Coons vs. O’Donnell Debate: Post Mortem
I didn’t see it. But if you did, feel free to weigh in.
Here is a statement she issued after the debate:
Wilmington, Del. – Unfortunately, some pundits are already criticizing Christine O’Donnell, the Republican nominee for the U.S. Senate seat in Delaware, for her answer to a Supreme Court question during Wednesday night’s debate. In response, O’Donnell released the following statement:
“Frankly, it makes sense that it wasn’t easy to recall some egregious Supreme Court cases when asked about ‘recent’ cases with which I disagreed. Such cases are few and far between with an outstanding bench of four solid constructionist Justices and a swing vote that often votes with them. There have been only a few cases during the Roberts and Rehnquist courts in which the liberal activist position has prevailed.
“One such case was Kelo v. City of New London in 2005 in which the court incoherently ruled that local governments could misuse the Fifth Amendment’s takings clause to throw private citizens out of their own homes and give the land to private developers to increase tax revenue.
“Such Constitution-shredding rulings should occur rarely, if ever. It is why it’s so important that Delaware’s next Senator commit to voting for federal judges and Supreme Court Justices who know how to read the plain English in the Constitution, apply that plain English to complex modern cases and don’t invent ’emanations and penumbras’ that the Founders never intended. Unlike my opponent, who just tonight referenced his view that we have different Constitutions based upon what year it is, I believe that the original version serves just fine.
“Tonight Chris Coons said that ‘this campaign is a job interview.’ By the end of the debate it was clear that Mr. Coons does not deserve a promotion. His tax-and-spend record and the doubling of the unemployment rate during his tenure as New Castle County Executive were just two of the items on his political resume that Delaware voters will reject.
“I was grateful for the opportunity to speak directly to Delawareans and to lay out a common sense way forward.”
So there you have it. Allahpundit collects some post-debate analysis from various sources, which suggests that O’Donnell was thrown off by several questions, including questions about evolution and financial problems (did she not think this would come up), and that Coons was openly contemptuous of her, which might help her.
Your thoughts?
““Such Constitution-shredding rulings should occur rarely, if ever. It is why it’s so important that Delaware’s next Senator commit to voting for federal judges and Supreme Court Justices who know how to read the plain English in the Constitution, apply that plain English to complex modern cases and don’t invent ‘emanations and penumbras’ that the Founders never intended. Unlike my opponent, who just tonight referenced his view that we have different Constitutions based upon what year it is, I believe that the original version serves just fine.”
Not the best orator in the world but in light of who else is running in that campaign she is without doubt the superior of the two as per her observation. Coons is the type of democrat that taxes are never too high for the productive class and eminent domain simply means your property is yours until taking it suits my ideology or I need it to payoff a crony.
cubanbob (409ac2) — 10/14/2010 @ 7:37 amShe did well, especially since it was essentially a 3 on 1 debate. Coons misspoke about County spending here. He claimed that he inherited a deficit; he inherited a surplus, and stated that the financial situation called for its expenditure and tax increases. The local papers here were full of lawsuits from locals pressing him to disburse that surplus rather than hand onto it.
Blue Hen (f0e613) — 10/14/2010 @ 7:38 amSewer taxes also increased under his watch. Another tack might be to demonstrate the tax profile of the average NCC resident since he gained control.
i would have opted for any of the decisions that gave legal rights to what were clearly enemy combatants, but besides that point ,I think she did pretty well, Coons didn’t explain how retreating from Afghanistan would improve the regional picture
ian cormac (6709ab) — 10/14/2010 @ 7:40 amI thought she came off fairly well, considering the array of self – inflicted problems that were already in place. Too bad that she neglected to get out in front of the more sensationalistic ones – all the undecided voters seemed to need was the fact that she wouldn’t come off as some kind of crazy person during the debate…and she didn’t.
Dmac (84da91) — 10/14/2010 @ 7:46 ami remember back in 88 everyone thought dukakis beat bush sr. in the debate. but as time went on it became clear that his comment about the death penalty for someone who raped his wife killed him. i remember alot of liberals saying kerry beat bush jr. the night he said that bit about a global test.
Point is, i think the dust has to settle before we really knew who won. But it doesn’t look good so far.
She needed to knock it out of the park tonight. She probably helped herself by not breaking out a pentagram and talking about masterbation, and some suggest the moderation was really unfair and that might help her too. But my sense right now is that she didn’t do as good as she needed to.
Yesterday she was down something like 20 points. she really needed a boost, here.
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 10/14/2010 @ 7:48 amI don’t understand the relevance of this question for a Senate candidate or a Vice Presidential candidate. It’s not in the job description for either candidate to decide cases.
It would be like the Senate asking a SCOTUS nominee which of the recent Presidential cabinet nominees they disagreed with.
Now asking a Senate candidate what she would consider when voting on a judicial nominee — THAT’S a relevant question.
aunursa (69b3db) — 10/14/2010 @ 7:52 amTrain wreck – but in her case a train wreck is a mild improvement
I’m not surprized at the thrown off questions
is anyone really?
She has been running for three years for this seat – you’d think she would have been over prepared
So to me – it was more about a Huckabeeesque running for personal gain rather than to gain an office in the senate
vetting anyone, anyone?
Hey I’m Tea Party to the core – can I have the next senate seat from Texas?
EricPWJohnson (cae720) — 10/14/2010 @ 8:08 amBtw, just to facilitate this discussion, here is the debate transcript, from Patterico’s favorite paper!
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/10/christine-odonnell-chris-coons-debate.html
Haven’t read any of it, but there you go.
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 10/14/2010 @ 8:10 amShe’s a lightweight and the Tea Partiers screwed up a great chance to pick up a Senate seat in Delaware.
packsoldier (069ea5) — 10/14/2010 @ 8:13 amI guess this may come down to whether the people of Delaware want a marxist like obama, or, they are interested in change.
They were successful in getting rid of an idiot (biden), through no fault of their own.
Jim (844377) — 10/14/2010 @ 8:26 amCoons’ contempt will not help O’Donnell. Women voters hate women candidates they perceive as unqualified. Sneers directed at Palin did not help Palin. Coons made the right tactical choice by showing what little regard he has for O’Donnell.
Daryl Herbert (6ca166) — 10/14/2010 @ 8:56 amfyi, i think this analysis of the policy positions they sketched out in the debate, is useful.
http://www.nationalreview.com/battle10/249724/o-donnell-coons-debate-highlights-policy-differences-katrina-trinko
Aaron Worthing (b1db52) — 10/14/2010 @ 9:13 amIf intellectual ability counted for anything in Delaware elections, slow Joe Biden would be a chicken farmer.
Bar Sinister (a148e1) — 10/14/2010 @ 9:20 amThe vote is Nov 2. The MSM, Dems and the Left have set the stage for near 100% Coon-ite voter apathy so it’ll be a lot closer than most think. O’Donnell will likely lose and we’ll have learned quite a bit about how to fight in 2012. It’s a long war. Even Ike lost his first real battle in WWII.
cedarhill (3295ec) — 10/14/2010 @ 9:25 amI watched it.
They had some fifteen pre-taped questions from U of D students-so of course they were all concerned about the economy. [that’s a joke.] Every question was from the Liberal perspective just about.
Anyways-too bad she has ruined her own credibility.
I think perhaps one of her weakest responses was about abortion, basically her response was so what if she has an absolutist position on that-the cases of rape and incest are only 1%. Probably most of the audience thought of that as a reason why she should compromise. It undermined her own position and since she’s been arguing that since her 20’s she probably should have anticipated that.
Her response about the Chinese government actually devolved to something like-“I don’t know if I really said that”-which given her track record sounded like she was weaseling once again.
She comes across as someone even younger than her 41 years, yet Palin calls her a “Mama Grizzly”. Well she hasn’t even had that basic experience-it’s a misnomer.
Palin has proven that she sure can’t pick them, Angle, O’Donnell and now the mess ups of Miller which the Conservative blogosphere likes to pretend their audience is too stupid to know about.
The Conservative blogosphere has turned out to be just as bad as the MSM they use to rail against, and they’ve sold out for a lot less-a ride on the Tea Party Express.
madawaskan (565543) — 10/14/2010 @ 9:27 amCNN ought to be ashamed of themselves on the way they conducted it.
SPQR (26be8b) — 10/14/2010 @ 9:28 am“If intellectual ability counted for anything in Delaware elections, slow joe biden would be a chicken farmer.”
No, you have to be smarter than the chickens for that.
Jim (844377) — 10/14/2010 @ 9:29 amMy money says the race between Coons and O’Donnell will be much closer than many think.
After all, if given a choice, how many Delaware voters will be willing to put up with a sneering, bald-headed, Marxist asshole for the next six years?
Here’s the short answer: a lot less than you might initially believe.
MarkJ (42fe5b) — 10/14/2010 @ 9:33 amI wish I could say I don’t understand why this not-very-close race is getting national attention like this, but I think I do understand.
CNN is kinda pathetic for airing it nationally.
MayBee (e121ec) — 10/14/2010 @ 9:37 amAs much as I am a definite O’Donnell critic, the fact is the female moderator was acid in her bias toward O’Donnell, cutting her off repeatedly, derisively. She was also honey and syrup to her boy Coons, smiling coyly in his direction at the end of the debate.
So it wasn’t fair.
O’Donnell was well spoken and did a fairly good job fending off two-on-one (Blitzer was more of a non-entity).
I didn’t like some specific points of what O’Donnell said. In particular, she earned a huge boo from the audience when she said in essence Coons’ faith is his Marxism and the voters prefer her Catholic faith.
Making such a transparently religious appeal didn’t go over well.
She certainly flubbed the Supreme Court question. Others have also flubbed this question in the exact same way. Can’t candidates or those preparing candidates realize they will be asked about Supreme Court decisions!
It’s not like that doesn’t happen all the time.
Yeah. Agreed.
Blitzer probably was biased, but the lady moderator was so obviously debating against O’Donnell that I hardly noticed it.
Also, yeah.
Coons was an arrogant condescending ass, but came across as having more grasp of the issues. One may disagree with his ideas (I do), but he spoke more confidently. Since the average voter knows less about the issues than either of the candidates, that matters.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 9:44 amIn nineteen days it will cease to matter.
AD-RtR/OS! (1f1015) — 10/14/2010 @ 9:51 amI disagree. I’m sure if she changed her views on that subject, she’d have more in common with the majority of her voters.
Related — and this time in all seriousness — I think part of the reason she is polling so badly (just horribly with women), isn’t only because she’s perceived as a “lightweight”. It’s because she’s perceived as someone who considers herself (morally and sexually) better than most people: She’s the person who is so honest, she won’t lie even under the most dire circumstances (but her academic record and statements on the 2008 election proves she will under much easier circumstances) … and she’s also the woman who is so pure that she doesn’t masturbate (suffice it to say I bet plenty of female voters are also skeptical on this score too).
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 9:57 amI disagree on this point. At least for me, what matters about this race, to the conservative, is ensuring we pick candidates who can win. At least in all but a few exceptional contests, where we need to send a message (and many have made a great argument that this was a good reason to select O’donnell). We need to look at this race and its long term consequences. Preventing the next Coons from reaching the Senate, gaining power over our deficit, our judges, our policies, is worth a compromise.
Cristoph’s take on the debate is very similar to mine. I think Coons looked like an ass, and the unfair CNN questioners looked even worse. Was it bad enough to help O’Donnell? In any fair land, absolutely. But I think O’Donnell’s few gaffes will get tons of coverage and Coons’s sneering won’t get much. I also think Delaware has made up its mind on O’Donnell quite a while ago.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/14/2010 @ 10:00 amThat’s interesting.
It reminds me of “I bet I have a higher IQ than you!” Joe Biden, but Biden was probably better at pulling it off.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/14/2010 @ 10:03 amI was not able to view the entire debate as CNN cut to the Chilean copper mine rescue before it was over. But from the portion I saw, O’Donnell seemed to acquit herself quite well. As has been pointed out by at several other readers, the debate seemed to be three against one. While Blitzer seemed unable to leave his personal bias against her at the door, the female questioner was overt in her dislike for O’Donnell. As a viewer from the west coast, where most people seem to view republicans as coming from another planet (nearly everything we hear about O’Donnell is condescending at best), I’d say she did surprisingly well. But given the size of her deficit in the polls, it seems unkilely that she can prevail. I’d never seen Coons speak before, but he came off as if he thought it beneath him to have to sit at the table with “an idiot” like his opponent. This rubbed me the wrong way, but I then can’t vote in Delaware.
Warren Poitras (ceaf82) — 10/14/2010 @ 10:17 amQuite a few of you, wrote her off, quite some time ago, focusing on a few almost extraneous issues which have been explained rather clearly, Actually
ian cormac (6709ab) — 10/14/2010 @ 10:21 amCoons seems to come off that way, much as with the facade of Obama, not the reality. Actually she comes across as very humble, although confident in what she believes.
I’m focussed on the fact that she’s 20 down in the polls and Mike Castle would have been a shoo-in.
Also, why is honesty an extraneous issue?
How is her claiming she won 2 out of 3 counties against the sitting VP in 2008 not problematic?
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 10:23 amThere are a lot of liars in Congress so that may not be as important with respect to her gaffes. I didn’t watch although I’ve have heard some comment today that CNN made this a setup with two “moderators” and a national broadcast. It all depends on how big a wave this election is. If it’s really big, and it could be, it will sweep her in. Nobody is dumber than Patty Murray so don’t be too dismissive. Every time Obama attacks someone personally, their fundraising takes off. That’s a sign of something going on.
Mike K (568408) — 10/14/2010 @ 10:50 amNow, I remember why I don’t watch CNN & the Obama Statist Liberal Media. The debate was 3 against one. They tried to “burn her at the stake.”
Juan (cc765e) — 10/14/2010 @ 10:52 amThat’s a solid impression to have;
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/10/delaware_debate_moderator_tell.html
ian cormac (6709ab) — 10/14/2010 @ 10:52 amChrisoph
well on the issue of being master of one’s domain, i will go with dennis miller: he who has a free hand shall cast the first stone.
So yeah, i very much disagree with her personal views. But what the hell does this have to do with anything a senator does?
well actually if clinton engaged in a little more, ahem, self-help, maybe he wouldn’t have caused that whole impeachment mess… but i don’t think that point applies to mcdonnell as much.
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 10/14/2010 @ 11:00 amNothing, but it’s the sort of thing modern women resent. Me, it just makes me laugh because of my encyclopedic experience with women. Even if true (and it may well be), it doesn’t take much to destabilize and for the opposite to become the norm.
Anyhow, way off topic.
Mike K makes an interesting point, which I thought of during the debate. CNN handled this so badly. To any fair-minded person, that’s gotta rub the wrong way. That could provoke a backlash against CNN for their unfair treatment of O’Donnell. This coupled with Coon’s contempt could result in sympathy for her. That may be enough for her to win a sizable number of votes she otherwise wouldn’t get.
I think that’s a long-shot, but it’s possible.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 11:11 amian cormac, great link. I remember that part of the debate well, but didn’t catch the, “… go for it.”
What a piece of work. That small piece of the debate covered by Mark J. Fitzgibbons at American Thinker was only one example of the travesty of media bias in this debate’s moderation.
Patterico, I know you were working and never actually watched this debate, but it is as bad as everyone is saying. Just awful. Blitzer should be embarrassed for being part of it.
I went in without a high opinion of O’Donnell, but considering the trashy way she was treated, she did alright in the main.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 11:19 amI will say this: Coons did much worse this time than in the last debate. He came across poorly. I think he’s written O’donnell off and the mask is slipping off his face.
I think those of you who expect O’Donnell to have a chance now are radically optimistic. In fact, this debate probably hurt her. Coons was smart enough to realize the debate is unfair, and admonished them. That’s obviously easy for him to do, since he still gets all the benefits of the unfair forum while denying the penalty.
The way he handled it, the issues O’Donnell would have to overcome have been called ‘distractions’, wiped from the table, and not overcome. She had to look extremely competent and she did not. She had to sell her qualifications for high office, and of course that’s a tall order, too.
As poorly as unbearably arrogant Coons did, I don’t think he could lose if he tried. And the problem isn’t just ideology. O’Donnell would have a hard time winning a Senate election in a red state. A lot of people have tried to paint O’Donnell as a tea party candidate, but she sinks as other Tea Party candidates surge.
We should consider why a state that was going to elect a moderate Republican by a high margin over a liberal democrat is soundly rejecting O’donnell for the third time.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/14/2010 @ 11:29 amdustin
i keep saying, if she is only the lightning rod this year, i will pat her on the back and say “good job.” ditto for palidino (sp?) in NY. We can win this majority without her.
i just wish my district had a contentious race this year. my guy is sailing through.
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 10/14/2010 @ 11:35 amI love this ad.
You’ve got some ideology. And you have an opponent with some defects.
But then you have what sets a powerful candidate apart from a DOA one. You have an example of a success, an example of devotion to the country, a nice big ‘look at my family’. You can believe in the person running because of all these factors.
Am I actually saying we should prefer nominees who have a spouse and kids over those who don’t, because they will be more likely to win? Yep. I don’t even think that’s unfair. Now, those who supported O’Donnell in the primary didn’t do anything wrong. Who exactly were they supposed to support? Castle sucks. O’Donnell sucks. Coons sucks. So they picked O’Donnell for ideology.
We can’t wait for the GOP to cough up better choices, so we have to be proactive in 2012 and 2014 to promote better candidates who have all these features needed to win. One factor some might overlook is that the Democrats are about to lose a lot of dead weight. They will be back with younger candidates with less of a record to criticize, making plenty of promises, much as the GOP is surging right now.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/14/2010 @ 11:39 amI understand your point. It’s a good election year.
I believe this race is consequential even though there are many other races. We’ll be cursing Coons for a long time.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/14/2010 @ 11:41 ambtw, althouse thinks she did very well controlling the debate. http://althouse.blogspot.com/2010/10/watch-christine-odonnell-dominate.html
she thinks this would resonate. it didn’t for me, but then again i didn’t think jerry brown calling whitman a whore was a big whup in and of itself, and the reaction at the brown-whitman debate suggests otherwise.
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 10/14/2010 @ 11:46 amNo matter who we think won or lost the debate, does it really matter? It was on CNN so other than you guys, most likely there were only about six other people who saw the debate, based on CNN’s ratings.
Sparrow (290149) — 10/14/2010 @ 11:55 amAaron, that’s a great link.
3 against 1. O’Donnell did a lot better than I would have done in her shoes.
It’s amusing to pretend the reverse sort of debate, with a Republican debating a Democrat with two die hard Republican moderators cutting the dem off, interjecting conservative points, etc. It’s hard to even imagine.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/14/2010 @ 12:07 pm“I wish I could say I don’t understand why this not-very-close race is getting national attention like this, but I think I do understand.”
MayBee scores again!
daleyrocks (940075) — 10/14/2010 @ 12:08 pmDustin:
My point was that all of the controversy will be irrelevant once the voters of DE have made their choice.
Whether it is a “good” choice or not, it is their choice, and they will have to live with it for the next…four?…years.
The GOP voters of DE told the Party that they did not wish to support a GOP-lite version of Biden (Castle),
and that they wished to go in another direction in choosing O’Donnell.
Now, if Coons wins (as most around here and elsewhere seem to believe), DE will have another Senator in the mold of Sloe-Joe:
One who will probably make the wrong choice on every vital national and international issue that comes before him.
If he actually performs better than Joe, it is to DE’s (the the Nation’s) gain – but that is a very low bar to hurdle.
If the GOP comes up one-short of organizing the Senate (50 vs. 51),
there will be a huge amount of negative material to sort through to paint the GOP/NRSC power structure with,
as they have not exactly shrouded themselves in glory in the cycle.
The GOP at all levels is undergoing a re-ordering, one that is powered from the lowest levels, and pushing upward. It is very similar to the changes that the grass-roots attempted following the defeat of Goldwater in ’64 and eventually brought us a Reagan Presidency; and, if the GOP is really to be the Party of Main Street, must be constantly pursued to push-back against “The Ruling Class” that attempts to control the national agenda.
AD-RtR/OS! (1f1015) — 10/14/2010 @ 12:13 pmEarth to Christoph…
Castle might have been a “shoe-in”, but the GOP voters of DE did not want him to represent them.
AD-RtR/OS! (1f1015) — 10/14/2010 @ 12:19 pmIt’s not like COD shot Castle on a downtown street in Wilmington –
the voters of DE looked at the choices that were presented to them, and made a decision.
You might not like that decision, but AFAIK, you don’t get to choose,
but you certainly do get to carp, an activity that you seem to excell at.
Well said, AD.
Castle was rejected, for legit reasons (not that the voters rejecting him isn’t legit on its own). That we’re going to lose a few races on the way to reforming the government isn’t even a bad thing, if it helps push our leadership in the correct direction.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/14/2010 @ 12:24 pmYes, I get that. I’m criticizing Delaware’s GOP primary voters and also the Tea Party yahoos who rushed in money to her campaign from out of state … and Sarah Palin.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 12:24 pmJim Geraghty at NRO thinks O’Donnell won, which is an interesting twist. We’ll see when the next polls come out.
Mike K (568408) — 10/14/2010 @ 12:25 pmI’m pretty sure she didn’t do anything as STUPID as Senator Biden in the 2008 VP debate.
Palin (correctly) asserted that Atricle I of the Constitution was about Congress. “You idiot”, blurted the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, “Article I is about the Executive!!111!!!!” [paraphrased].
Mr. Foreign Relations also asserted that France had driven Hezbollah out of Lebanon, “only to be let back in by Bush.” As though France could drive Hezbollah out of Paris, let alone Lebanon.
So, on the Biden scale of dumbness, 10 being Biden, O’Donnell could have asserted that the earth was 5000 years old and still been only an 8.
Kevin M (298030) — 10/14/2010 @ 12:28 pmChristoph…
I’m sorry, but we don’t get to criticize the voters,
only shake our heads in disbelief over their actions when they don’t purport to our “enlightened” vision.
I would remind you of these words:
“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union…”
AD-RtR/OS! (1f1015) — 10/14/2010 @ 12:31 pmRemember, the Government is a creation of the People, not vice-versa –
this is where Progressivism goes wrong.
Yes it is good to stand by while our voice is being
ian cormac (6709ab) — 10/14/2010 @ 12:31 pmgagged with the DISCLOSE act, and supporting what
turned out to be a ‘phantom’ cap n trade bill, solid
judgement all around
High unemployment, unsustainable debt. Governement power grabs, terrorist plots and the important question the idiot moderator can come up with is eveolution?
Why not just ask her what side or the toilet paper roll does she prefer to hang it? piull up or pull down? It has as much relavance as the evelotion nonsense. It does however, make it blatently obvious that they werent asking the important questions that would put Coons on the hot seat. Taxes going up? stay away from that one, coons will shoot himself in the foot with his answer.
Like her or not, she is the better candidate to choose from. let Delewarians decide for themselves. They deserve the beared marxist that will vote to raise their taxes if they are too stupid to vote for their own self preservation. She is a flawed candidate in many ways but her opponant is more of the same marxist/ facism crap coming from Obama and Dems. You want to loose everything you have? by al lmeans vote for Coons then but don’t complain when you lose your job, house, money and freedoms
Ex Dem (6a46d9) — 10/14/2010 @ 12:32 pmI have to strongly agree with that title, Mike K. It was a horribly moderated debate and the title encapsulated it.
This debate should be taught in journalism schools as what not to do.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 12:32 pmI think the debate played to O’Donnell extremely well. She’s been on tv for many years, has a degree in drama, and she was able to handle the 3 on 1 format without folding or stammering. I wouldn’t be surprised if she picks up 5 points for a week or two. But she needs 21 points.
AD, I would like to agree with Chris and say Palin made an unwise endorsement and the voters should have been afraid enough of Coons to beat him in their primary, but that’s not my call. I think Cap and Tax and an extremely harsh primary (much of which had a lot of lies about Castle impeaching Bush, supporting the stimulus, earning millions in corrupt deals) did him in. That’s still Castle’s fault. He didn’t campaign very well, and he hasn’t been a very good congressman.
Palin did stake a bit of her reputation on someone she did not scrutinize for ethics, which I find surprising.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/14/2010 @ 12:37 pmReally, why not?
I’m not saying they don’t have the right to make their decisions, but one can’t criticize them? That doesn’t even make any sense.
Edward Kennedy’s voters were just “cool” all those years? Barack Obama’s voters got it right?
Dare I say it, Hitler’s voters were beyond reproach?
Okay, there’s no moral comparison, obviously. But in principle, why can one not criticize voters for making what one considers a bad vote?
O’Donnell seems like a nice lady. I have a feeling I’d like her personally if I knew her. And that’s something. She’s certainly extremely well spoken.
But, tactically, she was always likely to lose this election for various reasons which have been discussed ad infinitum. And I can say that as a strategic decision, voting for Mike Castle in the primary would have left the GOP in a better position.
And you can criticize my opinion, etc. But voters are not beyond criticism.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 12:37 pmO’Donnell does not impress me. However, any one on the Democrat side of the aisle attacking her on her knowledge or intelligence is simply showing their hypocrisy given that the Democrats gave us, from that very state, the stupidest Vice President in US history with Joe Biden.
SPQR (26be8b) — 10/14/2010 @ 12:43 pmI don’t understand why you think Tea Partiers are “yahoos” or why it’s wrong for them to send money to support senate races in various states. We don’t have a federal system anymore, and senators from other states have tremendous impact on my life.
They want the GOP to be more conservative than Castle. You seem to be going beyond disagreeing with them on this and are actually criticizing their decision to participate. that’s why AD thinks you’re wrong.
I like Ex Dem’s point. They kept demanding O’donnell say if she believes in evolution, among other gotcha questions. Why didn’t they ask Coons about his record on taxation (I don’t recall them bringing it up)? He claims he’ll balance the budget… they never asked him how he intends to do it (obviously through a massive tax hike).
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/14/2010 @ 12:47 pm“…I’m sorry, but we don’t get to criticize the voters,
only shake our heads in disbelief over their actions when they don’t purport to our “enlightened” vision…”
You don’t do subtle at all, do you?
But, my larger point is that, the People are Sovereign in this Republic, no matter what our self-annoited betters wish to think, or act.
We might not agree with the choices that the voters make, but it is a decision made in all of our names, and is “our” decision.
So, if you want to posit on what you would have done differently, that’s Jake by me;
but please try to lighten-up on trying to paint the GOP voters of DE as mindless fools enraptured with the vision of TEA.
As an aside, I just wonder how many of those in DE affirmatively voted for Obama in ’08 knowing that this was their one solid chance of getting rid of Slow-Joe?
AD-RtR/OS! (1f1015) — 10/14/2010 @ 12:55 pmAnd, that this election offers the People of DE the first chance to re-order their electoral world, since the Slow-Joe Machine is not fully engaged?
Gotcha hack journalism only goes in one direction. You did not expect someone to challenge Coons’ belief system, did you?
JD (eb1dfe) — 10/14/2010 @ 12:57 pmHow could they challenge it sense they share it?
AD-RtR/OS! (1f1015) — 10/14/2010 @ 12:59 pmThe cognitive dissonance would have their heads implode.
spell check is not my friend….
AD-RtR/OS! (1f1015) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:00 pm“
sense“…”since”I don’t think it’s “wrong” for them to do so, I think it was a bad decision, for all the reasons any GOP critics of O’Donnell (Rove, Krauthammer, Patterico, Ace, et al.) have mentioned.
I don’t think they’re bad people. I think they are way out of touch with the mainstream electorate, particularly in a place like Delaware. They — as Ace constantly points out until his readership gets peeved at him and then he’s forced to back down for a bit — seem to think that if only they could better articulate a viewpoint that maybe 20% of Americans embrace (less in Delaware), they will win elections. I disagree (and criticize the reasoning).
I’m not criticizing their decision to participate. I’m criticizing their choice of how they exercised their right to participate upon strategic grounds.
And as far as why I think the Tea Partiers are yahoos, well because they chose to support an unelectable, somewhat kooky candidate with no history of accomplishment and thus gave up a GOP senate seat in a critical election for control of the senate and stopping Obama’s overreaches. I think the majority of people who would look at Christine O’Donnell and say, “Great candidate!” are yahoos.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:01 pmI think AD meant that you were sounding like one of the “Ruling Class” complaining that the people didn’t follow the instructions they were given. In other words, you can criticize the voters for many things, but rejecting the candidate that the party bosses want is not one of them. It is the people who vote in the primary that will decide your candidate.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:01 pmAD-RtR/OS!, if your basic point is, “Do I believe in democracy?” sure. Even when the leftists win.
That doesn’t mean I’m not going to criticize their votes.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:03 pmIf Coons wins this will be taught in Journalism school, as an example of what you can get away with.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:04 pmI see, MD. No, I certainly don’t believe voters have to follow the direction of the party leaders. Of course, voters have a right to make choices and change the direction of a party.
My point is this particular choice turned a sure win with Castle voting with the GOP most of the time (including caucassing with the GOP for control of the Senate at this crucial time) into your new Marxist Senator from Delaware, Chris Coons, for as long as he chooses to hold onto the seat.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:07 pmI still do, even though they prove me wrong time after time. We’ve got a crushing deficit and Coons is running on ‘I balance budgets!’. It amazes me they are asking O’donnell about evolution. She answers ‘Education is a local issue’ and Wolf keeps going ‘so? Tell me what you believe about evolution!’
It’s essentially a religious test, only asked because Wolf has calculated the answer’s effect on the election and wants to skew.
It’s so far from the issues of the day that it just amazes me they aren’t asking real economic questions. Coons has said that O’Donnell’s job’s plan (to get the fed gov off the backs of business so they can afford more hires) is not a real jobs plan. He should explain why he thinks that won’t create jobs. His jobs plan is to tax us to hire more people, green jobs, etc.
Instead, we’re asking about is O’Donnell believes in evolution?
It shouldn’t surprise me, coming from CNN, but it honestly really does. CNN really doesn’t want to be a successful news operation.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:09 pmI don’t know how many people thought that O’Donnell was a “great candidate” de novo, but they were voting for “change they believed in”, getting candidates that were more conservative whether the party bosses wanted it or not. They showed that they were going to have a voice in picking the candidate after all.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:10 pmAnd they accomplished that much, MD in Philly. While losing the open Delaware Senate seat to a Marxist.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:11 pmi just wish my district had a contentious race this year. my guy is sailing through.
Aaron–is that good or bad?
I found out that my Congresscreature (Wasserman-Schultz) does in fact have a GOP opponent and two NPA opponents. She’s still a shoo-in, but at least I have the chance to vote against her.
And Florida is experiencing a plethora of independent candidates–five for governor, and six for senator (not counting the Libertarian and Constitution Party candidates)–Crist’s name appears next to last on the ballot. I smell some karma there. My state representative is a Dem.; he has not GOP opposition but does have one running NPA. Another state house district has a Democrat running against someone who gives his affiliation as “TEA”. I think that district is around Fort Lauderdale. The state Agriculture Commissioner race has a Dem. a Rep. a NPA and a TEA. At the moment the polls for the governor’s race have the Democrat and Republican neck and neck. The day after Election Day may be very interesting here.
kishnevi (8627e9) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:13 pmIt was not a GOP seat, Christoph. Biden had held this seat for decades.
JD (eb1dfe) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:14 pmWhy would you expect that, Dustin? Is there any scintilla or iota of evidence that a MFM person thingie will challenge a leftist on their basic flawed assumptions?
If Wasserman-Schultz was my congresscritter, I might move.
JD (eb1dfe) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:16 pmChristoph-
It’s just that there are those who also caucass with the Dems “in the middle” and try to control the process and hold everyone else hostage. If anything, people are more tired of that. We count on Dem libs being Dem libs, we would like to count on Repubs who say they are conservative being conservative. In the case of trying to get “what’s possible”, people will have differing opinions and it will be impossible to know for sure.
I still say that I wouldn’t count on anything that made sense from a state that sent Joe Biden to the Senate that many times, and that is included electing Castle if he was the GOP nominee.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:19 pmTrue, JD. I may not have been fully descriptive in each comment I made due to brevity; however, I have referred to it as an open seat above: “the open Delaware Senate”, etc.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:20 pmI haven’t read the other comments above, so forgive me if I repeat or otherwise sound unoriginal.
My opinion: She did well, but I don’t think it will move the needle much.
She spoke intelligently on the issues and came off likable. But the moderators were more effective than Coons at beating her up (is there ANY voter in Delaware going to the polls this November to have their voice heard on the critical issue of…evolution?).
The local news moderator (Nancy Somethingerother) couldn’t have been worse unless she were wearing a Coons baseball cap during the debate. Every time O’Donnell started to get traction and knock Coons back on his heels, in came Nancy to rescue him. Her tongue dripped with vitriol toward O’Donnell. She literally pleaded with Coons to jump in and attack. And when he wouldn’t do it, she’d essentially tell O’Donnell to quit talking so the adults could move on to the next topic where they hoped to ridicule her more.
Coons was weak with his answers and came off whiny. Having said that – and I hope I’m wrong here – I think the one thing he did effectively was leave the audience skeptical of O’Donnell’s comments. He said something along the lines of “we’ll have to spend a lot of time correcting her falsehoods tonight and there probably won’t be time to correct them all.” Unfair slight, but I think effective because of the picture painted of O’Donnell by the absurd comments on Politically Incorrect, the questions about the accuracy of her resume, etc.
Her best moment in the debate was when she asked him whether his family would benefit financially from the cap and trade legislation. As he did anytime he responded to anything she said, he pretended to be confused by her supposed rambling. She nailed him on cap-and-trade, and that exchange was the most substantively interesting back-and-forth in the debate. But I wonder how many Delaware voters noticed she forced him to concede he will financially benefit from cap and trade.
If my memory is correct, Nancy “Honk if you love Coons” Fifteenminuteserup immediately changed the subject in an effort to prevent O’Donnell’s point from sinking in.
Christine O’Donnell did what she needed to do last night. We’ll see with the next round of polls if it was enough to break through the 3-on-1 tag team she was up against.
dbnrnet (9b5710) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:20 pmNot really, no.
It’s just so damn off the wall. We’ve got a major set of differences on the most newsworthy topics, and Wolf wants to ask about O’Donnell’s religious views again and again. I’d like to think, at some point, CNN realizes this is extremely counterproductive for them, for democrats, even for their blatant propaganda goals.
When they simultaneously show blatant bias against the real issues AND a particular candidate, they are sending the message they expect O’donnell to win on the issues.
Call my naive, I guess, but I’d hope they have some clue about this.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:21 pmIn the end, MD, of course different constituencies have a right to influence primaries and get out the vote. But if their votes result in a race that was previously expected to go their party’s way instead becoming a rout of their handpicked candidate, well … for them to say that it’s wrong to criticize primary voters’ is completely self-serving.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:23 pmThe fact that O’Donnell/My Pet Coons was being broadcast nationwide should have clued anyone in to how unserious they were. She is almost 20 points behind, yet is being held up as emblematic of teabaggers, conservatives, and Republicans nationwide. They would rather cover her statements from decades ago than cover the current policies and ideology of the WH and Congress that got us to where we are right now.
JD (eb1dfe) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:24 pmIn the form of Karate my daughter studies, to get a black belt one of the requirements is to be the “1” in a 3 against 1 fight for 30 minutes. That’s how Republican debate prep needs to be. Holding one’s own often involves at least one opponent out of commission at any one time from a kick to the groin – that should be part of Republican debate prep too. Ask the moderator how many bumper stickers for the opponent is on his/her car, or how much they had contributed to the opponents campaign. If it is that obvious, even if they say “None” you can make the “Oh, that’s surprising.” retort.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:33 pmLabels say more about the person using them than the people being labeled. Thus, if Tea Partiers are yahoos and Patterico is a twit, what does that make Christoph?
DRJ (d43dcd) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:37 pmComment by Christoph — 10/14/2010 @ 1:07 pm
“Well, there you go again…”
You just don’t get it, do you?
All of the pre-primary polling said that Castle was the “smart” pick, he was the one who was going to/had the best odds to, win.
This was all known before the first vote was cast…..
and he was (in those immortal words for some hair-darkening product)
REJECTED!
The GOP voters in DE (or at least a majority/plurality of them – that is the way it’s supposed to work in our democratic Republic, isn’t it?) said:
No! We don’t care, this guys a turkey, and needs to go away. “Out, damn spot!”
AD-RtR/OS! (1f1015) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:40 pmThe point of broadcasting O’Donnell nationally was to use a “quirky” candidate whose likely to lose a Senate election to affect the other toss-up races.
If CNN can use O’Donnell to aid Reid, they will.
Christian (2852e9) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:41 pmListen, all of you who are complaining about O’Donnell, think for a moment about California which may very well elect Jerry Brown and Barbara Boxer next month. Both have excellent opponents with plenty of money and smarts. Those whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad.
Mike K (568408) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:43 pmDRJ, the Tea Partiers managed to make rational decisions in Massachussets and again in Alaska with a guy who may be very conservative, but he’s also an excellent candidate.
It’s in Delaware (and those from elsewhere that rushed in money to support O’Donnell) that they went really far off the rails.
So not all Tea Partiers are yahoos. I’m reserving that for the Christine O’Donnell diehards, in a state that would otherwise go GOP.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:45 pmMike, why are you making racist comments about Teh Won?
AD-RtR/OS! (1f1015) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:46 pmAnd hey, I probably won’t limit my criticism simply to Delaware GOP primary voters. I don’t think I’m alone in critiquing the electorate in California, am I?
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:47 pmSo, the TEA Party rushing money into DE was bad, but was good in MA, AK, NV, etc.
Bad Money, Bad Money!
AD-RtR/OS! (1f1015) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:48 pm(Oh, I get so turned on slapping Ben’s portrait around)
When all is said and done, who would you rather have voting on national policy issues? This isn’t Jeopardy, it’s the US Senate. That’s a big plus for O’Donnell.
DaMav (6ab8ce) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:49 pmComment by Mike K —
Well said.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:49 pmJust remember, when criticizing CA voters, PP and AD are one!
Who was it that said: “Feets, don’t fail me now”?
AD-RtR/OS! (1f1015) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:50 pmMD, I think you’re right. Republicans should be prepared for some kind of reaction when a debate is this tilted. If they handle it wrong, it backfires. And it’s possible to benefit from weathering this crap.
But I would really respect a candidate that called them out at some point. These are democrats trying to help democrats win. The failure of journalism is why we’re suffering through so many failed policies.
—
DRJ, I’m amazed Cristoph would have that reaction to LGF banning Patterico. A few people have mentioned some kind problems he’s had, so maybe he just has an axe to grind now.
He’s moved the goalposts quite a bit from Tea Partiers who have supported O’Donnell over her two terrible opponents to people who think O’Donnell is a “great candidate” or are “die hards”. It’s another unnecessary straw man argument, in my opinion.
A lot of people who pushed O’Donnell to the nomination are not “die hards”. They are not “yahoos”. They just didn’t have any good options.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:50 pmIt was misspent, strategically. It isn’t the end of the world. The GOP are doing well this cycle and clearly the Tea Party movement and energy deserve a lot of the credit for it. Yet the Christine O’Donnell nomination still looks like a mistake, particularly if it costs control of the Senate.
Those committee chairs and the ability to subpoena could really come in handy with this administration. As could incumbency in Delaware for that matter.
Certainly never hurt Biden.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:53 pmWhile I seriously oppose Castle on Can and Trade, in comparison to Coons and losing, he was the good option.
The least bad successful option is generally the good option, relatively speaking.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:55 pmSorry to skunk up your party, but she is the ignorant-witch-of-the-East.
Larry Reilly (ae99e7) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:56 pmThat you take her seriously is……..uh, never mind, anything more would be taking this and you seriously.
We should count our blessings, Cristoph. This world where the Tea Party thinks with perfect strategy about each person’s money is totally incompatible with the grassroots buildup that got us within touching distance of a Senate majority.
Those yahoos are the reason for the good, and we just have to accept it’s not perfect. People support O’donnell because they don’t like RINOs and Coons. Surely you realize this will have strategic value in the future. It will affect Scott Brown’s votes, for example.
You seem to be limiting your analysis to mere elections. There’s so much more to politics than elections.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:57 pmI see the broader picture, Dustin, where the Tea Party can put the fear of God into the electorate and cause candidates to be more conservative than they otherwise would be and, once elected, to act more conservatively. At least in theory.
But I like the experiment a lot more in Alaska where ousting a quasi-Democrat gets a replacement electable Republican more than I do in Delaware where … well, you get the idea.
Besides, who said I’m always for the most conservative candidate? I’m often for the center-right candidate.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:59 pmIt will affect Scott Brown’s votes, for example.
Scott Brown is walking a tightrope, though … because he has to keep the majority of the voters of Massachusetts happy, not just the majority of the Republicans.
It’s similar to the tightrope that Ben Nelson has to walk.
aphrael (e0cdc9) — 10/14/2010 @ 1:59 pmYou watched the debate and think she’s stupid?
I think you’re not intellectually honest if that’s the case. It’s quite difficult to hold your own against 3 hostile debaters who sneer down on you, interrupt you, and constantly tell you to talk about something else. She was completely unfazed.
I do not like O’Donnell at all, but she clearly is much smarter than many, including me, have thought. I can say this because I am not ashamed to admit when I stand corrected.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/14/2010 @ 2:01 pmSorry, bad analogy. Unintentional typo. I didn’t mean they’d put the fear of God into the electorate, rather that they’d put the fear of God (or of the electorate) into the GOP candidates.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 2:01 pmShe is my congressperson, explains my cynicism, Miller is getting hammered by nearly every corner
ian cormac (6709ab) — 10/14/2010 @ 2:02 pmof the spectrum except talk radio up there, Ralston
at the REview Journal is savaging Angle, and we know the underhanded nature of media, re Rand Paul
ACU lifetime ratings:
Murkowski…70.19;
Castle……52.49!
Now, who was the “quasi-Democrat”?
AD-RtR/OS! (1f1015) — 10/14/2010 @ 2:06 pmaphrael, thank you for seeing that side of it. It will affect Scott Brown’s votes, for example … and could force him into a vote where he loses the electorate to keep the primary voters happy.
Etc.
But that’s always a risk and it’s always a balancing act between competing interests. My interest, for the most part (and especially against a radical leftist President like Obama), is that there be a credible opposition to his historic overreaches. That includes control of the Senate, its committees, subpoena power, etc., and not just feeling good because of sending a message to the GOP that its primary voters will force it to lose general elections in an attempt to get more conservative candidates.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 2:07 pmComment by Dustin — 10/14/2010 @ 2:01 pm
Dustin, Mary is just a troll, always has been, always will be.
AD-RtR/OS! (1f1015) — 10/14/2010 @ 2:07 pmSo many times, you insert an additional factor in your thinking when someone points out you’re wrong.
It’s very difficult to have a discussion with you.
You complained about people participating in this process. Then you moved the goalposts to people who are die hard O’Donnell fans. Now you’re actually just ignoring the big picture because you ‘like’ a different topic. So what?
I actually agree with most of your points on O’Donnell, but it’s not clear what your thesis is. If it’s that O’Donnell was not the most conservative candidate who could win, well… everyone already knew that. Oh wait, that’s not your point. You are center right. So you ARE criticizing the Tea Party for daring to participate from a different ideology.
So yeah, AD was totally right and you are totally wrong. This is what democracy looks like.
—
Aphrael, great comparison! This is a huge sea change, and it’s going to be many years before it’s clear where the tightrope even is. I expect many areas to become bluer (as most areas become redder). It’s not clear if this is a long term wave, yet (considering just how the dem 2006 and 2008 tides turned so quickly).
At any rate, a consequence, for better or worse, is that moderate Republicans will have to be very careful not to piss off the right. Electability is not going to protect them very well.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/14/2010 @ 2:08 pmYeah, fair point, AD-RtR/OS!.
What I think is happening here — and it’s only my own estimation of the two people — is that Mike Castle is more conservative than his voting record indicates, but is constrained by having to win elections in Delaware. And that Lisa Murkowski is a Democratic rat (the two Senators she most admires, for example, are Democrats), and she was similarly constrained by a more conservative electorate and GOP primary voters.
Now that she’s gone from the GOP, you’ll see just how leftwing she is.
Yet still a fair point.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 2:10 pmNo, I complained about how they participated. Rushing money to a candidate almost sure to lose in order to defeat a GOP candidate almost sure to win. The participation was great, and would have been a lot more productively offered to Angle or Miller or McMahon.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 2:12 pmNo. Miller is more conservative than I am, but I’d still support him. And there are many examples of this kind.
But Miller can win because he’s a good candidate. O’Donnell isn’t.
For what it’s worth, I’m in between Castle and O’Donnell on the issues. While I’m not religious, I’m a huge pro-life fanatic and so am probably closer to O’Donnell if anything.
But she can’t win, and it was widely known among halfway objective, intelligent people that she probably couldn’t win, whereas Castle almost certainly would.
That’s really my point. As I’ve said many times.
Center-right doesn’t mean “center”. It’s means center-right.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 2:17 pmI live with 2 very nonpolitical people. For some reason they were both interested in this debate, going so far as to Tivo it. When I want to get a feel for how voters might react to news that I’ve already made my mind up about because of so much time spent reading online accounts and keeping up with current events thru blogss, I turn to them. They are my “man on the street” gauge.
Their reaction was extremely, make that EXTREMELY, negative toward Coons. When I came downstairs to see what they were watching (I was glued to the miner rescue), each of them kept saying, “watch this part, she cleans Coons clock,” or “wait you have to see her make Blitzer look like a fool.” The remarks they made about the female co-moderator were even more negative.
Just a view from the peanut gallery. I have not watched the entire debate, but from the parts I did watch, I was impressed. She is not the airhead some here and many in the media and Washington elitists have made her out to be.
Bottom line, do Delawareans want an Obama/Pelosi/Reid tax and spend yes man or will they give a feisty, self-asssued, smart, conservative Christine the nod in representing them? Unfortunately, we are talking about voters who have reelectd the biggest idiot ever to the Senate in Joe Biden, so I don’t hold out much hope for a candidate that actually has their best interests at heart.
Sara (Pal2Pal) (4d3f49) — 10/14/2010 @ 2:19 pm“…That includes control of the Senate, its committees, subpoena power, etc…”
There are investigative committees on both sides of The Hill, and they can, and do, operate independently of each other.
AD-RtR/OS! (1f1015) — 10/14/2010 @ 2:19 pmIn fact, in the House, where the minority can be effectively throttled (talked to John Boehner lately?),
a crusading chairman such as Dan Burton or Henry Waxman (and soon to be Darrell Issa),
can really drive a painfully powerful agenda against an administration that has “inconvenient and/or unexpected” facts to shield.
Comment by Christoph — 10/14/2010 @ 2:10 pm
If you actually believe any of that re Castle and Murkowski, you need to ask your medical professional to re-evaluate your meds –
AD-RtR/OS! (1f1015) — 10/14/2010 @ 2:21 pmthey just ain’t workin’!
Yes, but I’m greedy.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 2:23 pmI think she spoke pretty well for an eight-year-old. Obviously this woman is in way over her head. Sometimes with her painfully slow and inarticulate responses I thought she was drunk but no, sadly, she wasn’t. But one could certainly see that the little hamster in her head had definitely fallen off his treadmill. I never thought I would live to see someone who makes Sarah Palin look like a deep, intelligent person but now I have. Wow. Just wow. I weep for the state of American politics.
Painful Truth (f1ced1) — 10/14/2010 @ 2:39 pmWhat question and answer are you referring to?
I thought she articulated her views without any problems, and she wasn’t slow. And that’s with people interrupting her in a hostile format.
Cute dumb dig at Palin too.
When you’re done weeping, perhaps you could back up your assertion.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/14/2010 @ 2:43 pmOh, PT’s just the classic troll. I half suspect PT’s an O’Donnell supporter trying to whip up unity behind her.
She was very articulate, is fast on her feet, and is a good communicator.
I hope she really doesn’t think the USA was directly fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan, but that’s another matter. I’ll give her the benefit of the doubt that she understood the fight was through the Mujahideen as proxies with some CIA/NSA, involvement, etc.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 2:49 pmIt does require a certain kind of…intelligence…to maintain a comfortable lifestyle in Greenville, DE on a reported income of $5800.00.
To the comment upthread about her unpopularity with women voters: my professional and personal contacts in Delaware find her “I’m You” commercial insulting, some find it offensive. These are women who have either climbed the corporate ladder, or maintained a home with husband and children – or both. They feel no sisterhood with this New Jersey native who got over on a cohort of GOP voters, mostly based in Lower Delaware.
And about those downstate voters – many were retirees, also out-of-staters, who settled in Delaware because of its favorable tax climate. Which they benefit from partly because of Mike Castle’s policies when a state legislator and Governor of the state.
As Alanis Morrisette would say: Isn’t it ironic?
Marla in PA (6fbcc4) — 10/14/2010 @ 2:53 pmDid POTUS know it was 50? Or did he really think it was 57?
A little more germane than Afghans v USSR v USA.
javert (0a0c11) — 10/14/2010 @ 2:55 pmVery well put, Marla.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 2:56 pmLOL.
Yeah, she’s crafty.
I’ve bashed her more than most, to be sure, but if someone watches the debate, it’s clear she’s put her education and TV experience to good use, and handled the various people attacking her quite well. I have thought of her as an airhead, but she plainly isn’t.
I believe only 25% of women in DE support her. She just doesn’t resonate well. As for Repubicans rejecting Castle because he failed to live up to his record as Governor, I fail to see the irony. They want the old Castle. If he had been a better congressman, or even campaigned seriously, I think he wouldn’t have lost to O’Donnell. He had a great record as Governor, and that carried him for too long.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/14/2010 @ 3:00 pmI’d be very curious what Marla’s opinion is on my comment #22.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 3:04 pmI’ve been listening to Delaware talk radio today, the consensus is that the debate has not been a game-changer. I expect that the taxman ads she is running will be effective in drawing more voters to her, but not enough to make up a double-digit poll deficit.
In one of the polls released this past week, only 35% of respondents – likely voters – believe she is qualified to hold office.
The two candidates debated again today at the Rotary Club, there’s at least another scheduled, I think on the 19th, hosted by WDEL-AM.
It’s not outside the realm of possiblity that she could pull a win out of her pointed hat – but from Christine’s perspective, she’s in a win/win situation. So what she loses to Coons, she can go on to a lucrative gig as the Senator of Conservative Cable TV.
Does anyone remember Joe Pesci in Raging Bull, trying to persuade his brother Jake to throw the fight?
“If you lose – you win. If you win – you win. You can’t lose!”
Marla in PA (6fbcc4) — 10/14/2010 @ 3:05 pmand could force him into a vote where he loses the electorate to keep the primary voters happy.
Etc.
But that’s always a risk and it’s always a balancing act between competing interests.
this is, ultimately, what the voters of California were trying to fix with the blanket primary (until the supreme court told us to stop it) and, again, with the top-two runoff.
radical leftist
I don’t think you understand what those words mean.
If you were to drop President Obama down in a city council election debate in San Francisco, he’d be a conservative.
aphrael (e0cdc9) — 10/14/2010 @ 3:10 pmI love that taxman ad, Marla. You may not like the I’m You ads, but they were pretty smart in how they rounded up tons of real scandals and pigeonholed them as witchcraft.
It’s made a real difference for her, even though it’s not very honest.
I think it’s well outside the realm of possibility that she can conjure up a win. But I agree that she’s destined for TV. I was thinking a left leaning network/show.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/14/2010 @ 3:10 pmDude, the San Fransisco city council would creep out the Politburo.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 3:11 pmChristoph, probably; there’s far too much political debate in San Francisco to make the Politburo comfortable. 🙂
aphrael (e0cdc9) — 10/14/2010 @ 3:13 pmDustin – I agree, Castle botched the campaign. His advisers did not serve him well. Also many of his voters hadn’t switched back to Republican after voting for Markell in the Dem primary. He was an old rusty guy, and didn’t see the threat coming from the right flank. He wasn’t able to make the correct adjustments.
Christoph – about comment 22:
Yes most women are skeptical about the purity front. She herself spoke of her adventurous past in a NYT piece, which was surprisingly even-handed towards her. In it, she admits she had boyfriends, but she “wasn’t a slut”.
Really, that’s as much as I can say on this subject without getting into her male roommate who is supposedly a campaign aide and the other boyfriend who bailed her out of her foreclosure.
So yeah – women are skeptical.
Marla in PA (6fbcc4) — 10/14/2010 @ 3:14 pmShe’d be good as Kathleen Parker’s replacement in that Elliot Spitzer farce. Christine does have an engaging personality and smile.
I really do hope she doesn’t get indicted.
I’ve enjoyed participating in this forum. So many discussions about this candidate have devolved into unpleasant and debased food fights on other conservative blogs. (g’nite guys, have to go make dinner now).
I’ll check back when there are other developments in the saga of the Delaware Senate race.
Marla in PA (6fbcc4) — 10/14/2010 @ 3:20 pmThe “I’m you” ads were not good.
The problem is if you are looking down on someone because of statements they’ve made hinting at dishonesty (2008 election results, education) or feeling like you’re being looked down upon for not meeting their standards of sexual puritanism … being told, “I’m you,” could easily prompt a, “You ain’t me, hunny!” response.
I’m you could only work for someone whom you look up to. So if in Iraq war veteran says, “I’m you; we both love this country,” or a Bill Gates says, “I’m you … we both work hard, like to give to charity, and even make mistakes at times … Windows Millenium anyone?” we can chuckle and laugh.
And as far as, “I’m you,” because we’re both not witches goes … well, that doesn’t exactly connect. And everyone wants to think of themselves positively. How does, “I can’t manage my finances worth shit,” connect with people? “I’m you… .”
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 3:22 pmCA isn’t applicable, Fiorina wasn’t the “Tea Party” conservative candidate in any way.
She was a “moderate pick”
As for Castle, do we want another Olympia Snowe? John McCain? Someone unreliable?
I at least know what Coons would do. Same with COD. Castle, not so much
Hawkins (a3c878) — 10/14/2010 @ 3:41 pmLadies and gentlemen, I present to you my definition of yahoo. Someone who would rather have a leftist like Coons in office rather than live with the tormenting mental uncertainty that a Senator might actually do the right thing some of the time.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 3:44 pmyet another hierarchical officious oracle
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 10/14/2010 @ 3:45 pmThe “I’m you” ads were not good.
The problem is if you are looking down on someone because of statements they’ve made hinting at dishonesty (2008 election results, education) or feeling like you’re being looked down upon for not meeting their standards of sexual puritanism … being told, “I’m you,” could easily prompt a, “You ain’t me, hunny!” response.
I’m you could only work for someone whom you look up to. So if in Iraq war veteran says, “I’m you; we both love this country,” or a Bill Gates says, “I’m you … we both work hard, like to give to charity, and even make mistakes at times … Windows Vista anyone?” we can chuckle and laugh or nod somberly as the case may be.
And as far as, “I’m you,” because we’re both not witches goes … well, that doesn’t exactly connect. And everyone wants to think of themselves positively. How does, “I can’t manage my finances worth a damn,” connect with people? “I’m you… .”
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 3:46 pmChristoph, at 125:
I agree.
She wasn’t the most moderate candidate in the race – that was Tom Campbell – but the conservative in the race was Chuck Devore.
(That said, she was also my least favorite of the three, and I’m delighted to see polls showing her losing).
aphrael (e0cdc9) — 10/14/2010 @ 3:50 pmYou gotta call him names?
What a lame rebuttal.
He’s presenting a legit POV. He doesn’t trust RINOs, so he will accept a less electable candidate. He’s not a ‘yahoo’, he’s just sick of RINOs. You said you understood the big picture argument, earlier in this thread, but want to talk about something else. I guess that means people who DO want to talk about the bigger picture are crazy.
Please let us Hawkins know when he has permission to talk about the bigger picture.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/14/2010 @ 3:59 pmFrom the vantage point of someone on the left, this has amusing parallels to the Lieberman/Lamont and Specter/Sestak debates.
aphrael (e0cdc9) — 10/14/2010 @ 4:06 pmDustin, I think it is irrational to want someone as a Senator who you know will vote against your interests vs. one who you don’t know what they’ll do on given votes, but you know they’ll vote the way you want them to a higher percentage of the time.
So if you want me to replace “yahoo” (which out of context can be a strong word: I got it in relationship to O’Donnell’s out of state supporters yesterday at a RightPundits.com thread) with irrational or unreasonable, I will.
But I can’t go further than that because that’s how I see it. I just don’t see the rationality in choosing Coons over Castle or Snowe or McCain because we know Coons will vote poorly most of the time, whereas Castle or Snow or McCain will some of the time.
Hawkins didn’t say he was playing long ball. He said he preferred the certainty of Coons over the uncertainty of Castle. He has the right to that opinion; however, I find it irrational.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 4:10 pmA couple of points. O’Donnell is not trailing as bad as the slanted polls seem to suggest.
1. Obammer would not be going to DE to campaign for Coons if he was that far ahead.
2. The campaign manager from NH would not be heading to DE to assist Coons if he was that far ahead. Look for the real polls start to tighten the race after this coming week.
I would rather lose a race to a lib, than win one with a squishy Repub. that votes 85-15. That being the moderate votes with the conservatives 85% of the time on nitpicking bullshite that doesn’t mean squat, and votes 15% of the time with the libs on the questions that really matter. It gives the demoncraps the cover of bipartisanship and also soils the conservative image.
peedoffamerican (a4dc7f) — 10/14/2010 @ 4:17 pmYou’re actually said you did understand the rationale earlier in this thread, Cristoph. You said you were choosing not to consider that. You’re moving goalposts.
Whether Hawkins is thinking about long term effects on other candidates or not is something I can’t say (Though I guess he is).
You say it’s irrational by denying the entire rationale. I think that’s pretty irrational. You obviously agree with my POV on this, but are unable to explain yourself without cheap shots and ignoring the entire argument. DRJ was right to call you out for this style of debate.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/14/2010 @ 4:26 pmYou know what, Dustin?
Two can play a long game. Some can put GOP candidates on warning that they won’t win re-election unless they govern conservatively. And others can point out that taking this to extremes can result in popular-in-their-states proven GOP vote-getters (calling such politicians and their supports names like “RINO”) being replaced by unelectable fringe candidates, thus putting Marxists like Coons in office and giving him the leg up of incumbency for future elections.
See how that works? It goes both ways, this rationale of which you speak.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 4:37 pmtoo little too late. you republicans are angry because you let a black man in the white house and so you drum up the troupes with stupid accusations and positions and slip in some racist angles to satisfy your hatred ans envy. so sad that you find such a great following of blind followers.
sign.
nat (8c749e) — 10/14/2010 @ 4:39 pman outsider lookin on from overseas
Oh, we’ll get another black man in office pretty soon, nat.
Why don’t you dis’ the Lt. Colonel while you’re at it? I know you’re dying to.
But I’d love to see you do it to his face.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 4:45 pmOff topic, but this is pure genius from LTC Allen West. If you’re interested in military tactics and the war on “terror” (which Allen West correctly defines), watching this is a must.
It’s easily up there with any of Victor Davis Hanson’s pieces on the war.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 5:02 pmMarla in PA:
I’m not a Delaware voter and I can’t speak to what motivates them, but based on the ideology of those they elect to office I doubt your acquaintances and I would feel a political sisterhood. Yet we do have some things in common: I’ve climbed the corporate ladder and maintained a home with husband and children, and yet I still identify with O’Donnell’s politics of smaller government and lower taxes. If your Delaware friends believe big government and higher taxes is the way to go, it appears that Coons is their man.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 10/14/2010 @ 5:14 pmYou are a moron, nat. No one cares what color the President is. We care that he’s incompetent.
SPQR (26be8b) — 10/14/2010 @ 5:28 pmI hereby proclaim the following to be true, beyond a shadow of a doubt, and do not doubt me on this:
1. Christoph is not happy that O’Donnell won the primary. Repeat that many times with slightly different words, and it is still true.
2. Some think that #1 is inherently and obviously justified, and disagreement is futile and lacking in intellectual rigor.
3. People can make comments good or ill portraying themselves as whoever, and unless it is someone that we’ve seen around a lot, there’s no way of judging who is plugging, who is disinforming, and who just likes to cause mischief.
4. Some are interested in give and take, and others are not. It is enjoyable and interesting to interact with the former, not so much with the later.
5. Even after the election is over, the number of ways to spin “the lesson” will always be more than the number of people in the discussion.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/14/2010 @ 5:29 pmaphrael, which Obama would be the SF conservative? The Illinois state senator? The Senator from Illinois? The presidential candidate? Or the President? None of them seem to have ever had the same positions.
SPQR (26be8b) — 10/14/2010 @ 5:31 pmChristoph, you mean the guy who doesn’t even live in the district he’s running to represent? (He actually lives in the same district I do, and would therefore be a logical candidate against Wasserman-Schultz). He may win, but it’s a far from certain thing, and while I’ve seen a few ads against him by Klein I’ve yet to see any ad on TV that is in his favor.
BTW, what’s an Illegal Disease?
*
tedfio1tedfio1
1 week ago
I Would Vote For This Guy In A Heartbeat!
He Knows Illegal Immigration Is A Major Problem:
Illegal Immigration List:
1. Increases The Entrance Of Terrorists!
2. Increases The Gang Violence!
3. Increases The Air-Borne Diseases!
4. Increase In Illegal Diseases!
Feel Free To Add To The List!
That’s the last comment currently showing on the front page of the first link you gave. With supporters like that…
kishnevi (827a72) — 10/14/2010 @ 5:31 pmI’ve mixed feelings actually. She’s articulate, has a great voice, and is so easy on the eyes that I’ll be really looking forward to her show when she gets one.
That’s on the offhand chance her new tactic of whining to news reporters about the NRSC doesn’t pan out.
Anyway, the Angle/Reid debate is coming up in 19 minutes. Fingers crossed.
Perhaps the NRSC should divert funds from Angle to O’Donnell because Coons is a “sitting duck” as she puts it?
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 5:41 pmI will be honest, I did not watch the Coons-O’Donnell debate. I have given up on that race. I think she is doomed.
Terrye (7c855d) — 10/14/2010 @ 5:55 pmChristoph:
Why should they waste their money on O’Donnell? I am sorry, but there are a lot of races out there where people are not getting a lot of resources, because those resources are going to be spent where they can do the most good…Coons would have been a sitting duck if Castle had won the primary, but he did not win, O’Donnell did.
Terrye (7c855d) — 10/14/2010 @ 5:57 pmI’m being sarcastic, Terrye. 😉
You should read the Hot Air comments. They’re brutal. Many ask if she’s sitting on the money she raised so far to pay her mortgage or to invest in an indoor campaign HQ swimming pool.
I won’t go that far, but she should spend that money first if she thinks Coons is such a sitting duck, prove it by moving the poll numbers in her direction, then hit up the NRSC for a major ad buy.
Assuming that’s what happens.
Angle and Reid are debating now. Angle’s got a shot.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 6:01 pmTo the comment upthread about her unpopularity with women voters: my professional and personal contacts in Delaware find her “I’m You” commercial insulting, some find it offensive. These are women who have either climbed the corporate ladder, or maintained a home with husband and children – or both. They feel no sisterhood with this New Jersey native who got over on a cohort of GOP voters, mostly based in Lower Delaware.
O’Donnell might have it right on smaller government (assuming it’s not lip service), and I’m not offended nor insulted by her “I’m You” commercial, but I nonetheless remain distrustful of her.
She has repeatedly displayed a lack of honesty and has not refuted and/or explained these issues in a straightforward manner.
To me, the issue of integrity trumps all else and is a gender neutral issue. Any promises, declarations and reassurances I hear from her are received with a wait-and-see reservedness.
Dana (8ba2fb) — 10/14/2010 @ 6:02 pmDana,
I’m not disagreeing with your point but it does raise an interesting theoretical question about where we set limits on voting for candidates. If I were a Delaware voter, I would be hard-pressed to let my personal concerns about O’Donnell trump my ideological concerns about Coons. At what point would you decide to sit home rather than vote?
DRJ (d43dcd) — 10/14/2010 @ 6:06 pmhe was outside and
ColonelHaiku (1606f6) — 10/14/2010 @ 6:06 pmlookin inside on his own
alone again, nat…urally
Crazy. The first question the moderator asked Reid was a hard-hitting question about why he has only now, in the last year, focussed on protecting the border, but for the rest of his career did nothing.
Maybe that was a pro forma giveaway to provide cover for hitting Angle for the rest of the night, but still promising.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 6:07 pmIt’s not so matter of money, but tone, you wrote her off long ago, Terrye, we get it. No the kind
ian cormac (6709ab) — 10/14/2010 @ 6:14 pmof people that end up in that slot, are the likes
of Nicole Wallace, who get paid their 30 pieces of silver, for stabbing other candidates in the back, now that is someone who is truly loathsome, IMHO.
DRJ,
In several of the earlier O’Donnell posts this month, I attempted to make this point: If one has doubts about a candidate’s character (specifically their lack of integrity), how then can one not have doubts about what the candidate politically claims and espouses?
Character (or lack thereof) is going to manifest itself in every corner of one’s life. It shapes and influences the whole being, not just this part or that. To me, it’s naive and foolish to think it won’t. It cannot be conveniently discounted or overlooked.
If anything, O’Donnell has revealed herself to be a weak individual, and it would likely stand to reason that once in a position of available power, influence and deal making, she could be more easily be corrupted than one who doesn’t have the integrity issue. That’s the irony.
There is a big disconnect happening, but as typical in the lesser-of-two-evils situation, a voter who doesn’t take lightly the privilege itself will hold their nose and cast their vote for her. More a vote against Coons than a vote for O’Donnell. And that’s what I would do.
Perhaps the broader point is that there seems to have been a serious lack of discernment and judgement exercised by the Tea Party in selecting this candidate. Where was the vetting? Is she really the best there was? If these issues can’t be first recognized as being issues, and then addressed, I don’t see the Tea Party being taken as seriously as they would hope to be. And I would like to see them taken much more seriously.
Dana (8ba2fb) — 10/14/2010 @ 6:36 pmit does raise an interesting theoretical question about where we set limits on voting for candidates.
That is 100%, in my opinion, the story on O’Donnell. There may be some who think she is a great candidate, but I haven’t seen them around here. The issue has been pro and con her against Castle, and pro and con her against Coons. Some arguments may be irrational and wrong, but most of it is a gut check on where you draw the line. There have been very, very, very few instances where I have been enthusiastic about a candidate. On a few occasions I sat it out or cast a protest vote for a third party, but usually it’s a pick of who I have the least reason to vote against.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/14/2010 @ 6:38 pmMy point is this particular choice turned a sure win with Castle
I would note that our party leaders here and all of our betters thought that Castle was sure to win the primary. But he did little positive campaigning, did a great deal of negative campaigning, and he had a record to defend, much of it good, and some very bad. It is easy to talk of O’Donnell as being bad in many ways, and to seek refuge behind the ideological dimension, which is real. But that ignores the very odd, but very real fact that Castle and the party leadership bungled this and turned a ‘sure win’ into this. Add to that the wave year and the Tea Party, which didn’t exist two years ago, and here we are.
Blue Hen (19dbec) — 10/14/2010 @ 6:40 pmDana,
O’Donnell was the Republican Senate nominee against Biden in 2008. She may have Tea Party support now but she was already someone the GOP supported. While I suspect it was difficult to get a more recognized or credible candidate to take the plunge against Biden, I think it’s wrong to act like the GOP wasn’t involved. We’ll never know for sure but I doubt O’Donnell would have gotten as much traction in Delaware without her prior GOP bona fides.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 10/14/2010 @ 6:44 pmBy the way, the questions directed at Harry Reid in the Nevada debate are much more hard-hitting than you see on the national level. Interesting stuff.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 10/14/2010 @ 6:45 pmDana-
Is there a “Tea Party” to vet candidates? It is a grass root movement of people who have had enough of the status quo, not an organization with clear and defined goals and people in established positions of authority with experience to make decisions, and all by the seat of their pants in a big rush. I think Palin herself might have been in a better position to evaluate O’Donnell as a candidate, but realistically, what was she going to do? She could support O’Donnell, support someone else, or stay out of it. Helping to select and prepare a better candidate I don’t think was an option in the midst of the circumstances. That’s where it goes back to the Republican powrs that be. They were the ones who choose to ignore the mood of the electorate.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/14/2010 @ 6:45 pmMD,
I suspect some Republicans would be having the same theoretical qualms about voting for Castle, if he were the GOP nominee. It goes with the territory in times like this.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 10/14/2010 @ 6:46 pmI’m not surprised the professional cynics are against her, at Hot Air, for raising a not unreasonable question, most of these issues have been resolved, from all indications, they haven’t seriously considered supporting a republican in a generation, they like their 50% tax hike, well they’ll get what they deserve, If they had shown an ounce of discernment about Biden in 40 years, the candidate who had a quarter million dollar fine, from that previous campaign for violating spending
ian cormac (6709ab) — 10/14/2010 @ 6:47 pmlimits I would take them seriously
Off topic (Angle-Reid), but this is how you moderate a debate.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 6:52 pmDRJ,
Firstly, it certainly was not my intent to ‘act like’ the GOP wasn’t involved. Please. I just neglected to mention them with the Tea Party. And if anything, it makes it that much more of a negative that she was the GOP nod in 2008, and is the current candidate. My gosh, GOP is not a sophomoric organization – and yet this candidate makes it appear they are, as much as the Tea Party (which truly is in it’s infancy).
Again, if character is in doubt from the get-go, there is no reason to belief it won’t continue to be. Some people are able to ignore that or look the other way. I prefer to see my candidates (and vote for them) with eyes wide open.
Dana (8ba2fb) — 10/14/2010 @ 6:57 pmMy expectations were so low that she wildly exceeded them. I think she will pick up votes but not win. Oh well, the big red wave will wash it all away…
Patricia (9b018a) — 10/14/2010 @ 6:58 pmThe Senate has been much more indulgent with Murkowski, I guess it’s noblesse oblige or something, refusing to exert discipline by purging
ian cormac (6709ab) — 10/14/2010 @ 7:00 pmher from her committeeship, ‘unwittingly’ resurrecting her campaign, and pushing Miller to the side, the candidate with those great credentials, who they strove to prevent his nomination
MD,
If Palin herself might have been in a better position to evaluate O’Donnell as a candidate, wouldn’t you assume that she could have also had a hand in selecting the candidate? The GOP/TP both look to her endorsements and it would seem she would have been given greater influence in the selection of the candidate. I guess my thought is the relationship between Palin/GOP/TP is a rather tangled web, and it’s becoming less clear which of the three is at the top of the pyramid. (I would say it’s still the GOP, but it’s a pretty tenuous hold at best).
Dana (8ba2fb) — 10/14/2010 @ 7:05 pmMy expectations were so low that she wildly exceeded them.
Heh. Aren’t you the smart one!
Dana (8ba2fb) — 10/14/2010 @ 7:06 pmI’d say the GOP is at the bottom of that pyramid, since the Tea Party is more organic an enterprise, and hence seeks to supplant the establishment, deja vu over all again, if one remembers the early 60s. except much of what was speculated and warned against then, has sadly come true. like an Allen Drury novel
ian cormac (6709ab) — 10/14/2010 @ 7:15 pmAgain, if character is in doubt from the get-go, there is no reason to belief it won’t continue to be. Some people are able to ignore that or look the other way. I prefer to see my candidates (and vote for them) with eyes wide open.
Comment by Dana
And Bidens’ character is sterling? And yet my fellow Delawareans voted for him seven times. Castle’s character is great? He could have taken on Biden three times, and chose not to. The GOP here did decide to send O’Donnell against him while Castle hung back and stayed in the House. Vetting opportunities existed and were not taken. Chances for the oh so wonderful Castle to take his rightful place existed; but weren’t taken. ANd then we were told that it was Castle’s turn. Ironically, Beau Biden fell in line, and opted not to run. Christoph was right in that it was the rank and file that failed to follow the script. In case anyone wondered, I prefer O’Donnell’s positions, but voted for Castle, since he had better prospects in the general.
Blue Hen (19dbec) — 10/14/2010 @ 7:20 pmI’m still confused, Dana. Delaware is a small state and it appears to be historically Democratic. Were there really that many qualified Republican candidates who had demonstrated loyalty to the State GOP Party over some period of time?
DRJ (d43dcd) — 10/14/2010 @ 7:21 pmWhere did I write that? Quote please. Because I don’t think I did.
What advantage would it have been for the GOP (or for Castle) to fight a probable losing campaign against Biden instead of serving in the House (and Governor’s Mansion for that matter)?
What — serving in the House of Representatives as a GOP congressman isn’t valid service anymore?
What great accomplishments did O’Donnell have in the meantime?
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 7:28 pmYes they sought not to challenge,and put up token candidate, Copeland, Chatsworthy, Protrack, Ting,
ian cormac (6709ab) — 10/14/2010 @ 7:37 pmlittle wonder growth in registrations are minimal
She ran in the 2006 GOP Senate primary and was the GOP nominee in 2008. They are not only accomplishments but fairly brave, given the political climate in 2006 and 2008.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 10/14/2010 @ 7:42 pm“Christoph was right in that it was the rank and file that failed to follow the script.”
“Where did I write that? Quote please. Because I don’t think I did.”
You criticized the Delaware Republican primary voters. In a way, you are right, since they failed to follow the script that both parties follow here.
Castle’s character is great? He could have taken on Biden three times, and chose not to.
“What advantage would it have been for the GOP (or for Castle) to fight a probable losing campaign against Biden instead of serving in the House (and Governor’s Mansion for that matter)?”
He’s the supposed heavy hitter that is known and loved. And he hung back, and followed the club rules here where the first string never meets head to head. Only four people have ever served two concurrent terms as governor here. It was the last four. They swap offices. Carper moved to governor and Castle moved to the House. And for you to say that is to acknowledge that the state GOP has been wasting money putting up sacrificial lambs
The GOP here did decide to send O’Donnell against him while Castle hung back and stayed in the House.
‘What — serving in the House of Representatives as a GOP congressman isn’t valid service anymore?’
Never said that. But the need was greater trying to take down Biden. But that wouldn’t help Castle, and was against the rules of the game here.
“What great accomplishments did O’Donnell have in the meantime?”
It’s interesting that you chose to add this. I noted that she didn’t have a record of service and that Castle did
Blue Hen (19dbec) — 10/14/2010 @ 7:44 pm“they haven’t seriously considered supporting a republican in a generation, they like their 50% tax hike, well they’ll get what they deserve”
ian – I don’t know how you measure a generation, but Mike Roth Jr. was a Delaware Senator from 1971-2001.
daleyrocks (940075) — 10/14/2010 @ 7:45 pmNot Mike, William
daleyrocks (940075) — 10/14/2010 @ 7:46 pmYes, I don’t question her bravery, certainly not in the public appearance and political sense. I’m referring to “great accomplishments”. I also acknowledge that there’s a first time for winning a campaign and certainly many people (Lincoln) have lost campaigns first.
But recall that I was asking the question to someone who was using the fact that Mike Castle was in Congress during this time as if this was a disqualification for him to be Senator and — worse — as a blight on his character in some way.
That’s silly.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 7:47 pmTo underscore what Ian observed, Democrat Beau Biden was very interested in continuing the foul ‘Biden dynasty’, until Castle declared interest. He then dropped out. Various excuses were floated; he had been ill (but recovered). His NG deployment was concluded, and the so called big case could have been handled by his office. Once that happened, Castle gained the impression held nationally that he had a lock. And if Delaware politics as usual had their way, it may very well have been the case.
Blue Hen (19dbec) — 10/14/2010 @ 7:49 pmChristoph,
I think you are misreading Blue Hen’s comments, or perhaps I am. I think Blue Hen’s point was that Castle wasn’t willing to run for the Senate either because he risked defeat and/or was unwilling to go against the state GOP powers. It may have been a wise personal and political decision, but it doesn’t necessarily demonstrate character.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 10/14/2010 @ 7:53 pmHairy Reed told some whoppers tonight.
JD (eb1dfe) — 10/14/2010 @ 7:56 pm“O’Donnell was the Republican Senate nominee against Biden in 2008.”
DRJ – O’Donnell was uncontested in the 2008 Republican Senate Primary. She came in third in the 2006 Republican Senate primary.
daleyrocks (940075) — 10/14/2010 @ 7:56 pmI think you are misreading Blue Hen’s comments, or perhaps I am. I think Blue Hen’s point was that Castle wasn’t willing to run for the Senate either because he risked defeat and/or was unwilling to go against the state GOP powers. It may have been a wise personal and political decision, but it doesn’t necessarily demonstrate character.
Comment by DRJ
This. He was very willing to play the club game here; the establishment game. Send someone else out to be outspent and run over by Biden. Trade off offices with Tom Carper. Ya know how people credited Castle with ‘working with everyone’? Well handing off elected offices is probably the highest example of that. He and the party leadership squashed Janet Reznicki years ago when she made a primary challenge against him.
And then this year and the TPE arrived. It was not pretty here. I got the polling, the calls, and saw the slugfest. It wasn’t pretty, but was very different from what were all used to.
Blue Hen (19dbec) — 10/14/2010 @ 7:58 pmDidn’t catch that debate. I hear that Rossi and Murray are still going at it. Rossi has yet to bust it open, though Murray seems to be in need of a hearing aid.
Blue Hen (19dbec) — 10/14/2010 @ 8:01 pmThanks, DRJ. I understand. Now it does seem to me that he was the main GOP state power that be at that time and in his judgement, he probably would not defeat Biden, but he could keep a seat in Congress. Then he’d run for Senate later.
It was his prerogative to make these decisions, just as it was O’Donnell’s to make hers regarding her political career and desire to serve when and where she pleased … and felt she could win.
I’m not saying it demonstrates character necessarily, but I am saying it is no proof of lack of character.
At any rate, Castle clearly was wrong to think he’d win the GOP Senate Primary. I certainly agree he should have campaigned harder, sooner.
O’Donnell worked hard. I’m not saying she is without charms.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/14/2010 @ 8:01 pmOI was counting from 1994 on, the last time Roth won, sixteen years can be considered a generation,
ian cormac (6709ab) — 10/14/2010 @ 8:04 pmDRJ @ 157–
that shouldn’t be too surprising. Wolf Blitzer has 33 senate and 435 congressional races to keep on top of. The Nevada folks have only one senate race. And they know Reid–as their senator for however many years, and whatever he did before he entered the Senate (Reid was not on my map before he became majority leader, so I’m not sure what his CV is). So they know his weak spots and the issues most important to Nevada voters. Plus, no doubt, they know that their audience includes Angle supporters, and if they want to keep that audience as a business proposition, they can’t just lie down and let Reid walk all over them.
From the very little bit I caught of the Delaware debate, O’Donnell seemed fairly capable and projected an attitude that she was fully up to the job of being a Senator.
kishnevi (3721d8) — 10/14/2010 @ 8:04 pmMaybe so but most debates I’ve seen at the state level have been more long-winded (with moderators letting the candidates talk for long periods of time) or involved more general questions where the candidates could avoid the difficult issues. For the most part, the questions to both Reid and Angle were focused enough that it was apparent when a candidate was dodging the issue.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 10/14/2010 @ 8:09 pmdaleyrocks:
I understand, and in a sense that’s my point. She was willing to take the difficult task that no one else wanted in 2008. Once again, I don’t know anything about Delaware politics but I suspect some Republicans felt she’d paid her dues and deserved a chance in 2010 when the odds were better.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 10/14/2010 @ 8:15 pmWell you saw the Movie Casino, the sleezy official played by one of the Smothers brothers, that’s Reid
ian cormac (6709ab) — 10/14/2010 @ 8:18 pmEntertaining debate, although O’Donnell underestimates the appeal of ‘Marxist’ rhetoric in government discourse. Chiefly Groucho.
Hail Freedonia!
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 10/14/2010 @ 8:20 pm189…Well, we all needed a bit of nonsense.
AD-RtR/OS! (1f1015) — 10/14/2010 @ 8:35 pm–O’Donnell underestimates the appeal of ‘Marxist’ rhetoric in government discourse. Chiefly Groucho. —
Yeah, that Marxism is always a hoot. Twenty million laughs in Russia under Stalin, sixty-five million laughs in China, two million in Cambodia and North Korea, and on and on… Ho Ho Ho Chi Minh (boat people, 1 million dead)
And Marxism is clearly a religion because after its countless failures over 100 years, people still believe in it.
Groucho indeed.
red (7b5f67) — 10/14/2010 @ 8:46 pm“I understand, and in a sense that’s my point.”
DRJ – I wasn’t trying to be critical and understand your point. They were tough years for Republicans. I was just trying to get facts about her prior runs out into the thread.
Also in response to ian’s point about people from Delaware not voting for a Republican in more than a generation – completely false with William Roth retiring in 2001 and their only member of the House being a Republican, just not the type of Republican ian wants in Washington.
daleyrocks (940075) — 10/14/2010 @ 8:52 pmBut..but…Red…
AD-RtR/OS! (1f1015) — 10/14/2010 @ 8:53 pmHe knew von Braun!
And Dan Rather!
Got it, daley. My problem is I don’t really have a good feel for Delaware so feel free to jump in and set me straight.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 10/14/2010 @ 9:00 pmThese people elected Biden for almost 4 decades. I have next to no faith in their ability to pick a competent politico, and surely not a leader.
JD (eb1dfe) — 10/14/2010 @ 9:01 pmDRJ – I moved from the East Coast to Chicago 30 years ago. I don’t have any feeling for Delaware anymore, although I once had family in Wilmington and visited a number of times as a kid.
daleyrocks (940075) — 10/14/2010 @ 9:04 pmI did pass through on Amtrak about 18 years ago, so I also have that going for me, which is nice.
daleyrocks (940075) — 10/14/2010 @ 9:06 pmI stayed in a Holiday Inn Express.
JD (eb1dfe) — 10/14/2010 @ 9:12 pmJD – I don’t shell out bucks for luxury places like that.
daleyrocks (940075) — 10/14/2010 @ 9:41 pmIt didn’t make me smarter like in the commercials though. Liars.
JD (eb1dfe) — 10/14/2010 @ 9:43 pmI was an OTR trucker for 2.5 years, mainly (but not always) east of I-35. In that time, I hit 47 states. Went through Philly 2 or 3 times a month. And I think I hit Delmarva twice. That area was my version of “flyover country.” Not really much of anything there.
John Hitchcock (9e8ad9) — 10/14/2010 @ 9:51 pmThis will sound like a flip comment but I mean it seriously. I have a hard time relating to such a small state as Delaware. It’s smaller than some Texas counties, and not that much larger than a couple of our cities. As a result, it’s hard for me to view it as all that diverse.
DRJ (d43dcd) — 10/14/2010 @ 10:07 pmDana, I meant it. I heard nothing but bad media spin on her; nothing about her positions or her campaign speeches. I thought she was in command and had Coons constantly evading her attacks. I think she will get some votes out of it.
Patricia (9b018a) — 10/14/2010 @ 10:08 pmDRJ…
AD-RtR/OS! (1f1015) — 10/14/2010 @ 10:24 pmL.A.Co. is twice as big as DE, with 11X the population.
My little town here in “the greater L.A. metropolitan area” has 1/8th the population of DE in an area of only 12sq.mi.
It is a completely “alien” world to those of us in the big city, or big country.
SPQR, presidential candidate and candidate, definitely. Senator from Illinois, probably.
State Senator, I don’t know; I really couldn’t comment on the record of any state Senator from anywhere outside of California. 🙂
aphrael (9802d6) — 10/15/2010 @ 12:45 amDRJ, I have a similar problem: I’ve lived in California since I was 10, almost all of it in a big urban area. (And even the dozen years or so in Santa Cruz was still intimately tied into the rest of California). I can’t imagine the politics of as small a state as Delaware.
aphrael (9802d6) — 10/15/2010 @ 12:48 amThat’s all I’ve really been asking for, O’Donnell, like her sponsor, two years ago, who had none of the drawbacks you impute to her, was under the most
ian cormac (6709ab) — 10/15/2010 @ 4:10 ammeticulous and yet often wrong scrutiny, than the leading Presidential candidate, and frankly the President is now. Those who laughed at Tina Fey’s
pecayune caricature, can enjoy replaying them while reaching for their foreclosure notices
MD in Philly,
I’m starting to think that Palin’s Momma Grizzly strategy has two components. One, get her some wins under her belt and earn her some political favors. Two, set up small skirmishes using conservative women to see what tactics will be used against them.
Xmas (f72f61) — 10/15/2010 @ 4:32 amMeanwhile I feel for you folks, we only have Charmin
Charlie, you have this to look forward to;
http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/10/economic-genius-jerry-brown-we-need-more-welfare-fewer-jobs/
Ah, feets, vote for the lesser evil.
ian cormac (6709ab) — 10/15/2010 @ 4:56 amOD should be a lesson to the TP and GOP/RINO/Elitists. Both sides need to get the snark out of their system by the time the elections occur so that they can be most effective.
VOR2 (c9795e) — 10/15/2010 @ 5:49 amThe nature of the TP is that don’t want central control which has its strengths. The downside is they don’t have the resources to check out candidates in advance to weed out the more problematic ones. This may seem unfair but the Dems certainly will point out problems.
If the GOP regains the house the first message out should be similar to Scott Brown’s and that is “the people won” add to that the mix of TP and “mainstream” GOP winners and a compelling case for expecting some compromise to be effective can be pushed.
It strikes me as ironic, there is one candidate whose views on many legal issues was important, he
hated the political speech aspects of the 1st Amendment, he was frankly envious of the fruits of other’s labors, he had been for all his life, indifferent to contemptuous of American expeditions abroad, alienated from the mainstream political culture, drawn to bitter clinging exponents of violence and strife ‘despite’ his educations. Coons is the fruit of the same tree. Focus on that
O’Donnell is not perfect,but too many have been willing to carve her up like a Thanksgiving turkey, participate in the media frenzy, something
ian cormac (6709ab) — 10/15/2010 @ 6:07 amresembling a two minute hate. Scott Brown, we will be lucky to survive this political office, he helped inflict upon us, Christie, willing to jettison a much better man, when the heat is on him
“Dana, I meant it. I heard nothing but bad media spin on her; nothing about her positions or her campaign speeches.”
Why would you? She doesn’t have any positions. On any issue. Check out her website (christine2010.com) and you don’t find one thing she’s for or against except for what she posted – yesterday – about the conservative Supreme Court she pretty much agrees with.
So this person, who is way more right-wing than Delaware is, and who hasn’t done anything, should be voted into the Senate of the United States?
On what basis?
At least the GOP candidates in other states – CA, NV – have some past experience to prepare them. You can’t argue they’re not qualified to hold office.
O’Donnell doesn’t even qualify for a city council.
JEA (c03c68) — 10/15/2010 @ 7:16 amLike those learned public policy scholar Jesse Ventura and Al Franken, both in Minnesota, the last a longtime guest on P. I., who as I recall failed to pay taxes in 37 states.
ian cormac (6709ab) — 10/15/2010 @ 7:20 amI am sure JEA can point out for us where he made the same argument about Teh Oe’s qualifications for being President.
She does not have any positions if they are not on her website is an incredibly ridiculous position, even for JEA.
JD (45da85) — 10/15/2010 @ 7:35 amBut she did pay off her student loan, thus establishing her financial management bona fides. Shouldn’t Delaware trust her to represent the state’s interests in the federal budget on that basis?
By way of contrast, Coons has no business experience at all.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/15/2010 @ 7:48 amHere’s Ace of Spades this morning talking about … well, he doesn’t call them yahoos … how about “conservatives with less than an ideal grounding in reality”?
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/15/2010 @ 8:36 amActually, if you follow the thread, she didn’t say
ian cormac (6709ab) — 10/15/2010 @ 8:48 amthat,
You mean “conservatives with less than an ideal grounding in reality”?
I’m paraphrasing.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/15/2010 @ 8:53 amYeah, that’s obvious.
It’s basically what everyone else has been saying for ages, except when you decided to claim someone was a “yahoo” and denied this exact rationale before I pointed out you already recognized it.
This is what I meant when I said it’s difficult to have a discussion with someone who inserts and deletes obvious points. I’ve seen you deny obvious interpretations of your views several times in a very short time. You’re either confused or playing a game. Instead of doing that freshman sophist thing, or bashing people’s legit views, try being a little more coherent.
Anyway, you told me you would stop using the insulting language if I wanted you to. I do, so I’m holding to your word.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/15/2010 @ 9:26 amMaybe, XMas, I don’t know.
DRJ-
From my limited experience, Wilmington, in the north, thinks of itself as an “East Coast City”, like Philly or NY. Going south, it becomes largely rural, officially referred to as “Lower Delaware”, but those in Wilmington typically refer to it as “Slower Delaware”.
Other than that, I know the southern tip of Delaware is home to the northernmost cypress swamp, and they had to capture a 4 ft long caiman a few years ago that somebody had let loose.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/15/2010 @ 9:50 amWow, O’Donnell’s cut Coons’s lead in half!
I was wrong. Apparently many people are willing to give O’Donnell a second look. She was smart in the debate, albeit imperfect, and is somehow moving beyond the ethical lapses and making this about the issues. I said she couldn’t win 100 times, and she probably can’t, but this is a great development.
Even if she loses, if it’s in single digits, that’s a major indictment of Coons’s tax record, and puts Delaware on the radar for future contests. A lot of people there are thinking about our country’s problems and picking a fiscal conservative over a fiscal jackass, even when she’s got tons of baggage.
This would be tied or better if that baggage wasn’t there.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/15/2010 @ 10:54 amShe should spend some of her war chest. She said Coons is a “sitting duck”. Let her spend some of her own money with good ads and then go back to the NRSC asking them to invest.
Clearly this Rasmussen poll is ammunition for her request. But the NRSC probably doesn’t want to swing a bunch of money her way with Crist making maneuvers in Florida and with her sitting on a lot of the money she’s raised with less than 3 weeks to go.
But yeah, good for her for moving the needle. She’s articulate. That helps.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/15/2010 @ 10:58 amA little post mortem to this post mortem: it seems no one considers the costs of getting all this money that is broadly proclaimed as being “won” by each candidate. You can safely consider that it cost them 80% or so to gain what they got. That would reduce $100,000 gross down to $20,000 net, give or take only a little bit.
don rickard (626b8d) — 10/15/2010 @ 1:57 pmThat’s probably true for Angle, don. For O’Donnell, she was blessed with Karl Rove raising millions for her with a few loose comments.
I’m really amused Cristoph is complaining about people directing their political contributions where they want, instead of to the more winnable races I’d send their cash to. In another thread, Cristoph calls me a collectivist for noting it’s immoral not to report wife-beaters. How strange.
I applaud those who contributed to O’donnell. Many of these contributions were not going to go to other candidates anyway. These people are putting their money where their mouths are and involving themselves in American politics. A lot of these folks for the very first time.
It’s awesome. And as I think my link shows, some of this money is sending a great message to a lot of independent voters. That Tax Man ad, for example. You can say this is a lost cause. I do not think O’Donnell will win. But the next Delaware conservative candidate has a much easier time thanks to the O’Donnell campaign and these ‘yahoo’ tea partiers.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/15/2010 @ 2:13 pmDude.
As I’ve said before and you’re just intentionally ignoring, I’m not questioning their right to do what they want with their money nor their morality. And that is a big difference. You are calling a beaten wife immoral (your word) for not going to the police to report a crime where she was the victim.
I’m criticizing their strategy not their decency. There is nothing about freedom or classic liberalism or libertarianism that mandates I refrain from criticism of a bad political decision. And that is not in any way equivalent to saying a crime victim is acting immorally because she doesn’t drop a dime on her husband.
Christoph (8ec277) — 10/15/2010 @ 2:18 pm