Ad: If You Like Your Senator, You Can Keep Her
Good stuff, and the beginning of many more like it:
The potential ubiquity of the ad is matched by its potential power. Remember that more than six in ten registered voters in the latest Washington Post-ABC News poll disapprove of President Obama’s handling of health care — including an eye-popping 50 percent who disapprove strongly. (Eighty-eight percent of Republicans and 70 percent of independents disapprove of Obama handling of the health care law.) And, nearly half (47 percent) of voters said that Obamacare is making the health care system worse while just 19 percent said the ACA had made things better.
Add it all up and you have a very scary situation for Shaheen — and any other Democrat, which is almost all of them, on the record supporting the ACA. Get used to this ad. You are going to see it thousands of times — in various forms — before 2014 is over.
Let’s make “if you like your Senate majority, you can keep it” as reliable a promise as “if you like your plan, you can keep it.”
The ads against Obama practically wrote themselves. Yet Team R swung and missed repeatedly. Apparently independent groups are better at messaging. Big time.
JD (8935bd) — 12/18/2013 @ 8:07 amExactly, JD. The entire country is focused on ObamaCare and Speaker Boehner wants to talk about jobs. Jobs are obviously important but that should have been the Republican message for the last 5 years. The message for today should be ObamaCare.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/18/2013 @ 8:19 amGood ad. Can everybody say Senator Brown?
elissa (78bee9) — 12/18/2013 @ 8:24 amI was hoping for Mark Steyn, myself…
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 12/18/2013 @ 8:26 amBut one can’t have everything.
The ObamaCare disaster/fiasco and inadequate job creation go hand-in-hand. They should both be talked about. This incompetent administration has the business community in a state of uncertainty… and, in fact, perhaps the ONLY thing that business can be certain of and depend on is that Obama and the Democrats will work in lockstep against free-market capitalism and American interests.
Crony capitalism and increasing the power and reach of the State is what Democrats are all about.
Colonel Haiku (b76d97) — 12/18/2013 @ 8:29 amLet’s make “Obamacare” sound like “Katrina” to Millenials, or “VietNam” to Boomers, or “Operation Market Garden” for you real oldtimers.
Kevin M (536c5d) — 12/18/2013 @ 8:37 amthe same Chris Cileeza who said “the only reason to vote Republican is HATE…”???
Colonel Haiku (b76d97) — 12/18/2013 @ 9:06 amGood article from HuffPo(!) detailing Obamacare’s major implementation failures:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/12/obamacare-delays_n_4435520.html
By the by, the “Basic Health Plan” program it mentions is quite a humdinger: States can — in addition to Medicaid expansion, and in addition to tax credits and subsidies being offered by the Feds for people making up to 400% of poverty level — set up their own single-payer plans . . . and the Feds (you and me!) will reimburse them for it. Of course, as mentioned in the article, it too will be delayed until after the 2014 mid-terms. No doubt, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz et al will be running on it, though. She promised they would.
Icy (161c51) — 12/18/2013 @ 9:08 amMOAR please.
© Sponge (8110ec) — 12/18/2013 @ 9:25 am“(Eighty-eight percent of Republicans and 70 percent of independents disapprove of Obama handling of the health care law.)”
Only 70% of independents disapprove? I’m thinking it is much higher! There must be a lot of INOs out there.
felipe (70ff7e) — 12/18/2013 @ 10:03 amIt would not surprise me that brown is a flop in N.H.
mg (31009b) — 12/18/2013 @ 10:35 amHe will get no funding from the racist, homophobic, stupid baggers.
#11-In other words the limousine liberals won’t support him?
R Solomon (aedd24) — 12/18/2013 @ 10:45 amMD–Mark Steyn is a national treasure. He is smart, and effective, a witty and likable communicator of Conservative ideas. In other words he is perfect doing exactly what he is doing in the venues he is doing it. I’d love to meet the guy.
elissa (78bee9) — 12/18/2013 @ 10:52 amHe’s Canadian.
nk (dbc370) — 12/18/2013 @ 10:58 amnk, sure but we stole him from them fair and square.
SPQR (768505) — 12/18/2013 @ 11:04 amYou’re right, nk. But I thought I had read that he was or intended to become a naturalized U.S. citizen. Apparently not. In any case Steyn is not eligible for a senate run.
elissa (78bee9) — 12/18/2013 @ 11:07 amNot to change the subject, but have any of y’all had the misfortune of seeing Pajama Boy?
Whitey Nisson (7ddaff) — 12/18/2013 @ 11:21 amYup. Is that the onesie pajama with the butt flap? Appropriate.
nk (dbc370) — 12/18/2013 @ 11:43 amSo, just a little bit serious, he can’t run because he hasn’t become a US citizen?
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 12/18/2013 @ 12:19 pmYou don’t have to be a US born/natural/I don’t want to get into a debate on what the terms mean- citizen for House or Senate, do you, just for POTUS/VP, right? (8th grade was a long time ago).
“No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.” (Art-1, 3/3)).
askeptic (b8ab92) — 12/18/2013 @ 12:28 pmI jusr read today here was a mayor of Jersey City who had to resign in 1963 after two years because he discovered he wasn’t a U.S. citizen.
Here is the abstract of the contemporary New York Times article:
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F10D16FE385C117B93C4AB1782D85F478685F9
Sammy Finkelman (9fe80b) — 12/18/2013 @ 12:28 pmThanks.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 12/18/2013 @ 12:38 pmSo if he hurries up and gets himself citizenized then he can run for senate starting in 2023 or so.
I’m thinking perhaps less for House, as the requirements as less (for age, anyway).
“I’d love to meet the guy.”
He’s very tall. So is Jonah Goldberg.
Mike K (cd7278) — 12/18/2013 @ 12:45 pmComment by MD in Philly (f9371b) — 12/18/2013 @ 12:38 pm
Seven Years v. nine Years.
askeptic (b8ab92) — 12/18/2013 @ 1:16 pmRush Limbaugh was pointing out many Republicans will never use this type of ad since they don’t want to be seen as
accuratemean.As I have said for years, Cocktailers don’t want to win elections really. They want to use the Conservative base to get in office then clown them by voting (D) and going to cool parties.
So the more O’Donnell’s and Angle’s purging the RINO, the better. As least, now as we bring the Party back to TRUTH, we can find out out who the Fugazy are (Ryan, Boehner).
Rodney King's Spirit (11dcd5) — 12/18/2013 @ 1:46 pm#1 Because most Republicans who run the Party never had to win at anything other than getting daddy to write a big enough check for an Ivy League School.
Conservatives, like me, are mostly self made and have no problem calling a spade a spade. Even if it dis-invites us from the Frat House.
Rodney King's Spirit (11dcd5) — 12/18/2013 @ 1:49 pmRodney King’s Spirit,
O’Donnell and Angle each lost the general election. Oops.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 12/18/2013 @ 2:29 pmthe RNC called the house today, looking for $$ to take back the Senate.
i obscenely declined their generous invitation to help retain & elect moar RINOs…
redc1c4 (abd49e) — 12/18/2013 @ 2:40 pmAs have every opponent that Biden had since 1972, and Reid everyone since 1986
narciso (3fec35) — 12/18/2013 @ 3:03 pmIs Tom Cotton really a “RINO” ?
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 12/18/2013 @ 3:07 pmO’Donnell and Angle were sabotaged by benedict rove and his band of team r.
mg (31009b) — 12/18/2013 @ 3:08 pm#27 …. I know. Point is the fact they won the Primary is good. We need this in every primary in the Country. Defeat RINOs. Even if you lose General Elections.
As much as this is mocked, the R Party does need go right as fast as possible. Ryan and Boehner are exactly what is wrong with R. Getting rid of them en masse is good.
Only place to run Ryan is in Sheila Jackson Lee’s district. But any district that goes R, run a Tea Party Type and get the RINOs into (D) districts.
I understand you get some bad R candidates by doing this and and it does hurt but in the long run it is the only cure to RINOism and to turn the debate in our favor.
How do you take advantage of this ….
http://www.gallup.com/poll/166535/record-high-say-big-government-greatest-threat.aspx?utm_source=alert&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=syndication&utm_content=morelink&utm_term=All
….. if the people you put into office don’t actually do what they claim they want to do?
The PR needs to match the Product if you want to win Elections.
RINOs are the #1 Enemy to Smaller Government, Smaller Debt and a return to the Constitution. Why? Because they lie to people and then CONSPIRE with the Lefty Lunatics to vote for Corporate Welfare and DoD boondoogles.
So as someone once told me “Democrats lose elections when they do what they say they will do. Republicans lose when they don’t do what they say they will do.“
Rodney King's Spirit (11dcd5) — 12/18/2013 @ 3:16 pmOh, that’s OK, E.S. Losing to a Liberal and beefing up the Progressive Horde is a small insignificant price to pay to rid the world of non perfect Republicans. Besides, the optics on the LET IT BURN and the WE NEED TO JUST HIT ROCK BOTTOM campaign posters and bumper stickers will be inspirational and awesome!
elissa (78bee9) — 12/18/2013 @ 3:17 pmMy wife and I have seen Steyn twice at the Stoughton Synagogue.
mg (31009b) — 12/18/2013 @ 3:18 pmBrilliantly humorous about topics that want to make you cry.
Allen, Thompson, McMahon, Mack, Rehberg, none were Tea, what went wrong,
narciso (3fec35) — 12/18/2013 @ 3:20 pmRepublicans, it has become clear to me, are interested only in being what Orwell called “a pensioned and permanent opposition.”
They are there to make the show look good for the rubes, and get the table scraps that the Democrats deign to give them. When necessary, they make a show of opposition, just the way a palooka does in the ring when he’s been hired to throw a fight (see, e.g., McCain, John, 2008).
buzzsawmonkey (279193) — 12/18/2013 @ 3:23 pm#2 DRJ: I see that the Weeper of the House is committed to the same Boldly Boring Ads that have proven such a success for Republicans in the past.
buzzsawmonkey (279193) — 12/18/2013 @ 3:34 pmJuan and Mitt had no fight.
mg (31009b) — 12/18/2013 @ 3:35 pmThe rove atards made sure of that.
Angle was a horrible, horrible candidate. Nobody needed to sabotage her, she did that fine on her own. I say this as a Nevada resident who was paying attention.
Chuck Bartowski (11fb31) — 12/18/2013 @ 3:35 pm27, 35. Youse guys omitted Akin to whom no one will admit.
Can’t wait for IA Jan. 2016, TEA poll had Ryan in 6th place behind Roobs with 4%.
Along come the Whigs and he’s out front with 75% approval.
Vegas bookmakers, steer clear of that contest.
32. An no, we cannot just get along.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/18/2013 @ 3:35 pmelissa,
I know, it reminds me of Stalin’s statement about how some Americans were “useful” or something.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 12/18/2013 @ 3:37 pm41. Ah, but one greater than Stalin is with us now. The Whigs are a “cult worthy of Jonestown”.
I’d just as soon not be seen with you lepers, if its all the same to you.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/18/2013 @ 3:41 pmGary,
Bud, occasionally I wonder if you’re reading a different thread. Nobody “omitted” Todd Akin from anything—what are you talking about ?
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 12/18/2013 @ 3:43 pmRodney King’s Spirit specifically named Christine O’Donnell and Sharon Angle, so I reminded him that they each lost their general election.
43. See, you were too embarrassed to admit of hiz Neanderthalness.
BTW, seismic activity today is a little scary.
http://www.iris.edu/seismon/
That’s a very nasty looking string from Kamchatka south, all Dec. 18.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/18/2013 @ 3:50 pmAmerican politics has been contentious, scandalous, frustrating, ugly and sometimes downright dirty since 1787. It’s the nature of the beast. Lawmakers are elected to represent geographic areas which include various factions in society which are competing for power and limited resources. The pols are lobbied, bullied, given “contributions” and other “encouragements”. Sometimes they’re blackmailed and sometimes their lives are threatened. Even with the most honest and godlike among them, there is no way they can ever make all their own constituents happy, let alone please constituents from other districts who also want a piece of them.
The current politicians are mostly all useless pieces of trash, right? Every one of them is just like Juan McCain or Sheila Jackson Lee, right? They all didn’t keep their promises and lied to get elected, right? But the “replacements” and the new leadership will buck that trend and will all be perfect, right? Right?
elissa (78bee9) — 12/18/2013 @ 3:54 pmRodney King’s Spirit,
Friend, the only people in the state of Delaware who prefer Christopher Coons to Mike Castle are left wingers. And the only people in the state of Nevada who prefer Harry Reid to Danny Tarkanian and Sue Lowden are left wingers.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 12/18/2013 @ 3:54 pm45. True, true and true.
If you can’t field an able bodied team and the coach is an abusive sadist and the trainer can’t bear come and watch the carnage, do you play the game anyway?
Don’t you forfeit?
We are taking the ball out of your hands. You are codependent enablers.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/18/2013 @ 4:03 pmPeople stomp their feet saying, “if we only nominate Sharon Angle instead of Danny Tarkanian or Sue Lowden, we can finally defeat Harry Reid !”
And “if we only nominate Christine O’Donnell instead of Mike Castle, we can defeat Christopher Coons !”
And then when Angle and O’Donnell get their clocks cleaned in the general election, the same people merely brush it off and say, “b-b-b-b-ut, don’t you get it, we won the primary—and they can never take that victory away from us !”
(Which elicits a facepalm.)
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 12/18/2013 @ 4:03 pmMany millions of electrons were spent over the unmitigated evil that was O’Donnell, like how could she let a lien be placed against her property, or she was clearly illegally spending campaign funds, or the unmitigated evil that she dabbled in withcraft, back in the day.
Her one true fault, was that the truth is not a defense, lying convincingly is the ticket to the bigtime, as Rosenthal’s acquaintance Harry Reid’s career makes clear,
narciso (3fec35) — 12/18/2013 @ 4:05 pm39- Did team r contribute to help her?
mg (31009b) — 12/18/2013 @ 4:07 pmAnd when team r loses again
mg (31009b) — 12/18/2013 @ 4:09 pmBlame the tea bagging racist, haters for not showing up.
#51
R Solomon (aedd24) — 12/18/2013 @ 4:23 pmAnd when team r loses again
Blame the limousine liberal racist haters for showing up in droves.
There-fixed it for you.
You’re welcome.
and the only bells what ring there are the clanging chimes of doom well tonight thank God it’s them instead of you
happyfeet (c60db2) — 12/18/2013 @ 4:25 pmWe need to properly vet our future nominees so we won’t end up with flakes, goofs, and late nite talk show punchlines.
If we already know that Harry Reid is a monster who will stop at nothing to defeat an opponent in the general election, then we have to nominate someone who can better withstand the scrutiny than the O’Donnells and Angles of the world.
Whining after the general election that Harry Reid and his minions played too roughly in the general election is a sign that we likely nominated someone who wasn’t yet ready for the task at hand.
We should follow the William F. Buckley rule of nominating the most conservative candidate who is electable. Naturally, “who is electable” is often subjective and open to Monday Morning Quarterbacking once the election is over, but seriously, can’t we all agree that Sharon Angle and Christine O’Donnell probably weren’t ready for their close-up ?
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 12/18/2013 @ 4:25 pmLike the last four that ran against Reid,
narciso (3fec35) — 12/18/2013 @ 4:28 pm48. “if we only nominate Christine O’Donnell instead of Mike Castle, we can defeat Christopher Coons !”
Historical revisionism, Stones. DE ran a closed primary. Castle lost by 6%. Your Republicans were sick of his mug. They were pleased to retire him.
Meanwhile in WI, having rebuffed the challenge to Walker, with new McVain protégé Johnson in tow, WI turned out 4 time Governor Thompson and elected first admitted lesbian to Senate.
People are sick of your tired, wrinkled azz(es).
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/18/2013 @ 4:31 pmMittens and Juan are not conservative, they are collectivist mutts.
mg (31009b) — 12/18/2013 @ 4:35 pmSo why has team r been burying Buckley’s rule, E. Stone?
Ensign did run against Reid, lost eventually won the other seat, whatever did happen to him?
narciso (3fec35) — 12/18/2013 @ 4:39 pm#48, You seem to miss the point that driving 55 off a cliff with your hands on the 10 and 2 is not preferable to doing so at 90mph with a beer in each hand.
Elections are repetitive games and if you continue to put up Sharon Angle’s — you will find some good candidates that will win and govern as needed. You do this repeatedly and eventually not only do you have a right of center party that fights but one that can win.
THe corrollary to that is by actually doing what you say and saying what you do …. the Republican brand gets healthy. Which it is not today. Republican Brand stands for all talk, no action, racists, bigots sitting in their homes raging at the TV but when time comes to get in there …. pussies.
The strategy of finding the most “electable” Republicans is flawed since the basic premise is flawed. The most electable in round 1 of a game is not the best to win the fight overall.
Anyway, game theory at work.
Rodney King's Spirit (11dcd5) — 12/18/2013 @ 4:45 pmgary, are you seriously comparing the June 2012 recall election against Walker in which 2.5 million voters went to the polls with the 2012 Senate election (in a Presidential election year) in which 2.9 million voters went to the polls? Did it occur to you that maybe Baldwin benefited from a whole s___load of low information voters coming to pull the lever for Obama and also convinced to vote for the Dem nominee for Senate while they were at it?
And since when has Ron Johnson been kicked out of the Tea Party movement and relegated to a John McCain protegee? Do we now have to come to you for final confirmation on who is an authentic conservative and who is a phony?
JVW (709bc7) — 12/18/2013 @ 4:47 pmGary,
What is it that you’re rambling about with “historical revisionism” ?
Friend, sometimes I think you must be going back and forth among multiple blogs on your computer, and so you then you end up forgetting which points were made here.
Christine O’Donnell actually defeated Mike Castle in the GOP primary. That’s a fact.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 12/18/2013 @ 4:49 pmIt is also a fact that Democrat Christopher Coons cleaned Christine O’Donnell’s clock in the general election.
Gary,
Did you officially ex-communicate Ron Johnson, too ?
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 12/18/2013 @ 4:57 pmI swear, one day there will be a news story that someone from the midwest was protesting in front of the Reagan Library that Ronald Reagan was a closet communist.
And I’ll just shake my head and conclude that it must be our friend Gary Gulrud !
1. Comment by JD (8935bd) — 12/18/2013 @ 8:07 am
Apparently independent groups are better at messaging. Big time
Even the news media is better at this thing.
Sammy Finkelman (9fe80b) — 12/18/2013 @ 5:05 pmNarcisco makes a great point that gets conveniently ignored. Reid has beat the last 5 Senate challengers, so the idea that Angle’s loss was somehow unique is just silly. Unless ES wants to answer for all the others that lost their seats on electable Romney’s coattails.
Let it burn seems to be a flexible standard. When we were being told it was awful to try to repeal, defund, and amend ObamaCare, we were told that was counter-productive and should let the system collapse on its own weight. But when we talk finances, we should compromise to minimize pain to the system and the people, with the promise of doing it the right way next time. Always the next right. The next election. All while drifting further left, spending more.
JD (1359d9) — 12/18/2013 @ 5:10 pmIt does strike me, JD, that this framing of matters in only the left’s talking points, which can always be massaged by underfunding an insurgent candidate, when the other side is fully committed,
narciso (3fec35) — 12/18/2013 @ 5:25 pmI take two exceptions to your view of the events, JD:
When we were being told it was awful to try to repeal, defund, and amend ObamaCare. . .
I don’t think hardly any Republicans said it was so horrible to try to do those things, but at some point you have to acknowledge that the votes aren’t there and that it just isn’t going to happen. If you thought a Government Shutdown II was a grand idea then you are welcome to your opinion, but clearly most Republicans didn’t find that to be a promising prospect. Want to repeal, defund, and amend? Win the Senate and the White House to go along with holding the House.
But when we talk finances, we should compromise to minimize pain to the system and the people, with the promise of doing it the right way next time.
“We” (Ryan, et al.) compromised because a very large part of the GOP caucus — including some bona fide conservatives — were uncomfortable with some of the cuts to defense programs and wanted to see that funding restored. Do you really in your heart of heart think that was going to happen without having to restore a degree of spending on social programs? If you want to argue that we should have left the defense cuts in place then I think that’s a legitimate debate, but it’s just wishful thinking to believe we would re-fund defense only. In the end we probably ended up with 63% of the sequester remaining in place, so that’s pretty damn good for a party that only controls one of the three negotiating bodies.
JVW (709bc7) — 12/18/2013 @ 5:28 pmAny deal with Patty ‘Obama is running daycares’ Murray is a bad deal, I think they did it as a stunt, giving the Solon of Scranton the week off,
narciso (3fec35) — 12/18/2013 @ 5:31 pmJD,
Sharon Angle’s defeat wasn’t unique ?!
He may have won his re-election races in past years, but c’mon, bro, you’re forgetting that in 2009/2010, Reid was considered by many to be a dead Senator walking.
Do you not remember how low Harry Reid’s approval ratings had dropped among Nevada voters ?
According to this Politico story in Sept 2009;
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) continues to suffer from dangerously low approval ratings back home and trails his two prospective Republican challengers, according a new Daily Kos poll.
The Daily Kos/Research 2000 poll shows Reid with a 52 percent disapproval rating, with only 36 percent of Nevada voters viewing him favorably. He’s only viewed favorably by 58 percent of Democrats, a sign he has to worry as much trouble from his own base as he does in persuading independent voters to back him.
Against Republican businessman Danny Tarkanian (son of Jerry), Reid trails by five points, 45 to 40 percent. Against outgoing Nevada Republican party chairwoman Sue Lowden – who’s expected to jump into the race – he trails 44 to 41 percent.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 12/18/2013 @ 5:32 pmReid has beat the last 5 Senate challengers, so the idea that Angle’s loss was somehow unique is just silly.
Well, if I am not mistaken, Reid must have won reelection in 2010 (a winnable election in which Dems were mostly trounced), 2004 (a Presidential year in which Dem turnout is going to be good), 1998 (the post-Lewinsky election in which the GOP took a hit), 1992 (Clinton at his most popular), and 1986 (the year the GOP lost the Senate). My point being that his mid-term elections wins — when he doesn’t get the full effect of a Democrat get-out-the-vote effort — have been helped by a weak opponent (2010), and running in two years in which the GOP fared poorly overall (1998, 1986).
JVW (709bc7) — 12/18/2013 @ 5:32 pmWell lets see, Biden won in ’72 during Nixon’s landslide, in ’78, when Carter was already hemorrhaging, in ’84 during Reagan’s landslide, in ’90, after he admitted plagiarism, twice, in ’96, I’ll give you that one, ’02 when we won back the Senate, let not run a candidate then,
narciso (3fec35) — 12/18/2013 @ 5:44 pmJVW makes an excellent point, as usual.
We all hate ObamaCare, we all loathe the debt, as well as the drunken
sailorcommunity organizer taxing and spending, but the GOP simply doesn’t have the requisite votes in the Senate nor in the White House in order to successfully change the course.And that’s just the consequence of losing past elections.
We have to change the Senate majority in 2014, and then we have to change the political party which occupies the White House, in 2016.
It isn’t rocket science, but it is math.
“Government Shutdown—The Sequel !” should not be coming to a theatre near any of us.
ObamaCare is sinking President Sefie’s presidency. Let’s not throw vulnerable Democrats a life preserver—a government shutdown—when they’re already having so much difficulty treading water in the plastic kiddie pool.
The disastrous ObamaCare must be the focus of the electorate in 2014—not a shutdown that closed the Grand Canyon, or temporarily stopped federal subsidies to deaf children.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 12/18/2013 @ 5:47 pmJD–I agree with you that Let it burn is a loosely defined catch phrase that means different things to different people–and I think mostly is used as a swear word type retort. I’m not trying to be a word scold. But a point I’d like you and others to at least consider is that when that phrase is (as it often is) chanted and written in all caps and used so cavalierly for so many circumstances, it sounds very different and mystifying and threatening, especially to the ears of non or less political types, as well as to the media. Let it burn is starting not to just be an inside political baseball term of frustration. It’s taking on a life of its own. It’s going to show up in ads and blogs and editorials and Sunday morning shows. Does Let it burn really sound benign and hopeful? Is “let it burn” the image you think we Conservatives want people to have in their minds of what we stand for and what our most sacred ideals of governance are? Does “Let it burn” seem like what a party or candidates who want to be taken seriously would actually say in public?
elissa (78bee9) — 12/18/2013 @ 5:50 pm. If you thought a Government Shutdown II was a grand idea
Never said any such thing.
JD (5c1832) — 12/18/2013 @ 5:53 pmGovernment Shutdown—The Sequel !” should not be coming to a theatre near any of us.
Good effin Allah. Who is calling for another shutdown? Are the only available options spend more or shutdown?
JD (5c1832) — 12/18/2013 @ 5:56 pmI don’t get it, Elissa. Let it burn is good when applied to ObamaCare, but bad when applied to the economy? I really don’t get it.
JD (5c1832) — 12/18/2013 @ 5:57 pmNarcisco, I don’t know anything about the ’72 Delaware Senate election, but I think that McGovern was such a dismal candidate that, paradoxically enough, he didn’t bring down his party too much since Congressional candidates had no qualms about distancing themselves from him. For what it’s worth, Senate Democrats strengthened their majority by two seats despite the Nixon landslide. Maybe voters were more comfortable being ticket-splitters in those days.
JVW (709bc7) — 12/18/2013 @ 5:57 pmI don’t get it, Elissa. Let it burn is good when applied to ObamaCare, but bad when applied to the economy? I really don’t get it.
We are better off as a country when we have an actual working budget, not an ongoing continual budget resolution. We are not better off as a country when we have a nasty government-mandated health care program. Does that clear it up?
JVW (709bc7) — 12/18/2013 @ 5:59 pmnarciso,
Harry Reid should have been picked off in 2010. I suppose some of you guys really must not remember how poorly Reid was polling in Nevada in 2009 and 2010.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 12/18/2013 @ 5:59 pmDon’t you remember all the cracks that Mark Steyn used to make in 2010 about how Harry Reid was going to lose his Senate seat ?
I have no doubt that Sharon Angle is a fine lady, and we probably all agree with her on the issues, but let’s admit that she ran a really poor campaign.
As JVW points out, it was a mid-term election when Democrats were getting whooped, and as I pointed out in the September 2009 polling data by DailyKos, Reid trailed both Tarkanian and Lowden (by five and four points respectively) in hypothetical head-to-head matchups as early as 15 months prior to the election.
That is indicative of a seat that has a bulls-eye target on it.
Are the only available options spend more or shutdown?
Come on, JD — what exactly was the GOP going to propose that Senate Democrats and the White House would agree to?
JVW (709bc7) — 12/18/2013 @ 6:00 pmIronically, they didn’t look askance at those who are setting fire to this country, there aren’t enough fire brigades, to put them out,
New Hampshire should turn Red, but there’s an influx of former Massachussetts residents, who have learned nothing from their experience, and like the ‘walker’s bring their condition across state lines,
narciso (3fec35) — 12/18/2013 @ 6:03 pmJD,
Seriously, dude ?
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 12/18/2013 @ 6:10 pmOk, if another government shutdown isn’t the ultimate conclusion to a stalemate where the two sides are dug in and refusing to budge, then what exactly is the conclusion going to be ?
New Hampshire should turn Red, but there’s an influx of former Massachussetts residents, who have learned nothing from their experience, and like the ‘walker’s bring their condition across state lines,
National Review had a great cover story years ago about how Vermont went from being a staunchly conservative state to a liberal bastion. It is pretty much what happened in New Hampshire: liberals who wanted to enjoy the benefits of rustic rural living moved to cities like Burlington and Montpelier and Battleboro. Since they are natural busybodies, they started running for school boards and town councils, and the reticent yankee Republicans with a live-and-let-live attitude never bothered to organize against him. Next thing you know, within a generation or two, the state has become an incubator for hardcore leftists and is electing the likes of Bernie Sanders to the Senate.
The lesson being that eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.
JVW (709bc7) — 12/18/2013 @ 6:11 pmJD–I don’t think the phrase Let it Burn is good optics for politics period. I know your angels are still pretty young but I’ll bet they would come up with a not great image if you asked them what that phrase meant. As for Obamacare, yes, let’s trash it daily and let it slowly crumble under its own weight, the incompetence, and poor polling, and vow to repeal it as soon as voters give us the man power in both in congress and the WH to do it. And let’s say that directly. It’s honest and voters immediately understand what it means.
elissa (78bee9) — 12/18/2013 @ 6:12 pmI think we are f@cked. The Dems will drive us over the cliff at 100 mph. Should Team R take control, they will drive us off the same cliff after reducing the rate of growth to 90 mph. Those that suggest we should consider slamming on the brakes, or easing onto the brakes, will be cast out as hysterics.
Take the sequester. We reduced the rate of growth, still spent more year after year. And people wailed. The sequester should have been a good starting point.
JD (1359d9) — 12/18/2013 @ 6:13 pmSeriously, dude ?
Ok, if another government shutdown isn’t the ultimate conclusion to a stalemate where the two sides are dug in and refusing to budge, then what exactly is the conclusion going to be ?
Again, there are vast choices available between increasing spending and shutting down the government. There was no stalemate. This was “negotiated” behind closed doors, and voted on by the House and Senate in less than a week.
JD (1359d9) — 12/18/2013 @ 6:17 pmIt seems to be, take a look at Keystone ‘it’s the right thing to do,’ as Wilford Brimley would say, people are overwhelming for it, it aids a fellow ally to the North, it goes nowhere, abetting the Sauds, the Siloviki, Chavez’s psycho successor,
narciso (3fec35) — 12/18/2013 @ 6:18 pmI think we are f@cked. The Dems will drive us over the cliff at 100 mph. Should Team R take control, they will drive us off the same cliff after reducing the rate of growth to 90 mph. Those that suggest we should consider slamming on the brakes, or easing onto the brakes, will be cast out as hysterics.
Agreed. But all we are saying is that first we have to get ourselves in the driver’s seat.
JVW (709bc7) — 12/18/2013 @ 6:18 pm” I’m not trying to be a word scold. But a point I’d like you and others to at least consider is that when that phrase is (as it often is) chanted and written in all caps and used so cavalierly for so many circumstances, it sounds very different and mystifying and threatening, especially to the ears of non or less political types,”
This may not be worth the electrons it is printed on but, to this independent, the “Let it burn” phrase evokes the memory of Nero – which may be apropos since he wanted to do away with the old Rome to make way for a new Rome. my question is will the “Christians” get the blame again?
felipe (6100bc) — 12/18/2013 @ 6:23 pmJD wrote,
“Again, there are vast choices available between increasing spending and shutting down the government. There was no stalemate. This was “negotiated” behind closed doors, and voted on by the House and Senate in less than a week.”
————
What are these vast choices that you allude to ?
And my friend, I would submit that there is actually a perpetual stalemate in DC, that’s why we’ve been funding the federal government on a continuing resolution for several years. And that’s part of the impetus for why Hairy Reed—the guy who should have lost his Senate seat in 2010—changed the filibuster rules. Because he wants to circumvent the opposition to Obama’s left wing nominees.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 12/18/2013 @ 6:26 pmDon’t be so negative JD. What you fear economically may never happen. WWIII may break out in the mideast. We may all get wiped out by a nuke or taken out by an asteroid strike or a worldwide flu pandemic, first. The possibilities are endless.
elissa (78bee9) — 12/18/2013 @ 6:27 pm84.I think we are f@cked. The Dems will drive us over the cliff at 100 mph. Should Team R take control, they will drive us off the same cliff after reducing the rate of growth to 90 mph. Those that suggest we should consider slamming on the brakes, or easing onto the brakes, will be cast out as hysterics.
This rings true to me, YMMV.
felipe (6100bc) — 12/18/2013 @ 6:29 pmES – spending at sequester levels was an option. It was already the law. Spending at the last budget agreement tied to debt ceiling was an option. We agreed to spend beyond anything on the table, with promises that we will do things right, next time. After the next election. And the one after that. If things go right. And we addressed none if the things that will crush us, electing to tinker around the edges. Again. If those ideas as so politically noxious now, why would I believe that they will be more palatable to the same people, later.
JD (1359d9) — 12/18/2013 @ 6:35 pmElissa – thanks. That is so less depressing. 😉
JD (1359d9) — 12/18/2013 @ 6:36 pmWWIII may break out in the mideast. We may all get wiped out by a nuke. . . or a worldwide flu pandemic, first.
Why not all three? It would be a nice tribute to WWI (which featured the Spanish Flu outbreak) and WWII (which ended with the use of nuclear weapons). We should always strive to do things bigger and better than our predecessors.
The asteroid strike is harder to schedule, but I’m sure there are environmental scientists who would aver that global climate change is making an asteroid strike more likely.
JVW (709bc7) — 12/18/2013 @ 6:37 pmES – spending at sequester levels was an option. It was already the law.
You are forgetting that first would have come — ta-da! — a government shutdown as Dems demanded higher taxes and more spending. Also, as I mentioned earlier, there were too many Republicans who were worried (legitimately or not) that the defense cuts were too severe.
Again, just to bring this argument full circle, JD, I really think that had we held out for more we would have had the PR hit of a government shutdown, yet ended up exactly where we ended up with the Ryan/Murray compromise.
JVW (709bc7) — 12/18/2013 @ 6:40 pmDon’t forget the Yellow Stone Caldera, but seriously, this seems like that previous great budget deal, back in the Spring of 2011,
narciso (3fec35) — 12/18/2013 @ 6:41 pmWe should follow the William F. Buckley rule of nominating the most conservative candidate who is electable. Naturally, “who is electable” is often subjective and open to Monday Morning Quarterbacking once the election is over…
Elephant Stone, my sentiments exactly.
Bill Buckley, as a resident of New York, obviously was surrounded by liberals galore, so he knew fully just how pernicious and contagious their left-leaning biases were. Nonetheless, I still feel totally sympathetic with the conservatives who are frustrated or disgusted by the squishes, much less the flat-out liberals. But I see so many liberal reflexes in many Americans (and humans throughout the world in general) — and that trait being worse now than ever before — that I’m forced to think not just ideologically but tactically too.
Mark (58ea35) — 12/18/2013 @ 6:55 pmThat brings back memories. Back in the ’80s when I left the community college go away to a four year university I saw no point in joining a frat. Why would I want to hang out with a bunch of dudes I didn’t know? I did become a “big brother” to a sorority. My attitude was “cut out the middle man.”
Also I worked in a liquor store during the school year, and loaded and sometimes drove moving trucks in the summer. I needed the money to pay rent, buy food, and to keep my ’68 Charger in gas.
But now all the frat boys who drove beemers their parents bought them and never had to work their way through school because of daddy’s money accuse me of being the out-of-touch elitist.
Steve57 (e607ae) — 12/18/2013 @ 7:00 pmWell by that standard, Jim Buckley would never have run, Keating was no rightwinger,
narciso (3fec35) — 12/18/2013 @ 7:05 pmWell by that standard, Jim Buckley would never have run, Keating was no rightwinger,
No, by definition Jim Buckley was obviously the most conservative candidate who could be elected.
JVW (709bc7) — 12/18/2013 @ 7:10 pmYou are forgetting that first would have come — ta-da! — a government shutdown
Why? Sequester spending was the law. Not only did we compromise off that, we agreed to spending increases beyond what was proposed.
JD (5c1832) — 12/18/2013 @ 7:11 pmWhy? Sequester spending was the law. Not only did we compromise off that, we agreed to spending increases beyond what was proposed.
If I’m not mistaken the original post-shutdown agreement was set to expire, and without a renewal or a compromise solution government spending would have been shut off once again.
JVW (709bc7) — 12/18/2013 @ 7:19 pmBut you see ‘that’s the cunning, cunning, plan’ that and cutting veteran’s benefits, some kind of multidimensional chess
narciso (3fec35) — 12/18/2013 @ 7:21 pmAnd that’s a tautology, because he won he was the candidate,
narciso (3fec35) — 12/18/2013 @ 7:30 pmYeah, I know, and I get your main point that nobody really knows who is an “electable” candidate until after the election transpires. Maybe it’s just because I am in California, but I am a pretty firm believer that you need to analyze whether or not your candidate can really win, irrespective of how close their positions track to yours. I’m pro-life, but I know that it would be self-defeating for me to insist that any candidate I vote for share that position, because a pro-life candidate is almost assuredly not going to be elected out of my State Assembly, State Senate, U.S. House, or U.S. Senate districts.
JVW (709bc7) — 12/18/2013 @ 7:38 pm60. Why, yes I am equating the Walker recall with the general Election. Walker was elected with a very high turnout(77%), retained with an nationally unrepresentative high turn out(71%). People in WI, on both sides, have been highly motivated continuously since 2010.
If you are claiming coattails for Dog you are alone.
Just what part of the country to you hail from?
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/18/2013 @ 7:43 pmWhen was the last time a Republican was elected to the Senate from California, 1990
narciso (3fec35) — 12/18/2013 @ 7:47 pm61. Let me spell it out for you. You.are.full.of.Sh*t. because you cannot find your azz with both hands.
Ron Johnson was never a TEA. Moreover, he’s a refugee from the Twin Cities.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/18/2013 @ 7:47 pm103. You’re on a roll, narciso. Keep it coming.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/18/2013 @ 7:50 pmOr let’ put it another way, is anyone seriously challenging Jerry Brown,
http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/2013/12/12/slate-criticizes-heartland-science-while-calling-penguins-mammals
narciso (3fec35) — 12/18/2013 @ 7:54 pm94. Why not all three? And why not by Nov. 2016?
Eisenhower is not President. Kids are setting homeless peoples on fire for kicks. The GOP is voting to extend benefits to illegals and cut pensions to war vets. Rap is considered music.
Dogs and cats living together.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/18/2013 @ 7:59 pm105. Ok, CA. I don’t get why you people vote at all. Hell, outside the Big Sur I don’t get being there at all.
But then I hate people.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/18/2013 @ 8:03 pm87. How to manage so from the trunk is Magic!.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/18/2013 @ 8:07 pm#87 …. Agreed. But all we are saying is that first we have to get ourselves in the driver’s seat.
Except when we get in the Driver’s Seat we simply treat it like MY PRECIOUS and go about doing bad thing.
So throw the car seat into the volcano and stop pretending REPUBLICANS are any better drivers. They just move slower while going in the wrong direction.
This is not about winning races. This is about changing the entire dialogue and slope of the playing field towards Conservatism.
You can not do that without purging these god awful career Politicians from the Party and bringing in (dare I say it) true believers. People who live it and preach it daily.
And while in the short run, your bench is weak, the more they preach, the more they communicate the more you bring even better talent to your side.
Right now Republican means weak, ineffectual and only principled when it suits their personal agenda.
Like the Farm Bill.
Rodney King's Spirit (11dcd5) — 12/18/2013 @ 8:53 pmI think there may be a conservative news story that is being missed tonight.
Ag80 (eb6ffa) — 12/18/2013 @ 8:55 pmWell it’s an oblique angle;
http://therightscoop.com/sarah-palin-defends-duck-dynastys-phil-robertson/
narciso (3fec35) — 12/18/2013 @ 8:59 pm114. The floor is in good hands.
115. Well, A&E, “Easy come, easy go”.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/18/2013 @ 9:03 pmPuh-lease. Phil Robertson forgot what sea he went swimming in. Didn’t he see what happened to Baldwin? Except that in Robertson’s case it was much worse because he spoke sincerely and credibly and it could not be laughed at like Baldwin’s fake-tough-guy-act-by-some-Hollywood-pansycake. The entertainment industry is militantly pro-gay and militantly left-wing politically correct. If Robertson wants to be in front of a TV camera and get paid for it he’ll have to play their game.
nk (dbc370) — 12/18/2013 @ 9:08 pmThen there’s this offering from Chairman Nancy;
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/366629/pelosi-declares-end-immigration-law-mark-krikorian
narciso (3fec35) — 12/18/2013 @ 9:10 pmGot it so the point is say nothing, let them flood the zone, instead of being a little more tactful
narciso (3fec35) — 12/18/2013 @ 9:12 pmYou can preach the Gospel, or you can be the towel boy at the brothel, is the way I’d put it. I am not ready to hold up a play actor in a reality show as any kind of conservative spokesman let alone icon. Duck Dynasty, Jersey Shore, dancing bears, organ grinders’ monkeys, all samee-samee. Entertainment if that’s what tickles people.
nk (dbc370) — 12/18/2013 @ 9:52 pmIt’s amazing how slick some politicos think they are.
Just tell the truth. Admit your views. Explain why you hold them. Hold them when it is challenging.
Over time, you will have something called Credibility.
The GOP doesn’t have much, which is why it only gains in a negative way (when people are more mad at democrats).
Just imagine if the GOP had held true to limited government, balanced budgets, and freedom. Right now, with a perilously intrusive NSA, Romneycare X 1000 literally stealing healthcare from those who earn to subsidize it for those who take, and endless corruption from both sides, the American people would leap at a political party with the humility to avoid playing short term strategic games with every issue.
It Is Not About The Next Election, child.
Dustin (d75eff) — 12/18/2013 @ 10:18 pmnow it’s a free speech issue?
good god that is one stupid hoochie
happyfeet (8ce051) — 12/18/2013 @ 10:18 pmnk:
I agree with you with a qualifier. The Robertsons at some point decided to present themselves in a reality show for a reason. It may have been for money or it could have been for more spiritual reasons. I do not know their hearts.
Regardless, they struck a chord with a lot of people for their devotion to the Protestant Christian faith. When you do that, you are always a target because many consider Christians intolerant.
However, in my experience, Christians are tolerant to a fault. All people are sinners and all are entitled to the forgiveness of their sins. That is my faith.
The left has been recently giddy over the words of leader of the Roman Catholic Church because of his recent words about all entering the Kingdom of Heaven. Yet, he has never denied the dogma of the Church.
People choose their own path and their own faith. I see no reason to condemn anyone for following that path unless it criminally harms others.
Ag80 (eb6ffa) — 12/18/2013 @ 10:26 pmIt’s a “does the organ grinder need the monkey or does the monkey need the organ grinder” issue. And Sarah is not a stupid hoochie. She’s singing for her supper too, the song her audience wants to hear. That’s smart.
nk (dbc370) — 12/18/2013 @ 10:27 pmif we got rid of cable we would starve all these barnacles of their oxygen and they would sink shivering into the depths like how leleleleleleonardo didididididicacacacaprio did in the titanic
but except without a soundtrack
happyfeet (8ce051) — 12/18/2013 @ 10:30 pmAg80, I do not condemn Robertson. I do not condemn the people who watch Duck Dynasty. I’ve watched it. I find it anodyne. I am saying that it’s not a conservative story, I guess. Sorry.
nk (dbc370) — 12/18/2013 @ 10:32 pmI believe that Obamacare has a provision that is enforced by the Abortion lady Sebelius, that fines Americans who disapprove of gay anal sex. We really need to read that law so we know what’s in it.
Gus (70b624) — 12/18/2013 @ 10:33 pmFair enough, nk.
Ag80 (eb6ffa) — 12/18/2013 @ 10:39 pmI think this thread has a curse that causes people to have *unnecessary* arguments. So, let’s put aside for a moment the question of whether Megyn Kelly’s endowments are natural. Who has the nicer legs? I give the edge to Sarah. happyfeet, I know you worship her so I have your vote. Anybody else?
nk (dbc370) — 12/18/2013 @ 10:47 pmCan’t wait to see the republicans trash Mia Love. Wrong views, wrong color, right out of the republican handbook.
mg (31009b) — 12/18/2013 @ 11:29 pmWhy can homo’s push their perverted beliefs down are throats? Mr. Robertson’s views are based on reason and beliefs, so that makes it criminal?
mg (31009b) — 12/18/2013 @ 11:41 pmIf you pay for cable-your the problem.
Guys – RELAX !
Mr Podesta was a tad harsh while speaking about the Senate and its current majority party, but, hey, Mr Podesta recognises his own party.
Rather than get defensive and acting as though Mr Podesta might have been trying to insult the Republicans in Congress, we should commend him for his willingness to speak truth to power and call out the reality of his observations about the Senate under Harry Reid’s leadership …
Alastor (2e7f9f) — 12/18/2013 @ 11:59 pmThose who prefer “primarying” Republicans, many with strong lifetime conservative records, to concentrating on beating vulnerable Democrats, are not really interested in the country, or the party. They are the Purity Police, they would rather lick the jackboots of totalitarian masters than elect those who would resist, but not in the precise way the purists demand.
Angle was clearly the worst candidate to run against Reid, she had more to attack and was viewed as flaky. And O’Donnell never had a chance in liberal Delaware, but the moderate Castle had won two terms as Governor and several in the House and was so popular that Biden’s son refused to run.
Castle only had a 53% lifetime rating from ACU, but he never voted against the party on a whipped vote. Coons is 100% for Reid and Obama. Do your own math.
In the meantime, Christine O’Donnell has been using the millions she didn’t spend against Coons to live, legally, and laughing at the suckers who sent it in.
Estragon (19fa04) — 12/19/2013 @ 1:22 am100. Comment by JVW (709bc7) — 12/18/2013 @ 7:10 pm
by definition Jim Buckley was obviously the most conservative candidate who could be elected.
They didn’t know it would happen. He won in a 3-way race.
That race was run because Buckley considered Richard Ottinger and Charles Goodell just about equally liberal, so there was litle to lose.
A better example might be the 1980 race where a Republican primary was run versus long-time U.S. Senator Jacob Javits (partly on the basis of age – he was born in 1904) and the rather dishonest D’Amato from the Nassau County Republican machine won.
The general election had Elizabeth Holtzman (a rather extreme liberal) as the Democratic nominee, Al D’Amato as the Republican, and Jacob Javits continuing on the Liberal line. He got about 11% of the vote.
Sammy Finkelman (9fe80b) — 12/19/2013 @ 2:40 am134. Comment by Estragon (19fa04) — 12/19/2013 @ 1:22 am
Those who prefer “primarying” Republicans, many with strong lifetime conservative records, to concentrating on beating vulnerable Democrats, are not really interested in the country, or the party.
They prefer that because they can win those elections. The idea may be to scare the remaining Republicans, who may still retain, or achieve, a majority.
Angle was clearly the worst candidate to run against Reid,
Harry Reid knew that, and did everything he could to make that happen. A similar strategy happened in Missouri.
And O’Donnell never had a chance in liberal Delaware
It would have been hard work.
Castle only had a 53% lifetime rating from ACU, but he never voted against the party on a whipped vote.
If so, he played both sides a little bit too much.
In the meantime, Christine O’Donnell has been using the millions she didn’t spend against Coons to live, legally, and laughing at the suckers who sent it in.
How exactly? Did she collect money for herself, also?
Sammy Finkelman (9fe80b) — 12/19/2013 @ 2:46 am92. Comment by JD (1359d9) — 12/18/2013 @ 6:35 pm
If those ideas as so politically noxious now, why would I believe that they will be more palatable to the same people, later.
Because the same people wouldn’t be in the Senate and in the Oval Office.
Sammy Finkelman (9fe80b) — 12/19/2013 @ 2:48 amI will work for a candidate, because of my beliefs in the candidate.
mg (31009b) — 12/19/2013 @ 2:50 amGive them money-Never. If they can’t win on ideas f-em.
I have a stockpile of supplies for the family, We will carry on, no matter what crap sammich the elite republicans vomit out.
narciso @70. Biden also won in 2008.
Delaware is one of those states where a candidate can run on a Presidential ticket and for some other office at the same time.
Texas is another, and that happened in 1960 and 1988, with LBJ and Lloyd Bentsen, and so is Connecticut, where Senator Joseph Lieberman was re-elected to a third term at the same time he was runnig for Vice-President.
Wisconsin is also another and Paul Ryan was sent back to the House at the same time he lost the race for Vice President in 2012.
Arizona is or was not such a state, in 1964, and Barry Goldwater had to leave the Senate after the 1964 election. Neither is Minnesota, I believe, nor ar most states.
In New Jersey, someone can be both a mayor of a city and a member of the state legislature at the same time, unless that has changed.
Sammy Finkelman (9fe80b) — 12/19/2013 @ 2:56 amWell she won the independents by 17 points, but Tom Ross really tought us something, and the Battle of Delaware prefigured the national campaign,
narciso (3fec35) — 12/19/2013 @ 5:45 amMany of the things, that were said about her, turned out to be true, as with the tax dodging dog torturing, school kid clipping nominee, what is this Groundhog day?
narciso (3fec35) — 12/19/2013 @ 6:02 amShould have put that in quotes,
narciso (3fec35) — 12/19/2013 @ 6:33 amI found this:
http://delawarerepublican.wordpress.com/2011/02/17/delaware-gop-chair-tom-ross-implodes-at-sussex-gop-meeting/
Sammy Finkelman (9fe80b) — 12/19/2013 @ 7:44 amThe only reason to vote for any candidate is your confidence that the candidate will do what you want done if elected.
Who cares if the candidate is plain spoken and unpolished?
Better that than the weak, untrustworthy, corrupt smarmy, lying, deceiving, effete snobs that Karl arose et al. Want to foist on us. The polished candidate is the one that special interests control …. every time.
Texpat (a745f4) — 12/19/2013 @ 7:48 amWho tortured a dog or dogs?
Sammy Finkelman (9fe80b) — 12/19/2013 @ 7:48 amAnd O’Donnell never had a chance in liberal Delaware, but the moderate Castle had won two terms as Governor
Certainly from both a tactical but also ethical standpoint, O’Donnell had no business sticking her big mouth into that election.
It’s annoying when a person like her is either ideologically fine, if not even great, but is tactically stupid, or visa versa. However, in actuality, she the worst of both worlds.
Mark (58ea35) — 12/19/2013 @ 7:53 amThis will probably get lost amidst traffic on the other posts, but as it was mentioned before,
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 12/19/2013 @ 8:54 amwhat conclusion, if any, is to be taken from the fact that Wisconsin affirmed walker as governor, but then also elected the first openly lesbian senator? Was it voter turnout in different contexts, was it individual candidates, and if so what about them?
134. O’Donnell was the 2008 GOP candidate versus Biden. DE runs a closed primary, open to Republicans. Castle was a 72 year old public tick
with no socially redeeming qualities.
The Republican electorate turned the useless ph*ck out.
I cannot believe the unparalleled hypocrisy and unabashed idiocy of Republicans.
Minnesota is a caucus state. I cannot even participate in the fool caucus unless I pledge not to vote for another party.
You azzlappers have made your own bed of inconstancy. You won’t leave even your own unmolested.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/19/2013 @ 9:57 am147. I don’t have a conclusive answer but some data.
First, WI is possibly the most polarized electorate in the country as one might expect of a slosely divided purple state.
Turnouts, even back in 1992, have been uncharacteristically high.
In 2000 it was estimated, years later, Gore received 4500 fraudulent votes.
A judge blocked their new voter id law for the 2012 election. Registrations before that ruling were running about 100K behind for Dhims state wide leading some to suggest that as the true size of existing minority multiple registrations.
Three significant contestants vied for the GOP Senate seat. The ossified former governor eeked out a victory.
While TEA groups in-state supported Ron Johnson and Sean Duffy, there are no TEAs representing WI in DC.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/19/2013 @ 10:15 amComment by MD in Philly (f9371b) — 12/19/2013 @ 8:54 am
what conclusion, if any, is to be taken from the fact that Wisconsin affirmed walker as governor, but then also elected the first openly lesbian senator? Was it voter turnout in different contexts, was it individual candidates, and if so what about them?
Different issues, different offices with different powers, and different candidates on both sides.
Fiscal matters probably matter more to people at the state level. There it can result in higher taxes and lower services, not to mention measurably worse government, as in education.
They feared people opposed to Walker might have damaged quality of life. At the national level, you have people worried about what Republicans might do. At the state level, they’re worried about what the public employee unions might do. This is not a worry at the federal level.
Sammy Finkelman (9fe80b) — 12/19/2013 @ 10:41 amAt the federal level, all you get from unnecessary spending is bigger deficits, which don’t matter to people.
What does matter, higher taxes or reduced services or benefits is something that a focus on fiscal discipline might bring about.
Sammy Finkelman (9fe80b) — 12/19/2013 @ 10:44 amJeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire was one of the 6 Senators to whom Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius sent that letter to, dated Wednesday, saying people with canceled plans could get a hardship exemption
The others were Sens. Mark Warner and Tim Kaine of Virginia, Angus King of Maine, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, and Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota.
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303773704579268921897477550
If Barack Obama likes a Senator, he’ll do almost everything he can to keep that Senator. Not just in the Senate, but on the reservation.
Sammy Finkelman (3bb3ae) — 12/20/2013 @ 10:13 amFrom the New York Times Neediest cases Wednesday:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/18/nyregion/after-losing-his-mother-and-his-health-a-man-takes-shaky-steps-to-recovery.html
He still has other financial problems, but not ones related to medical care. He borrowed $4,000 from people he helped years ago in Odessa. He is not in very good contact with his ex-wife and son in Florida.
Sammy Finkelman (3bb3ae) — 12/20/2013 @ 12:26 pm