If someone agrees with all 10 of these statements . . . then they’re already a Republican, aren’t they? They certainly aren’t voting Democrat. So this won’t peel any votes away from the opposition.

The only way for the Reds to win is to get the “semi” votes — people who may agree with 4 or 5 of those statements, but waver on the other points. Instead of telling those voters “come on over into the tent, we can work together”, all this does is tell them “we don’t want you”. Sure, you may be willing to vote for supporting the military requests in Afganistan and lower taxes, but if you think DOMA is a bad policy then you can take your vote and get the hell out of here. Go vote Democrat, you commie!

Number of votes gained — zero.
Number of votes driven to the other party — seems like more than zero.

I suppose theoretically, the idea is to get the hardcore that may have withheld their votes in protest back into the fold, but could those voters possibly be enough to (a)shift the balance of power and/or (b) counterbalance the “semis” that this seems designed to drive away? I can’t imagine so.

I just don’t understand what this was designed to accomplish.

Or is the most important part of that line “oppose Obama”?

And isn’t #10 a little broad? It suggest that there should be no limits on who can own guns: criminals (even in jail as there can not be any government [Fed, State or Local] rules saying they can be denied guns), the mentaly ill, 4 year olds, tourist, etc. I guess this would also mean that if someone can pay for it, they can own it. So, a 155mm howitzer for every drug dealer in the city! That should make gang wars a lot more interesting on the news.

I’m sure the move-on crowd threatening wavering Dems will lead to a more moderate Dem party?

Are we the ones issuing 10 point manifestos about who will be excommunicated from the party?

And, again. We. Won. Doesn’t matter if it’s by 1 or 1 million. Your guys have the uphill battle and its the teabaggers who will be making people on your own team miserable.

We already expect them to be hysterical and frothing at the mouth about about Marxism, concentration camps, FEMA, and death panels.

It’s having at that crazy aimed at your own guys that’s the issue.

Agreed. Confession is no doubt good for the mind, if not the soul . . . but the “God insists you do it this way or you’ll be punished eternally” aspect of it seemed a bit murky.

Almost as if the practice as institutionalized sprang from the minds of Man as opposed to the Divine . . .

. . . naaaaahhhhh.

On-topic, I think with all the frustration with politicians of all stripes in America today, something that smacks so strongly of “PR talking-point marketing” IMO has a strong chance of backfiring.
The Dem ads practically right themselves:
“The GOP — great with slogans, but where’s the performance?”
“If you’re looking for a catchy jingle for a sneaker commercial, vote GOP. If you’re trying to run a sneaker company, vote Dem.”

It won’t matter to the faithful, since they believed the talking points regardless (even if some are so vague as to be indefiniable), but the middle might pull away. Really, who didn’t think these were Repub positions already? You’re not infoming anybody with these “points”. All you’re doing is calcifing the image of the GOP as TaxCutting, UnionBusting, GayOppressing, GunWaving, AntiChoice ideologues.

The base will love it . . . but these are the descriptors that anti-GOP forces use to make the party unpalateable to the non-base. It seems like these are just doing the alienation work for the opposition.

So, as someone who tends to vote with the opposition (or at least in opposition to these bullet points) . . . Thanks?

True, BUT whether NY-23 became a big deal or not, the outcome would have been as it turned out. Own Goal on the Establishment.

You have an interesting point here “Not more than I think because I think it will happen more times than not if you continue to drive the party to the right.” I’m sure the move-on crowd threatening wavering Dems will lead to a more moderate Dem party?

Regards,

Third, there is a Conservative Party in NY, which has a line on the ballot, which is not the case in most other states.

And fourth, you lost.

Whatever comes out of it for the teabagger movement, the bottom line you lost a seat and we picked one up.

I think 2010 will have more of that outcome given similar circumstances (conservative ousts squishy liberal) than you think.

Not more than I think because I think it will happen more times than not if you continue to drive the party to the right.

But was any purpose served by dumping on the Sacrament of Reconciliation? I’m a mostly lapsed Catholic myself and have not been to confession in 40 years. But respect, Rick, show some respect. It’s basic.

The truth is no one in the GOP believes in it any more.

I very much doubt that. Contrary to what you think, tea party folks are not dumb, THEY ARE very frustrated. To the extent they find the Republican Primaries as a place to do their battles, as it should be. It’s interesting how all most of analysis draws from NY-23, which was unique for a couple of reasons, First it was a “Special Election” and Second, as a result of the first, there WAS NO Primary. Third, there is a Conservative Party in NY, which has a line on the ballot, which is not the case in most other states.

This 10 point list seems assinine to me, and an attempt to recapture the “Contract with America”. OR more likely an attempt to suck up to the vocal dissatisfaction afoot. They are tone deaf, and either don’t understand or attempting to deceive those who find the RNC as much a part of the problem as Obama and the Democrats.

It will be interesting, and I keep waiting for an explaination as to how Cristie and McDonnell managed to get the votes of close to 60% of independents.

Regards,

Whatever happened to the actual topic?

Purity Control is going to be what limits the GOP success in 2010. The teabaggers will demand it, moderates who might have been re-elected won’t be and conservatives who win will be a detriment on 2012 as they enforce fealty during the run up to the elections.

They will take out the Republicans we’d have the hardest time beating with swing voters who like divided government and replace them with a dozen Michelle Bachmanns. These men and women will take positions and say things so outlandish over the next two years it will cause reasonable people to do a big wtf?

The wtf vote breaks the Democrats way.