[lit-ideas] Re: The Religious Right Isn't What It Used to Be
- From: Chris Bruce <bruce@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 11:51:59 +0100
On 29. Okt 2007, at 03:31, John McCreery wrote:
Lawrence,
We have no substantive disagreement. All it takes is "They
might...not vote" coming true to destroy destroy Republican
majorities. They don't have to vote for Democratic candidates. All
they have to do is sit out or support third-party candidates. That's
the Republican strategist's nightmare and his Democratic counterpart's
dream scenario.
I like that 'destroy destroy' - and think it says worlds about the
impatience (to say the *least* - some are not so polite) which I seem
to sense in many Americans awaiting the end of the Bush, Jr. era.
Chris Bruce
Kiel, Germany
--
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
- Follow-Ups:
- [lit-ideas] Re: The Religious Right Isn't What It Used to Be
- From: Andreas Ramos
- References:
- [lit-ideas] The Religious Right Isn't What It Used to Be
- From: John McCreery
- [lit-ideas] Re: The Religious Right Isn't What It Used to Be
- From: Lawrence Helm
- [lit-ideas] Re: The Religious Right Isn't What It Used to Be
- From: John McCreery
- [lit-ideas] Re: The Religious Right Isn't What It Used to Be
- From: Lawrence Helm
- [lit-ideas] Re: The Religious Right Isn't What It Used to Be
- From: John McCreery
Other related posts:
- » [lit-ideas] The Religious Right Isn't What It Used to Be
- » [lit-ideas] Re: The Religious Right Isn't What It Used to Be
- » [lit-ideas] Re: The Religious Right Isn't What It Used to Be
- » [lit-ideas] Re: The Religious Right Isn't What It Used to Be
- » [lit-ideas] Re: The Religious Right Isn't What It Used to Be
- » [lit-ideas] Re: The Religious Right Isn't What It Used to Be
- » [lit-ideas] Re: The Religious Right Isn't What It Used to Be
- » [lit-ideas] Re: The Religious Right Isn't What It Used to Be
- » [lit-ideas] Re: The Religious Right Isn't What It Used to Be
- » [lit-ideas] Re: The Religious Right Isn't What It Used to Be
- » [lit-ideas] Re: The Religious Right Isn't What It Used to Be
- » [lit-ideas] Re: The Religious Right Isn't What It Used to Be
- » [lit-ideas] Re: The Religious Right Isn't What It Used to Be
- » [lit-ideas] Re: The Religious Right Isn't What It Used to Be
Lawrence,We have no substantive disagreement. All it takes is "They might...not vote" coming true to destroy destroy Republican majorities. They don't have to vote for Democratic candidates. All they have to do is sit out or support third-party candidates. That's the Republican strategist's nightmare and his Democratic counterpart's dream scenario.
- [lit-ideas] Re: The Religious Right Isn't What It Used to Be
- From: Andreas Ramos
- [lit-ideas] The Religious Right Isn't What It Used to Be
- From: John McCreery
- [lit-ideas] Re: The Religious Right Isn't What It Used to Be
- From: Lawrence Helm
- [lit-ideas] Re: The Religious Right Isn't What It Used to Be
- From: John McCreery
- [lit-ideas] Re: The Religious Right Isn't What It Used to Be
- From: Lawrence Helm
- [lit-ideas] Re: The Religious Right Isn't What It Used to Be
- From: John McCreery