Just because we won the 2006 elections does not mean 2008 will be just as easy.
What I am saying is this. The 2004 Red States, on average, gave Bush more solid support then the 2004 Blue States. Because some core blue states are expected to lose votes, its important that we make inroads to western states that are actually growing. sheesh.
James
I agree, James. I've got a feeling that a more centrist Republican will win the White House in 2008, though it could go either way. I'm basing that on the candidates that both parties are putting up and based on history from 20 years ago. Now, I know that Ronald Reagan didn't take us into an ill-advised war in Iraq, but he did have the last decade of the Cold War. The candidates that the Democrats are putting up, namely, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama aren't the best candidates in my opinion. Hillary has too much baggage, and Barack has too little experience, especially when foreign policy experience is gravely needed at a time like this. The other candidates are either not well known enough, or they are a political has-been (John Edwards). The Republicans are not doing so great, either, though in their candidates. John McCain is too old and not in good health, Rudy Guiliani and Mitt Romney are too liberal to win the Republican nomination.
I do hope the Democrats take the White House in 2008, but gut feeling tells me we will have to wait until 2012 to get the White House back. Of course, I don't want the Democrats with complete control over all three areas of Government, President, Senate, House. So, if the Democrats retain control of Congress in 2008, the Republicans had better win the White House in 2008. If the Republicans take over either chamber of Congres, then the Democrats need to win the White House.