• 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!

O'Donnell wins Delaware

Its not difficult for a whackjob to get 35%. Hell, there are still 27% of people who think that GWB was a good President.

Yeah, and 35% believe Bush knew about 9/11 before it happened....

and, 33% still believe Gore won the 2000 election, despite numerous studies showing the election was legit.

Your point ???

A lot more moon battery on the lib side than on the conservatives.
 
Of course, but the party doesn't seem to be very open to other religions and non religious people... A lot of people who aren't Evangelic don't like hearing the likes of Bush and Palin go on and on, how it's more their country than anybody else's... and other people in the party saying, the laws should be based on OUR religious tenants and morals


Ahem, laws ARE at least rooted in the moral tenants of Christianity, "Thou shalt not kill" etc...however, to attach a label to repubs without knowing for a certainty like you did here with me, ie: "Evangelical" is a huge mistake liberals often make, and get awfully upset when any sort of label is attached to them. I wonder if it is some sort of block they have going on to see that they themselves do it, or what?


The government isn't based on morals, it's based on freedom and individual rights laid out in the Constitution

It is based on limited government. Fore if you don't have that first, you don't have the individual freedoms, or rights other than what Uncle Sugar tells you that you can have.


I know most Muslims voted repub when Bush was running, but after the smear on Muslims and Barack Hussein Obama, and now all this Mosque bs (which btw they constitutionally have the right to build).. you can bet on losing their votes in the future


That is a pure dodge. You know most Muslims? man, your rolodex must be chock full. As for the Mosque, "BS" as you put it, in not being contested that they have the "right" to build it for the umpteenth time. But rather whether they should.


I don't think anything is going to change... I think both parties are going to engage in their typical bs... blame the other party. Both parities will continue to run up the debt and ignore the constitution, whilst accusing the other of trampling it... deficits will continue to rise. Ron Paul will never be elected, because neo cons are still in the republican party and you guys are blatantly blind to it. No offense, but most of TP'ers probably voted for Bush two times in a row, and said "he kept us safe" and probably thought the constitutional ban he promised for gay marriage sounded great at the time.


I see, so repubs are really just a bunch of war mongering, homophobes, and racists right? :roll: Man, when will you liberals learn that people arguing under the banner of the TP are fed up with BOTH "parties"? That although they may see repubs as a lesser of two evils as it were, that if that repub doesn't espouse constitutional values of less government, and less taxation, that they will be fought within the repub party.

TPers are not against a strong defense, or any of the enumerated powers laid out within the Constitution, but are tired of politicians treating the Constitution as if it were some quaint notion, laid out by men that had no idea of the future, and therefore think that they don't have to follow it properly.

The fact is dems don't think they are destroying anything. You do, but they don't.. and they think repubs are destroying everything. Everybody is going to vote the same.

I can only hope that you and other liberals continue to think that way.


Yes a lot of people are dependent on the government, but the republicans aren't doing anything legit about it- when they are just shouting that people on unemployment are lazy.. They really aren't lazy the economy is ****. Or when the Republicans think people on welfare and food stamps have the skills to ****ing actually get a job that will support their families when they are kicked off. They don't have skills, so they will come back for welfare as soon as they can.

The liberal 'war on poverty' is a huge failure, and has only served to foster generational dependency. And a guaranteed voting class for the demo's that keep promising more, but once in delivering little. Minority, and welfare (zero liability) voters have been duped by the libs for decades.

Local communities need to be restructured and the importance we place on federal government needs to be revised before anything really changes.. or nobody is going to be happy.

Are you actually arguing for a stronger Central Government? It hasn't worked, why would we continue to do that which has failed so miserably?

And you Evangelicals need to learn how to stop running other people's lives through the federal government.. worry about your own community. You're a MAJOR part of the problem.

Again with the labels eh? So I guess I can take from this that you are saying that those who want a smaller government footprint in our lives, and lower taxes should just shut up and sit down eh? But I know, you're not a liberal right?


j-mac
 
Its not difficult for a whackjob to get 35%. Hell, there are still 27% of people who think that GWB was a good President.

Heck, for that matter the polls released yesterday said 28% believe Obama has a clue about how to turn around the economy and that his policies are actually working. So...yeah...no accounting for mindless ideological morons, is there D2?
 
"In our view we would rather have
someone
who owes some back taxes but is not trying to hide them than someone who is trying to sell out the Tea Party,"
Russell said, referring to Castle.
Really now? Hummmmm.

Oh Nooooos!
Public records show O'Donnell has no steady income, no savings, no investments and owns no property. She rents a room out of her campaign office, which is a town home in a residential community. Last year, she reported making $5,800 in income divided between two sources.

Her alma mater, Fairleigh Dickinson University, sued her in 1994 for about $4,000 in unpaid tuition. She satisfied the debt in 2003 and received her diploma this month after completing an additional course

O'Donnell said it's not uncommon for students to take years to pay back their debts.

Are there no decent candidates anywhere?
 
I was watching the news when Scott Brown won, and some pro life group got really excited and dropped a gift basket off for him at the office... lol.. They thought he was pro life, just because he was on the Republican ticket.

Of course, but the party doesn't seem to be very open to other religions and non religious people... A lot of people who aren't Evangelic don't like hearing the likes of Bush and Palin go on and on, how it's more their country than anybody else's... and other people in the party saying, the laws should be based on OUR religious tenants and morals

Wait a minute.... which is it? First you admit that Scott Brown is pro-choice, then you seem to claim that the Republican party isn't open to people that don't agree with the entire party platform.

Seems you disproved your own misguided theory.
 
Really now? Hummmmm.

Oh Nooooos!


Are there no decent candidates anywhere?


She sounds like an average American. Everyone has money problems at some point in their life. Or is it that media, and pundits don't like anyone who isn't a millionaire, DC insider to get in the game?


j-mac
 
She sounds like an average American. Everyone has money problems at some point in their life. Or is it that media, and pundits don't like anyone who isn't a millionaire, DC insider to get in the game?


j-mac

What is her platform? Fiscal responsibility? I ask because her finances seem to be a little screwy:

Another letter from the Federal Election Commission dated March 12, 2009 which stated: "It has come to the attention of the Commission that your Treasurer for Friends of Christine O'Donnell has resigned and the Commission has received no information regarding a new treasurer. A treasurer must be appointed within 10 days of the resignation of the previous treasurer (11CFR& 102.2(a)(2)." Another identical letter to this one was mailed on September 9, 2009. So much for requirements concerning Campaign Receipts and Disbursements and Treasurer replacements in the O'Donnell campaign. It appears that this all could still be pending?

In examining an earlier report covering the period of 1/1/09 to 3/31/09 it appears that debts and obligations owed by the committee totaled $24,298.64. During that period Ms. O'Donnell received contributions totaling $7,215. What is remarkable throughout the report is the consistent pattern of reimbursement to herself for meals, gasoline purchases, small amounts here and there, as if she might be living off of the campaign contributions. Cell phone reimbursements, an unusual $475.20 reimbursement for mileage and an expense reimbursement to a Brent Vosher (a former boyfriend) in the amount of $750 who owns the house where she was living--a house she once owned. Could that be a rent check? Another expenditure is a payment to Delmarva Power for her electric bill in the amount of $600. Another mileage reimbursement in the amount of $60. Then a $200 check to herself simply labeled-- fundraising expense?

To add to her potential woes, Christine O'Donnell has an apparent problem with the Delaware Republican Committee brought about by its October 9th Vicmead event which is the Delaware GOP's annual primary fundraiser. The Delaware Republican leadership throughout the state is in an uproar over this one. This is the story as presented to me from those in charge: " After ordering two tickets at $175 a piece for the Vicmead event, apparently the credit card number Ms. O'Donnell gave to the Committee was declined for the purchase. According to my reliable sources, "she was told she could settle the account at the door. However , instead of doing exactly that, Ms. O'Donnell and friend somehow avoided the main entrance and entered from another area-- they ate the food, net-worked the event and then left. She was e-mailed and messages left on her phone by the Delaware GOP and asked to pay the amount due ($350)"--all this information came directly from GOP headquarters. "It is now late January, 2010- well over four months after the event and the Delaware Republican Committee has still not been paid"--said Chairman Tom Ross.

Based on all of this--Christine O'Donnell--- the bastion of moral integrity and honesty, has indeed been questioned. Is the Vicmead fiasco, that's got all the Delaware GOP insiders upset and rolling their eyes, merely a miscomunication and an unfortunate oversight ? Are the documented campaign finance irregularities significant or no big deal?
Delaware Way: Jud Bennett Writes ~ Who is Christine O'Donnell????
 
She sounds like an average American. Everyone has money problems at some point in their life. Or is it that media, and pundits don't like anyone who isn't a millionaire, DC insider to get in the game?


j-mac

I don't know anything about the woman and don't live in Delaware so I don't really care. But I find it VERY telling that idiots on the left continue to go to 1994 and 1996 to attack her, have said little about her actual politics and have said absolutely ZERO touting their own absolute ZERO of a candidate.

WE are in the mess we are in financially because mindless morons play this game of partisan ideology. Meanwhile, the crippled and dependent pets froth at the mouth because the potential is slightly greater now that congress will have a better chance at continuing to tax, spend, and toss them a few crumbs, and amazingly...that appeases them.
 
I don't know anything about the woman and don't live in Delaware so I don't really care. But I find it VERY telling that idiots on the left continue to go to 1994 and 1996 to attack her, have said little about her actual politics and have said absolutely ZERO touting their own absolute ZERO of a candidate.

WE are in the mess we are in financially because mindless morons play this game of partisan ideology. Meanwhile, the crippled and dependent pets froth at the mouth because the potential is slightly greater now that congress will have a better chance at continuing to tax, spend, and toss them a few crumbs, and amazingly...that appeases them.

Kind of like all those old Obama videos. ;)
 
What is her platform? Fiscal responsibility? I ask because her finances seem to be a little screwy:

DP first...Winston cites Republican sources (sources invested indefeating the woman...but thats OK...because when it suits his need...bias is GOOD) and they are in a lather and froth over a $60 check?

I wonder...since...you know...you find this so incredibly relevant...what would the left candidates finances look like? Or Obamas for that matter? Or Charlie Rangels?
 
What is her platform? Fiscal responsibility? I ask because her finances seem to be a little screwy:


If you are implying that campaigns should be scrutinized closer for their practices, I couldn't agree more. But, if you are posting from this obvious Castle friendly opinion man because he bolsters the attack on O'Donnell due to his own support of the establishment guy, then I really don't put much stock in it.

j-mac
 
Kind of like all those old Obama videos. ;)

From 2006??? :lamo

Hell...in 1996, Im thinking the only Obamas videos you are going to find are him smoking crack in the back of a state owned limo while on state time and dime, and a whole lot of 'present' votes.

Stop it man...you are embarrassing yourself. I mean...more...
 
A lot more moon battery on the lib side than on the conservatives.

:lamoNot even close...:lamo



I love how these videos build from "seemingly-normal" to "a little off" to "kinda out there" to "whacky" to "bat**** crazy" to "full-throttle retard"...

And what's up with the obesity?? It's these pigs that are running up health care costs.

At 3:00 Al Sharpton is supposedly bringing the black panthers. And apparently GB never referred to the President as a racist...:roll::roll:

Gill, the teatards and teabrains are lame and stupid beyond our capacity to even understand. People this stupid are a public safety issue.
 
DP first...Winston cites Republican sources (sources invested indefeating the woman...but thats OK...because when it suits his need...bias is GOOD) and they are in a lather and froth over a $60 check?

There was a bit more than a 60$ check listed there. Why the selective editing on your part?

I wonder...since...you know...you find this so incredibly relevant...what would the left candidates finances look like? Or Obamas for that matter? Or Charlie Rangels?

Why don't you start a thread about it instead of attempting to derail this one.
 
From 2006??? :lamo

Hell...in 1996, Im thinking the only Obamas videos you are going to find are him smoking crack in the back of a state owned limo while on state time and dime, and a whole lot of 'present' votes.

Stop it man...you are embarrassing yourself. I mean...more...

No, you're being very selective in your distain. From birthers to community organizer to 2006, your side dredged all kinds of old crap up and did so dispite evidence to the contrary.

A little late for you guys to complain now. ;)
 
Well, your side is running another Marxist, and Marxists aren't doing well this year. They aren't popular, including Obama the ROTFLOL... Uniter.

Here's a beauty. I'm sure Dems weren't going to spend too much had Castle won (good riddance), now they are in a fight... a huge one, Dems will have to spend because O'Donnell will have pretty full coffers as this race has national attention now.

It's a new day, politics as usual doesn't count.
I'm going to start an O'Donnell tracking thread in Polls. Ought to be tremendous fun.

.
Joe Biden beat her 65% to 35% in 2008, what makes you think she will do any better this time?
 
No, you're being very selective in your distain. From birthers to community organizer to 2006, your side dredged all kinds of old crap up and did so dispite evidence to the contrary.

A little late for you guys to complain now. ;)

Riiiiiiight...what was Barry doing in 1996 Boo? And for that matter...who?

Complaining? hell to the no...I think its funny. Im willing to bet good money that without jumping to Wikipedia or Google there isnt 3 leftists posting here that can even NAME her democrat opponent or what his positions are. Ive YET to see ANYONE say why he is a better candidate (is it a he? or a she? Hell does anyone even know THAT without Googling it?). SO...big deal...as a teenager, the woman said on MTV the EXACT same thing Jimmy Carter said. THATS a good reason to vote against her.
 
:lamoNot even close...:lamo



I love how these videos build from "seemingly-normal" to "a little off" to "kinda out there" to "whacky" to "bat**** crazy" to "full-throttle retard"...

And what's up with the obesity?? It's these pigs that are running up health care costs.

At 3:00 Al Sharpton is supposedly bringing the black panthers. And apparently GB never referred to the President as a racist...:roll::roll:

Gill, the teatards and teabrains are lame and stupid beyond our capacity to even understand. People this stupid are a public safety issue.



I know, we should just round up all the Glenn Beck supporters and euthanize them, right? Your posts are often detestable.


j-mac
 
No, you're being very selective in your distain. From birthers to community organizer to 2006, your side dredged all kinds of old crap up and did so dispite evidence to the contrary.

A little late for you guys to complain now. ;)


Yes, it is so unfair to want to know what influences the life of the man running for President had in his life isn't it? Oh, I forgot, only when it is a demo.


j-mac
 
Joe Biden beat her 65% to 35% in 2008, what makes you think she will do any better this time?

As stated earlier

Really? I don't think it'd be THAT shocking really. Look at a few things...

First, the overall attitude of the country was far more on the anti-republican side of things than the anti-democrat side I think it'd be relatively accurate to say is the majority currently. Throw in on top of that a whole heap load of generalized anti-incumbant feeling.

Second, it was a Presidential Election year where you had an extremely popular Democratic candidate running that drove record turnout of a large amount of groups that traditionally vote democratic.

Third, she was running against the guy that was set to be VP on the ticket with said extremely popular Dem. candidate.

Fourth, she was running against a long time incumbant who was well entrenched in the state.

Would a 20 point swing be difficult? Definitely. But there are numerous reasonable factors to suggest that a large swing is definitely at least possible
 
:lamoNot even close...:lamo

I love how these videos build from "seemingly-normal" to "a little off" to "kinda out there" to "whacky" to "bat**** crazy" to "full-throttle retard"...

And what's up with the obesity?? It's these pigs that are running up health care costs.

At 3:00 Al Sharpton is supposedly bringing the black panthers. And apparently GB never referred to the President as a racist...:roll::roll:

Gill, the teatards and teabrains are lame and stupid beyond our capacity to even understand. People this stupid are a public safety issue.[/SIZE]

Do I really need to repost all the videos of Obama idiots from the campaign??

Or how about a few quotes from the far left moonbats over at Daily Kos or Democratic Underground ??? I can easily find some crazy quotes there in under two minutes.

And go ahead and keep calling tea party folks crazy. You are simply making them more determined and confirming their view of those on the left.
 
There was a bit more than a 60$ check listed there. Why the selective editing on your part?



Why don't you start a thread about it instead of attempting to derail this one.

60, here...250 there...what...700 in other places...all reported by her opponents. Now...back to the facts...when was the LAST lime (or EVER) that you did a little dirt digging on left leaning candidates?

Dont worry...we know the answer...you can say it...:lamo
 
Whoa it seems like this lady is in some deep doo doo:
O'Donnell owes the federal government $11,744.59 in taxes and penalties from the 2005 tax year, according to a lien filed by the IRS on March 2, 2010, with the New Castle County Recorder of Deeds.

According to the IRS Web site, liens are placed after a taxpayer has been notified of a debt and the person fails or refuses to pay within 10 days. Liens attach to all current and future property owned by the taxpayer, including vehicles.

O'Donnell said she is currently being audited by the IRS and contacted the agent responsible for her case when she received the lien.

"That's a mistake," she said. "The IRS agent handling my audit was even perplexed by that questionable lien notice because he's in the process of resolving my audit."

Her federal campaign committee reported $23,776 in debt, more than the $10,585 cash in her campaign account, according to her most recent filings with the Federal Elections Commission. The FEC has cited her eight times for failure to report her contributions between 2007 and 2009.

She owes outstanding payments to staffers, consultants and volunteers, according to a campaign finance filing from January.

Know Christine O'Donnell? Take a closer look...
 
I know, we should just round up all the Glenn Beck supporters and euthanize them, right? Your posts are often detestable.


j-mac

OFTEN ?? How about most of the time.
 
Back
Top Bottom