GOP currently last in money raised, last in the polls and have the lowest young voter recruitment in decades.

Perhaps, if the GOP would get back in touch with Republican values, then maybe they could appeal to more voters. As it is, we have two parties in congress right now...democrats and socialists. This systematically abandons about 3/4 of the American population (my opinion...don't ask for links).

Think about it. What's the #1 excuse the socialists use? It's "We're not Bush." What's the #1 excuse the demopublican candidates have been using? "We're not as bad as Bush." It's sickening.

Do you think the average 18, 19, 20 year old thinks that far? They are brainwashed with a tidal wave of liberal/left agitprop in the government K12 schools, by lib professors in college, by the popular culture. The conservatives should fund a counter-MTV show with rock bands (yes, rock, not rap crap) playing anti-statist music.

How odd would you find it to see a 17 year old who is for the war in Iraq?

How old is everyone in here?

How old are you?

__________________
"Only a fool tests the depth of the water with both feet."

That is implying that Rock Bands are Conservative, right?

__________________
"Only a fool tests the depth of the water with both feet."

Most of 'em are probably over in Iraq, right/

But yeah, the 'Pubs are in trounle. Mehlman is already out though, he's about to resign (it just hasn't been made public yet) -

But yeah, there is this "groundswell" thing going on, and most of it has to do with hatred of the Neo-Cons -

'Cause out of all those candidates, Ron Paul has been the big surprise, right? He's the only one who's doing "exceptionally well", financially and otherwise. And what does he stand for? He's anti-war, and pro-liberties. And he's doing just peachy, his campaign is really taking off, he was declared "the winner" of tonight's Republican debate on Fox (by popular vote), and.....

On the flip side of the coin, we have Romney, who's history at this point. In spite or all his money, and his "conservative image", which he tries very hard to build on, his campaign isn't going anywhere? And why is that? Well, look at what he talks about - a "marriage preservation amendment" - it's like, who cares? Only the "social conservatives" care about that, and there's very few of 'em left in this country (and most of 'em are in mOklahoma amd Iowa) - for whom issues like that matter "more" than things like fiscal sanity and a reasonable foreign policy.

Of the other Republican candidates, some are distinguishing themselves in unusual ways - like, did you hear Duncan Hunter in the debate tonight? Don't you get the idea that he'd be a great Secretary of Defense? I mean, he's totally "into" all that, he's familiar with the terminology, and the industry (-ies), and the people, and he knows how to pull the strings - so like, in a Giuliani administration, I could easily see Hunter becoming an influential S.o.D.

Right? So I mean, I'm kinda looking around at that landscape right now - who actually has "skills", and what "skills" do they seem to have -

Giuliani is probably the guy though, right? He's going to get the nomination. McCain isn't generating any exceitement, and Thompson is coming off as unprepared and kind of a doddering old fool, and meanwhile Giuiliani's the only guy out there "doing the right thing", like, for instance, did you catch the whole deal that went on with Perkins and his people?

They wanted Giuliani to come out in favor of "marriage preservation", but what he did instead, is to say that he wouldn't fight it. So, that's a pretty big deal, right? 'Cause now, those million voters who listen to Perkins, are goibng to believe that Giuliani is "not the enemy", and so they're far less likely to bolt the party, and so on -

So Giuliani is actively "going after" votes, while Ron Paul, it's like, the votes just kinda "come to him", know what I mean?

Yeah, thi'll be interesting all right. But yeah, that was pretty funny in tonight's debate, it's like every major candidate tried to put some distance between himself and Bushie. They really want to convince everyone that they're "not Bush". Did you catch McCain's quip? That was pretty funny.... see, but, he used to say stuff like that "all the time", and now it only happens rarely and between cups of coffee, so....

Yeah, I think Giuliani's the guy - and Hillary's the girl - so unless something noteworthy happens between now and then, that looks likye the election.

They have to be created. In any case, there aren't any rock bands any more. Pop music is, as far as I can tell, divided between rap crap and what we used to call "bubblegum" music.

Yeah? No more rock bands? I mean, what did you have in mind? "Super-groups" like the Rolling Stones? Or just "ordinary" rock bands?

There have been some "niches" that have disappeared - so like, if you were into "hair metal", most of those bands are gone - you know, Ratt, Poison, Stryker, like that....

And the problem with Ozzy and people like that, is that they're just so (*)(*)(*)(*) old - I mean, Robert Plant is actually playing in Las Vegas now, did you know that?

But, I mean, there's "alternative", right? There's the Pearl Jam thing, which is still reflected in bands like Nickelback and so on, and then there's this whole Mars Volta phenomenon, so I'd say that genre's still going pretty strong -

And underground punk is still pretty strong (there's even this new "Mexican punk" think which is starting to get pretty big) -

And then, there's like thousands of speed metal bands, I mean, that's like 50% of the indie scene (and most of the rest are the rappers) -

So, yeah, I wouldn't say "rock is dead". Not be any stretch of the imagination.

Whatever is around that you could call rock is very minimal. Also, record companies are, broadly speaking, part of the liberal media establishment.