Call Me GOP

The old news is that Sarah Palin is stepping down. However, the way in which she’s discussing her resignation is rather progressive: she’s turned to social networking sites. The whole thing is still rather mysterious, but at least she offers forth her thank-you letter.

If you’re not already, you can follow her on Twitter for further news and updates.

Rep. Eric Cantor R-VA, the # 2 Republican in the House  predicted a 2010 victory, in an exclusive interview with ABC News recently:  “I really believe we’ve got a shot at taking back this House because you see what’s gone on here with the unfettered ability of this administration and Nancy Pelosi to run this Congress.  The American people see that this agenda is way far out of the mainstream. They want a check and a balance on this power. And I think at the end of the day that’s what rules come November 2010.”

The Democrats have a 257-178 majority, meaning Republicans would need a net gain of 40 seats to win control of the House. Daunting but not impossible: In the 1994 elections the Republicans had a 54-seat gain, giving them control back of the house.

What would the Republicans do differently, right now at this point in history, if they had the same control as the Democrats? Remember, the goal is to find insights into the strengths of the Republican party, so be constructive please. What do you think?

So we’ve been at this for a week now. And there seems to be a general feeling that there are too many different groups within the Republican Party that can’t seem to compromise — or agree to disagree. (This goes back to the idea that unity isn’t the same as unanimity.) You think that all the bickering further divides the party, which would be stronger if it could focus on the things that do unite Republicans. As a party (and country) that is growing more demographically complex, it needs to change, and yet there’s a fear that adapting will take it away from its conservative tradition. But some of you think that’s an old-fashioned sentiment.

Republicans stand for less-government involvement and more personal freedom. If the party could unite over that, it would at least be a good starting point. In fact, one of you quoted “rising star” Paul Ryan: “If you believe in freedom, liberty, self-determination, free enterprise, I don’t care if you’re a Muslim, Jewish, Agnostic, Christian, gay, straight, Latino, black, white, Irish, whatever. Join us.”

That’s why we are having this tournament (this is still the original bracket, which I’ll be updating soon). We need to find out whose ideas speak to this new vision. Check out our new nominees (yes, we listen!), vote, and don’t forget to tell us what that person stands for that matters most to you.

DirtyRottenScoundrels asks why so many Republicans are jumping ship. Care to venture an answer?

As the unemployment rate grows, John Boehner criticizes the stimulus package and asks, “Where are the jobs?”

Read more on MSNBC.

Despite some…not-so-positive press recently, the Alaskan governor might be on the rebound (as reported by The Washington Post).

The New York Times Magazine analyzes the political landscape of California. Read the full story here or just catch up on The Daily Beast.

This article was brought to my attention in the comments. It’s an interesting piece in The Washington Post about the breakdown of the Republican Party and what it plans to do.

A coworker just sent me this article, on why Mitt Romeny is the Republican to watch in the next few years. You guys seem torn about him but tend to agree with this article. So should we keep him in the bracket for round two?

Michael Steele and Sean Hannity discuss the climate change bill and increase taxes. Which of them would you prefer to see in the bracket…and why? What are your thoughts on the new bill?