the Democrats, his hopes for a permanent Republican majority would be lost. Latinos are a big, and getting bigger, voting block.

So go ahead, GOP. Scream about the evil brown people sneaking over our borders. It may, in the short term, help you win elections. In the long run though, you will regret it.

Johnny:

So what does the Republican Party stand for?? Tax cuts for the top 2% in the county, throwing billions of our tax dollars down the drain in Iraq, and a President who does not believe that the Constitution applies to him?

And as for Rudy?? You REALLY think that the Religious Right will hold their nose and vote for Mr. Pro-choice, Anti-Gun, Pro-Gay Rights Rudy??

Yeah, right.

Keep on dreaming Johnny - once the Dems get Rudy by himself and show him to be the hypocrite he really is, we will be back in the White House in 2008.

Lou:

Actually, Rudy was on the panel, and then did not attend the meetings. He quit the panel because he was making too much money making speeches instead of serving his country.

Hypocrisy - run your entire campaign on 9/11, and then not serve on the investigative panel.

I read yesterday in Time that 1% of all Americans accounts for 20% of all income earned. John D, why do you hate 99% of Americans, including perhaps yourself? Ok, the latter is a gimmie...

Bobin, Guiliani was never on the 9/11 Commission.
Also, I do not find Guiliani turning down being on the Commission any big deal. Why is it a big deal to you folks?

Nisleib, you do make some valid points and yes, the Republican party is split on the immigration issue. My belief is more in the middle of the two factions. I do not believe in throwing them all back, but I don't believe in amnesty either. I do believe the borders need to be tighter and an easier way for many of the Mexicans to gain LEGAL citizenship.

Jennifer, more Democrats are on the side of the illegal immigrants than are Republicans, cheap labor aside.

Kb, Bobin and the rest of the Lefty Loons, Bush cut traxes for ALL Americans, not just the top 1 percent. Again, ALL tax brackets were lowered under Bush, the child tax credit DOUBLED under Bush (which helps middle and low income folks the most), the marriage penalty tax removed (again, helps middle and low income earners the most), and in 2001, all Americans received either a $300 or $600 refund. I'll say this again, ALL Americans received tax cuts under Bush. And for lowest income earners, the tax laws were changed so that they effectively no longer pay a federal income tax.

Jennifer, please explain how this war in "unwinnable"? You Loons keep saying that, but the proof does not support your contention. For the second month in a row, Gen. Petraeus's surge plan is showing great dividends, just a couple of weeks ago bin Laden whined how Al Qaeda is losing in Iraq, Iraqis are working with the U.S. military in outing Al Qaeda terrorists, deaths for U.S. servicemen and Iraqi people were down for the second straight month in October.

Really, you folks have no clue and are out of touch with reality. But that's what makes you folks Loony Lefty Kooks.

Jennifer M,

Nice post. One correction: 3. $3 BILLION a month for Bush's war. How many schools, homeless shelters, libraries would that fund?

Good for nothing Mark Silva cannot spell. It's spelled D-e-f-e-a-t-o-c-r-a-t for those who are not spelling challenged partisan hacks. When are we gonna get to read the love letters to Obama today? The LiBune Obama Bureau is running behind on their daily quota.

Johnny:

$300?? Yippeee!!!!!!!!! That's $50 a year over the past 6 years!!! $4 a month - Vegas, here I come!!!

And the child care credit?? How much extra does that put back in your pocket?? Remember, that $500 does not mean that that is what you get back - it just gets applied to your tax bill. So maybe you get a couple of hundred back.

Compare that with what the tax cut meant to Dick Cheney last year - how many extra thousands of dollars he got.

And as for Rudy - if he is the so-called expert on 9/11, wouldn't he want to give his expertise to the commission?? But instead, he was too busy giving speeches. Isn't that hypocritical to call yourself the hero of 9/11, but tell the committe investigating it that you are too busy giving speeches patting yourself on the back to give them your "expert knowledge"??

Also Johnny, if YOU knew anything, you would know that Al-qaeda in Iraq is NOT part of Bin Laden's Al-qaeda - the Army says that. Plus, he did not say they were losing in Iraq - he told the insurgency to basically stop killing civilians and get back to what they do best - kill American soldiers.

And the reason deaths for civilians are going down is that the ethnic cleansing of the neighborhoods by Shi'ites is almost over.

Oh, and I love your bit about American soldiers deaths decreasing. ONE DEATH IS TOO MANY!!! Tell you what - you go to the funeral of one of these soldiers, and tell the grieving family how great things are - their service member died, but hey - the numbers overall are going down!!!!

Like it has been said, who will be last soldier killed in Iraq due to George Bush's insanity???

Posted by: John D | November 1, 2007 9:33 AM

Every word you post is just a straw dog argument. No one believes anything you present as Democratic thinking except for you and Paulo. Probably because you are unable to read, comprehend or reason anything not filtered through Newsmax,(m)Ann Coulter and other facsists.

and in 2001, all Americans received either a $300 or $600 refund.

Posted by: John D | November 1, 2007 11:40 AM

Meanwhile, the bill for the Iraq war is now projected to cost $8,000 for every man, woman, and child in America.

Little Johnny, when can I get you to sit down for a game of poker? I'll drive your car home with the deed to your house in the glovebox and you'll be celebrating the one hand of the night you took $20 off me.

>

As REPUBLICAN Senator Richard Lugar said, our "victory" in Iraq is much like planting a crop on a floodplain.

"In my judgment," he said, "some type of success in Iraq is possible, but as policy makers, we should acknowledge that we are facing extraordinarily narrow margins for achieving our goals."

Let me translate it for you...our soldiers could stay there till doomsday, and the Iraqi people will still be at each other's throats.

That's what I call an unwinnable war.

More than 3,800 American soldiers are now dead. They will never come home again, and their parents' hearts are shattered...all because the Shiites and the Sunnis need to fight over who has found favor with God and who should have political power.

Meanwhile, Halliburton and Blackwater benefit financially -- to the tune of more than $10 billion in taxpayer funds, out of your pocket and mine -- as do all of the politicians these companies support.

That's what I call an unwinnable war that decimates lives and the economy.

Thanks a lot for supporting George W. Bush. Maybe your 2012 candidate will be Norman Bates?

I'm furious that my last post did not appear to make it up, despite it being loaded with facts and links. So, to summarize:

Johnny D,

The bottom bracket goes from $0- $7500, so even if one makes $1, they owe the government 10 cents. Fair? Further, even those earning under the poverty line will pay a marginal rate of 15% on income between $7500 and $20,000. http://www.irs.gov/formspubs/article/0,,id=150856,00.html

Even worse, after the Bush 2001 tax cuts, the effective rates for those in the bottom 4 quintiles (bottom 80%) actually increased from what they were in 2001 to what they will be in 2008.

The only quintile to experience and actual DECREASE in effective rates? Top quintile, top 20%. The bottom quintiles averaged an effective INCREASE of .7%, while the Top 5% experienced a cut of 1.1% and the Top 1% got a tax break of 2.6%, by far the largest of any group. http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdoc.cfm?index=5746&type=0&sequence=1 The second chart midway down the page, Table 2, is the one I am referencing.

Bush could have completely eliminated taxes on those below the poverty line (would even Trickle Down Terry acknowledge that as reasonable?), but instead he focused his energy almost exclusively on comforting the most comfortable Americans.

Them's the facts. Now spin away.