See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Comments

1. #1
   On January 2nd, 2008 at 10:25 am, meatpieandtatters said:

   I don’t believe polls. They’re designed for media-contrived results.

2. #2
   On January 2nd, 2008 at 10:26 am, meatpieandtatters said:

   What better way to throw people off-track than give them a false sense that they’re gaining?

3. #3
   On January 2nd, 2008 at 10:34 am, The Raging Republican said:

   I’m sure Cackles will just chalk this up to a “vast right wing conspiracy”.

4. #4
   On January 2nd, 2008 at 10:37 am, mike volpe said:

   Well, some can chalk this up as partisan thinking however I firmly believe that 2008 will be a good year for the Reps.

   Whatever problems the Reps have, they are nothing compared to the nightmare of the Dems leadership. Their Presidential candidates would be laughable if everyone wasn’t sure the Dems would win. I have several reasons for my thinking, and I firmly believe I am right.

   Here is how I wrote about it.

5. #5
   On January 2nd, 2008 at 10:41 am, madchef said:

   If the Republican party would clearly define it’s message and what it stands for, i.e. a secure border, winning the war on terror, fiscal responsability, ect. AND live up to those promises, then there is no reason why the Republicans can’t win back and hold onto both houses of congress and the White house.

6. #6
   On January 2nd, 2008 at 10:45 am, cpodug said:

   To paraphrase Lewis Carroll:

   “When I use a poll,” Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone. “It means just what I choose it to mean – neither more or less.”
   “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make polls mean so many different things.”
   “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master – that’s all.”

7. #7
   On January 2nd, 2008 at 10:45 am, The Raging Republican said:

   On January 2nd, 2008 at 10:41 am, madchef said:

   If the Republican party would clearly define it’s message and what it stands for, i.e. a secure border, winning the war on terror, fiscal responsability, ect. AND live up to those promises, then there is no reason why the Republicans can’t win back and hold onto both houses of congress and the White house.

   It would be a landslide victory. I just can’t wrap my tiny little brain around why they haven’t figured this out.

   AND live up to those promises

   Thats the real root of the problem.

8. #8
   On January 2nd, 2008 at 10:51 am, Mark Jaquith said:

   It’s hard to believe given widespread, grass-roots conservative discontent over illegal immigration and spending gone wild, but Rasmussen is reporting an uptick in the number of Americans self-identifying as Republicans.

   Many states require you to be a Republican to vote in the Republican primaries. Many of those registration deadlines were in December. What reason can you think of that people would register as Republicans just in time for the primaries? Lightbulb moment in three, two one…

9. #9
   On January 2nd, 2008 at 10:59 am, Brian72 said:

   Independent affiliation has also dropped. This looks like former Republicans returning to the party. Self-described independents only make up 29.5% of the electorate, which is the first time since June 2006 that number has been below 30%.

   That drop in independents could be bad news for Bloomberg, and RonPaul for that matter. If anything can move poll numbers, it might be a billion dollars.

   To quote someone:

   “It’s called conservatism. It works every time it’s tried.”

   Let’s try it, shall we?

10. #10
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 11:01 am, BadIdeaGuy said:

    I don’t follow polls. Political polling is mass-marketing in place of leadership.

    Except for one or two, all the candidates running are p-poor leaders.

11. #11
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 11:08 am, tre said:

    Of those Republicans, how many identified themselves as “Reagan Conservative Republican.”?
    That’s how I define myself.

12. #12
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 11:09 am, Alphonse said:

    Little to choose from. The Republicans make bad decisions and spend more than the Democrats, but the me-too Democrats seem to be afraid to do anything but follow the lead of the Republicans.

13. #13
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 11:12 am, Lifeofthemind said:

    The Republicans have one advantage over the Democrats. Both parties have some people, not all, in positions of authority who are cynical hacks. Both depend on fringe elements to do the grunt work and raise money. The difference is that the Republicans have not surrendered to the lunatic fringe. The Ron Paul supporters will not be allowed to set the agenda.

    It isn’t that Paul or Patrick Buchanan are wrong on everything. They aren’t. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day and both of them are correct more often than that. The fact is that a core of their supporters are unstable and may be dangerous. Republicans have no problem with excluding people like that and Democrats keep trying to be tolerant of the intolerant.

14. #14
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 11:16 am, mike volpe said:

    look folks, I am not necessarily happy with the Party anymore than anyone else, however I think it is a gross distortion to say things like there is little to choose from, or that they are no better than the Dems.

    Remember, it was the Dems who set out with ever fiber of their being to lose in Iraq. it was the Reps that resisted even when that was politically unpopular.

    It is the Dems that want to institute universal health care. They wanted to expand SCHIP. They are proposing a plethora of tax increases.

    It was David Vitter, a Rep, that proposed an end to sanctuary cities. His bill was voted for by nearly every Rep and against by nearly every Dem.

    It was the Dems that brought DREAM to the floor.

    the Dems are pushing through a secular progressive agenda with bills like ENDA.

    Do not make a mistake between a party you general like and support that has disappointed you in some matters, and the other party which wants to implement a whole different agenda.

15. #15
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 11:17 am, Lifeofthemind said:

    Michelle,
    If you ask real nice could you get Charles of Little Green Footballs to fix you up with “Show New Comments” buttons?

16. #16
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 11:17 am, Brian72 said:

    On January 2nd, 2008 at 11:09 am, Alphonse said:

    Little to choose from. The Republicans make bad decisions and spend more than the Democrats, but the me-too Democrats seem to be afraid to do anything but follow the lead of the Republicans.

    That would be wrong. The Republicans have strayed from fiscal conservatism in favor of buying power in DC with our tax money, which they learned from Democrats.

    Democrats have constantly hammered every program the R’s have proposed domestically as being “underfunded”.
    Education, SCHIP, Homeland Security, everything I can think of was never enough. Look through the vetoes last year to see what the Democrats would have spent with a Democrat president.

    So, your line about Republicans spending more than Democrats is factually inaccurate.

17. #17
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 11:20 am, Mr_Conservative_Cat said:

    Like Pelosi’s Christmas call to the family of the fallen soldier – three months after he fell – expect Democrats to be doing non-stop imitations of Republican Light. In other words expect another nearly full year of non-stop game-playing instead of attending to the people’s business.

18. #18
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 11:22 am, Gregor said:

    I hate bringing this up, but believe it or not, it’s likely that this surge is caused by PaulBots. Ron Paul supporters have been running a fanatical campaign urging Democrats and Independents to change Party affiliation to Republican just for this year, which would then allow them to vote in the Republican primary for Ron Paul.

    There is a chance that PaulBots could do to the Republican primary what they’ve managed to do to online polls.

    I’m not sure if it will be enough for him to beat any of the top candidates, but I expect that he’ll end up doing much better than what people expect.

    Either way, expect to see foaming-at-the-mouth PaulBots protesting in mass and claiming rigged elections.

19. #19
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 11:25 am, deepdiver said:

    The GOP is so afraid of a strong message that the MSM will jump all over that they have no real message at all. It has mostly been that way since Bush I. I think part of it is that the GOP leadership assumes that people will see through all the tortured reasoning and half-truths the MSM and Hollywood spew. They seem to think that quiet, logical reasoning will win out over the screaming inanity. That may be true, but how much of what we know as America will still exist by the time that happens? Obviously, I am much in agreement with Betsy Newmark’s comments.

    Essentially the GOP seems to say, “We stand on our record,” and then leaves it up to the people to go look up that record, analyze it and draw their own conclusions. That doesn’t work in a hostile MSM sound bite environment. Bill Clinton gets out there and touts his record constantly. We hear more (erroneous) information from Billy Boy about his record in a week than we have heard from the GOP in the last 7 years. And you have to dig to find that little bit. The GOP leadership just mentions points that they need to be hammering on. If the MSM is going to report 25% of what Billy Boy says and only 5% of what the GOP says, then 99% of the GOP’s comments have to be on target and touting their accomplishments so that almost anything the MSM reports they said is constructive, positive and leadership quality. Pandering isn’t leadership – it’s the opposite. Zero tolerance isn’t leadership. Bipartisanship isn’t leadership. Compassionate conservatism isn’t leadership. Leaders make the hard decisions other do not want to or cannot make. While people may like someone who reminds them of their next door neighbor, they will follow someone who offers them a vision and hope.

20. #20
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 11:34 am, davenp35 said:

    I agree with Mark. Dems are changing to Reps to sabotage the campaign. Why else would Huckabee be getting the support he is?

21. #21
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 11:40 am, Mark Jaquith said:

    I didn’t say that. Democrats are, according to polling, likely to win in 2008. Crossing the isle to sabotage the campaign would be stupid, considering that if they voted in the Democratic primaries they might actually get a chance to decide our next president. I’m suggesting that they’re crossing the isle (like I did, from a third party) to vote for a Republican they actually support.

22. #22
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 11:49 am, TXRose said:

    I agree, Mike V and DeepD. The GOP needs to develop it’s message and
    hammer away at the public like the dems do. I do know that the reason
    Slick gets away with the lies is because under dimm law, any lie told 3
    times become truth.
    My husband and I have been long time Reps and have watched the party
    push the self destruct button time and time again. We cannot figure out
    why they don’t crow about their successes. We cannot understand why,
    if a strategy does not work, they keep pushing it.
    We are no longer active in the party (as we used to be) because the
    frustration was absolutely telling on us.

23. #23
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 11:49 am, davenp35 said:

    Then I don’t agree with what Mark said. LOL Sorry for the misinterpretation.

24. #24
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 11:52 am, meatpieandtatters said:

    I like the Ron Paul effect: strict constitutional flavoring with just a hint of income tax elimination and covered in a nice IRS reduction.

25. #25
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 11:53 am, Boomer said:

    I have had it with the “Stupid Party” and will continue to identify as an Independent. I have absolutely no trust in polls or those gathering data for them.

26. #26
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 12:08 pm, RetFireman said:

    Keep showing Sheehan, Code Pink, Kos and all the rest of the people who speak for the Democrats. Keep letting Rosie O’Donnell out there to make her oh so informed statements on the ar Against Islamic Aggression and Global Domination and 9-11. Keep having Moveon.org come forward with their threats and their insane commentary about the Mid-Western States, insulting the “little guy” and the Christians.

    Just keep doing what they are doing, and you will continue to see more and more people jumping ship. The more the Democrats come forward, insulting the people of the United States, insulting their belief systems, insulting their country, insulting their military…the same military that this country overwhelmingly supports…as long as the Liberals and the Left-Wing keep showing who they are and continue to tell people what to do, what to think, remove their rights and freedoms and worst of all…keep telling people that they are about to tax the crap out of them straight into a recession and into the worst economy since the Depression, you ill continue to see people “jmping ship” and coming to the Grand `ol Party

    At a time when it should be easy to win people over to the Democrat corner, they are losing people. Now why would that be> Hmmmm…could it be that people are not as stupid as Liberals insist that they are?

    Could be…

27. #27
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 12:09 pm, Monte Hall said:

    Watch –
    We are getting reports on our local news here in Tulsa that Micheal Bloomberg is meeting/supposed to meet with several politician types in Norman, OK (home of OU).

    Subject: possible third party run in 2008, most likely to steal votes (Rockefeller types) away from Republicans (doing a Ross Perot and deliberately getting the Demorat in with only a plurality).

28. #28
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 12:11 pm, Mark Jaquith said:

    I like the Ron Paul effect: strict constitutional flavoring with just a hint of income tax elimination and covered in a nice IRS reduction.

    I hope it lasts. I know Ron Paul’s brand of no-compromise constitutional limited government and maximal individual liberty is a bit intense for many Conservatives, and I’m not under any illusions about his chances for success. But maybe, just maybe, his run will help remind Conservatives of how far they’ve strayed from conservative principles. Maybe it will show people that you don’t need to settle for gun-grabbers (Romney, Giuliani), amnesty advocates (McCain), or religiously motivated do-gooders (Huckabee).

29. #29
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 12:30 pm, Romeo13 said:

    And Yet…

    29.5% of the electorate defines themselves as “other”…

    Yep… almost a third of voters in this country essentialy have NO representation, because the two parties have conived to control the elections.

    One point many of you miss however, is that a LARGE number of the dispossesed are CONSERVATIVES who feel betrayed by the Republican party. They are not for Paul, or Bloomburg… but also don’t see the overspending corrupt Repubs in power representing them.

    Its instructive to me that the ONLY Repub running on ISSUES is one who gets no positive press, and very little help from the Repub party.

30. #30
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 12:31 pm, J S Ragman said:

    Somebody please fill me in. I don’t know much about Bloomberg, other than the fact that he’s radically anti-gun, and was a Democrat before he was a Republican before he was an Independent. What effect do we think a third-party run by this imbecile would have?

31. #31
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 12:33 pm, Laddy said:

    If I’m not mistaken, Rasmussen derives these party identification results from polling and not voter registration rolls. I would assume he’s also asking who they’re supporting while polling. Thus it should be pretty easy for him to pull out any Paul effect. I see no reason why he wouldn’t if that was the case. Since he didn’t specify a Paul effect, I’d assume that maybe there wasn’t one, but I obviously could be wrong.

32. #32
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 12:44 pm, TXRose said:

    I too know very little about Bloomberg except that he changes parties
    more often than I do shoes, and I am a shoe freak.
    About the polls. I know, at least two dozen registered dems that
    NEVER vote for the dem pres candidate. They only vote their party on a
    local level and have to register dem to do that in the primary. If they
    were polled, they would answer democrat.

33. #33
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 12:53 pm, Monte Hall said:

    Joe Sh$t the Ragman –
    I believe — emphasize, believe — Bloomberg would want to be a spoiler. With his Billion $ of his own (some months ago it was reported he said he would be willing to spend $1B to campaign) he could pull a reverse (perverse) Ronald Reagan: I didn’t leave the Republican Party, the Party left me.

    I believe the more conservative a candidate that the Repubs nominate, the more tempting it is for Bloomberg to do a counter stroke. 2008 could be a tight, really tight race. All he needs to do is confuse just a very few percentage points of middle/liberal RHINOS to shoe in the Demorat, open borders, anything goes Socially, and anything goes as long as it’s good for business candidate.

    Could he, with a billion for a psuedo party and lots of advertising, sow a lot of confusions and doubts? Just a few single digit points of doubt.

34. #34
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 1:08 pm, Miss Ladybug said:

    Not all states require party identification when registering to vote. I can name two, from personal experience: Arkansas and Texas. When I lived in Arkansas, I would sometimes vote in the Dem primary because there were more choices to make: the Rep primary ticket often had lots of “unopposed” candidates. So, I would primary vote for Dems to at least vote for the Dem I objected to least, just in case a Dem won in the general…

    So, voter registrations aren’t necessarily the right guide to actual affiliation, and which primary someone votes in isn’t always a good indicator, either. I can only hope that these “self-identifying” people are actually Republicans, and not people trying to throw a wrench in the Republican works, or those crazy PaulBots…

35. #35
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 1:09 pm, ThatSamIAm said:

    If the Republicans can get a leader with some balls to step forward and start hammering away at the Dems they can take back congress. These Dems are ripe to be knocked off their high horse because nobody likes them. You never hear anyone praising Wimpy Harry. You never see or hear from Howard Dean. You rarely see John Kerry. The Republicans lost their conservative way trying to play political games and got caught with their hand in the cookie jar. The American voter wanted to make them pay for that more than they wanted to push the Dems sociliast agenda with Hillary-care, illegal immigrant palooza, surrender at all costs and blame America first. Now it’s turning back again because we see how corrupt and un-American the Democrats are.

36. #36
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 1:16 pm, Miss Ladybug said:

    ThatSamIAm~

    I think you’re right. Contrary to what we always here about the 2006 mid-term elections, I don’t think the Dems won because of the anti-war message that is “conventional wisdom”. I think the Dems won because of a combination of frustrated Republicans (tired of Republicans in Congress spending like drunken sailors) stayed home, and because of Dems running candidates in several red states that were talking more conservative and/or hawkish than the Rep candidate…

37. #37
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 1:30 pm, josetheguerilla said:

    I’d like to think that predictions of the looming GOP disaster are grossly exaggerated, but there is still time for the “Stupid Party” to muck things up.

    Yesterday, Ajmontana said he saw a UFO. I think it was the Ron Paul blimp!!!

38. #38
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 1:30 pm, iamsaved said:

    Remember the Democrat’s constant use of the phrases Failed Policies of the Bush Administration and Culture of Corruption? Well, they’ve come home to roost right in the Democrat’s hen house.

    Every one of their campaign promises have failed and the longer things roll along, their own corrption begins to manifest itself.

    The voting public isn’t as dumb as the far left would lead you to believe.

    The old adage that if you point a finger at someone, there are three pointing back at you holds true.

39. #39
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 1:40 pm, TXRose said:

    I think the MSM, in their “I absolutely won’t publish anything good about
    Iraq” mode are helping the GOP. By not putting Iraq in front of the public
    day by day, the short memories in this country are forgetting that there is
    a war in Iraq and are able to see the travesty of the Pelosi/Reid “leadership”(LOL) in DC. If this can go on for awhile, we may see a turn
    around for the Republicans. As for third party candidates…they get into
    the race strictly to act as spoilers. I do not think Perot, even with his
    supersized ego, actually thought he could win.
    Texans do not have to state party affiliation when they walk into the voting
    booth in Nov but they do have to state it to vote in the primary. You cannot be Independent in the primary. You must declare either Rep or
    Dem.

40. #40
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 1:50 pm, J S Ragman said:

    #33 Monte Hall

    I understand the theory of a third party candidacy for Bloomberg. And I understand his $1 billion. But if the Rasmussen figures are anywhere near correct, hasn’t he basically told 70% of the registered voters in America that our party affiliation is wrong?

    All that I know about him is that for a while he was sending his agents down here to Virginia to do illegal firearms sting operations.

    If he is more of a liberal, I would hope he would draw more voters away from the Dem candidate. But as I said, I don’t know much about his stance on most issues other than the second amendment. If he wants to spoil the Democrats campaign, then more power to him.

    What do you know about his core beliefs? (and I acknowledge that a turncoat like him may not have any).

41. #41
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 1:59 pm, vickisoup said:

    Ron Paul is all the rage, here in the People’s Republic of Santa Cruz. I don’t think we should get too far ahead of ourselves by counting him out. He is a force with which to be reckoned, it seems, as his message IS resonating with some unlikely followers, after all. Most people here would have never thought themselves open to a “Republican” candidate, and yet…there they are….Ron Paul bumper stickers all over the county.

42. #42
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 2:24 pm, Miss Ladybug said:

    The only reason Ron Paul as an (R) after his name is that he couldn’t get elected here in Texas, in his district with an (L) behind it. He might talk the talk and walk the walk when it comes to small government and be against extra-Constitutional federal power, but he’s anything but serious when it comes to facing the threat of Islamic terrorism…

43. #43
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 3:17 pm, BlameAmericaLast said:

    I wouldn’t put your cheerleading skirts on just yet. The way the Dems play, there will probably be many last minute October surprises. Just like 2006 with the Republican sex scandals. I’m sure they’re holding out until the last minute.

44. #44
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 3:24 pm, xblade said:

    There is a chance that PaulBots could do to the Republican primary what they’ve managed to do to online polls.

    Only problem is in the primaries, they don’t use online voting or text message voting. The Paul effect won’t be anywhere near as dramatic when these guys aren’t allowed to vote 4-5 times each.

45. #45
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 6:29 pm, secondsight said:

    I am not surprised. The Democrats have had a year to monopolize the MSM news. So we had Pelosi in Syria, Retreat Reid, Murtha the Turncoat, Frank the Shakedown Guy, Schumer the Noisy, etc etc.

    They weren’t ready for primetime. In fact, they’re far left of JFK and their lack of mainstream content showed. 2007 felt like Abbie Hoffman et al in Power.

    If you categorize voter’s choices as between French Socialism ala Nutroot Democrats and liberal Republican (ie centrist commonsense), the Democrats are lucky this change isn’t an avalanche.

46. #46
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 7:11 pm, TXRose said:

    Just like Howard Dean had this fantastic online support, so does Ron Paul.
    The one big problem with this is that for Dean, they couldn’t leave their
    computers long enough to go vote. Paul may want to think about that before
    he starts revving up for a pres campaign.
    Bob Novak is forecasting Romney GOP, Obama, Edwards and HRC in that
    order. (I didn’t know he was psyhic).

47. #47
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 7:21 pm, brooklyn red said:

    Well, it’s easy (for me)to believe given widespread, grass-roots conservative discontent over illegal immigration and spending gone wild, but Rasmussen is reporting an uptick in the number of Americans self-identifying as Republicans.

    Even here in uber-liberal NYC people are ashamed to be associated with the Dems.

    And 9/11 didn’t scare Newyorkers anywhere near as much as Hillarycare scares Newyorkers. We are jaded, not stupid.

48. #48
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 9:29 pm, beenthere said:

    Given that the trend for the Republican Party has been since Reagan left office, for Republicans to move to being Independents and Independents to move to being Democrats, I think we can confidently say this up tick is a Ron Paul inspired phenomenon. Now there are strong reasons why this gradual though significant change is happening. I don’t want to get into them now, however. What is clear, is that the Republicans need to do some serious thinking about how to reverse it. With everything else, except ironically Iraq at the moment going against them, a third party headed by Paul would not help matters at all. This is a serious problem, but from what I see, few are thinking about it.

    As for Paul himself, he really does not impress me. Like most libertarians, he appears more comfortable with the Left than the Right (though it was Ayn Rand herself who almost single-handedly created modern Libertarianism, though she wasn’t that happy about it) and seems to have no grasp of how dangerous the world situation is; as a consequence, has no idea how to address it. In this respect, I grant he is like almost all the others (I do think Fred has an inkling, but sorry, Fred is not going to happen).

    Oh well. I still think it will be Hilary in the White House, but at this point it may not matter — almost any democrat or their dog will win.

49. #49
    On January 2nd, 2008 at 9:47 pm, William Teach said:

    As has been said, Dem ideas are popular until people actual start to hear the details, then they go downhill from there.

50. #50
    On January 3rd, 2008 at 5:09 am, 1ManMilitia said:

    Go Ron Go