Here We Go: Handicapping the 2014 Senate Races

Legal Insurrection starts looking the field over. Obviously, it would a good thing to have a majority in the Senate, to block Obama's nominees at least in his last two years.

Grover Norquist meanwhile threatens that the Tea Party will really come out in force if Obama forces us over the fiscal cliff, which he most likely will.

Posted by: Ace at 12:48 PM



Comments

1 Oh God, no. I can't. It is still too soon for me to start thinking about the NEXT election season. I leave it in the capable hands of the rest of the Horde.

Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Hobbit, rooting for SMOD or the Mayans, whichever comes first at December 03, 2012 12:50 PM (4df7R)

2 If Kerry ends up being Sec of State...what are the chances that Scott Brown could take that seat?

Posted by: wheatie at December 03, 2012 12:50 PM (CM59X)

3 I actually don't mind discussing the 2014 Senate races now because aren't some candidate filing due in like mid-March, 2013?


Holy shit, it's December, 2012. How the fuck did that happen?

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Also on Teams Daryl and Glenn. at December 03, 2012 12:50 PM (VtjlW)

4 I can't hear you. La la la la la la la la la la . . . .

Posted by: WalrusRex at December 03, 2012 12:51 PM (Hx5uv)

5 I am hoping Lindsay Graham will be primaried.

Posted by: Vic at December 03, 2012 12:52 PM (YdQQY)

6 If Kerry ends up being Sec of State...what are the chances that Scott Brown could take that seat?


The Mass Dem state committee is asking that same question. Brown would be the front runner out of the gate, at least.

Posted by: fluffy at December 03, 2012 12:53 PM (z9HTb)

7 "I can't. It is still too soon for me to start thinking about the NEXT
election season. I leave it in the capable hands of the rest of the
Horde."

Thank you. United States Senator Sarah Palin.

Posted by: mrp at December 03, 2012 12:53 PM (HjPtV)

8 If Tim Scott challenges Lindsey Graham in a primary, Lindsey can go back in the closet.

Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at December 03, 2012 12:53 PM (QXlbZ)

9 Holy shit, it's December, 2012. How the fuck did that happen?
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Also on Teams Daryl and Glenn. at December 03, 2012 12:50 PM (VtjlW)

Tell me about it

Posted by: 2011 at December 03, 2012 12:53 PM (79ueO)

10 If the GOP is not going to take better control of the polling places and absentee ballots and who counts them then they might as well close up shop.
I cannot say they lost because of fraud but I will say they lost because of electoral seepage.
That means that they do not protect and harvest all the votes that they should be receiving but instead allow Democrats to make them disappear or not be counted.
Democrats vote with a shotgun blast while Republicans vote with a BB gun.

Posted by: NeoKong at December 03, 2012 12:54 PM (w5v/W)

11 If Kerry ends up being Sec of State...what are the chances that Scott Brown could take that seat?

Remote. The legislature wants to go back to having the governor select the new Senator.

Even if he can run, what the hell is the point? Next election he'll face another Juggernaut like Warren and get the shit kicked out of him. Do we really need Scott Brown that badly?

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at December 03, 2012 12:54 PM (J7sV0)

12 Which races will Huckabee and akin wreck this time?

Posted by: M. Murcek at December 03, 2012 12:54 PM (GJUgF)

13 Fifty - four trees at the WH, bitches! Going to spend 4+ million of your dollars on vacation this month! How's that hope and change working out, proles?

Posted by: Queen Michelle at December 03, 2012 12:54 PM (wIgpo)

14 Why don't we run Jay Z Watts in ALL the Senate races he's bound to win one.

We'll make him Alan Keyes version 1.zero

Posted by: sven10077 at December 03, 2012 12:54 PM (LRFds)

15
But...but...perpetual campaigning is like, good for the economy.

Think of all those poor consultants who would be out of work, if we had a lull between elections.

Posted by: wheatie at December 03, 2012 12:54 PM (CM59X)

16 Even if he can run, what the hell is the point? Next election he'll
face another Juggernaut like Warren and get the shit kicked out of him.
Do we really need Scott Brown that badly?



How many people get to be a sacrifice pawn twice in their career?

Posted by: fluffy at December 03, 2012 12:56 PM (z9HTb)

17 Do we really need Scott Brown that badly?

Nah. He's already given lie to the myth that Republicans can win in the Northeast by being moderate Democrats.

Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at December 03, 2012 12:56 PM (QXlbZ)

18
11... Do we really need Scott Brown that badly?

Not so much Scott Brown, it's just that we need all the R's we can get, in order to retake the Senate.

Posted by: wheatie at December 03, 2012 12:57 PM (CM59X)

19 He's got Mary Landrieu's seat as a toss-up?

Okay, I can safely ignore the rest of his post. Miss Piggy ain't going anywhere. Her brother is mayor of New Orleans now. He'll have them whipped into line.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at December 03, 2012 12:58 PM (+yYvY)

20 I think any Macaca would do at this point.

Posted by: Butters at December 03, 2012 01:00 PM (NIZHJ)

21 Not so much Scott Brown, it's just that we need all the R's we can get, in order to retake the Senate.

Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell would be about as effective as Speaker John Boehner.

I think it's time we vote for competent people willing to be an aggressive opposition party.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at December 03, 2012 01:01 PM (J7sV0)

22 Barack Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a malignant traitor.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at December 03, 2012 01:02 PM (5DR1j)

23 "Obviously, it would a good thing to have a majority in the Senate, to block Obama's nominees at least in his last two years."

Anyone who wants to stand on a GOP ticket next cycle has to be absolutely remorselessly grilled behind closed doors beforehand, about what their positions are on hot button issues and what they plan to say about those positions when asked.

If someone doesn't have acceptable, polished answers ready to go and drilled to perfection, they should have their candidacy canned.

No more unrehearsed, extemporaneous blurting out of insane crap about rape pregnancies being something that "God intended" to happen.

We can't afford Amateur Hour any longer. The stakes are too high now.

Posted by: torquewrench at December 03, 2012 01:02 PM (ymG7s)

24 You're going to take the experienced and connected candidates the inner circle forces on you and you're going to LIKE it

Don't even think of running somebody who actually believes that Constitutional and conservatism stuff

I'll shit all over them

After all, I'm just an analyst doing my job

Posted by: Karl Rove at December 03, 2012 01:02 PM (wwsoB)

25 Next up, THE ARCHITECT !!!!

You're a Great American, Karl!

Posted by: HANNITY!!! at December 03, 2012 01:03 PM (wwsoB)

26 If we're going to take back the GOP, this is where we have to do it. Even your "good" Senators need to be primaried- from the Right. Bitch McConnell needs to know how mad we are at weak-kneed Republicans.

Of course, I still like the idea of starting a new Party to challenge the Republicans from the Right. Yes, it'll suck for a while, but it has a better chance of ever achieving actual results than reforming the GOP does.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at December 03, 2012 01:04 PM (5DR1j)

27 Where does Grover Norquist PBUH get the idea that he is Caliphate of the Tea Party?

Posted by: Butters at December 03, 2012 01:04 PM (NIZHJ)

28 mitt lost by 5 million votes and we're talking about the tea party?

Posted by: so joeindc44 is full of all sorts of hindsight now, like JFK? at December 03, 2012 01:04 PM (QxSug)

29 Sorry, but once Bonehead caves on the Fiscal Cliff.... the GOP is pretty much done as far as Fiscal Cons are concerned...

They could not even get their own to vote last election (which is why Obama won)....

GOP, needs a serious facelift, if not replacment, before we even start talking people for the Next Election...

Posted by: Rambo at December 03, 2012 01:05 PM (lZBBB)

30 But...but...perpetual campaigning is like, good for the economy.

Think of all those poor consultants who would be out of work, if we had a lull between elections.
Posted by: wheatie at December 03, 2012 12:54 PM (CM59X)



I blame James Carville for the current state of political discourse. He was the primary proponent of the perpetual campaign.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Also on Teams Daryl and Glenn. at December 03, 2012 01:05 PM (VtjlW)

31 Posted by: Empire of Jeff at December 03, 2012 12:58 PM (+yYvY)

Yeah no offense to the good professor, but did anyone notice his record during the last election? I think every one of his "operation Counterweight" people failed. Even those who were arguably in safe seats from his perspective.
He let's his love (or hate) of a candidate overshadow the facts on the ground.

(Note: This isn't an argument to move more center, just an observation.)

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at December 03, 2012 01:05 PM (i177X)

32 no doubt i will vote some R but largely the party is dead to me

Posted by: unclear on the concept at December 03, 2012 01:05 PM (TAd8I)

33 Who are the Whigs running?

Posted by: Butters at December 03, 2012 01:06 PM (NIZHJ)

34 Repubs are in too much disaray right now to be winning anything. The MFM will make sure that it will be perpetuated too.

I'm not seeing any big changes in 2014. If we go over the fiscal cliff, all bets are off for anything resembling an American election will happen.

Posted by: Soona at December 03, 2012 01:06 PM (9Zv89)

35 I am hoping Lindsay Graham will be primaried.

You do it. You'll have the curmudgeon vote all sewn up!

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at December 03, 2012 01:06 PM (5DR1j)

36 Lets see talk about Senate Seats in 2014 or A-Rod's new injury and is he finished? Yup tough choice. OK I decided, lets talk about tits and ass

Posted by: Nevergiveup at December 03, 2012 01:07 PM (79ueO)

37 Posted by: torquewrench at December 03, 2012 01:02 PM (ymG7s)

And yet, the GOP Professionals.... have gotten us into this mess.

Its that Sign of Insanity thing.... why continue to elect people who have FAILED us?

Posted by: Romeo13 at December 03, 2012 01:07 PM (lZBBB)

38 :::No more unrehearsed, extemporaneous blurting out of insane crap about rape pregnancies being something that "God intended" to happen.

We can't afford Amateur Hour any longer. The stakes are too high now.::::

My PAC has sent out talking points to potential candidates with this very aim. Specifically:

"Of course women can become pregnant after being raped, but we believe we can protect them from both these horrible types of assaults and an equally agonizing decision to terminate or spare their unborn child.

By not dressing like whores all the time, women can make these issues mere footnotes in our American story."

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at December 03, 2012 01:08 PM (+yYvY)

39 It looks like there is a real possibility of letting it burn by voting present as we go full Thelma and Louise.

P.S. I think I kinda, half way understand what is going on. The social contract has been breached and we can no longer ignore it. I don't really mean the Hobbes, Locke, or Rousseau version whereby the people have a social contract with their government (although that has been breached as well). What I mean is that the basic social contract whereby I will act reasonably and in good faith and you will act reasonably and in good faith. We're pretty stupid but even we have finally begun to realize that Obama and the Democrats will not act reasonably nor in good faith. Therefore, there is no possibility of any fruitful compromise. And it doesn't matter what the media says. We're in Hitler-after-Munich territory now.

On the other hand, there is some thought that congress will vote to allow the president to unilaterally raise the debt ceiling whenever he wants. Apparently McConnell was making comments of this nature eighteen months ago. their motive would be that voting for or against debt ceiling raises is heavy lifting and they don't like heavy lifting.

Posted by: WalrusRex at December 03, 2012 01:08 PM (Hx5uv)

40
30...I blame James Carville for the current state of political discourse. He was the primary proponent of the perpetual campaign.

Thank you, AtC.
I've always thought so myself.

Before Carville...politics were still rather civil. He changed it forever.

Posted by: wheatie at December 03, 2012 01:08 PM (CM59X)

41 Let's really drill into the details on this. Let's make extremely specific predictions and brag about our micro-targeting prowess. If there's anything we learned from the last election it's that handicapping races is a super valuable use of time.

Posted by: Gristle Encased Head at December 03, 2012 01:08 PM (+lsX1)

42 Within hours of Obama's reelection, the Left was already at work on the midterms. They'll copy the Claire McCaskill model: actively supporting their preferred Republican opponents (aka the Todd Akins of the world). They'll dump huge sums into competitive races.
The GOP will run just enough novices and douchebags to ensure that the Democrats hold the Senate.
Meanwhile, we've seen the limits of what responsible, concerned citizens are capable of politically. They had a good run in 2010, but now there's just too many parasites who are voting reliably democratic. Seniors will die off, making future Democratic majorities that much bigger. This will get worse with amnesty.
The FSA is now Occupying Amerikkka.

Posted by: Sam In VA at December 03, 2012 01:09 PM (rFiOs)

43 Yeah no offense to the good professor, but did
anyone notice his record during the last election? I think every one of
his "operation Counterweight" people failed. Even those who were
arguably in safe seats from his perspective.
He let's his love (or hate) of a candidate overshadow the facts on the ground.Posted by: tsrblke


Um, no. He was only trying to rally people to those candidates. If we can't support candidates who eventually lose, aren't you asking for Ace to shut down his blog as well?

Posted by: weft cut-loop at December 03, 2012 01:10 PM (JEpGb)

44 I think that Mary Landrieu's a little tougher than a toss-up.

She's got a ton of money, her brother in charge of New Orleans to ensure a high black turnout, seniority, and weak GOP bench to face unless Jindal, Jeff Landry, or Charles Boustany runs against her.

Jindal's unlikely to run, though he would be in the final year of his second term as Governor and is prohibited from running for a third consecutive one.

One of Landry or Boustany will be back in the house, probably Boustany as he has the support of the state GOP.

Landry's a Tea Party guy but one who got fucked by redistricting thanks to the lone Dem seat in New Orleans being protected as a minority majority district.

Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at December 03, 2012 01:10 PM (e0xKF)

45
Lizzie "Run with Dogs" Warren has already proven to be the stupid and we will begin phazing out our coverage of her vapid statements and pressers to avoid embarrassment to the DNC andthe appearance that the voters chose unwisely.

But, if the republicans dare to run against her in six years we will point out what a financial genius, intelligent compromiserand champion of the poor she is and always has been...she is solid middle class all the way baby! We must defeat the republicans with our narrative.

Wait. What?

Oh, Scott Brown? He's a heartless super wealthy conservative extremist. He just isn't good for Mass. or the country.

Posted by: The Media at December 03, 2012 01:11 PM (Ss2Nc)

46 And get crackin' on that Amnesty thing. Karl Rove doesn't want his kids exposed to manual labor.

Manual Labor No!
Manuel Labor Si!

Posted by: Karl Rove at December 03, 2012 01:11 PM (QXlbZ)

47 What I mean is that the basic social contract whereby I will act reasonably and in good faith and you will act reasonably and in good faith. We're pretty stupid but even we have finally begun to realize that Obama and the Democrats will not act reasonably nor in good faith.


Well, we have. The GOP? Not so much.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Also on Teams Daryl and Glenn. at December 03, 2012 01:11 PM (VtjlW)

48
37...And yet, the GOP Professionals.... have gotten us into this mess.

Handicapping ourselves -- it's what we do best!

Posted by: wheatie at December 03, 2012 01:12 PM (CM59X)

49 Posted by: wheatie at December 03, 2012 01:12 PM (CM59X)

Yeah.... and I say this as a Raider's Fan....

The GOP seems to pick leaders, like the Raiders pick coaches... some good ones in the old days, but modern track record sucks.

Posted by: Romeo13 at December 03, 2012 01:14 PM (lZBBB)

50 wheatie @ 2

No chance Scotty Brown re-emerges as a Senator from the People's Republic of MA. None. Zero. Zip. Nada.

Posted by: DocJ at December 03, 2012 01:14 PM (A5uiv)

51 Mitch McConnell could end up facing Ashley Judd for the Kentucky Senate seat?

Nahhhh... voters would put someone who's never held office into the Senate just because they're a celebrity, right?

I mean .. Al Franken must have been student council president or a member of the student senate at Harvard, right?

Posted by: kbdabear at December 03, 2012 01:15 PM (wwsoB)

52 "Where does Grover Norquist PBUH get the idea that he is Caliphate of the Tea Party?"

Pamela Gellar's alias spotted!

Posted by: Shoot Me at December 03, 2012 01:15 PM (qiXMt)

53 Scott Brown was great, with all the great press and SNL skits-he was the next best thing to a Democrat that could be elected (until they got the chance to elect a real one).

Posted by: ejo at December 03, 2012 01:15 PM (GXvSO)

54 :::41 Let's really drill into the details on this. Let's make extremely specific predictions and brag about our micro-targeting prowess. If there's anything we learned from the last election it's that handicapping races is a super valuable use of time.
Posted by: Gristle Encased Head at December 03, 2012 01:08 PM (+lsX1)::;;

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at December 03, 2012 01:16 PM (+yYvY)

55 Posted by: weft cut-loop at December 03, 2012 01:10 PM (JEpGb)

But throughout the races, his handy capping of them was horrible. Granted well all fell victim to that this cycle but he seemed somewhat worse about it.
Heck look at is work on Scott Brown, Yeoman's work on critiquing fauxahauntus, but he just seemed to think that would win over the MA people. (It didn't.)
Frankly, I got a little worried by his blog when it took him so long to let Newt's loss go. I still read it daily, it's great, I just tend to ignore his handicaps for races.

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at December 03, 2012 01:16 PM (i177X)

56 Gosh, it sure is fun being a Republican today. Yes indeedy it is. Fun, fun, fun.

Posted by: Cricket at December 03, 2012 01:16 PM (DrC22)

57 Wow did I really say "handy Capping" great, clearly not enough coffee this morning. (proofread proofread proofread.)

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at December 03, 2012 01:18 PM (i177X)

58 Election talk already? I think I'll slash my wrists.

Posted by: cranky-d at December 03, 2012 01:18 PM (HDtn6)

59 Do not nominate anyone for Senate who does not believe in a rape exception for abortion, period.

Posted by: Jon (not the troll) at December 03, 2012 01:18 PM (WQTcF)

60 Posted by: Empire of Jeff at December 03, 2012 01:16 PM (+yYvY)

Well.... for just $49.95 plus shipping and handling, we can send you the New SarcoMeter! Guarneteed to detect Sarcasm at 50 ft!

But Wait! order now and we'll throw in the New Gaydar attatchment as well!

Posted by: Midmight Movie Comercial at December 03, 2012 01:18 PM (lZBBB)

61 Posted by: Sam In VA at December 03, 2012 01:09 PM (rFiOs)


-----------------------------------------------


I think those of us that stated on the evening of Nov. 6th that the United States of America as we've known it is over were correct. We are ruled by pure democracy now. The republic, as it was prior to last month, is dead.

We have too many socialist/communist illegal aliens and mal-educatedslaves of government now. We've reached and passed the tipping point.

The only way I can see the US Constitution surviving is by a split from DC.

Posted by: Soona at December 03, 2012 01:19 PM (9Zv89)

62 I've re-weighted those predictions using 2012 turnout numbers and they come out as You Will All Die Cold And Alone In The Dark +8.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at December 03, 2012 01:20 PM (+yYvY)

63 My height is not a handicap.

Posted by: Bob Costas at December 03, 2012 01:21 PM (wIgpo)

64
listen to all you eyores!



Posted by: soothsayer at December 03, 2012 01:21 PM (jUytm)

65 McConnell must be primaries.

Absent a total change in GOP leadership, there must be a 3rd party or an article v convention.

As it currently stands, the GOPs some purpose is to exploit its base and advance the cause of liberalism.

The situation with the party is intolerable.

Posted by: Hopeless at December 03, 2012 01:21 PM (n9F1h)

66 I find it hard to care anymore. Anyone else having that problem?

Posted by: Mr. Pink at December 03, 2012 01:21 PM (++kZl)

67 59 Do not nominate anyone for Senate who does not believe in a rape exception for abortion, period.


What I love about liberal 'Republicans' is there 'never let a crisis go to waste' mentality.

How about let's not nominate anybody stupid enough to say he's gonna take poor peoples' paychecks or touch medicare?

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at December 03, 2012 01:22 PM (PVNda)

68 Eeyore was an optimist

Posted by: Cricket at December 03, 2012 01:22 PM (DrC22)

69 What's the downside to being "forced" over the fiscal cliff? 50% of the country voted for the dick, and it's about time it was given to them.

Posted by: kartoffel at December 03, 2012 01:22 PM (OgNv0)

70 pic.twitter.com/XpAsKnxh

Posted by: fluffy at December 03, 2012 01:23 PM (z9HTb)

71 66 I find it hard to care anymore. Anyone else having that problem?
Posted by: Mr. Pink at December 03, 2012 01:21 PM (++kZl)

_____

Dear Mr Pink, You have put your finger on it. Does that sound crude? I find it hard to care.

Posted by: Cricket at December 03, 2012 01:23 PM (DrC22)

72 Well, many of the parasites don't turn out for midterms. At least they haven't in the past. Without their Lord God Zero on the ballot, they have nothing to vote for. That was partially the reason for the 2010 wave. But after R senate candidates lost in states that Romney won handily last month (ND and MT, I'm looking at you)I honestly don't know what think.

Of course, it would help not to have any former witches running for the GOP in blue states.

Posted by: Damn Sockpuppet at December 03, 2012 01:23 PM (YmPwQ)

73 30...I blame James Carville for the current state of political discourse. He was the primary proponent of the perpetual campaign.

Thank you, AtC.
I've always thought so myself.

Before Carville...politics were still rather civil. He changed it forever.


Posted by: wheatie at December 03, 2012 01:08 PM (CM59X)


Amen to this. I'm amazed that anybody gave that hick anything but a flea collar much less any fucking credibility. That his puts-makeup-on-with-a-trowel Repuke wife can stand being around him shows that we have to clean out our own stable of dimwits. Carville should be nothing more responsible than a promoter for SEC football.

Posted by: Captain Hate (more dagny and less curious) at December 03, 2012 01:25 PM (t8uv1)

74 Hey everybody, if we run Scott Brown, we'll win everywhere!

Posted by: A "fiscal conservative" commenter at December 03, 2012 01:25 PM (PVNda)

75 Do not nominate anyone for Senate who does not believe in a rape exception for abortion, period.

Every primary candidate needs to answer that question *before* the primary.

An answer of, "I personally do not believe in punishing a child for the sins of a parent, but, realistically, we are not going to get any abortion reform legislation passed without a rape exception."

Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at December 03, 2012 01:25 PM (QXlbZ)

76 "And yet, the GOP Professionals.... have gotten us into this mess.
Its that Sign of Insanity thing.... why continue to elect people who have FAILED us?"

So far as the "professional" consultantocracy are concerned, two modest proposals:

There were GOP candidates who actually won last cycle. Against the odds and despite the undertow. Promote their campaign managers and consultants to newer bigger responsibilities. I'm thinking of, for example, Dean Heller's staff. Who won by steadily ATTACKING the Democratic candidate, every day of the race. Wow! Who knew that works?

Contrariwise, there were GOP candidates last cycle who had what should have been easily winnable races and foolishly flushed them away. Their managers and consultants need to be driven weeping into outer darkness and never hired again by any Republican candidate, not even in a race for county sewer commissioner.

If these simple rules had actually been followed this year, things might have been different this year as well. I can't tell you how strong the sick, sinking feeling was when I realized that Romney was hiring McCain campaign retreads from '08. True genius there.

Posted by: torquewrench at December 03, 2012 01:25 PM (ymG7s)

77
this morning on CNBC tv:


Boehner's Tea Party Problem

underneath is their stupid countdown clock to the 'fiscal cliff'

and on the other side is a banner: Rise Above

Posted by: soothsayer at December 03, 2012 01:26 PM (jUytm)

78 I find it hard to care anymore. Anyone else having that problem?

No, I find it impossible to care anymore. F-- the GOP.

Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at December 03, 2012 01:26 PM (QXlbZ)

79
and on ABC News it's Boehner is a Scrooge

Posted by: soothsayer at December 03, 2012 01:26 PM (jUytm)

80 I've re-weighted those predictions using 2012 turnout numbers and they come out as You Will All Die Cold And Alone In The Dark +8.
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at December 03, 2012 01:20 PM (+yYvY)


Okay, cold and alone I was expecting. But in the dark? Fuck that!

Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Hobbit, rooting for SMOD or the Mayans, whichever comes first at December 03, 2012 01:27 PM (4df7R)

81 Did y'ever notice, you never hear social conservatives demanding that all the fiscal conservatives be expelled from the party?

Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at December 03, 2012 01:27 PM (QXlbZ)

82 Cold and in the dark? Well better stock on candles then.

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 03, 2012 01:28 PM (osh8D)

83 re: "Did y'ever notice, you never hear social conservatives demanding that all the fiscal conservatives be expelled from the party?"

Because there aren't any in it.

Posted by: oblig. at December 03, 2012 01:28 PM (cePv8)

84 wont matter if we get all the choir to sing on key regarding rape n abortion becoz thats fighting the last cycle and the table is set. dems will come up with a new lie and repubs will stomp their dicks in response, like always.

Posted by: unclear on the concept at December 03, 2012 01:28 PM (TAd8I)

85 That his puts-makeup-on-with-a-trowel Repuke wife
can stand being around him shows that we have to clean out our own
stable of dimwits. Carville should be nothing more responsible than a
promoter for SEC football. Posted by: Captain Hate (more dagny and less curious) at December 03, 2012 01:25 PM (t8uv1)
Exactly, if the shrewish and selfish Mary Matalin is your idea of a Conservative woman, then there is no hope for you. As for the Republican party, it lost because it brought a bent butter knife to a nuclear war. You cannot cede every single piece of high ground to the enemy, let the kneepad media kneecap you, let the cheaters count the votes, and the phanbois and the toke phanphatgirl moderate the debates and win.

Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Wily Wrepublican Wench at December 03, 2012 01:29 PM (kXoT0)

86
I said last week the worst thing Boehner can do is let this drag out. The narrative is being cemented into people's heads every day.

Just make the deal, you orange dummy.

Posted by: soothsayer at December 03, 2012 01:30 PM (jUytm)

87 Posted by: Cricket at December 03, 2012 01:23 PM (DrC22)

I really think that the reason Obama won last election was that Conservatives no longer believe their votes matter.

Even when they vote in the Repubs, the Repubs break every campaign promise... like in 2010 where they PROMISED immediate spending cuts.... yet we got spending increases... or now on the No Tax Pledge.

Look at the TEA party movement.... Millions of energized people in a movement, which was then coopted into the GOP... and is now, as far as GOP leadership is concerned, not a Factor at all....

Those millions tried...they spoke.... and the GOP did NOT LISTEN... so many of them stayed home....

Its REALLY hard to continue to support a group whose only real arguement is that we are not as Bad as the other guy.... election after election...

Posted by: Romeo13 at December 03, 2012 01:31 PM (lZBBB)

88
59Do not nominate anyone for Senate who does not believe in a rape exception for abortion, period.

Wouldn't matter.
As long as we keep knee-capping ourselves by keeping abortion as a political issue...we're fucked.

We claim to be the party of Freedom and Liberty...yet come across as preachy control-freaks by wanting to outlaw abortion.

There are millions of men out there who want to keep abortion legal...probably more than women who do.
Until that changes, it is a loser issue.

Posted by: wheatie at December 03, 2012 01:31 PM (CM59X)

89 Boehner, "The people have spoken so for Christmas I am giving Obama everything he wants."

But remember Obama had a Dem Senate and House for his first two years and still screwed it up.

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 03, 2012 01:32 PM (osh8D)

90
oh, and guess what else?

today we had yet another piece of data showing us signs that housing is starting to recover!!

oh, and consumer spending is down to lowest levels since 2009!

wait, what?

Posted by: soothsayer at December 03, 2012 01:33 PM (jUytm)

91 Posted by: torquewrench at December 03, 2012 01:25 PM (ymG7s)

Once again.... the arguement is 'if' we had run the right people.... but I don't think that is the core problem...

Its TRUST... pure and simple...

Posted by: Romeo13 at December 03, 2012 01:33 PM (lZBBB)

92
Awww..... isnt that cute.

Ya'all think your going to get to 2014.


You guys aint making it to Christmas.

Posted by: Mayan Calendar at December 03, 2012 01:33 PM (nELVU)

93 An answer of, "I personally do not believe in punishing a child for the sins of a parent, but, realistically, we are not going to get any abortion reform legislation passed without a rape exception."
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at December 03, 2012 01:25 PM (QXlbZ)


MFM Headline: R candidate believes a victim of rape committed a sin.

Posted by: RWC at December 03, 2012 01:34 PM (fWAjv)

94 today we had yet another piece of data showing us signs that housing is starting to recover!!


Yeah, and I'm feeling much better.

Posted by: dead cat at December 03, 2012 01:34 PM (z9HTb)

95 You guys aint making it to Christmas.
Posted by: Mayan Calendar at December 03, 2012 01:33 PM (nELVU)

THANK YOU!!!

Posted by: RWC at December 03, 2012 01:35 PM (fWAjv)

96 We claim to be the party of Freedom and Liberty...yet come across as preachy control-freaks by wanting to outlaw abortion.

Yes, damn us and our fascist need to stop murder!

If only we'd drop the issue, we'd all get our real goal of low taxes!

Let us follow the model of Scott Brown, electoral juggernaut!

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at December 03, 2012 01:35 PM (5PkZK)

97 By not dressing like whores all the time, women can make these issues mere footnotes in our American story.

Bluenose.

Posted by: George Orwell what knows 47% got a fever and Uncle Sugar is the only cure at December 03, 2012 01:35 PM (Lxw+T)

98 There are millions of men out there who want to keep abortion legal...probably more than women who do.
Until that changes, it is a loser issue. >>

Yes if any progress is to be made on this issue repubs need to use the dem tactic of lying to the voters and small incremental changes made out of public view.

Posted by: Buzzsaw at December 03, 2012 01:35 PM (tf9Ne)

99 "Did y'ever notice, you never hear social conservatives demanding that all the fiscal conservatives be expelled from the party?"


Oh I've been told that I should be expelled not to mentioned jailed.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Also on Teams Daryl and Glenn. at December 03, 2012 01:35 PM (VtjlW)

100 Do not nominate anyone for Senate who does not believe in a rape exception for abortion, period.

Oh, fuck that - do not nominate anyone for Senate who does not believe that the MSM is a treasonous fifth column which needs to be mocked, deligitimized and attacked 24 / 7, period.

Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at December 03, 2012 01:35 PM (zF6Iw)

101 OT

Is anyone watching the online only webisodes of Battlestar
Galactica: Blood and Chrome? There are 10 eps in total, two eps released
every Friday, and only two eps remain until next year (January I think)
when SyFy broadcasts all ten together in a row.

I think it's
worlds better than the regular series. We're looking at the first
human-Cylon war without the bullshit philosophical and religious
asshattery contaminating the writing. It's just balls-out action. The
young William Adama does a pretty good job and the SFX are decent
enough. I'm not complaining. My only regret is that NBC won't carry this
through with a full series unlike BSG and Caprica. Too bad, it's pretty
good and a lot of other fans think so.

Posted by: EC at December 03, 2012 01:35 PM (GQ8sn)

102 We claim to be the party of Freedom and Liberty...yet come across as preachy control-freaks by wanting to outlaw abortion.

Where did anyone say last election cycle that they wanted to outlaw abortion? Because I never heard that. As far as I know, the only time abortion even came up was when the lefty media (BIRM) pushed the issue.

Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Hobbit, rooting for SMOD or the Mayans, whichever comes first at December 03, 2012 01:35 PM (4df7R)

103 Hollande: Israeli settlement plan contrary to peacemaking
After Israel's envoy in Paris summoned to French foreign ministry, president says 'extremely concerned' by decision to build 3,000 new settler homes, but adds 'we don't want to shift into sanctions mode.' PMO: We won't succumb to pressure

Fuckin French

Posted by: Nevergiveup at December 03, 2012 01:36 PM (79ueO)

104 We could nominate Jesus Christ, the American people would vote against him. The media would turn him into a fucking monster, he would want to bankrupt the nation and fire everyone from their job so he could enrich some evil corporation. Meanwhile, Obama could have 20% unemployment, 40 trillion added to the national debt, and the fucking asshole pieces of shit that voted for him would smile and be yapping to their friends about Big Bird, Binders, and contraceptives while they marched to the voting booth en mass to vote for him. Fuck it, my only thing now is wishing them the most pain possible.

Posted by: Mr. Pink at December 03, 2012 01:36 PM (++kZl)

105 President Barack Obama wants Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz to
stay on as chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, party
officials said on Monday.

She was credited with making a particularly strong push for the
president among women and Jewish voters and in her home state of
Florida, where he eked out a narrow victory over Republican rival Mitt
Romney.






Medusa threatened to turn them to stone if they didn't vote her way

Posted by: TheQuietMan at December 03, 2012 01:36 PM (1Jaio)

106 Oh, fuck that - do not nominate anyone for Senate who does not believe that the MSM is a treasonous fifth column which needs to be mocked, deligitimized and attacked 24 / 7, period.
Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at December 03, 2012 01:35 PM (zF6Iw)


Thix x10^10

Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Hobbit, rooting for SMOD or the Mayans, whichever comes first at December 03, 2012 01:36 PM (4df7R)

107 By not dressing like whores all the time, women can make these issues mere footnotes in our American story."


Posted by: Empire of Jeff at December 03, 2012 01:08 PM (+yYvY)


We aggreeeee!!!!

Posted by: CAIR at December 03, 2012 01:36 PM (lZBBB)

108 Aren't we supposed to call someone if we have an election lasting for more than 4 hours?

Posted by: Truck Monkey at December 03, 2012 01:37 PM (jucos)

109 Posted by: TheQuietMan at December 03, 2012 01:36 PM (1Jaio)

Too late the President is already stoned. On Maui Wowee.

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 03, 2012 01:37 PM (osh8D)

110 I think it's worlds better than the regular series. We're looking at the first human-Cylon war without the bullshit philosophical and religious asshattery contaminating the writing.


I swear by the insanity of cthulhu that the writers of the new BSG and the writers of Lost were in a contest to see which of them could be all sure sure sure we know exactly what we're doing and then fuck it all up the most.


Still pissed they didn't eat the polar bear on Lost. Still. Pissed.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Also on Teams Daryl and Glenn. at December 03, 2012 01:38 PM (VtjlW)

111 I've liked what I've seen so far of BSG:B&C.

How about that finale of TWD? Isn't it awesome the way they let the evil "Governor" character give a GWB speech about "Terrorists" who "resent our way of life" and "want to take what we have."

Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at December 03, 2012 01:38 PM (QXlbZ)

112 gop will always coopt the tea party becoz they fear new parties more than losing your individual vote. they learned that from perot. and that is your only leverage with the gop at present. so do the third party and bring them to the table

Posted by: unclear on the concept at December 03, 2012 01:39 PM (TAd8I)

113 Do not nominate anyone for Senate who does not believe in a rape exception for abortion, period.


Every primary candidate needs to answer that question *before* the primary. An answer of, "I personally do not believe in punishing a child for the sins of a parent, but, realistically, we are not going to get any abortion reform legislation passed without a rape exception."
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at December 03, 2012 01:25 PM (QXlbZ)


Throw the answer back in the questioner's face: "Why are you asking me that? Have you asked my opponent? What does this have to do with Obama's failed economy? Do you have any questions that don't come from the DNC?"

Hit them in the face with their bias. Punch back twice as hard. At this point, I don't give a good goddamn if a GOP candidate wants to boil babies in a pot and serve them for dinner - I want them to Preston Brooks the shit out of Democrats and the MSM (BIRM).

Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at December 03, 2012 01:39 PM (zF6Iw)

114 I could be convinced to donate to the "Primary Boehner and McConnell PAC"

Posted by: slatz at December 03, 2012 01:39 PM (mE0Rl)

115
102...Where did anyone say last election cycle that they wanted to outlaw abortion? Because I never heard that. As far as I know, the only time abortion even came up was when the lefty media (BIRM) pushed the issue.

Romney said he "would like to see Roe v Wade overturned".

In the minds of liberals, that means 'outlawing abortion'.

Posted by: wheatie at December 03, 2012 01:40 PM (CM59X)

116 Do not watch The Walking Dead. It is not even something that shambles and moans its hour upon the stage. Full of groans and gargles signifying nothing.

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 03, 2012 01:40 PM (osh8D)

117 66
I find it hard to care anymore. Anyone else having that problem?

Posted by: Mr. Pink at December 03, 2012 01:21 PM (++kZl)

Yo. I'm going with "buy booze and guns and let it burn". But it's Monday so I might change my mind.

Posted by: joncelli at December 03, 2012 01:40 PM (RD7QR)

118 >>>Meanwhile, Obama could have 20% unemployment, 40 trillion added to the
national debt, and the fucking asshole pieces of shit that voted for him
would smile and be yapping to their friends about Big Bird, Binders,
and contraceptives while they marched to the voting booth en mass to
vote for him.

This. If the unemployed and/or massively over-taxed masses are voting on abortion, the time for appeals to rationality is over. Take the money you would have donated to R campaigns and buy more ammo.

Posted by: kartoffel at December 03, 2012 01:40 PM (OgNv0)

119 So, if the GOP goes away and we have a new party, doesn't it just bottle the old quarrels in a new package? If not, which squabbling groups gets kicked out?

Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at December 03, 2012 01:41 PM (QXlbZ)

120 Anyone working on flipping some of those accidental Democrat Senators (ND, MT, etc.) to I after Obama goes after oil and guns?

Posted by: Jean at December 03, 2012 01:41 PM (iy7de)

121 So, if the GOP goes away and we have a new party, doesn't it just bottle the old quarrels in a new package

Only if we don't leave the center-left retards behind in the shattered remnants of the GOP.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, Trebuchet enthusiast at December 03, 2012 01:42 PM (GBXon)

122
Lindsay Graham seems like he could be vulnerable in theory, but I wonder if in practice. Susan Collins is the best we can do in Maine (I would have supported Olympia Snowe for the same reason had she not retired.)

My early thought is to focus on Republican primaries in Toss-up states, rather than challenging Republican incumbents.

William A. Jacobson
Legal Insurection




Rubber-stamp of the party nomenklatura, Yay Conservatism!

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at December 03, 2012 01:42 PM (kdS6q)

123 I don't give a good goddamn if a GOP candidate wants to boil babies in a pot and serve them for dinner - I want them to Preston Brooks the shit out of Democrats and the MSM (BIRM).
Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at December 03, 2012 01:39 PM (zF6Iw)
--------------------------------------------------------------
Word. What is the difference between boiling babies in pots and ripping them out of the womb before birth? The end result is the same but it is just arrived at via different means.

Posted by: Truck Monkey at December 03, 2012 01:43 PM (jucos)

124 119 So, if the GOP goes away and we have a new party, doesn't it just bottle the old quarrels in a new package? If not, which squabbling groups gets kicked out?


You unify conservatives by attacking Democrats and their notions.

If the new party is aggressive and confrontational, most of the GOP will sign up and be a-ok with it.

We need an attitude adjustment, not a platform adjustment.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at December 03, 2012 01:43 PM (5PkZK)

125 Saw a "Obama 2012 Hillary 2016" bumper sticker last week at the grocery store. What are asshats like that doing out here in the 'burbs?

Posted by: Count de Monet at December 03, 2012 01:43 PM (BAS5M)

126 Even just reading this thread, I see that the repubs will never agree enough on any common ground. Too many liberal repubs. Too many people that want to just play along enough to win a few seats.

I really don't see any "core values" being presented that everyone can unite around. Taxes? A shallow cause in the big picture.

Once again, we're not going to have any fiscal conservatism until we address social conservatism.

Posted by: Soona at December 03, 2012 01:44 PM (EMZGs)

127 Saw a "Obama 2012 Hillary 2016" bumper sticker last week at the grocery store. What are asshats like that doing out here in the 'burbs?
Posted by: Count de Monet at December 03, 2012 01:43 PM (BAS5M)
-------------------------------------------------------
Close to the University?

Posted by: Truck Monkey at December 03, 2012 01:45 PM (jucos)

128 Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at December 03, 2012 01:39 PM (zF6Iw)

In all fairness, they could ask the democrat the question but the answer would be "dude, I support unlimited access to abortion anyway."
The problem is not the asking of the question as much as it's the implication that this person is evillllll.

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at December 03, 2012 01:45 PM (i177X)

129 >>How many people get to be a sacrifice pawn twice in their career?

Does Adlai Stevenson count?

Posted by: LibertarianJim (team #letitburn) at December 03, 2012 01:45 PM (WDCYi)

130 :::124 119 So, if the GOP goes away and we have a new party, doesn't it just bottle the old quarrels in a new package? If not, which squabbling groups gets kicked out?


You unify conservatives by attacking Democrats and their notions.

If the new party is aggressive and confrontational, most of the GOP will sign up and be a-ok with it.

We need an attitude adjustment, not a platform adjustment.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at December 03, 2012 01:43 PM (5PkZK):::

^^^THAT^^^

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at December 03, 2012 01:45 PM (+yYvY)

131 If by "out in force" for the "Tea Party" Norquist means more Akins, Mourdocks, Angles, Bucks and O'Donnells, then by Jan. 2015 the Dems will be back to 60-plus seats in the Senate. The other ghastly irony with this subject is that a significant percentage of the audiences of conservative and faux conservative blogs actually do not grasp the significance of not having a Senate majority. You'd have to explain it to them -- using a puppet show and a flow chart, no less -- and yet they'd still not be able to figure it out.

Posted by: Tsar Nicholas II at December 03, 2012 01:46 PM (pmsMR)

132 By not dressing like whores all the time, women can make these issues mere footnotes in our American story.

This is the age of compromise. We must learn to meet in the middle. Let us propose an odd-even day scheme. On even days, demure modest dress. On even days, underpass freeway slut split crotch vinyl lo-rise jeans and nipple clamps.

Posted by: George Orwell what knows 47% got a fever and Uncle Sugar is the only cure at December 03, 2012 01:46 PM (Lxw+T)

133 Word. What is the difference between boiling babies in pots and ripping them out of the womb before birth? The end result is the same but it is just arrived at via different means.
Posted by: Truck Monkey at December 03, 2012 01:43 PM (jucos)


I hope that was sarcasm, TM. Because if you're serious - well, I'm pissed off, jacked up on cold medication, have a pounding headache and am in no mood to suffer fools right now.

Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at December 03, 2012 01:46 PM (zF6Iw)

134 How about that finale of TWD? Isn't it awesome the way they let the evil "Governor" character give a GWB speech about "Terrorists" who "resent our way of life" and "want to take what we have."
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at December 03, 2012 01:38 PM (QXlbZ)


I loved that. I was laughing my ass off, because the premise is so completely wrong. "Terrorists," I said, "do not 'want what we have.' They want to DESTROY what we ARE. They don't hate us for what we have that they don't. They hate us because WE AREN'T THEM. But you all go ahead and play along in your silly little leftist fantasy world while I sit here laughing at you and dreaming of Daryl stabbing you in the throat with a coat hanger."

Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Hobbit, rooting for SMOD or the Mayans, whichever comes first at December 03, 2012 01:47 PM (4df7R)

135 @132 Um, on odd days. Slut zombie party.

You don't expect me to read my comments for clarity, do you?

Posted by: George Orwell what knows 47% got a fever and Uncle Sugar is the only cure at December 03, 2012 01:48 PM (Lxw+T)

136 Saw a "Obama 2012 Hillary 2016" bumper sticker last week at the grocery store. What are asshats like that doing out here in the 'burbs?
Posted by: Count de Monet at December 03, 2012 01:43 PM (BAS5M)


This morning I had to go to the doctor for my annual physical (blech), and I happened to see an "Obama/Biden 2012" sticker in the parking lot. I walked right over to the car and spat on it. Felt SO good. And it did wonders for my blood pressure -- 112/64!

Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Hobbit, rooting for SMOD or the Mayans, whichever comes first at December 03, 2012 01:48 PM (4df7R)

137 We could nominate Jesus Christ, the American people would vote against
him. The media would turn him into a fucking monster, he would want to
bankrupt the nation and fire everyone from their job so he could enrich
some evil corporation. Meanwhile, Obama could have 20% unemployment, 40
trillion added to the national debt, and the fucking asshole pieces of
shit that voted for him would smile and be yapping to their friends
about Big Bird, Binders, and contraceptives while they marched to the
voting booth en mass to vote for him.

---

Jesus: Father forgive them for they know not what they do.

WalrusRex: Let them burn in eternal fire while being ass-raped by Satan's barb cock!

Posted by: WalrusRex at December 03, 2012 01:49 PM (Hx5uv)

138
Whither was the Tea Party a month ago?

Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie ® at December 03, 2012 01:49 PM (1hM1d)

139 We need an attitude adjustment, not a platform adjustment.

You can't make an attitude without breaking some eggs.

Posted by: George Orwell what knows 47% got a fever and Uncle Sugar is the only cure at December 03, 2012 01:49 PM (Lxw+T)

140 Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at December 03, 2012 01:46 PM (zF6Iw)

Although not eloquently stated, that is an incredibly logical conclusion for a person who believes that life begins at conception to hold. I know, incredible isn't it!

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at December 03, 2012 01:50 PM (i177X)

141 We could nominate Jesus Christ, the American people would vote against
him.


Recall God was booed on the floor of the winner's convention, the Democrat convention.

Posted by: George Orwell what knows 47% got a fever and Uncle Sugar is the only cure at December 03, 2012 01:51 PM (Lxw+T)

142 This. If the unemployed and/or massively over-taxed
masses are voting on abortion, the time for appeals to rationality is
over. Take the money you would have donated to R campaigns and buy more
ammo.


Posted by: kartoffel at December 03, 2012 01:40 PM (OgNv0)




I mentioned in an earlier thread that we have clients who are all up in arms now about the higher taxes they will pay on investments and want to take any and all profits this year to avoid the higher taxes next year. Yet they all voted for Barry because of "war on womyn" and other nonsense like that but now they're pissed at the higher taxes they'll have to pay

Posted by: TheQuietMan at December 03, 2012 01:52 PM (1Jaio)

143 Still pissed they didn't eat the polar bear on Lost. Still. Pissed.

You might be less so after trying bear meat. It isn't good.

I probably would've just stuck to eating fish and the occasional wild boar too.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at December 03, 2012 01:52 PM (SY2Kh)

144 :::You don't expect me to read my comments for clarity, do you?:::

No worries, Orwell. None of us can make sense of your comments; it would be hypocritical to demand that you do so.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at December 03, 2012 01:52 PM (+yYvY)

145 >>>Once again, we're not going to have any fiscal conservatism until we address social conservatism.

Newsflash: we're not going to have any social conservatism until we WIN SOME FUCKING ELECTIONS, so it's pretty easy to figure out which of our feet we ought to be putting forward first, huh? Because fiscal conservatism can win, all over the country. Social conservatism (at least of the "no rape exception to abortions" variety) is a national death sentence now and likely loser everywhere except maybe the Deep South and the Plains states.

This isn't hard. It's not what you'd prefer, but the logic is pretty clear.

Posted by: Jeff B. at December 03, 2012 01:53 PM (5Gq4U)

146 On even days, underpass freeway slut split crotch vinyl lo-rise jeans and nipple clamps.


Cut. Jib. Newsletter.

Posted by: EC at December 03, 2012 01:53 PM (GQ8sn)

147 Posted by: tsrblke (work) at December 03, 2012 01:45 PM (i177X)

Very true. My point is that you lose ground by initially accepting the enemy's premise. There is no - and I cannot imagine one happening any time soon - congressional race that has abortion as its central plank. Abortion questions have no immediate economic ramifications (please note I'm rambling in generalities; the long-term effects of abortion rates do matter, but that's neither here nor there right now). The Obamaphone public is too stupid, too lazy and too biased to sit through a candidate's explanation of his / her abortion position. The question should be treated and answered, at the outset and at any time it is asked, as a deliberate distraction by the media acting as an unpaid collaborator to the Democrat campaign.

Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at December 03, 2012 01:54 PM (zF6Iw)

148
126...Once again, we're not going to have any fiscal conservatism until we address social conservatism.

There are a lot of social conservatives, like Huckabee for example, who are okay with big government solutions...and higher taxes.

They want to replace liberal social engineering with conservative social engineering.
But it's still using the government to force social changes.

Personally, I would like to see the Government become as inconsequencial in our lives as possible.

Posted by: wheatie at December 03, 2012 01:54 PM (CM59X)

149 Close to the University?
Posted by: Truck Monkey at December 03, 2012 01:45 PM (jucos)

Just to one of several area community college campi, so that couldn't be the draw. It's just trees, churches, subdivisions, and cattle horses. None of that hip, trendy, urban sophistication bullshit out here. At least I thought there wasn't any.

Posted by: Count de Monet at December 03, 2012 01:54 PM (BAS5M)

150 Posted by: Jeff B. at December 03, 2012 01:53 PM (5Gq4U)


Jeff, Mitt Romney's crushing defeat is a repudiation of every electability instinct you have.

Fiscal conservatism didn't sell. It failed abysmally.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at December 03, 2012 01:55 PM (DRG6e)

151 From Steyn at NRO - http://tinyurl.com/cbc3gkj, here are some choice tidbits...

...if nothing else, the unfortunate events of November 6 should have
performed the useful task of disabusing us poor conservatives that
America is any kind of “center-right nation.”


You cannot simultaneously enjoy American-sized taxes and European-sized government. One or the other has to go.






The only way this ends well is if someone - extraterrestrials, I assume - bails us out, a miraculous development in the field of energy changes the calculus of energy production to the point that we get oil's benefits at lower prices without any of the icky consequences, Americans decided to either pay for all this government they've bought over the last 40-years or go with a whoooooooooooole lot less until the bill is paid off, or Divine intervention. These are, ahem, unlikely.

So it will end poorly, that is to say, we'll run out of other peoples' money - probably pretty damn quickly. Point being, I don't think it really matters a whole tinker's damn whom we install into The World's Most Deliberately Arrogant Body in 2014.





Posted by: DocJ at December 03, 2012 01:56 PM (A5uiv)

152 On even days, underpass freeway slut split crotch vinyl lo-rise jeans and nipple clamps.


You mean like casual Fridays?

Posted by: Count de Monet at December 03, 2012 01:57 PM (BAS5M)

153 Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at December 03, 2012 01:54 PM (zF6Iw)

Yeah I think as long as you include that in your response you'd be on the right track. What I've learned is the media isn't as dumb as we think it is. If you just said "This is bias, rrrrarrrrggg" they're going to turn, ask the the guy the question and get the answer they know is coming.
Better instead to deflect. I like the idea of challenging the presupposition that our rape response has to be so crappy that we need to be expecting a non-0 number of rape abortions. Deflecting that it's not anywhere near a central issue of any campaign would likely work too.

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at December 03, 2012 01:57 PM (i177X)

154
Yet they all voted for Barry because of "war on womyn" and other nonsense like that but now they're pissed at the higher taxes they'll have to pay

You should gently remind them that they also voted for higher taxes. Also: if they want European style socialism, they need to pay European style taxes.

Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie ® at December 03, 2012 01:57 PM (1hM1d)

155 There are a lot of social conservatives, like Huckabee for example,

Name another one, then.

I can name tons of social moderate GOPers who fucked us fiscally, but nobody ever mentions them.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at December 03, 2012 01:57 PM (DRG6e)

156 Anyone working on flipping some of those accidental Democrat Senators (ND, MT, etc.) to I after Obama goes after oil and guns?

Probably not. They pulled the old "conservative Democrat" bait and switch, where they run as conservatives but will vote liberal the moment Harry Reid needs them to.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at December 03, 2012 01:58 PM (SY2Kh)

157 145: If logic still had a damn thing to do with elections, Obama would never have been President.

Folks right now are willing to overlook fiscal stupidity because they're getting their toys and their pandering. It's a direct link from "get social -> ignore fiscal". What we need to counter it is the equivalent of "This is why we can't have nice things", establishing how the A is undermining the B.

Sadly, I suspect this will be provided by Mr. Pain, Teacher Extraordinare. But when that comes, we had best be ready to assist in the learning of the lesson. And that won't happen without reinforcing the need for some effing self-discipline replacing instant gratification.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, Trebuchet enthusiast at December 03, 2012 01:59 PM (GBXon)

158 "Did y'ever notice, you never hear social conservatives demanding that all the fiscal conservatives be expelled from the party?"

I've repeatedly said that this is a big-tent party and as a libertarian fiscon, I'm fine having socons under the big tent and standing for office. Completely okay with it.

The only thing is, circuses are held under big tents, and the socon wing have repeatedly shown up seemingly determined to make the whole party look like clowns.

If socons get better control of their messaging, great. Bravo. Hasten the day. But it's simply not going to work if we have socons sitting in front of television cameras and talking about pregnancies from rape being "intended" by God, or said pregnancies implying that the rapes in question were not "legitimate" rapes.

That stuff is absolutely fucking bughouse nuts, and it loses elections not only for the socons but for the party as a whole, and the socons need to knock it off right now.

Socons then take that quite reasonable request that they stop blurting out damaging crazy shit, and interpret it as a demand that they be expelled from the party!

Brick wall. Head. Some assembly required.

Posted by: torquewrench at December 03, 2012 02:02 PM (ymG7s)

159 Nobody was selling fiscal conservatism. Romney was painted as a corporatist far more concerned about keeping his investments and CEO and NASCAR owner buddies profitable than about your tax rates, by the media and by his own fucking party members in the primaries, and he failed to break out of that. Ryan was selling it, but he couldn't even get the candidates to buy his plan back in the spring - remember Noot's "right wing social engineering" bullshit? If Republicans come along who can eloquently explain the benefits of capitalism they're smeared by other Rs and regarded as social darwinist psychopaths by the MFM.

Posted by: kartoffel at December 03, 2012 02:03 PM (OgNv0)

160 >>>Fiscal conservatism didn't sell. It failed abysmally.

This is, of course, exactly backwards. We lost (and got pasted in so many winnable Senate races) because Obama was able to drown out our economic and fiscal message by running a cultural/war-on-women "GOP doesn't care about people like you, they just want to get up your vagina and root around" campaign. And it worked. Because people like you, it seems, actually really DO just want to do that.

But I suppose I'm not surprised to see you drawing the wrong conclusions. Because it would be too psychologically devastating to have to revise them, I suppose. The real shame is that you're clinging to the one thing that destroyed us, and threatens to destroy the nation: forefronting wildly, perversely unpopular socon stances that have no bearing whatsoever on the economic health of the country, so that the middle of the country turns away from us as being wild-eyed extremists.

Look, part of me wants to 'let it burn' as we're all saying these days. But another part of me doesn't want to let these fuckers just win, either.

Posted by: Jeff B. at December 03, 2012 02:03 PM (5Gq4U)

161
Fiscal conservatism didn't sell. It failed abysmally.

In the polling booth, after no one tried to sell it, yes, it did.

However, out in Literalville, fiscal conservatism is harsh mistress, and all these trillions of dollars of debt will come due, with interest.

The real fiscal cliff will be that day when the quarterly tax revenue is less than the amount of interest due. At which point you can no longer borrow money because no one in their right mind would expect you to be able to pay it back. And since all your income is going to service the debt, there will be nothing left to pay salaries or benefits.

Ideally, the government would shut down, but since they'll have a supply of paper, ink and printing presses, they'll just print money. Ask the Weimar Republic how that worked for them, or more recently, Zimbabwe. Anyone up for a $10,000 note?

Heh...Salmon P. Chase is on the $10,000 note: http://preview.tinyurl.com/d2abzzl

Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie ® at December 03, 2012 02:05 PM (1hM1d)

162 You should gently remind them that they also voted for higher taxes. Also: if they want European style socialism, they need to pay European style taxes.

Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie ® at December 03, 2012 01:57 PM (1hM1d)



Like all liberals they are hypocrites. They voted for Barry to be socially hip but will turn inside out to avoid paying the higher taxes he's going to hit the "rich" with. The election for them wasn't about economics it was about binders and Sandy Fuck. But now that all of their taxes are going up it's piss and moan time

Posted by: TheQuietMan at December 03, 2012 02:06 PM (1Jaio)

163
155 There are a lot of social conservatives, like Huckabee for example,


Name another one, then.

I can name tons of social moderate GOPers who fucked us fiscally, but nobody ever mentions them.

----------

Name another one?

George W Bush liked big government solutions...and spending.
But at least he gave us some tax cuts, though.

Santorum likes big government solutions too.
Herman Cain seemed to, as well.

People like to say that Romney was a fiscal conservative more than a social conservative.
But Romney wanted to "replace" Obamacare with his own version.
And you don't get much more socially conservative, than someone who was a leader in his own church...and doesn't drink alcohol or coffee for religious reasons.

Posted by: wheatie at December 03, 2012 02:07 PM (CM59X)

164 >>>You should gently remind them that they also voted for higher taxes. Also: if they want European style socialism, they need to pay European style taxes.

I think a lot of people don't quite realize how the swing voters feel: they don't want higher taxes (who does, really, except for the true liberal believers?), but they will damn sure take THAT over electing the Todd Akins and Richard Mourdocks of the world. We can all sit here and shriek about the irrationality of that decision, how those guys don't represent us as a whole, how it's not like abortion is ever really going to be banned ANYWAY...and we're wasting our time, because we're attempting to use reason to overcome an emotional, gut-level feeling.

The only solution is to not make the mistake in the first place. No more Todd Akins, no more Richard Mourdocks.

Posted by: Jeff B. at December 03, 2012 02:07 PM (5Gq4U)

165 >>Personally, I would like to see the Government become as inconsequencial in our lives as possible.

This.

You know what I want? A government that stays out of my way so I can live like a social conservative and not bankroll someone else's choices.

I don't want one strong enough to impose that way of life on others, because that same government will eventually change hands.

Posted by: LibertarianJim (team #letitburn) at December 03, 2012 02:14 PM (WDCYi)

166 Let me save everyone 2 years worth of time. Here is what 2014 will go like:

Around mid 2013 there will be polls showing Repubs picking up 8 seats.

On election night the Dems "win" seats in 4 states with 50.01% of the vote as the urban counties report 818 new votes found in a trunk at 1:45am. This is in states that haven't elected a Democrat to the senate in 90 years and where every single poll showed the Repub winning.

The GOP as usual says nothing, does nothing, Karl Rove blames the tea party. Nate Silver says, hey polls aren't perfect you know.

We end up with 49 GOP seats. Harry Reid sets a record by not proposing a budget for 9882 days.


Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at December 03, 2012 02:16 PM (HDgX3)

167 Mitch McConnell could end up facing Ashley Judd for the Kentucky Senate seat?Nahhhh... voters would put someone who's never held office into the Senate just because they're a celebrity, right?I mean .. Al Franken must have been student council president or a member of the student senate at Harvard, right?

Posted by: kbdabear at December 03, 2012 01:15 PM (wwsoB)

Ashley Judd hasn't had anything to do with Kentucky since she was fucking half the UK basketball team in 1996. She showed up for the Kentucky inaugural ball in 2008, but had bodyguards all around her and wouldn't talk to anyone. Nobody in the state actually considers her a real Kentuckian, and they don't take kindly to carpetbaggers in the Commonwealth.

The only Democrat that could have beaten McConnell was Jerry Abramson, and he has already said he isn't running. Ashley may make a vanity run, but that's all it will be.

Posted by: rockmom at December 03, 2012 02:19 PM (NYnoe)

168 This is, of course, exactly backwards. We lost (and got pasted in so many winnable Senate races) because Obama was able to drown out our economic and fiscal message by running a cultural/war-on-women "GOP doesn't care about people like you, they just want to get up your vagina and root around" campaign. And it worked.

Romney won white women and all women over 55. So you are flatly wrong with your political instincts yet again.

Because people like you, it seems, actually really DO just want to do that.

As usual, fuck off Jeff. Your only goals are to get your damn taxes lower and to pretend you are some political whiz kid. You have no special insight into Politics, Jeff. You have an opinion which is frequently wrong, like the rest of us. Unfortunately, you have it tied to a smug sense of superiority.

But I suppose I'm not surprised to see you drawing the wrong conclusions. Because it would be too psychologically devastating to have to revise them, I suppose.

This is the very definition of projection, Jeff. We didn't lose independents. We lost because minorities turned out and independents didn't turn to Mitt like you prophesied they would.

You thinkminorities turned out because of abortion? Because of social issues?

The fact is, you were completely wrong when you said that Romney would mobilize independents and win on a fiscal conservative message.So I'm unsurprised you are scapegoating a Senate race (which the presidential candidate soundly condemned, mind you) as the reason a President wasn't elected - it is the only thing you've got.

You have to blame social conservatives, because you can't come to grips with the fact that everything you believed - that a moderate running on fiscal issues would win every state - was utterly wrong.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at December 03, 2012 02:21 PM (FkKjr)

169 rockmom at December 03, 2012 02:19 PM (NYnoe)

_______________

I remember the exact same things being said about Al Franken. He hasn't lived in MN for 20 years. He's a joke in the state. Nobody in MN likes carpetbaggers, etc. And look how that turned out.

I'm not saying Judd would be a lock or anything, but this "oh we have nothing to worry about" type of thinking worries me.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at December 03, 2012 02:22 PM (HDgX3)

170 People like to say that Romney was a fiscal conservative more than a social conservative. But Romney wanted to "replace" Obamacare with his own version. And you don't get much more socially conservative, than someone who was a leader in his own church...and doesn't drink alcohol or coffee for religious reasons.
Posted by: wheatie at December 03, 2012 02:07 PM (CM59X)


Romney was not a social conservative. He was a social liberal who said he was a social conservative when he ran for president.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at December 03, 2012 02:23 PM (FkKjr)

171 #159 I had forgotten about Newt's "right-wing social engineering" shit-bomb at Ryan. He really did screw us this time around, didn't he? Almost like Axelrod was paying him.

Posted by: rockmom at December 03, 2012 02:23 PM (NYnoe)

172 Another advantage for Judd is that her opponent, like Norm Coleman, is a squishy asswipe.

Posted by: ejo at December 03, 2012 02:26 PM (GXvSO)

173 I would ask "who in their right mind would vote for that fatassed Ashley Judd for the Senate" except that has been effectively answered.

Posted by: Captain Hate (more dagny and less curious) at December 03, 2012 02:29 PM (t8uv1)

174 #169 Judd's a different animal from Al Franken. She hasn't done anything political except campaign for abortion (many suspect she has had a few), which is not popular in Kentucky. Franken wrote two books about the Right that made him a folk hero nationally among progressives. And still he only won because there wasa third party candidate and then with massive fraud.

The last Democrat Senator from Kentucky was Wendell Ford, a conservative who was a popular Governor before running for Senate. He retired in 1998 and Jim Bunning won that seat easily, even while Republicans got beat up in that midterm election. Before that you have to go back to Dee Huddleston, who McConnell beat in 1984. They're down to one Congressman now out of the 6 in the delegation. Other than the Governorship, Kentucky is as solid a Republican state as there is.

Posted by: rockmom at December 03, 2012 02:32 PM (NYnoe)

175 I can't name an Ashley Judd movie other than Eye of the Beholder.

And that one with Tommy Lee Jones.

Posted by: LibertarianJim (team #letitburn) at December 03, 2012 02:35 PM (WDCYi)

176
170...Romney was not a social conservative. He was a social liberal who said he was a social conservative when he ran for president.

Maybe so.
So did he lose the socon vote because of this? Is that who stayed home?

Personally, I don't want to think that.
I like social conservatives, and consider myself one.
I too, think that abortion is murder.

But I think that the only way to stop abortion, is to stop glorifying the attitude towards "sex with no consequences" which pervades our society.
So what do we do? ...Declare that dicks are a lethal weapon, and cause abortions?
Heh.
That would go over real well, wouldn't it.

I think that Romney lost for several reasons...one of which is that he was characterized as a 'corporate boss', and a lot of people were turned off by the idea of 'voting for your boss'.

Posted by: wheatie at December 03, 2012 02:37 PM (CM59X)

177 12 Which races will Huckabee and akin wreck this time?

A: Shelly Moore Capito announced she will challenge five-term Democrat senator Rockefeller. She is the daughter of a popular governor and won her last House race with 70% of the vote. So, naturally the Club For Growth that brought us Angle and Mourdock will now recruit some lunatic to primary the most electable candidate. Rockefeller would rather retire than face Capito. I'm sure he'll funnel some money through the right's useful idiots like Jim DeMint, CFG and friends.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at December 03, 2012 02:50 PM (i0vBR)

178 The only solution is to not make the mistake in the first place. No more Todd Akins, no more Richard Mourdocks.


Posted by: Jeff B. at December 03, 2012 02:07 PM (5Gq4U)


Yeah those pesky primaries are really a bitch, aren't they? Maybe you think the idea of six more years of Dick Lugar was a great fucking idea but I sure as hell didn't and neither did the voters of Indiana. Nor did Lugar turn out to be anything but a spiteful bitter prick after the primaries.


Maybe the concept of John Cornyn coordinating efforts to capture the Senate should be put in mothballs forever.

Posted by: Captain Hate (more dagny and less curious) at December 03, 2012 02:52 PM (t8uv1)

179 Graham is a ripe target for a primary challenge and would probably be a
slight underdog. Regardless of who the nominee is, this seat will be
won by the Republicans.

If '10 and '12 have taught us anything, it's that it DOES matter who the nominee is, even in red states. I'm all for knocking off Graham, but it has to be with a good candidate. Just being more conservative isn't good enough. It also might be a good idea for all of them to attend Politics 101 training on how to answer the 'so, you don't think there should be an exception for rape' abortion question.

Posted by: Chris at December 03, 2012 02:52 PM (gI9Bk)

180 Posted by: wheatie at December 03, 2012 02:37 PM (CM59X)

Romney lost, because wealthy businessmen do not necessarily make good politicians. He was a weak candidate with no coherent message except, "I'm not Obama," while voters had no idea who he was except unemployed millionaire. They never took his candidacy seriously.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at December 03, 2012 02:53 PM (i0vBR)

181 171 #159 I had forgotten about Newt's "right-wing social engineering" shit-bomb at Ryan. He really did screw us this time around, didn't he? Almost like Axelrod was paying him.

#171 It didn't matter, anyway, because once Ryan was nominated, you never heard from him or his plan again.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at December 03, 2012 02:57 PM (i0vBR)

182 The important thing to remember here, is that in '16, the Dems will only have to defend 10 seat, and almost all of them are solid Dems. We not only need to grab the Senate in '14, but do so with enough seats to blunt the gains the Dems will likely have in '16.

The only bright spot in the '16 Senate elections is that Nevada's super-popular Governor might end up running against Harry Reid (assuming Gov. Sandoval isn't knee-capped by the Ron Paul cultists...

Posted by: The Political Hat at December 03, 2012 03:01 PM (XvHmy)

183 158 "Did y'ever notice, you never hear social conservatives demanding that all the fiscal conservatives be expelled from the party?"

Who are these fiscons and where the hell have they been all my life?

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at December 03, 2012 03:02 PM (i0vBR)

184 The only bright spot in the '16 Senate elections is that Nevada's super-popular Governor might end up running against Harry Reid (assuming Gov. Sandoval isn't knee-capped by the Ron Paul cultists...
Posted by: The Political Hat at December 03, 2012 03:01 PM (XvHmy)

Ron Paul will have long retired since then, and his followers will flock to the son, who will not yet have announced his presidential ambitions at that time. Besides, Rand is more about legalizing weed and gay marriage (like his dad was with the anti war message) than tea party populism.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at December 03, 2012 03:06 PM (i0vBR)

185
Ron Paul will have long retired since then, and
his followers will flock to the son, who will not yet have announced his
presidential ambitions at that time. Besides, Rand is more about
legalizing weed and gay marriage (like his dad was with the anti war
message) than tea party populism.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at December 03, 2012 03:06 PM (i0vBR)
When Rand Paul endorsed Romney, the Ron Paul cultists went even more crazy and started calling him a "Judas"Their reaction is the one reason that I am willing to consider Rand.

Posted by: The Political Hat at December 03, 2012 03:11 PM (XvHmy)

186 Look on the bright side: y'all only have to put up with this for another 18 days.

Posted by: TheREALApocalypse at December 03, 2012 04:39 PM (rFiOs)

187 I predict a guy named Bob will win an election in 2014. Also, a woman named Mrs. something or other.

PS - I'm never wrong.

Posted by: Kevin at December 03, 2012 07:14 PM (ufexm)






Processing 0.03, elapsed 0.0435 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0188 seconds, 196 records returned.
Page size 126 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.

MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat