• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Republican wins Democratic New York House seat

I like how you're so naively right-wing that it's all about Obama, and nothing to do with Park 51 or gay marriage or not knowing how to campaign or offending people whose support he needed to ensure victory.

In other words, I like how you think it's all about Obama and nothing to do with reality.

I also like how part of your argument for the truth of this unreality is that the media agrees with you. Well, if the media's got the right idea, Conservative, then I'm assuming you won't write this off as left-wing media bias:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/us-pa...-obama-economy-over-republicans-congress.html

What I like is you ignoring the role of a Congressman and support or lack of support for his agenda. In this case lack of support.
 
See, that's the funny thing -- my argument is that part of the reason the man lost is his agenda. Read that again -- his agenda. Not Obama's. The things that he did and believed in, not Obama.
 
See, that's the funny thing -- my argument is that part of the reason the man lost is his agenda. Read that again -- his agenda. Not Obama's. The things that he did and believed in, not Obama.

What do you think a Freshmen Congressman's role is? Tell me you haven't been brainwashed into believing that this was a local election? Too many people don't seem to have a clue.
 
I'm quite familiar with New York politics, and I've done a lot of reading on this particular election. I'm not doing what Conservative is doing -- blindly assigning meaning that doesn't exist.

You may be familiar with NY politics, but I actually lived in that district the first 20+ years of my life. I did not follow the election, just assumed it was a slam dunk. Only when I heard on morning Joe I think the day before that it was actually a race, but even then did not think a Republican would actually win.
 
What do you think a Freshmen Congressman's role is? Tell me you haven't been brainwashed into believing that this was a local election? Too many people don't seem to have a clue.

Congressional elections are by their very nature local elections -- elections in which only a relatively small locality can vote. They are each about the beliefs, needs and desires of a small portion of the population.

Anyway, since you're holding up the media as a source of truth now that they agree with your partisan perspective, then no doubt you also believe CNN is telling the truth about more people trusting Obama on the economy than the Republicans in Congress.
 
You may be familiar with NY politics, but I actually lived in that district the first 20+ years of my life. I did not follow the election, just assumed it was a slam dunk. Only when I heard on morning Joe I think the day before that it was actually a race, but even then did not think a Republican would actually win.

So, in other words, you paid about as much attention to the process as Weprin did, and were just as surprised by the result. Makes sense to me.
 
Congressional elections are by their very nature local elections -- elections in which only a relatively small locality can vote. They are each about the beliefs, needs and desires of a small portion of the population.

Anyway, since you're holding up the media as a source of truth now that they agree with your partisan perspective, then no doubt you also believe CNN is telling the truth about more people trusting Obama on the economy than the Republicans in Congress.

Not at all, I recognize reality. Congressional elections are for the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, not the local commissioners job. The fact that small numbers vote is irrelevant, what power does that Freshman Rep really have in a House with 435 other members?

Do you put faith in a CNN poll that says that? Are you happy with your Rep? That is all that matters. National polls on Congress are irrelevant regardless of what the media tells you. I like my Representative and as long as more people in my District support him that is all that matters. National polls on Congressional popularity may make you feel good but think about it? I know you can figure this out.
 
So, in other words, you paid about as much attention to the process as Weprin did, and were just as surprised by the result. Makes sense to me.

If you think it was the quality of the candidate you are fooling yourself. I will bet that most people who voted never saw either one of the candidates. Sad but true.
 
Do you put faith in a CNN poll that says that?

No, I'm just pointing out that by touting the press coverage as evidence of the correctness of your view, but slamming them the rest of the time as being left-wing biased, you're being a hypocrite.

Are you happy with your Rep? That is all that matters. National polls on Congress are irrelevant regardless of what the media tells you. I like my Representative and as long as more people in my District support him that is all that matters.

And that's what makes House elections local matters. Thanks for reinforcing my point. :lol:
 
If you think it was the quality of the candidate you are fooling yourself. I will bet that most people who voted never saw either one of the candidates. Sad but true.

I'm pretty sure it was a whole lot more about voting against Weprin than it was about voting against Obama or voting for Turner.
 
I'm pretty sure it was a whole lot more about voting against Weprin than it was about voting against Obama or voting for Turner.

What is the basis of that statement? Remember as a Democrat in that district the instinct is to vote for him. He was not the incumbent with people wanting change. What can you point to that he did where people would change a vote they may have never changed in their life.
 
What is the basis of that statement? Remember as a Democrat in that district the instinct is to vote for him. He was not the incumbent with people wanting change. What can you point to that he did where people would change a vote they may have never changed in their life.

Wow, 70+ pages of the same old my-side-rocks-your-side-sucks politics. What a surprise.

This wasn't a referendum on Obama, or the Republican agenda, or on what flavor of ice cream Ben & Jerry's should invent next, or anything else that it's been tied to. I also reject Schumer's half-assed explanation about how conservative the district has been getting over the past decades, mainly because it kept electing a Democrat. This was about local politics and nothing but local politics.

I don't know about any of you, I noticed that Weprin took certain positions which left him very vulnerable in a district full of conservative Jews:
He supported the Park15 project -- the so-called "Ground Zero Mosque."
He voted for the legalization of gay marriage in New York.
He wasn't particularly effective at attacking his opponent or addressing his opponent's attacks.
He pissed off some local interest groups with gestures as thoughtless as, well, not showing up to talk to them.
Summation, for all you tl;drers -- this was an election lost by an idiot because of local politics. It was nothing more or less than that.

I realize that the national media (and, heck, let's throw Fox News in there) didn't have a whole lot to say about these another salient facts in the wake of Turner's victory, but that doesn't make them any less true, or this referendum crap any less false.

I now return you to your regularly scheduled baseless posturing.

There you go.
 
No, I'm just pointing out that by touting the press coverage as evidence of the correctness of your view, but slamming them the rest of the time as being left-wing biased, you're being a hypocrite.



And that's what makes House elections local matters. Thanks for reinforcing my point. :lol:

It makes your point? Your point was the poll numbers for Congress were terrible and thus justification that Obama is doing better than the numbers show. The only thing local about a Congressional election is the spin by people who don't know the role of the govt. They are only local in that they represent the people of that area on the national stage. Very little of what they do affects the local community and you should know that.
 
It makes your point? Your point was the poll numbers for Congress were terrible and thus justification that Obama is doing better than the numbers show.

Um, no, that wasn't even close to the point I was making. I even told you what my point was, but you missed it anyway. Oh well.
 
I'm sure that Conservative saw other elections as a referendum on Obama ... like when a Democrat recently won the NY seat held by Republicans since Jack Kemp won it in the 70s. Or when Hoffman, a Democrat, won in a NY district that had been solidly Republican since the party was formed in 1856? I'm sure. :lol:
 
I'm sure that Conservative saw other elections as a referendum on Obama ... like when a Democrat recently won the NY seat held by Republicans since Jack Kemp won it in the 70s. Or when Hoffman, a Democrat, won in a NY district that had been solidly Republican since the party was formed in 1856? I'm sure. :lol:

Well those are just local referendums of course:lamo
 
I'm sure that Conservative saw other elections as a referendum on Obama ... like when a Democrat recently won the NY seat held by Republicans since Jack Kemp won it in the 70s. Or when Hoffman, a Democrat, won in a NY district that had been solidly Republican since the party was formed in 1856? I'm sure. :lol:

When were those elections and what was the Obama approval rating at the time? As I stated I completely understand why cult followers will not admit what is obvious.
 
Can we all agree that since has taken place 14 months before the next election it is not a predictor of anything. Things will happen, polls will change. People will be guessing wrong about the winner of the election in October of 2012.
 
Can we all agree that since has taken place 14 months before the next election it is not a predictor of anything. Things will happen, polls will change. People will be guessing wrong about the winner of the election in October of 2012.

There is no question that you are right, poll numbers will change. I do believe however that the majority in this country are now realizing that they made a mistake in 2008 and it is going to be hard for Obama to recover unless he creates so much dependence that provides the votes necessary for re-election. He will buy as many votes as possible to stay in his job. It is that kind of policy that Conservatives want to defeat and one that this country cannot afford.

NY 9 is an indication that the tide is turning and there is a reason that Obama, who won with 52% of the vote now has a 39% JAR losing 13% of that support. Hard to imagine a Democrat District for the past 90 years to all of a sudden ignore the Obama record and just vote for a Republican because of Weiner's resignation.
 
When were those elections and what was the Obama approval rating at the time? As I stated I completely understand why cult followers will not admit what is obvious.

New York's 23rd congressional district special election, 2009 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The 2009 special election received significant national attention, and was alternately described as "a referendum on President Barack Obama" and "a fight over the identity of the Republican Party."
 
There is no question that you are right, poll numbers will change. I do believe however that the majority in this country are now realizing that they made a mistake in 2008 and it is going to be hard for Obama to recover unless he creates so much dependence that provides the votes necessary for re-election. He will buy as many votes as possible to stay in his job. It is that kind of policy that Conservatives want to defeat and one that this country cannot afford.

NY 9 is an indication that the tide is turning and there is a reason that Obama, who won with 52% of the vote now has a 39% JAR losing 13% of that support. Hard to imagine a Democrat District for the past 90 years to all of a sudden ignore the Obama record and just vote for a Republican because of Weiner's resignation.

I do not disagree with anything you have said. But as you know in a race for electoral votes there are some states that almost certainly go one way or the other. Also this race will be the most costly and negative in the history of US elections. So while I agree that Obama has a problem not sure anyone can ascertain what will happen 14 months from now. What will be the wedge issue, or misstatement by either Obama or his opponent that the press will magnify, what national or international event that will happen next summer that will change everything.
 
New York's 23rd congressional district special election, 2009 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The 2009 special election received significant national attention, and was alternately described as "a referendum on President Barack Obama" and "a fight over the identity of the Republican Party."

Thunder, as I have pointed out I don't expect true Obama supporters to acknowledge even what is common knowledge today. Obama's current approval ratings are at record lows for him and the results are there for all to see. It is hard for most people to ignore those results and the only ones that will are the Obama cult who refuse to admit that they were wrong.
 
Thunder, as I have pointed out I don't expect true Obama supporters to acknowledge even what is common knowledge today. Obama's current approval ratings are at record lows for him and the results are there for all to see. It is hard for most people to ignore those results and the only ones that will are the Obama cult who refuse to admit that they were wrong.

do you agree that the election in the 23rd was a referendum on Obama?
 
do you agree that the election in the 23rd was a referendum on Obama?

I believe that Owens got 73K votes and the Conservative and Independent got 78k votes which means Owens didn't get the majority in that District. I also realize that election was in 2009 and not 2011. Guess those facts escaped you.
 
I believe that Owens got 73K votes and the Conservative and Independent got 78k votes which means Owens didn't get the majority in that District. I also realize that election was in 2009 and not 2011. Guess those facts escaped you.

The next presedential election is not for 1 year and 2 months. Many exciting and game-changing things can happen between now and then, including a sudden improvement in the economy, decrease in the unemployment rate, or the GOP candidate could say things such ridiculously stupid things as to make the election a cake-walk for Obama. I understand that the members of the anti-Obama cult fail to comprehend this, but these are the facts.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom