What could possibly save 2006 or 2008 for the rethugs?

[unschooler]

Go ahead. Scare me.

[bdamomma]

1. turd blossom karl rove

[mindem]

2. Diebold

[dchill]

5. You beat me to it...

Diebold, ES&S, Sequoia (et al) and Karl Rove's "Phantom Evangelical Voters" - who were never, ever approached by a pollster of any kind. You know, the kind whose numbers are greater than the number who actually voted.

[unschooler]

8. We need to be sure their are independent exit pollsters on duty.

How to do that, I have no idea.

[dchill]

18. "independent exit pollsters..."

would be considered fork-tongued servants of the antichrist by the powers that be (Karl Rove). The ONLY way to get a fair election is voter-verified paper ballots. But I can see that isn't going to happen.

(And yes, I do know who the real fork-tongued servants of the antichrist are.)

[unschooler]

20. You mean this forked-tongued servant of the antichrist?

[dchill]

23. Thanks - you just made me...

:puke:

[LA lady]

24. but some lied

Yeah, but the damn Young Repubs were told to lie to the exit pollsters, how are we gonna get around that crap

[unschooler]

25. I just think it's telling if all of the legit pollsters just happened to

get it wrong (gee - that's never happened).

[Inland]

3. Why, the democrats.

Don't underestimate the talent for implosion, or even worse, fading into the woodwork. And Lieberman.

[unschooler]

19. If we blow this one, they'll have a BLANK CHECK.

Then it's time to look at New Zealand or wherever.

[spindrifter]

4. And McCain--

he will be kind of a Perot-cum-Nader spoiler.

[unschooler]

7. But whose pot will he spoil?

Ours of theirs?

[spindrifter]

13. My greatest fear is that it will be ours.

There are plenty of people that are ticked off with the Rethugs but can't resist that "tough on" stance and feel comforted by McCain, a Vietnam veteran.

[unschooler]

16. If he could pull some of the sane people away from Gawd's Own Party,

he might do some long-term damage to the R's. At least the Rovian strategy wouldn't work.

[othermeans]

6. Another terror attack

[smoochpooch]

9. Yep.

If it happens, we can't be timid. We know whose fault it is.

[unschooler]

10. I wonder whether that would backfire against them.

You know: the republicans control everything and they can't protect us.

[dchill]

11. Ooh, ooh, wait - I know!!!

World War III - elections called off by Presidential Fiat! We couldn't possibly expect to change horses in the middle of that stream! (You wanted me to scare you...)

[unschooler]

12. You scared me.

And the Congress and the Supreme Court would probably go along with it. :scared:

[dchill]

22. The Supreme Court would more than "go along...

with it." Scalia, in particular, is already rubbing his hands together in gleeful anticipation. It would be his honor to cancel elections. His kind of Opus Dei-mocracy doesn't need them.

HARTFORD, Conn. -- Conservative U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia had some advice Wednesday for those who questioned his impartiality after he refused to recuse himself from a case involving his hunting buddy, Vice President Dick Cheney.

"For Pete's sake, if you can't trust your Supreme Court justice more than that, get a life," Scalia said.

Scalia, addressing an audience at the University of Connecticut's law school on Wednesday, said recusing himself from the 2004 case _ which focused on an energy task force that Cheney led _ would only have given fuel to newspaper editorial writers and other detractors who have said he is too close to the vice president.

"I think the proudest thing I have done on the bench is not allowed myself to be chased off that case," Scalia said.

The case in question involved Cheney's request to keep private the details of closed-door White House strategy sessions that produced the administration's energy policy.

http://www.wfsb.com/Global/story.asp?S=4761664

[unschooler]

26. THAT's the proudest thing he's done on the bench? What a legacy!

:puke: :puke: :puke:

[TheCentepedeShoes]

32. Why change horsemen

in the middle of an Apocalypse. Think someone here saw that on a bumper sticker.

[BillZBubb]

14. The Democrats' "strategists".

They'll tell our candidates that the Repugs are imploding. Therefore, our candidates shouldn't take any stands at all. That way, they "won't alienate the voters". Our base will be unenthused, we won't pull any of the millions of people who would be our allies to the polls, and the Repugs win with a little help from their friends (at Diebold and the various Secretary of State criminals.) Hey it's been that way for the past three elections.

[sampsonblk]

30. Yep, what you said

That's the only way we could bobble this perfect opportunity - sorta like we did in '04.

Weakness + Diebold = GOP "mandate" shoved down our throats again.

[elfin]

15. The magic combo of

gerrymandering plus diebold to "win" by slim margins, plus lying and smearing opponents, plus pulling out all the hate stops against gays, plus enormous amounts of money for non-stop homey sounding media buys. In other words, same old same old.

[lvx35]

17. Here's my guesses

1) capture of Bin Laden, in america, with a nuke under his arm.
2) a videotape of top Democrats eating children.
3) the wierd event that makes everybody jump back and go "woah, Bush had us fooled all along, and was just PRETENDING to be an idiot because it was all part of his brilliant master plan to bring world peace."

[Sensitivity]

21. If McCain can take Repub Nom, Dems in trouble. McCain still seen as In

Does not seem to matter to Indis that he has prostituted RW recently.
Unfortunately, it is simple arithmetic. Whoever gets the indi vote can win --
and the baggage of Bush will be history because of McCain's perceived independence.

[unschooler]

27. I wonder if the fundies will let McCain through the primaries.

I don't see a lot of love for him from those folks. I suppose if he's sufficiently "anointed" he might be able to cut out the Brownback-types early in the primaries.

Say it ain't so.

[Yupster]

34. Republican primaries always

go to the guy seen as next in line. Right now that's McCain.

[unschooler]

35. McCain would be an extremely formidable candidate.

Despite his history.

I'm just not sure Dobson and the SBC and those folks would countenance him.

[SoCalDemGrrl]

28. Diebold, ES&S, Sequoia

[Robeson]

38. ...and don't forget voter suppression. That's always been a time....

...honored action.

[Savannah Progressive]

29. Save it for the Repugs? We will win it for them.

With the Democratic Party running right as fast as they can, dumping our constituents, and our ideals overboard as fast as possible, we will win it for the Repugniks.

I am actually expecting a very low Democratic Party turn out, granted we hate Bush, we all do, but we aren't offering a change from Bush, we can't really.

We are only offering a Repugnik Lite, or even Repugnik Strong, option for the voters. Now, when someone cares about a womans right to choose, whom should they support as a candidate? Repugniks are opposed to Abortion, but so are the Democrats in South Dakota, Georgia, Alabama, and even the DNC. The DNC is not defending a womans right to choose as part of their national platform, so it's been thrown overboard to try and tease the Anti-Choice vote from the Repugniks.

We call it Real Security, but are we offering what we all know real security is? Understanding, diplomacy, and considered action with an alliance? No, we are just going to bomb, patrol, and equip "smarter". Hardly a campaign we can get behind, Vote Democrat, and we will give you Smarter Smart Bombs.

The people want real health insurance options, so we tackle the issue by ignoring it entirely. The people wanted an end to the abusive and intrusive Patriot Act, so we voted for it. The people needed defending from the Credit Card Company written Bankruptcy reform, and we voted FOR the Bankruptcy Reform.

They wanted Judicial Reform, so we gave them Alito and Roberts on a silver platter.

The Unions want job protections for Americans, and we vote for CAFTA.

What can save the election for the Repugniks? Why the Democratic Party can, and we can do it better, faster, and smarter than they ever will.

[Yoda Yada]

31. "Tampering with" the forms of all the newly-registered Democrats.

If Republicans can "mess with" the voter information for all the NEWLY-REGISTERED Democrats for the 2006 elections.....then the Republicans will control Congress AGAIN and.... there will NEVER be an investigation of election fraud in a Republican-controlled Congress!

(Even if Karl Rove ends up fighting his own legal battles....he will leave instructions for others to follow.) :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

[justice1]

33. I wouldn't give them any ideas.

[unschooler]

36. Just in case Rove reads DU.... and hasn't done this by then...

[smoochpooch]

37. No kidding! I'd swear that sometimes they just listen to us

discuss and debate and then decide what we're good at defending and what we suck at. Makes sense, I'd do the same to them if I wanted to know what's going on in their heads. We should deke them for the next few months, maybe we can catch them off guard.

[samsingh]

39. Diebold and other electoral fraud

its happened in every election since 2000

the supreme courts partisan decision sent a signal to every repug and conservative that they could go ahead and break the law at will.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

40. Democratic infighting is one obvious candidate.

If the Democrats go on spending as much time attacking their own elected representatives for not standing up to the Republicans, rather than concentrating on getting enough of them elected that they can actually do so, then the Republicans won't even *need* saving.

Campaign to get Democrats elected. It doesn't matter if they're not ones that you personally agree with on everything; they'll still be a step towards retaking the committees and actually being able to resist the Republicans to some extent.

In the primaries, don't support the candidate you'd most like to see elected; support the one you think would have the best chance of winning (within reason, obviously, but the degree of nose-holding justifiable is hard to overstate).

And above all, don't criticise the elected Democrats for "cowardice", "gutlessness", "spinelessness", "selling out", or any of the other usual suspects. The reason they're not standing up to the Republicans is because *they* *are* *a* *minority*; in a Democracy they *can't* stand up to them. Changing that is the *only* way to make them do it, and as well as being a necessary step it will also be a sufficient one - despite the allegations being hurled, lack of will is *not* the problem. Lack of votes is.

[peacetheonlyway]

41. ELECTION FRAUD

election fraud
election fraud
election fraud
election fraud

Diebold in 44 counties in Oh
Diebold and ES&S Controlling 75M votes
Satellite controlled chips installed in both vendors machines allowing single remote control of all the data on PCMCIA memory cards, reversed forever from the original intent of the voter and nobody will ever suspect

and Diebold now controlling the voter registration roll so nobody can go back and complain when they INVENT hundreds of thousands of phantom republican voters..

it's much more coordinated than anyone would suspect..

the winner of the 2008 presidential election is CHUCK HAGEL

and the republicans will gain 75% control of both houses..

you heard it here first....