<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Conservative Bloggers Polled on 2006 Election</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/conservative_bloggers_polled_on_2006_election/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/conservative_bloggers_polled_on_2006_election/</link>
	<description>Online Journal of Politics and Foreign Affairs</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 15:16:43 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Republican bloggers think they&#8217;ll keep control &#171; donnatella</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/conservative_bloggers_polled_on_2006_election/comment-page-1/#comment-102499</link>
		<dc:creator>Republican bloggers think they&#8217;ll keep control &#171; donnatella</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Nov 2006 17:48:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/11/conservative_bloggers_polled_on_2006_election/#comment-102499</guid>
		<description>[...] Outside The Beltway has an interesting poll: John Hawkins polled a large number of conservative bloggers on the 2006 election (I was asked but didn’t participate) and got some interesting results. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Outside The Beltway has an interesting poll: John Hawkins polled a large number of conservative bloggers on the 2006 election (I was asked but didn&rsquo;t participate) and got some interesting results. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave Schuler</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/conservative_bloggers_polled_on_2006_election/comment-page-1/#comment-102485</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave Schuler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Nov 2006 16:30:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/11/conservative_bloggers_polled_on_2006_election/#comment-102485</guid>
		<description>Republicans will hold the Senate.  I think the House is too close to call.

Take the Illinois 6th and 8th Congressional Districts.  Both are in areas that are traditionally Republican strongholds but one seat is currently held by a Democrat (it&#039;s complicated) and the other is Henry Hyde&#039;s old seat i.e. it&#039;s been in the Republican column.  Polls in both districts are within the margin of error.

The net result of these races could be:  Democrats  net 1 (pick up one, retain one), &lt;i&gt;status quo&lt;/i&gt; (Dems win one, lose one&#8212;the most likely outcome IMO), or Republicans net 1 (retain Hyde&#039;s seat, pick up one).  I suspect that&#039;s the case in a lot of places.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Republicans will hold the Senate.  I think the House is too close to call.</p>
<p>Take the Illinois 6th and 8th Congressional Districts.  Both are in areas that are traditionally Republican strongholds but one seat is currently held by a Democrat (it's complicated) and the other is Henry Hyde's old seat i.e. it's been in the Republican column.  Polls in both districts are within the margin of error.</p>
<p>The net result of these races could be:  Democrats  net 1 (pick up one, retain one), <i>status quo</i> (Dems win one, lose one&mdash;the most likely outcome IMO), or Republicans net 1 (retain Hyde's seat, pick up one).  I suspect that's the case in a lot of places.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Joyner</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/conservative_bloggers_polled_on_2006_election/comment-page-1/#comment-102483</link>
		<dc:creator>James Joyner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Nov 2006 16:28:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/11/conservative_bloggers_polled_on_2006_election/#comment-102483</guid>
		<description>cian:  I ignored that one because that&#039;s what partisans ALWAYS say.  See almost any of the popular Democrat blogs, like kos or myDD, for example, for the exact same argument in the other direction.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>cian:  I ignored that one because that's what partisans ALWAYS say.  See almost any of the popular Democrat blogs, like kos or myDD, for example, for the exact same argument in the other direction.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cian</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/conservative_bloggers_polled_on_2006_election/comment-page-1/#comment-102477</link>
		<dc:creator>cian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Nov 2006 16:10:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/11/conservative_bloggers_polled_on_2006_election/#comment-102477</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;K) Republicans don’t fight back hard enough against Democratic attacks. (37) — 59.7%&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Tells you everything you need to know about conservative bloggers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>K) Republicans don&rsquo;t fight back hard enough against Democratic attacks. (37) — 59.7%</p></blockquote>
<p>Tells you everything you need to know about conservative bloggers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: McGehee</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/conservative_bloggers_polled_on_2006_election/comment-page-1/#comment-102474</link>
		<dc:creator>McGehee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Nov 2006 15:46:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/11/conservative_bloggers_polled_on_2006_election/#comment-102474</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;I don’t know how else to respond when people call decent men like Jim Webb a pervert for no other reason than to win an election.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Wait a minute. Let me get this straight.

John Cole somehow had this crazy idea, once upon a time, that politics brings out the &lt;i&gt;better&lt;/i&gt; angels of people&#039;s nature?

And it&#039;s &lt;i&gt;everybody else&lt;/i&gt; who&#039;s drinking the Kool-Aid?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>I don&rsquo;t know how else to respond when people call decent men like Jim Webb a pervert for no other reason than to win an election.</p></blockquote>
<p>Wait a minute. Let me get this straight.</p>
<p>John Cole somehow had this crazy idea, once upon a time, that politics brings out the <i>better</i> angels of people's nature?</p>
<p>And it's <i>everybody else</i> who's drinking the Kool-Aid?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Joyner</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/conservative_bloggers_polled_on_2006_election/comment-page-1/#comment-102471</link>
		<dc:creator>James Joyner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Nov 2006 15:24:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/11/conservative_bloggers_polled_on_2006_election/#comment-102471</guid>
		<description>Triumph:  I find the results interesting, not because they constitute a scientific poll--they don&#039;t--but for reasons Cernig points to in his Cole quote.  People are clearly drinking the Kool Aid here despite all evidence to the contrary.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Triumph:  I find the results interesting, not because they constitute a scientific poll--they don't--but for reasons Cernig points to in his Cole quote.  People are clearly drinking the Kool Aid here despite all evidence to the contrary.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cernig</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/conservative_bloggers_polled_on_2006_election/comment-page-1/#comment-102469</link>
		<dc:creator>Cernig</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Nov 2006 15:01:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/11/conservative_bloggers_polled_on_2006_election/#comment-102469</guid>
		<description>Hi James,
&lt;blockquote&gt;1) Do you think the GOP is going to retain control of the House?

Yes (38) — 61.3%
No (24) — 38.7%&lt;/blockquote&gt; It&#039;s interesting, in the light of this, to read &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=7551&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;John Cole&#039;s&lt;/a&gt; post today (said post is attracting a LOT of attention today):
&lt;blockquote&gt;What makes this even more frustrating is that not only do I feel like I have been duped, but I established a lot of friends in the right wing of the blogging community- and now I read their pages and I can’t believe what I am reading, even though I know that five years ago I probably would have been saying the same or similar things. I know many of them as people- and not just GOP parrots- having spent time working on collaborative projects with them, serving on the editorial board at Red State, appearing on radio shows with them- you name it. I have, at one point in time, defended many of them from what I perceived to be unfair attacks. So I know that by and large they are not bad people (Dan Riehl is an unmitigated asshole, however). Yet I read their pages now, and through my eyes, it looks like they are so divorced from reality it makes me question what, if anything, I ever believed in.

In short, it really sucks looking around at the wreckage that is my party and realizing that the only decent thing to do is to pull the plug on them (or help). I am not really having any fun attacking my old friends- but I don’t know how else to respond when people call decent men like Jim Webb a pervert for no other reason than to win an election. I don’t know how to deal with people who think savaging a man with Parkinson’s for electoral gain is appropriate election-year discourse. I don’t know how to react to people who think that calling anyone who disagrees with them on Iraq a “terrorist-enabler” than to swing back. I don’t know how to react to people who think that media reports of party hacks in the administration overruling scientists on issues like global warming, endangered species, intelligent design, prescription drugs, etc., are signs of… liberal media bias.

And it makes me mad. I still think of myself as a Republican- but I think the whole party has been hijacked by frauds and religionists and crooks and liars and corporate shills, and it frustrates me to no end to see my former friends enabling them, and I wonder ‘Why can’t they see what I see?” I don’t think I am crazy, I don’t think my beliefs have changed radically, and I don’t think I have been (as suggested by others) brainwashed by my commentariat.

...And I don’t know why my friends on the right still keep fighting for these guys to stay in power. Why do they keep attacking decent people like Jim Webb- to keep this corrupt lot of fools in office? Why can’t they just admit they were sold a bill of goods and start over? Why do they want to remain in power, but without any principles? Are tax cuts that important? What is gained by keeping troops in harms way with no clear plan for victory? With no desire to change course? With our guys dying every day in what looks to be for no real good reason? Why?
&lt;/blockquote&gt; Loyalty over substance, John.

Regards, C</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi James,</p>
<blockquote><p>1) Do you think the GOP is going to retain control of the House?</p>
<p>Yes (38) — 61.3%<br />
No (24) — 38.7%</p></blockquote>
<p> It's interesting, in the light of this, to read <a href="http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=7551" rel="nofollow">John Cole's</a> post today (said post is attracting a LOT of attention today):</p>
<blockquote><p>What makes this even more frustrating is that not only do I feel like I have been duped, but I established a lot of friends in the right wing of the blogging community- and now I read their pages and I can&rsquo;t believe what I am reading, even though I know that five years ago I probably would have been saying the same or similar things. I know many of them as people- and not just GOP parrots- having spent time working on collaborative projects with them, serving on the editorial board at Red State, appearing on radio shows with them- you name it. I have, at one point in time, defended many of them from what I perceived to be unfair attacks. So I know that by and large they are not bad people (Dan Riehl is an unmitigated asshole, however). Yet I read their pages now, and through my eyes, it looks like they are so divorced from reality it makes me question what, if anything, I ever believed in.</p>
<p>In short, it really sucks looking around at the wreckage that is my party and realizing that the only decent thing to do is to pull the plug on them (or help). I am not really having any fun attacking my old friends- but I don&rsquo;t know how else to respond when people call decent men like Jim Webb a pervert for no other reason than to win an election. I don&rsquo;t know how to deal with people who think savaging a man with Parkinson&rsquo;s for electoral gain is appropriate election-year discourse. I don&rsquo;t know how to react to people who think that calling anyone who disagrees with them on Iraq a “terrorist-enabler” than to swing back. I don&rsquo;t know how to react to people who think that media reports of party hacks in the administration overruling scientists on issues like global warming, endangered species, intelligent design, prescription drugs, etc., are signs of… liberal media bias.</p>
<p>And it makes me mad. I still think of myself as a Republican- but I think the whole party has been hijacked by frauds and religionists and crooks and liars and corporate shills, and it frustrates me to no end to see my former friends enabling them, and I wonder ‘Why can&rsquo;t they see what I see?” I don&rsquo;t think I am crazy, I don&rsquo;t think my beliefs have changed radically, and I don&rsquo;t think I have been (as suggested by others) brainwashed by my commentariat.</p>
<p>...And I don&rsquo;t know why my friends on the right still keep fighting for these guys to stay in power. Why do they keep attacking decent people like Jim Webb- to keep this corrupt lot of fools in office? Why can&rsquo;t they just admit they were sold a bill of goods and start over? Why do they want to remain in power, but without any principles? Are tax cuts that important? What is gained by keeping troops in harms way with no clear plan for victory? With no desire to change course? With our guys dying every day in what looks to be for no real good reason? Why?
</p></blockquote>
<p> Loyalty over substance, John.</p>
<p>Regards, C</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Triumph</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/conservative_bloggers_polled_on_2006_election/comment-page-1/#comment-102468</link>
		<dc:creator>Triumph</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Nov 2006 14:56:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/11/conservative_bloggers_polled_on_2006_election/#comment-102468</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;John Hawkins polled a large number of conservative bloggers on the 2006 election (I was asked but didn’t participate) and got some interesting results.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

These results are meaningless. This isn&#039;t a &quot;poll.&quot;  There is no random sampling.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>John Hawkins polled a large number of conservative bloggers on the 2006 election (I was asked but didn&rsquo;t participate) and got some interesting results.</p></blockquote>
<p>These results are meaningless. This isn't a "poll."  There is no random sampling.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Newshoggers</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/conservative_bloggers_polled_on_2006_election/comment-page-1/#comment-133919</link>
		<dc:creator>The Newshoggers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/11/conservative_bloggers_polled_on_2006_election/#comment-133919</guid>
		<description>&lt;!--%kramer-pre%--&gt;  James Joyner has a post today on a &quot;poll&quot; of rightwing blogs that he was invited but declined to take part in. One of the &quot;findings&quot;:  1) Do you think the GOP is going to retain control of the House?   Yes (38) — 61.3%&lt;!--%kramer-post%--&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!--%kramer-pre%-->  James Joyner has a post today on a "poll" of rightwing blogs that he was invited but declined to take part in. One of the "findings":  1) Do you think the GOP is going to retain control of the House?   Yes (38) — 61.3%<!--%kramer-post%--></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tempus Fugit Blog [ Tempus Fugit &#124; TxFx.net ]</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/conservative_bloggers_polled_on_2006_election/comment-page-1/#comment-133920</link>
		<dc:creator>Tempus Fugit Blog [ Tempus Fugit &#124; TxFx.net ]</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/11/conservative_bloggers_polled_on_2006_election/#comment-133920</guid>
		<description>&lt;!--%kramer-pre%--&gt;    Outside the Beltway» Conservative Bloggers Polled on 2006 Election  Dean&#039;s World» Why I&#039;m splitting my ballot in November  QandO» For the Divided Government Critics  Unclaimed Territory» More on Mark Halperin&#039;s sad little crusade for right-wing blessings  Homeland Stupidity&lt;!--%kramer-post%--&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!--%kramer-pre%-->    Outside the Beltway» Conservative Bloggers Polled on 2006 Election  Dean's World» Why I'm splitting my ballot in November  QandO» For the Divided Government Critics  Unclaimed Territory» More on Mark Halperin's sad little crusade for right-wing blessings  Homeland Stupidity<!--%kramer-post%--></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
