 |
| Moderated by: Wingie, VT-R, Terry, S., nNeo, mb, Lynne, kC, Heel, Freaks1932, dcbl, D |
|
|
| Author | Post |
|---|
Big_Mike
Member
|
Posted: Wed Nov 4th, 2009 03:36 am |
|
tom_in_sac wrote: Then I eat my share of crow. But thundering stupidity would be to think the three races in NY, NJ and VA were clear evidence of a right-wing resurgence in 2010.
Agreed.
These wins just prove that conservatives are still willing to listen to nice sounding, but still stinky, BS. We're going to have to see if the conservative base will continue to hold the party's feet to the fire.
Libertarian 2012.
Last edited on Wed Nov 4th, 2009 03:36 am by Big_Mike
|
Super Cat
Member
| Joined: | Sat Jul 23rd, 2005 |
| Location: | Basilissa Gata, USA |
| Posts: | 27830 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 4th, 2009 05:13 am |
|
tom_in_sac wrote: AlterEgo wrote: I think you have a major claim on "thundering stupidity" T I S, we can review the conservatives "lack of cohesion" tomorrow when the party takes not only all the races in Virginia, but the governorship of NJ also.
Then I eat my share of crow. But thundering stupidity would be to think the three races in NY, NJ and VA were clear evidence of a right-wing resurgence in 2010. Oh wait, you do. Sorry.
The theological right will never shove the gays back in the closet, the chuch back in the schools, women back in the closet or abortions back in the alley, and I seriously think that's what some of you people mean to do. And it's worse than just stupid to think it possible, it's deranged.
It's not about republicanism, but conservatism.
The approach you people take, the inquisitional exorcism of what you label RINO, is anything but conservative. In point of fact, it's radicalism, as foaming-at-the-mouth nuts as an Earth Firster or a PeTA girl in a cage.
I've always been accustomed to the person who was right calling the person who was wrong stupid, not the other way around. Crazy world, eh?
|
insidedge
Member
| Joined: | Fri Aug 29th, 2008 |
| Location: | New York USA |
| Posts: | 1305 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 4th, 2009 05:31 am |
|
Election outcome, very close, but Hoffman (C) lost, 46% to 49% in favor of Owens (D). And even tho' Scozzafava (R) bowed out she got 5%.
This is a traditionally republican area. A democrat hasn't won there for many years. Conservatives sent a strong message to the republican party for its social liberal choice, but it didn't turn out in a win for either the republican or conservative party. 
Last edited on Wed Nov 4th, 2009 05:32 am by insidedge
|
IronBob2004
Member
|
Posted: Wed Nov 4th, 2009 05:38 am |
|
insidedge wrote: Election outcome, very close, but Hoffman (C) lost, 46% to 49% in favor of Owens (D). And even tho' Scozzafava (R) bowed out she got 5%.
This is a traditionally republican area. A democrat hasn't won there for many years. Conservatives sent a strong message to the republican party for its social liberal choice, but it didn't turn out in a win for either the republican or conservative party.
It purged us of one less scum bag from the GOP. Scozzafava not only screwed her party but her political career in the Republican Party. Good riddance. Now let NY deal with their choice. They deserve what they get.
|
insidedge
Member
| Joined: | Fri Aug 29th, 2008 |
| Location: | New York USA |
| Posts: | 1305 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 4th, 2009 06:04 am |
|
IronBob2004 wrote: insidedge wrote: Election outcome, very close, but Hoffman (C) lost, 46% to 49% in favor of Owens (D). And even tho' Scozzafava (R) bowed out she got 5%.
This is a traditionally republican area. A democrat hasn't won there for many years. Conservatives sent a strong message to the republican party for its social liberal choice, but it didn't turn out in a win for either the republican or conservative party.
It purged us of one less scum bag from the GOP. Scozzafava not only screwed her party but her political career in the Republican Party. Good riddance. Now let NY deal with their choice. They deserve what they get.
How about the 11 guys in the pizza place who made the decision to run her? And dismissed Hoffman? Wonder how they're sleeping tonight. Considering how well Hoffman did as a 3rd party candidate, seems that if they'd chosen him to start with he'd have been a shoo-in.
|
cloudman
Member
| Joined: | Fri Aug 6th, 2004 |
| Location: | Lone Star State |
| Posts: | 14830 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 4th, 2009 02:32 pm |
|
Tsalagi1 wrote: AlterEgo wrote: lightoftruth wrote: This should be the first win in the "C" column. Are we watching the birth of a viable national third party???? No NO NO NO NO NO third party.
What we need is a conservative take over of the republican party. We need to exorcise the RINO's from the party, kick out the current leadership, force them to switch to the dem party. because that is where they belong. They have more in common with the dems than they do with us.
Sooo...we moderates must leave a Party because we're not idealogically pure?
Why not?
That 's what you want so called "social conservatives" to do and they outnumber so called "moderates".
Scozzafava was neither. She is a true RINO and voted to the left of most "moderate" democrats.
|
Big_Mike
Member
|
Posted: Wed Nov 4th, 2009 02:45 pm |
|
cloudman wrote: Tsalagi1 wrote: AlterEgo wrote: lightoftruth wrote: This should be the first win in the "C" column. Are we watching the birth of a viable national third party???? No NO NO NO NO NO third party.
What we need is a conservative take over of the republican party. We need to exorcise the RINO's from the party, kick out the current leadership, force them to switch to the dem party. because that is where they belong. They have more in common with the dems than they do with us.
Sooo...we moderates must leave a Party because we're not idealogically pure?
Why not?
That 's what you want so called "social conservatives" to do and they outnumber so called "moderates".
Scozzafava was neither. She is a true RINO and voted to the left of most "moderate" democrats.
She's to the left of Lieberman...
|
tom_in_sac
Member
| Joined: | Wed Nov 7th, 2007 |
| Location: | Sacramento, CA |
| Posts: | 2027 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 4th, 2009 05:18 pm |
|
IronBob2004 wrote: It purged us of one less scum bag from the GOP. Scozzafava not only screwed her party but her political career in the Republican Party. Good riddance. Now let NY deal with their choice. They deserve what they get.
And when all your "scumbags" are purged for the sake of ideological purity, you'll be able to count the number of conservatives holding office on your fingers. Assuming you can count on your fingers.
|
Lensy
Member
| Joined: | Sat Jul 12th, 2008 |
| Location: | Photo Finish! |
| Posts: | 5246 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 4th, 2009 07:07 pm |
|
| oops. Wrong board. Last edited on Wed Nov 4th, 2009 07:07 pm by Lensy
|
Lynne
S. Moderator
| Joined: | Fri Oct 12th, 2007 |
| Location: | Good Times |
| Posts: | 2044 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 4th, 2009 08:03 pm |
|
insidedge wrote: Election outcome, very close, but Hoffman (C) lost, 46% to 49% in favor of Owens (D). And even tho' Scozzafava (R) bowed out she got 5%.
This is a traditionally republican area. A democrat hasn't won there for many years. Conservatives sent a strong message to the republican party for its social liberal choice, but it didn't turn out in a win for either the republican or conservative party.
You need to quit thinking in such narrow terms of republican and democrat. Look at their voting records. It didn't matter who won because essentially, they were both liberal (fiscally and socially). Neither one would have represented me or a large part of the republican party. A big clue should be when the (R) dropped out, she asked her backers to support the (D).
The people need to vote on a referendum to have a primary decide their candidate, because I guarantee you, DeDe -- pronounced (D) (D) would not have been the people's choice.
|
Thoughtless
Member
|
Posted: Wed Nov 4th, 2009 10:07 pm |
|
AlterEgo wrote: lightoftruth wrote: This should be the first win in the "C" column. Are we watching the birth of a viable national third party???? No NO NO NO NO NO third party.
What we need is a conservative take over of the republican party. We need to exorcise the RINO's from the party, kick out the current leadership, force them to switch to the dem party. because that is where they belong. They have more in common with the dems than they do with us.
Your statement is contradictory.
If your intention is to reduce the number of people that vote Republican, then a third party would work much better, then trying to convert Republicans to Democrats.
|
cloudman
Member
| Joined: | Fri Aug 6th, 2004 |
| Location: | Lone Star State |
| Posts: | 14830 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 4th, 2009 10:19 pm |
|
Big_Mike wrote: cloudman wrote: Tsalagi1 wrote: AlterEgo wrote: lightoftruth wrote: This should be the first win in the "C" column. Are we watching the birth of a viable national third party???? No NO NO NO NO NO third party.
What we need is a conservative take over of the republican party. We need to exorcise the RINO's from the party, kick out the current leadership, force them to switch to the dem party. because that is where they belong. They have more in common with the dems than they do with us.
Sooo...we moderates must leave a Party because we're not idealogically pure?
Why not?
That 's what you want so called "social conservatives" to do and they outnumber so called "moderates".
Scozzafava was neither. She is a true RINO and voted to the left of most "moderate" democrats.
She's to the left of Lieberman...
She's also way to the left of the democrat that won. He's what everyone calls a "blue dog" these days.
|
tom_in_sac
Member
| Joined: | Wed Nov 7th, 2007 |
| Location: | Sacramento, CA |
| Posts: | 2027 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 4th, 2009 10:19 pm |
|
Super Cat wrote: I've always been accustomed to the person who was right calling the person who was wrong stupid, not the other way around. Crazy world, eh?
Not so crazy after all. I said Owens would win, and now that the votes are counted, he did. That extends the Dem grip on the House.
The good news is wins in NJ and VA, and in NJ, it's a GOP moderate that won on, get this, issues like money and taxes, not abortion or gay marriage.
So, I think last night's election does show that you who believe that the salvation of the US and the GOP is a radical shift to the right are in fact those in denial of reality.
In other words, stupid.
|
cloudman
Member
| Joined: | Fri Aug 6th, 2004 |
| Location: | Lone Star State |
| Posts: | 14830 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 4th, 2009 10:35 pm |
|
tom_in_sac wrote: Super Cat wrote: I've always been accustomed to the person who was right calling the person who was wrong stupid, not the other way around. Crazy world, eh?
Not so crazy after all. I said Owens would win, and now that the votes are counted, he did. That extends the Dem grip on the House.
The election of Scuzzyfava would have done the same.
Owens is not an ideological democrat. He was a registered independent before switching parties to run.
Owens took a decidedly moderate line on health care restructuring, saying he does not support a public option available to anyone--the crux of the restructuring put forward by President Obama. He said some health plans in Congress not longer include the idea of a public option. This stance is gaining some traction in the Senate.
|
Big_Mike
Member
|
Posted: Wed Nov 4th, 2009 10:49 pm |
|
tom_in_sac wrote: Super Cat wrote: I've always been accustomed to the person who was right calling the person who was wrong stupid, not the other way around. Crazy world, eh?
Not so crazy after all. I said Owens would win, and now that the votes are counted, he did. That extends the Dem grip on the House.
LOL
You said he'd win by a horse length. +5 points was your prediction wasn't it?
Well, had the retarded 5% who still voted Scozzafava pulled their heads out of their arses and actually voted for someone in the race, it might have been different.
Either way. The fact that the libtards have clamored to this previously scoffed at race as proof of their winning should tell you that conservatives scored a victory last night.
|
tom_in_sac
Member
| Joined: | Wed Nov 7th, 2007 |
| Location: | Sacramento, CA |
| Posts: | 2027 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 5th, 2009 12:52 am |
|
Big_Mike wrote: You said he'd win by a horse length. +5 points was your prediction wasn't it?
And you implied (but didn't commit to) the reverse, that Hoffman would win by a big margin. At least I made a commitment, and I was closer to the truth than you were.
What this and other races should be showing the fundamentalist recto-craniums is that it's the independents that are making the races now. The Dems have registration advantages just about everywhere, now, but they can still lose if the people in the freakin' CENTER don't like what they're seeing and hearing.
I just don't know what kind of sledge hammer it's going to take to penetrate the thick fundamentalist skulls, or if there's anything in there to reach anyway.
|
AlterEgo
Member
| Joined: | Sun Aug 23rd, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 166 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 5th, 2009 01:09 am |
|
tom_in_sac wrote: AlterEgo wrote: I think you have a major claim on "thundering stupidity" T I S, we can review the conservatives "lack of cohesion" tomorrow when the party takes not only all the races in Virginia, but the governorship of NJ also.
Then I eat my share of crow. But thundering stupidity would be to think the three races in NY, NJ and VA were clear evidence of a right-wing resurgence in 2010. Oh wait, you do. Sorry.
The theological right will never shove the gays back in the closet, the chuch back in the schools, women back in the closet or abortions back in the alley, and I seriously think that's what some of you people mean to do. And it's worse than just stupid to think it possible, it's deranged.
It's not about republicanism, but conservatism.
The approach you people take, the inquisitional exorcism of what you label RINO, is anything but conservative. In point of fact, it's radicalism, as foaming-at-the-mouth nuts as an Earth Firster or a PeTA girl in a cage.
"the inquisitional exorcism of what you label RINO, is anything but conservative".
How would you know? You're a RINO, a moderate, and you have no place to go. The dems don't want you, they want to get rid of the blue dogs. We don't want you because you only ruin the republican party with your lack of core beliefs, you don't have the support of the libertarians because they, like conservatives have principles too, and you don't have your own political party.
You miss the whole point TIS, WE ARE NOT GOING TO LET MODS. or RINO's, or YOU define what conservative is anymore. Nor do we care to let RINO's or Mods. relegate the republican party to political second class status any longer.
The fact of the matter is that a recent Rasmuessen poll shows that 40% of the people in this country currently identify themselves as conservative, only 19% identify themselves as liberal, and independents who identified themselves as conservative rose from 26% in 2005 to 33% as of May, 2009. Even registered dems calling themselves conservative went up to 8%.
Where does that leave you moderates, you RINO's? NO WHERE! Out in the cold. Politically impotent. No more free rides. Pick a side TIS, or get out of the way! Cause no one is gonna let you play both sides of the board any longer.
You know what they say, if you play in the middle of the road you'll get run over from both directions.
As for last night, try some garlic on that crow.
Huge, Huge victories in Virginia. And not just the governors race, but all over the state! In a dark navy blue state like NJ, a 5% win by the conservative republican candidate Christy is also HUGE! It's so big there aren't even any claims of voter fraud by ACORN.
Purging the moderates, or RINO's, apparently seems to be what we need to do in order to win.
Oh, and BTW, there is nothing wrong with conservative social policy either. You see, none of the conservative republicans elected yesterday were "pro-choice".
And to point out in your own words just how ignorant you are about conservative core principles, no conservative that I've heard of wants to "shove the gays back in the closet", wants to force "women back in the closet or abortions back in the alley", or wants to put the "the chuch back in the schools". Those are strictly liberal talking points used to falsely defame, minimize, or marginalize as radical conservative republicans, and those accusations have no basis in truth or fact. And the only people that buy into those arguments are liberals, or weak minded moderates.
You know, the more I read your posts the more I wonder why you haven't been kicked off this board, because the more you write, the more you smell like a liberal to me.
You need to start your own party TIS, the moderate party. Assuming you can find enough people to join.
|
AlterEgo
Member
| Joined: | Sun Aug 23rd, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 166 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 5th, 2009 01:15 am |
|
Thoughtless wrote: AlterEgo wrote: lightoftruth wrote: This should be the first win in the "C" column. Are we watching the birth of a viable national third party???? No NO NO NO NO NO third party.
What we need is a conservative take over of the republican party. We need to exorcise the RINO's from the party, kick out the current leadership, force them to switch to the dem party. because that is where they belong. They have more in common with the dems than they do with us.
Your statement is contradictory.
If your intention is to reduce the number of people that vote Republican, then a third party would work much better, then trying to convert Republicans to Democrats.
Huh?
|
tom_in_sac
Member
| Joined: | Wed Nov 7th, 2007 |
| Location: | Sacramento, CA |
| Posts: | 2027 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 5th, 2009 01:45 am |
|
How would you know? You're a RINO, a moderate, and you have no place to go. The dems don't want you, they want to get rid of the blue dogs. We don't want you because you only ruin the republican party with your lack of core beliefs, you don't have the support of the libertarians because they, like conservatives have principles too, and you don't have your own political party.
Talk about loose-in-the-head talk. Nobody with two neurons to rub together really believes that. For one thing, Owens a Dem moderate, WON. For another, Christie, a GOP moderate, WON. You can smoke whatever crack you're after as long as you want, but when it comes time to vote, most people don't want you, or anyone who is fringy enough to pass your nut-whack litmus tests.
The voters want problems solved, they want jobs, they want lower taxes, they want choice, they want security and liberty, and they're smart enough to know they won't get that from blowhard ideologue hacks who are good for nothing but thumping the Bible and rubbing the people they'll have to work with the wrong way. Even Babs Boxer is smart enough to get that much every once in a while, abrasive and aggravating as she is (can't wait to tell that one goodbye).
You need to start your own party TIS, the moderate party. Assuming you can find enough people to join.
I know this is totally beyond you, but those people are exactly the ones deciding elections, yesterday and going forward.
Last edited on Thu Nov 5th, 2009 01:46 am by tom_in_sac
|
insidedge
Member
| Joined: | Fri Aug 29th, 2008 |
| Location: | New York USA |
| Posts: | 1305 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 5th, 2009 01:53 am |
|
Lynne wrote: insidedge wrote: Election outcome, very close, but Hoffman (C) lost, 46% to 49% in favor of Owens (D). And even tho' Scozzafava (R) bowed out she got 5%.
This is a traditionally republican area. A democrat hasn't won there for many years. Conservatives sent a strong message to the republican party for its social liberal choice, but it didn't turn out in a win for either the republican or conservative party.
You need to quit thinking in such narrow terms of republican and democrat. Look at their voting records. It didn't matter who won because essentially, they were both liberal (fiscally and socially). Neither one would have represented me or a large part of the republican party. A big clue should be when the (R) dropped out, she asked her backers to support the (D).
The people need to vote on a referendum to have a primary decide their candidate, because I guarantee you, DeDe -- pronounced (D) (D) would not have been the people's choice.
Not sure what you think I'm thinking above. I posted the facts of what happened. Not my thinking anywhere in there. It's simply what happened.
It's obvious that republicans/conservatives inserted their candidate into the running because, yet again, republicans had no real choice between the republican and democrats running--both liberals.
My thinking: No problem, it was a good decision on their part. Was happy to see them do it, and happy to see Scozzafazaa bow out. The outcome, altho' he didn't win, was actually really good for Hoffman, it was a very close count. It was clear from the outset that the point was made by Hoffman with the support of the Thompsons, Palin, and others who actively worked to keep Hoffman's campaign funded and his name out there. Good for them.
My personal thinking does have to do with first the person, then their party-line because the fact remains that we do vote for a person attached to a party. No man is an island. Whether I like the person and the party platform effects my vote. For me, person and party does work together in my decision of who to vote for. Again, if I'd a choice of voting for Hoffman with the Conservative Party or Scozzafazza with the Republican Party, I'd have voted for Hoffman.
So, I'm not sure what it is you think I need to quit thinking. I'm not easily impressed and even less easily swayed, least of all by politicians or political parties. Were there an individual I thought worthy, I would vote for him/her if s/he ran on a Disneyland ticket. I've never been that impressed with anyone although it may come to be with Ron Paul. I make my own decisions, not the party I attach myself to, most identify with and register as in order to vote in those primaries because it is more likely I'd vote for that party (that is, until republican positions on immigration law enforcement, a few other things, and the bailout!)
Last edited on Thu Nov 5th, 2009 01:54 am by insidedge
|
Current time is 07:16 pm | Page:   1 2 3 |
|
|
|
|
