Specter rejected by Pa. Dems in bid for 6th term
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9FPKIE82&show_article=1

Another Democrat that Obama supported and went out for - and he loses his bid to Sestak.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

The more reliable Democrat wins and you think this is an Obama failure. It's interesting how you guys are so invested in Obama's defeat that you are willing to root for it even if it means failure for the U.S. When he went to argue for Chicago as the site of the Olympics people like you were thrilled that he didn't succeed. Keep it up and let me know how it works out for you.

Voter___ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The more reliable Democrat wins and you think this
> is an Obama failure. It's interesting how you
> guys are so invested in Obama's defeat that you
> are willing to root for it even if it means
> failure for the U.S. When he went to argue for
> Chicago as the site of the Olympics people like
> you were thrilled that he didn't succeed. Keep it
> up and let me know how it works out for you.

Obama backed Specter - yes, it is another candidate Obama supported who lost. I call that a failure.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Voter___ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The more reliable Democrat wins and you think this
> is an Obama failure. It's interesting how you
> guys are so invested in Obama's defeat that you
> are willing to root for it even if it means
> failure for the U.S. When he went to argue for
> Chicago as the site of the Olympics people like
> you were thrilled that he didn't succeed. Keep it
> up and let me know how it works out for you.

BTW - regarding the Olympics... what we didn't support was Obama going out to make such a big play for the Olympics, and him touting it as such a done deal - then having it thrown back in his face as it turned out he didn't swing the vote as he thought he would. He made a big play to make some flamboyant gesture - and it backfired. It not only made him look like an idiot, it reinforced the "arrogance of America" message that folks seemed to think only Bush could push on the world. If he keeps up like this, while he may get a few more legislative victories, they will be a hollow memory for his single term - his advisers are not helping his, or his party's, long-term prospects right now. If you don't see that, you are pretty fucking blind.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Yeah, Shrub backed him too and he is 80 years old. Whatever.

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Voter___ Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The more reliable Democrat wins and you think
> this
> > is an Obama failure. It's interesting how you
> > guys are so invested in Obama's defeat that you
> > are willing to root for it even if it means
> > failure for the U.S. When he went to argue for
> > Chicago as the site of the Olympics people like
> > you were thrilled that he didn't succeed. Keep
> it
> > up and let me know how it works out for you.
>
> Obama backed Specter - yes, it is another
> candidate Obama supported who lost. I call that a
> failure.

Voter___ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yeah, Shrub backed him too and he is 80 years old.
> Whatever.
>
> Registered Voter Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Voter___ Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > The more reliable Democrat wins and you think
> > this
> > > is an Obama failure. It's interesting how
> you
> > > guys are so invested in Obama's defeat that
> you
> > > are willing to root for it even if it means
> > > failure for the U.S. When he went to argue
> for
> > > Chicago as the site of the Olympics people
> like
> > > you were thrilled that he didn't succeed.
> Keep
> > it
> > > up and let me know how it works out for you.
> >
> > Obama backed Specter - yes, it is another
> > candidate Obama supported who lost. I call that
> a
> > failure.

LOL - yeah, right. Whatever :)

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

You have NO idea what you are talking about.

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Voter___ Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The more reliable Democrat wins and you think
> this
> > is an Obama failure. It's interesting how you
> > guys are so invested in Obama's defeat that you
> > are willing to root for it even if it means
> > failure for the U.S. When he went to argue for
> > Chicago as the site of the Olympics people like
> > you were thrilled that he didn't succeed. Keep
> it
> > up and let me know how it works out for you.
>
> BTW - regarding the Olympics... what we didn't
> support was Obama going out to make such a big
> play for the Olympics, and him touting it as such
> a done deal - then having it thrown back in his
> face as it turned out he didn't swing the vote as
> he thought he would. He made a big play to make
> some flamboyant gesture - and it backfired. It not
> only made him look like an idiot, it reinforced
> the "arrogance of America" message that folks
> seemed to think only Bush could push on the world.
> If he keeps up like this, while he may get a few
> more legislative victories, they will be a hollow
> memory for his single term - his advisers are not
> helping his, or his party's, long-term prospects
> right now. If you don't see that, you are pretty
> fucking blind.

Voter___ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You have NO idea what you are talking about.
>

Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University
Attachments:

One thing I remember growing up in PA is that Specter was the only republican that people in my family would vote for.

That does not bode well for the teabaggers.

TheMeeper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> One thing I remember growing up in PA is that
> Specter was the only republican that people in my
> family would vote for.
>
> That does not bode well for the teabaggers.

Yeah, and no one ever thought a Republican would win Ted Kennedy's seat in MA either.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

TheMeeper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> That does not bode well for the teabaggers.

It looks like things are not boding well for the incumbents.

Dane Bramage Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> TheMeeper Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >
> > That does not bode well for the teabaggers.
>
> It looks like things are not boding well for the
> incumbents.


It's mostly a reactionary vote by all the stupid white trash that lives up there and believes everything Glenn Beck says. This isn't the kind of political movement that lasts very long. They'll be all angry again in 3-4 years anyway.

Sestak's a better candidate anyway.

No, This Isn't an "Anti-Incumbent" Year
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horseraceblog/2010/05/this_isnt_an_antiincumbent_yea.html

Quote

...
Ok. So, the idea is that the public mood is anti-incumbent in general, which means we should expect lots of "hand-to-hand" combat between Democrat and Republican candidates as they try to position themselves as being the most anti-Washington.

No. This is totally wrong.

It is a false equivalency being pushed because Arlen Specter is probably going to lose today. If that happens, Snarlin' Arlen will make the fourth high-profile pol that Barack Obama embraced in friendship who was later rebuked by the voters of a blue or purple state. Deeds, Corzine, Coakley, Specter. The White House doesn't want this "narrative" to get out - so they're pushing this alternative instead.

This isn't about dissatisfaction with the performance of the 44th President. Oh no. This is about demanding change in Washington - the very same change, by gum, that Barack Obama has been working so hard to bring about!

"Change that you can believe in" has gone from an over-worked campaign slogan to an unfalsifiable hypothesis. Vote for a Dem, you support the President's agenda for change. Vote for a GOPer, you support the President's agenda for change.

But how many Republican incumbents are in severe jeopardy of losing their seat in Congress to a Democratic challenger?

I count one: Joseph Cao of New Orleans.

Meanwhile, I count more than 20 Democrats in the House and Senate who are in severe jeopardy. Lower the threshold from "severe" to "serious" jeopardy, and I count maybe four Republicans and more than 50 Democrats.

The White House is absolutely, positively correct that there is a divide between America and Washington - but what they fail to appreciate (or, more likely, they appreciate it but want to fake-out the press) is that Washington, D.C. now belongs to Barack Obama.
...

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

TheMeeper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dane Bramage Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > TheMeeper Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > >
> > > That does not bode well for the teabaggers.
> >
> > It looks like things are not boding well for
> the
> > incumbents.
>
>
> It's mostly a reactionary vote by all the stupid
> white trash that lives up there and believes
> everything Glenn Beck says. This isn't the kind
> of political movement that lasts very long.
> They'll be all angry again in 3-4 years anyway.
>
> Sestak's a better candidate anyway.


If they vote in your favor, they're articulate white people, if they vote against what you believe, they're "white trash". Nice....

==================================================================================================
"And if any women or children get their legs torn off, or faces caved in, well, it's tough shit for them." -2LT. Bert Stiles, 505th, 339th (On Berlin Bombardier Mission, 1944).

Lieberman lost his party's nomination too. Guess where he is now? I'm not saying that's what will happen here, I'm just saying this doesn't prove, well, anything.

another one bites the dust.

TheMeeper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dane Bramage Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > TheMeeper Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > >
> > > That does not bode well for the teabaggers.
> >
> > It looks like things are not boding well for
> the
> > incumbents.
>
>
> It's mostly a reactionary vote by all the stupid
> white trash that lives up there and believes
> everything Glenn Beck says. This isn't the kind
> of political movement that lasts very long.
> They'll be all angry again in 3-4 years anyway.
>
You're saying Democrats are stupid, white trash? Check.

The year 2015 in a U.S. High School history class:

Student
Wasnt Mr. Obama the President who cost all the democrats their relection bids and ended up with the worst popularity ratings of any modern president?

Teacher
Well yes Peter, you will receive an A for your assignment as you did your homework. But remember, a one term president can only do so much damage and a valuable lesson was learned by the American public during that time.

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> TheMeeper Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > One thing I remember growing up in PA is that
> > Specter was the only republican that people in
> my
> > family would vote for.
> >
> > That does not bode well for the teabaggers.
>
> Yeah, and no one ever thought a Republican would
> win Ted Kennedy's seat in MA either.
Scott Brown is a moderate. Wait until voters in KY start paying attention to Rand Paul's attacks on Woodrow Wilson and the 17th Amendment. The moonbats have arrived.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

Popularity doesn't really matter. To wit: Gore v. Bush II

G Connally 2nd year public school teacherr Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The year 2015 in a U.S. High School history
> class:
>
> Student
> Wasnt Mr. Obama the President who cost all the
> democrats their relection bids and ended up with
> the worst popularity ratings of any modern
> president?
>
> Teacher
> Well yes Peter, you will receive an A for your
> assignment as you did your homework. But remember,
> a one term president can only do so much damage
> and a valuable lesson was learned by the American
> public during that time.

Bring back GWB and the Right! I hate seeing my 401k recover, jobs being created, and the economy back on track. That shit's for sissies.

What's funny is that the Right is clinging onto the Tea Party movement like a life line. RV loves to state how they're always being misrepresented by the leftist media and that they're a force to be reckoned with. LOL

In 5...4...3...

Voters are finally coming around to what they should be doing. If you are unhappy but still want to vote your party, the place to do it is to vote out the incumbents at the primaries.

The above was a party-agnostic comment, but specifically with Spector why would any democrat vote for him? He pulled a party switch purely as a way to try to stay in office in this election. If he was truly unhappy with republicans because his ideas now differ to greatly he should have done exactly what Lieberman did and go independent.

TheMeeper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Sestak's a better candidate anyway.


I know people that worked with him in the Navy. He did not have a good reputation as a leader- was very abusive etc... the tyrant/bully type. No one could stand up to him since he was an Admiral... until Admiral Mullen was selected as Chief of Naval Operations and immediately upon taking command he fired Sestak- and I mean kicked him out of the Navy. Karma is a bitch.

ITRADE Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >
> You're saying Democrats are stupid, white trash?
> Check.

I'm referring to some very specific tea party dopes I know from PA in real life. Like a chick who lived off welfare for years, used WIC to raise a child out of wedlock, and purposely works seasonal jobs so she can sit around collecting unemployment- that way she can sit around all day smoking cigarettes getting riled up by Fox News and ranting about elitists. Or this other dumbass I know who collects disability but is fit enough to sit in the same bar every night, drnking up the courage to come home and email people racist birth certificate conspiracies.

Maybe these people do need to come out of the woodwork politically.

pgens Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Voters are finally coming around to what they
> should be doing. If you are unhappy but still
> want to vote your party, the place to do it is to
> vote out the incumbents at the primaries.
>
> The above was a party-agnostic comment, but
> specifically with Spector why would any democrat
> vote for him? He pulled a party switch purely as
> a way to try to stay in office in this election.
> If he was truly unhappy with republicans because
> his ideas now differ to greatly he should have
> done exactly what Lieberman did and go
> independent.

The main problem here is you have the (supposedly) popular sitting President backing this guy. That doesn't bode well when all the candidates he has gone out to support have lost their seats.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

TheMeeper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ITRADE Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > >
> > You're saying Democrats are stupid, white trash?
>
> > Check.
>
> I'm referring to some very specific tea party
> dopes I know from PA in real life. Like a chick
> who lived off welfare for years, used WIC to raise
> a child out of wedlock, and purposely works
> seasonal jobs so she can sit around collecting
> unemployment- that way she can sit around all day
> smoking cigarettes getting riled up by Fox News
> and ranting about elitists. Or this other dumbass
> I know who collects disability but is fit enough
> to sit in the same bar every night, drnking up the
> courage to come home and email people racist birth
> certificate conspiracies.
>
> Maybe these people do need to come out of the
> woodwork politically.


I'm not sure how that is possible. Unless you're saying that Democrats have become Glenn Beck fans, you are missing a VERY relevant point.

The Pennsylvania primary is a CLOSED primary - meaning that only registerd democrats can vote for democrat candidates.

Kinda toasts your argument, doesn't it?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/19/2010 08:48AM by ITRADE.

pgens Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Voters are finally coming around to what they
> should be doing. If you are unhappy but still
> want to vote your party, the place to do it is to
> vote out the incumbents at the primaries.
>
> The above was a party-agnostic comment, but
> specifically with Spector why would any democrat
> vote for him? He pulled a party switch purely as
> a way to try to stay in office in this election.
> If he was truly unhappy with republicans because
> his ideas now differ to greatly he should have
> done exactly what Lieberman did and go
> independent.

Gotta remember, Spector was a democrat, who became a republican, who reverted back to being a democrat.

Hell, 6 years ago he won the republican primary by less than 10,000 votes. Clearly, many republicans don't see him as a viable republican.

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> The main problem here is you have the (supposedly)
> popular sitting President backing this guy. That
> doesn't bode well when all the candidates he has
> gone out to support have lost their seats.


The main problem here is Roger Ailes and the RNC have thrown money, PR and support behind the Tea Baggers, and the Tea Baggers are taking out Republican establishment candidates in return. I can't wait to see how the new GOP lunatic fringe does in a general election against normal human beings.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

ITRADE Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> TheMeeper Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > ITRADE Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > >
> > > You're saying Democrats are stupid, white
> trash?
> >
> > > Check.
> >
> > I'm referring to some very specific tea party
> > dopes I know from PA in real life. Like a
> chick
> > who lived off welfare for years, used WIC to
> raise
> > a child out of wedlock, and purposely works
> > seasonal jobs so she can sit around collecting
> > unemployment- that way she can sit around all
> day
> > smoking cigarettes getting riled up by Fox News
> > and ranting about elitists. Or this other
> dumbass
> > I know who collects disability but is fit
> enough
> > to sit in the same bar every night, drnking up
> the
> > courage to come home and email people racist
> birth
> > certificate conspiracies.
> >
> > Maybe these people do need to come out of the
> > woodwork politically.
>
>
> I'm not sure how that is possible. Unless you're
> saying that Democrats have become Glenn Beck fans,
> you are missing a VERY relevant point.
>
> The Pennsylvania primary is a CLOSED primary -
> meaning that only democrats can vote for democrat
> candidates.
>
> Kinda toasts your argument, doesn't it?
Attachments:

Let me tell you how badly the Democratic party will miss Specter.....Specter who? The important vote in PA was for Murtha's seat....enough said.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Specter would probably have been easier to beat in the general election. The guy was a dick but if you want to advance conservative or repub causes, he would have been prefered.

On the other hand, old Arlen is an arrogant fuck and I would not put it past him to run as n independent, that would fuck things up for dems.

I thought the bellweather was supposed to be the old Murtha district race, but it doesn't look like they elected an Obama democrat there b any means,- pro-life,guns, anti-Obamacare, bailouts. This is a victory for who now?

If Specter ran as an independent, I believe he would pull more moderate Republicans than he would moderate Democrats. In the end, I think it would increase the odds of Sestak winning the general.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Specter would probably have been easier to beat in
> the general election. The guy was a dick but if
> you want to advance conservative or repub causes,
> he would have been prefered.
>
> On the other hand, old Arlen is an arrogant fuck
> and I would not put it past him to run as n
> independent, that would fuck things up for dems.
>
> I thought the bellweather was supposed to be the
> old Murtha district race, but it doesn't look like
> they elected an Obama democrat there b any means,-
> pro-life,guns, anti-Obamacare, bailouts. This is a
> victory for who now?


If nothing else...the Murtha seat sucks the air out of the republica/teabag movement...and when push comes to shove a dem from PA will realize on which side of the bread his bread is buttered..and it aint with the republican agenda. Just wait and see how thin non-Obama dem sucks up to mainstream dems come 2012.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Registered Voter Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> >
> > The main problem here is you have the
> (supposedly)
> > popular sitting President backing this guy.
> That
> > doesn't bode well when all the candidates he
> has
> > gone out to support have lost their seats.
>
>
> The main problem here is Roger Ailes and the RNC
> have thrown money, PR and support behind the Tea
> Baggers, and the Tea Baggers are taking out
> Republican establishment candidates in return. I
> can't wait to see how the new GOP lunatic fringe
> does in a general election against normal human
> beings.

How does this relate to the Specter race again? The WH offered Sestak a job ( http://sweetness-light.com/archive/sestak-offered-plum-job-to-quit-race ) in the administration to try and keep him out of the race opposing poor Arlen. That failed, and now you have Sestak - who is much farther to the left then Arlen who tried to play the center - in the race. In Statewide elections, there are a lot of "white trash" democrats out there - and Toomey is very popular. I think they would have lost the seat anyway come the election - Sestak will make it a closer race since there will be a more obvious choice for where the left vote will go, but they will still lose Specter's seat.

And yeah, Specter losing his primary had nothing to do with Roger Ailes or the Tea Party. But you keep drinking the koolaid there WTL.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/19/2010 09:03AM by Registered Voter.

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> How does this relate to the Specter race again?
> The WH offered Sestak a job (
> http://sweetness-light.com/archive/sestak-offered-
> plum-job-to-quit-race ) in the administration to
> try and keep him out of the race opposing poor
> Arlen. That failed, and now you have Sestak - who
> is much farther to the left then Arlen who tried
> to play the center - in the race. In Statewide
> elections, there are a lot of "white trash"
> democrats out there - and Toomey is very popular.
> I think they would have lost the seat anyway come
> the election - Sestak will make it a closer race
> since there will be a more obvious choice for
> where the left vote will go, but they will still
> lose Specter's seat.
>
> And yeah, Specter losing his primary had nothing
> to do with Roger Ailes or the Tea Party. But you
> keep drinking the koolaid there WTL.

Your point was that Obama is 0 for 4. Of course, heaven forbid that maybe the candidates who lost just sucked.

The GOP, on the other hand, have let the genie out of the bottle. The Tea Party is doing a pretty good job of knocking off electable Republicans. Come November, who Obama does and doesn't endorse may be irrelevant. The Tea Party may throw the GOP so far right that its candidates start to become unelectable.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Your point was that Obama is 0 for 4. Of course,
> heaven forbid that maybe the candidates who lost
> just sucked.

The folks he goes out of his way to support (and arguably he did less for Arlen - overtly - then most of the others) have failed. So either Obama is good at picking losers... or....

>
> The GOP, on the other hand, have let the genie out
> of the bottle. The Tea Party is doing a pretty
> good job of knocking off electable Republicans.
> Come November, who Obama does and doesn't endorse
> may be irrelevant. The Tea Party may throw the GOP
> so far right that its candidates start to become
> unelectable.

You mistake far-right religious candidates with Conservatives. If the Tea Party was pushing a heavy religious plank, you would have a better argument. That was the Republicans problem - they allowed for their message to become overly saturated with religion and overt religious backing. The Tea Party is pushing fiscal conservatives, and small Federal government advocates. That has a much larger across the board support, regardless of party. Democrats are suffering anti-big government sentiment from their independent backers - the GOP is in a different boat - and the Tea Party wins are resetting the GOP clock back to pre-1994 in sentiment. The GOP won back then because of big government fears, and then lost their focus on fiscal conservative policies which is where we are today. That is why the GOP is suffering - the Democrats are facing a much larger issue.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Again, what did the candidate who wom Murthas seat embrace that was Obamas beside party affiliation? The rundown I heard on this guy sounds like he's a very conservative, moderate dem.


Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WingNut Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Specter would probably have been easier to beat
> in
> > the general election. The guy was a dick but if
> > you want to advance conservative or repub
> causes,
> > he would have been prefered.
> >
> > On the other hand, old Arlen is an arrogant
> fuck
> > and I would not put it past him to run as n
> > independent, that would fuck things up for
> dems.
> >
> > I thought the bellweather was supposed to be
> the
> > old Murtha district race, but it doesn't look
> like
> > they elected an Obama democrat there b any
> means,-
> > pro-life,guns, anti-Obamacare, bailouts. This is
> a
> > victory for who now?
>
>
> If nothing else...the Murtha seat sucks the air
> out of the republica/teabag movement...and when
> push comes to shove a dem from PA will realize on
> which side of the bread his bread is buttered..and
> it aint with the republican agenda. Just wait and
> see how thin non-Obama dem sucks up to mainstream
> dems come 2012.

On the plus side Specter will have more time to check his blood sugar and check it often! He might even qualify for a power scooter at no cost.
Attachments:

I don't think the TP candidates are going to win in places other than KY and UT.
The TP thing will just be used as a slur to frighten Northeastern voters away from moderate repubs.

Now let's flashback to how it was a "scare tactic" to associate Obama woth Rev.Wright, ACORN or William Ayers. Isn't using a TP association for candidates who really aren't the same thing?

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> The folks he goes out of his way to support (and
> arguably he did less for Arlen - overtly - then
> most of the others) have failed. So either Obama
> is good at picking losers... or....
>

Creigh Deeds was a good candidate? The frigid bitch in Massachusetts who refused to shake voters hands was a good candidate? Obama didn't pick those people. The primary voters in those states did. If a candidate asks for the President to help them, the President can't really refuse.


>
> You mistake far-right religious candidates with
> Conservatives. If the Tea Party was pushing a
> heavy religious plank, you would have a better
> argument. That was the Republicans problem - they
> allowed for their message to become overly
> saturated with religion and overt religious
> backing. The Tea Party is pushing fiscal
> conservatives, and small Federal government
> advocates. That has a much larger across the board
> support, regardless of party. Democrats are
> suffering anti-big government sentiment from their
> independent backers - the GOP is in a different
> boat - and the Tea Party wins are resetting the
> GOP clock back to pre-1994 in sentiment. The GOP
> won back then because of big government fears, and
> then lost their focus on fiscal conservative
> policies which is where we are today. That is why
> the GOP is suffering - the Democrats are facing a
> much larger issue.

No. The Tea Party is full of angry people yelling about Woodrow Wilson. The general electorate is going to look at that and say, "What the fuck are these people talking about?"

As for fiscal conservatives, I would love to hear Rand Paul's answer to a debate question about "Should the government eliminate Medicare." That will be a real election winner for the GOP.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Now let's flashback to how it was a "scare tactic"
> to associate Obama woth Rev.Wright, ACORN or
> William Ayers. Isn't using a TP association for
> candidates who really aren't the same thing?


It's not the same thing at all. If a candidate is railing against the 17th Amendment, it's a losing position. GOP candidates are going to be forced into a position of either embracing the Tea Party or denying the Tea Party. This is going to force them to push away moderates or push away Tea Baggers. This is going to cause some GOP voters to stay home.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

But which candidates are rallying against the 17th amendment?

I don't think the vast majority of TP attendees march to a particular drum besides lower spend/tax, no Obamacare. Some of them will do outright fruity things like the anti-war crowd sure did, but I think you're dreaming to think they are all united under one tent.

Remember FOX News implying Code PInk and International Answer spoke for the dem party?

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But which candidates are rallying against the 17th
> amendment?
>
> I don't think the vast majority of TP attendees
> march to a particular drum besides lower
> spend/tax, no Obamacare. Some of them will do
> outright fruity things like the anti-war crowd
> sure did, but I think you're dreaming to think
> they are all united under one tent.
>
> Remember FOX News implying Code PInk and
> International Answer spoke for the dem party?

This is what they are for (according to the Tea Party Platform being adopted by state GOP parties).

- Abolish the Department of Education
- Adopt the Austrian economic model
- Assert the States Rights provision of the 10th Amendment (I guess this means no Amendments above the 10th Amendment count now).
- Ignore all UN Treaties
- Discard political correctness (apparently the 1st Amendment doesn't matter anymore, either)
- Health Care is not a right (no Medicare or Medicaid, I guess)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

I can find an opinion on anything.

First read this---

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/5/19/02954/1862


Then this---

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2010/05/19/2010-05-19_10_proving_bad_time_for_dems_bam.html

https://www.irehr.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=54:ron-paul-and-the-tea-parties-states-rights-and-the-17th-amendment&catid=20:analysis&Itemid=29

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

It's not an opinion. The Tea Party wants to eliminate the 17th Amendment. Somehow this is supposed to stop corruption. Maybe we should get rid of all elections so that there's no longer an influence of money on elections.

Seriously, these people are going to drive the GOP off of a cliff. Not that that matters to me.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

WTL is just on his talking points roll this morning. This is the new thing they are rolling out in trying to scare folks about how "radical" the Tea Party is, or anyone associated with them. In all truthfulness, Rand Paul is probably more radical then the Tea Party folks are, but in a different way. It will be interesting to see where his election run goes.

But there is nothing "official" to this BS of repealing the 17th Amendment. It is an idea/thought/question being floated by some ultra-conservatives.

Funny, I don't remember seeing "ignore all UN treaties" anywhere lately - if the Senate ratifies a treaty, it is kind of binding, no? Health Care is NOT a right - show me please int he Constitution or the Bill of Rights where it was defined that way and you might have an argument. All you are doing now is pushing some desperate talking points to generate fear of voting for Tea Party backed candidates.

Poor WTL - really having to show your "lunatic fringe" lately.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

WTL, dude honestly you seem like one the the more intelligent posters here, your little O'Meara thing aside, your shit about local stuff is usually spot on and I agree with you.

But when the politics come out and you start linking these weak ass references, I don't know what to say. The Maine GOP "platform" is one group who is writing the state GOP. Could we find some local dem group in California or Oregon that's just as goofy? Probably find one goofier, but who the fuck has time to look?
And what is irehr.org ? Looks like a scare group to me without a lot of substance.


Come on brother, return to the world of the living. You're getting like the kid who farts on the elevator then leaves to piss people off.

I know they're closed primaries and yes I'm talking about registered Dems who are caught up in the teabag Glenn Beck nonsense. They registered dem cuz they were either pro-choice, union employed, anti-Bush, promised something by a local Dem candidate 10 yrs ago, etc. etc. It doesn't make sense which was my point- these people are idiots. I mean really- how stupid is it for a person living off welfare and unemployment to rant about socialism? Maybe the whole anti-govt mentality makes good sense when spewed by Beck and Hannity, but when it's applied to the ordinary lives of these dopes from east bumfuck, it makes very little sense.



ITRADE Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> I'm not sure how that is possible. Unless you're
> saying that Democrats have become Glenn Beck fans,
> you are missing a VERY relevant point.
>
> The Pennsylvania primary is a CLOSED primary -
> meaning that only registerd democrats can vote for
> democrat candidates.
>
> Kinda toasts your argument, doesn't it?

Specter lost to another democrat. Big Whoop! The Democrats will have a real Democratic Senator come January.

The real story is Pennsylvania 12, the only election yesterday where a Democrat and a Republican were running for an actual seat. In a district that went for the old guy for president in 2008, this district overwhelming elected a Democrat, and sent the tea party/Hannity conservative Republican candidate packing.

Memo to Tea partyers, if you force your Republican candidate to run on national issues-defense, war, conservative values, anti abortion, lower taxes, etc. They will lose. Do not believe the crap Sean Hannity is telling you in his latest piece of crap book; elections are won and lost on local issues.

Yeah like if you set up kiosks @local ghetto shopping malls and use radio dj's to support your platform and to drum up voters who normally NEVER would be voting in the first place. Mix in little bit of voter fraud and you got yourself a recipe that can land you in the Oval Office.

The Republicans are absolute morons when it comes to abortion though, reproduction and politics don't mix. When will they get it? Maybe they are just a bunch of closet fags that want everyone to have kids and give them up so the faggots who can NOT naturally have kids can adopt them. Maybe someone else can make better sense of it then me.

It doesn't look like the Sestak "thing" is going away - and every time Gibbs opens his mouth it gets worse.

Of course Holder would announce a criminal investigation into BP now (when they are trying to keep them working on the well - it is always good to distract them with legal issues) - like maybe they should let them get the well capped first.

Secretive on Sestak
Gibbs: 'I'd refer you to the memo'
http://www.politico.com/politico44/perm/0610/secretive_on_sestak_435a43c7-f633-414e-adf7-b50533599c78.html

"A reporter asked Gibbs why he wouldn’t discuss the offer over many months, even as the administration contended that nothing inappropriate had taken place. “I’d have to ask counsel for a better answer,” Gibbs said.

The press secretary also demurred on whether offers made to Sestak in June and July of 2009 — as mentioned in the memo of explanation offered by White House counsel Robert Bauer — were made by former President Bill Clinton and whether there were multiple approaches to Sestak, as opposed to the single phone call he described. “Whatever’s in the memo is accurate,” Gibbs said, adding that he would “check.”

Gibbs said the advisory post at issue “was an unpaid position and didn’t constitute a lot of what you hear,” but he didn’t say precisely what the position offered was.

Pressed on how a widely discussed scenario — where Sestak serving on the president’s Intelligence Advisory Board could have been possible while Sestak continued to serve in the House, which is forbidden by the board’s rules — Gibbs said simply, “I’d refer you to the memo.” "

Yeah, everything on the up and up there. I guess at this point they hope Korea goes hot, or that Turkey, Israel and their Arab neighbors get into a spat not involving Iran. Anything to turn attention from the Sestak time bomb.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Sestak is a big fat zero of an issue. So...back street politics looks a little slimy..so what! Get the fucking job done...

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sestak is a big fat zero of an issue. So...back
> street politics looks a little slimy..so what!
> Get the fucking job done...

Yeah, too bad "street politics" can be against the law in Federal lands. Keep up the denial though Vincetard - it looks good on you.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Vince(1) Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Sestak is a big fat zero of an issue.
> So...back
> > street politics looks a little slimy..so what!
> > Get the fucking job done...
>
> Yeah, too bad "street politics" can be against the
> law in Federal lands. Keep up the denial though
> Vincetard - it looks good on you.

Me in denial? The guy was offered a non-paying govt advisory job! Republicans are so fucking desperate....

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Registered Voter Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Vince(1) Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Sestak is a big fat zero of an issue.
> > So...back
> > > street politics looks a little slimy..so what!
>
> > > Get the fucking job done...
> >
> > Yeah, too bad "street politics" can be against
> the
> > law in Federal lands. Keep up the denial though
> > Vincetard - it looks good on you.
>
> Me in denial? The guy was offered a non-paying
> govt advisory job! Republicans are so fucking
> desperate....

Lol - and you accuse me of believing propaganda and lies? You are such an idiot.

LOLOLOL - omg you are a nut. Go peddle your shit to someone that gives a damn, like your psychiatrist.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Sestak is now ahead in PA polls. Same thing is starting to happen in several toss-up states. It's only June, but if the Republicans think they are going to run away with things this November, they may be sadly mistaken.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sestak is now ahead in PA polls. Same thing is
> starting to happen in several toss-up states. It's
> only June, but if the Republicans think they are
> going to run away with things this November, they
> may be sadly mistaken.

Yeah, I see the delusion is spreading...

Republicans Jump Out To Historic Lead In Gallup Generic Ballot
http://realclearpolitics.blogs.time.com/2010/06/01/republicans-jump-out-to-historic-lead-in-gallup-generic-ballot/

"Gallup's generic polling shows the number of voters saying that they would vote for Republicans rising three points from last week, while the number saying they will vote for Democrats dropped four points. The 49%-43% lead for the Republicans is the largest that the pollster has ever recorded for the party. Moreover, Democratic enthusiasm for voting this fall fell a point, while enthusiasm among Republicans stayed about fifteen points higher. This indicates an even wider lead for Republicans once Gallup imposes a likely voter screen this fall.

There's any number of reasons for this: the public's perception of Obama's response to the oil spill, the shaky stock market performance last week, continued concern about the economy and spending. The bottom line is that, despite what is perceived as an underperformance for the Republicans in PA-12 a couple of weeks ago, there are still plenty of Democrats in trouble for this November"

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

I donanted $100 to Sestak's campaign....he will kick ass.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> "Gallup's generic polling shows the number of
> voters saying that they would vote for Republicans
> rising three points from last week, while the
> number saying they will vote for Democrats dropped
> four points. The 49%-43% lead for the Republicans
> is the largest that the pollster has ever recorded
> for the party. Moreover, Democratic enthusiasm
> for voting this fall fell a point, while
> enthusiasm among Republicans stayed about fifteen
> points higher. This indicates an even wider lead
> for Republicans once Gallup imposes a likely voter
> screen this fall.
>
> There's any number of reasons for this: the
> public's perception of Obama's response to the oil
> spill, the shaky stock market performance last
> week, continued concern about the economy and
> spending. The bottom line is that, despite what
> is perceived as an underperformance for the
> Republicans in PA-12 a couple of weeks ago, there
> are still plenty of Democrats in trouble for this
> November"


Generic polls don't mean shit. Voters vote for people. Take a look at what is happening in Nevada. Reid is starting to close the gap. The Dem is ahead in the Ohio Senate race...it had been a Republican seat.

The fact is the Republican Party is being driven by the radical fringe. And the oil spill isn't going to benefit the party of "drill, baby, drill" because the GOP is more closely affiliated with this kind of shit than the Dems, even if you don't like Obama's handling of the situation.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

If the people of Nevada vote out the influence that a Senate Majority Leader brings to voters there....they are the biggest fucking idiots in the world. But then again Id love to see a first term senator fight against being the atomic waste dump of the world...like it was in the 50s.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Registered Voter Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> >
> > "Gallup's generic polling shows the number of
> > voters saying that they would vote for
> Republicans
> > rising three points from last week, while the
> > number saying they will vote for Democrats
> dropped
> > four points. The 49%-43% lead for the
> Republicans
> > is the largest that the pollster has ever
> recorded
> > for the party. Moreover, Democratic enthusiasm
> > for voting this fall fell a point, while
> > enthusiasm among Republicans stayed about
> fifteen
> > points higher. This indicates an even wider
> lead
> > for Republicans once Gallup imposes a likely
> voter
> > screen this fall.
> >
> > There's any number of reasons for this: the
> > public's perception of Obama's response to the
> oil
> > spill, the shaky stock market performance last
> > week, continued concern about the economy and
> > spending. The bottom line is that, despite
> what
> > is perceived as an underperformance for the
> > Republicans in PA-12 a couple of weeks ago,
> there
> > are still plenty of Democrats in trouble for
> this
> > November"
>
>
> Generic polls don't mean shit. Voters vote for
> people. Take a look at what is happening in
> Nevada. Reid is starting to close the gap. The Dem
> is ahead in the Ohio Senate race...it had been a
> Republican seat.
>
> The fact is the Republican Party is being driven
> by the radical fringe. And the oil spill isn't
> going to benefit the party of "drill, baby, drill"
> because the GOP is more closely affiliated with
> this kind of shit than the Dems, even if you don't
> like Obama's handling of the situation.

You have vast knowledge. Please put numbers on the House and Senate.

Morris: Obama doesn’t have a clue
http://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/dick-morris/100913-obama-doesnt-have-a-clue

Quote

...
America is watching the president alternate between wringing his hands in helplessness and pointing his finger in blame when he should be solving the most pressing environmental problem America has faced in the past 50 years. We are watching generations of environmental protection swept away as marshes, fisheries, vacation spots, recreational beaches, wetlands, hatcheries and sanctuaries fall prey to the oil spill invasion. And, all the while, the president acts like a spectator, interrupting his basketball games only to excoriate BP for its failure to contain the spill.

The political fallout from the oil spill will, indeed, spill across party and ideological lines. The environmentalists of America cannot take heart from a president so obviously ignorant about how to protect our shores and so obstinately arrogant that he refuses to inform himself and take any responsibility.

All of this explains why the oil spill is seeping into his ratings among Democrats, dragging him down to levels we have not seen since Bush during the pit of the Iraq war. Conservatives may dislike Obama because he is a leftist. But liberals are coming to dislike him because he is not a competent progressive.

Meanwhile, the nation watches nervously as the same policies Obama has brought to our nation are failing badly and publicly in Europe. When Moody’s announces that it is considering downgrading bonds issued by the government of the United States of America, we find ourselves, suddenly, in deep trouble. We have had deficits before. But never have they so freaked investors that a ratings agency considered lowering its opinion of our solvency. Not since Alexander Hamilton assumed the states’ Revolutionary War debt has America’s willingness and ability to meet its financial obligations been as seriously questioned.

And the truth begins to dawn on all of us: Obama has no more idea how to work his way out of the economic mess into which his policies have plunged us than he does about how to clean up the oil spill that is destroying our southern coastline.
...

True dat.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Can we retroactively impeach Reagan?
Attachments:

Larry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Registered Voter Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> >
> > >
> > > "Gallup's generic polling shows the number of
> > > voters saying that they would vote for
> > Republicans
> > > rising three points from last week, while the
> > > number saying they will vote for Democrats
> > dropped
> > > four points. The 49%-43% lead for the
> > Republicans
> > > is the largest that the pollster has ever
> > recorded
> > > for the party. Moreover, Democratic
> enthusiasm
> > > for voting this fall fell a point, while
> > > enthusiasm among Republicans stayed about
> > fifteen
> > > points higher. This indicates an even wider
> > lead
> > > for Republicans once Gallup imposes a likely
> > voter
> > > screen this fall.
> > >
> > > There's any number of reasons for this: the
> > > public's perception of Obama's response to
> the
> > oil
> > > spill, the shaky stock market performance
> last
> > > week, continued concern about the economy and
> > > spending. The bottom line is that, despite
> > what
> > > is perceived as an underperformance for the
> > > Republicans in PA-12 a couple of weeks ago,
> > there
> > > are still plenty of Democrats in trouble for
> > this
> > > November"
> >
> >
> > Generic polls don't mean shit. Voters vote for
> > people. Take a look at what is happening in
> > Nevada. Reid is starting to close the gap. The
> Dem
> > is ahead in the Ohio Senate race...it had been
> a
> > Republican seat.
> >
> > The fact is the Republican Party is being
> driven
> > by the radical fringe. And the oil spill isn't
> > going to benefit the party of "drill, baby,
> drill"
> > because the GOP is more closely affiliated with
> > this kind of shit than the Dems, even if you
> don't
> > like Obama's handling of the situation.
>
> You have vast knowledge. Please put numbers on
> the House and Senate.

I already did in a different thread. You can go look it up, if you want.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

Voter___ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Can we retroactively impeach Reagan?


Apparently Sestak wasn't even a declared candidate when the discussion was going on. This is a lot about nothing. Leave it to Issa to step on a bad news cycle for Obama with a pointless claim that will go nowhere.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sestak is now ahead in PA polls. Same thing is
> starting to happen in several toss-up states. It's
> only June, but if the Republicans think they are
> going to run away with things this November, they
> may be sadly mistaken.

yet, there goes the house. wtg, genius.