Page 4 of 17 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 162

Thread: Dems thrilled as tea party win stuns Delaware GOP

  1. #31
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,343

    Re: Dems thrilled as tea party win stuns Delaware GOP

    Quote Originally Posted by Dav View Post
    One more thing: http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/p..._DE_915424.pdf

    Both O'Donnell and Coons have a negative favorability rating throughout the state. THAT is choosing the lesser of two evils. Castle, as it happens, would have started out with a net positive favorability.
    And was one of the Republicans that voted for an investigation of Bush, toward the ends of impeachment. Castle is no better than Spector was.


    j-mac
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  2. #32
    Sage
    Dav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    04-16-16 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,539

    Re: Dems thrilled as tea party win stuns Delaware GOP

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    Does a Republican candidate have to have a liberal stamp of approval to be "electable" in a,... let me edit that, any state?


    j-mac
    If having a "liberal stamp of approval" means not being 100% conservative, then yes, there are states where that is true.

    Delaware, for example.

  3. #33
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,998

    Re: Dems thrilled as tea party win stuns Delaware GOP

    Quote Originally Posted by Dav View Post
    Yes we do. She's not.

    And the polls, and common sense.
    No, those things say its unlikely she's to be elected. At the same time, most of those things weren't exactly keen on her winning the primary far out either.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dav View Post
    But compromise is required to WIN. GOP voters in Delaware refused to compromise; as a result, they now won't win where otherwise they would have. And as a result of that, they will be on the losing side of any legistlation or appointment that passes by an extremely thin margin.
    Not, compromise would be HELPFUL to win NOW. As I've said, for one, I don't mind if we lose this one if it helps out in the long two. Two, difficult or unlikely is the not the same as impossible. If we went off the assumption at the beginning that a person can't win she shouldn't be the nominee anyways because it was pretty much written off early on Castle was taking the primary.

    Additionally, you're assuming a garaunteed win, something that is ridiculous to assume in Politics most times especially with a republican in a blue state regardless of how positive the feeling towards them is. Second, you're acting like anything that would need a slim margin that Castle would've voted on the side of the Republicans rather than the democrats which is again a questionable decision since 40% of the time he was known to side with Democrats including on some issues that would be of high importance to some republican voters.

    Now, you could say "Yeah, well those few times he does break the thin margin in the favor of the Republicans is lost". And that's true. The counter however can be also now that "Those things that Dem's win by a slim margin are fully on them, instead of some of them having his support and thus allowing them to gain cover and protection from criticism by claiming it was 'bipartisan'". Essentially, the notion would be that the amount of "slim margin" victories he'd give to the Republicans wouldn't outweight the amount of "slim margin" or even "decent margin" victories he'd give to the Democrats that'd allow them to claim "bipartisan" support to deflect criticism and blame if/when the issue goes bad.


    There is so much wrong with that that I'm not sure how any logically thinking person could justify it.
    You can't honestly see how a logically thinking person would rather vote on principle knowing there's a good shot they'll lose rather than abandoning principle to get someone who may do a few good things for you but whose negatives essentially make the good things a wash?

    To start with, it's not just that Castle had a better chance of winning than O'Donnell, it's that Castle would almost certainly have won, and O'Donnell will almost certainly lose.
    We're a few months out, similar could've been said about this exact same race in the primaries some months ago. You're young dav but you know better than this, you shouldn't count your chickens before they hatch and make such ludicrously near absolute comments. Castle had a significantly better chance of winning than O'Donnell and a great shot at taking the state, but I think its ridiculous to say he was almost certain to win.

    Which means that basically, the vote was between a moderate Republican and a Democrat. It's making my head spin that so many conservative Republicans chose the Democrat in that race.
    You're using the same idiotic fallacy people use against individuals when they choose to vote Libertarian or Green party rather than Democrat or Republican as people scream "IF you vote for that person its really a vote for the Democrat/Republican!". No, its a vote for your guy.

    Conservatives are choosing to at least be given the chance to vote for a person they agree with and IF somehow that they win will do things that make them happy rather than voting for someone who has a good shot to win but once is elected is going to do as many things in their mind that harms their cause and purpose as he does to help it.

    The "lesser of two evils" to whom?
    To the people who were voting in this election.

    As a matter of fact, the whole problem with this election is that it is making the electorate as a whole choose between the "lesser of two evils" by forcing them to choose between a staunch liberal and a staunch conservative, when they were perfectly willing and eager to vote for a moderate.
    Its making SOME of the electorate choose between the lesser of two evils, namely the moderates. At the same time, if it was between a moderate republican and a staunch democrat again someone is having to choose between the lesser of two evils, the conservatives. However, in the PRIMARY, the conservatives and moderates both had a chance to vote for the guy they'd WANT to vote for..the conservatives won. What you're suggesting is they should've voted for the other guy so moderates didn't have to pick between the lesser of two evils, instead forcing THEMSELVES to have to make that choice.

    If the "electorate" was so eager and ready to vote for a moderate, perhaps they should've....oh I don't know...voted for the moderate in the primary. Crazy thought there.

    pquote]Castle's standing in the state beyond the GOP had nothing to do with electability. When it comes to ideology, "lesser of two evils" is entirely relative, and eliminating the most popular choice will only contribute to the perceived problem.[/quote]

    Exactly, it is relative. And relative to the people who voted for O'Donnell, they made a choice with their vote to nominate someoen they LIKED and could vote for with good consious rather than abandoning principle to nominate someone that could possibly win but would've been simply nominating the lesser of two evils regarding the main ticket.

    Frankly, if choosing the "lesser of two evils" means choosing the candidate who disagrees with you less, the only way to NOT do that would be to vote for yourself in every election.
    No one expects to agree 100% with everything a candidate says.

    But when you look at two candidates and go "Oh god, I don't want to vote for this guy. He's horrible" and then you look at the other candidate and go "Oh god, I REALLY don't want to vote for this guy. He's REALLY horrible" and thus you vote for the first guy, THAT's the lesser of two evils.

    If you're going "Eh, this guys not bad. I wish he had a few different views on x y and z, but I think he's going to be pretty good in Washington" and the other guy you're going "oh god, I can't stand that guy, I'm not voting for him" then yo'ure not "voting for the lesser of two evils" because I wouldn't say that first guy really falls in the "evils" type of category.

    And since Republicans essentially chose the Democrat to win here, this time they, ideologically, chose the GREATER of two evils.
    No, they choose to vote on principle rather than sacrifice it for the sake of winning and naught much else.

    And when it comes to personal integrity, there's nothing to suggest that Castle is more "evil" than O'Donnell, so that's clearly not the issue.
    There is a fair bit to suggset that when it comes to conservative values there is things to suggest that Castle is more "evil" than O'Donnell. When people talk about "lesser of two evils" you realize they're not literally suggesting morally, devil worshipping, type evil but equating evil in this case to "thing I dislike strongly/think is bad".

  4. #34
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,998

    Re: Dems thrilled as tea party win stuns Delaware GOP

    Quote Originally Posted by Dav View Post
    One more thing: http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/p..._DE_915424.pdf

    Both O'Donnell and Coons have a negative favorability rating throughout the state. THAT is choosing the lesser of two evils. Castle, as it happens, would have started out with a net positive favorability.
    What the state wide feelings on O'donnel is is irrelevant on whether or not conservative voters on the primary felt that nominating Castle would've given THEMSELVES a situatio nwhere they'd have to choose the lesser of two evils (with regards to Castle or Coons)

  5. #35
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,343

    Re: Dems thrilled as tea party win stuns Delaware GOP

    Quote Originally Posted by Dav View Post
    If having a "liberal stamp of approval" means not being 100% conservative, then yes, there are states where that is true.

    Delaware, for example.

    Not so. conditions can change. People get fed up with being lied to over and over. I know, and have good friends in DE, and I know this to be true.

    If what you are saying is true, then 1) No state would ever have a chance of changing traditional historical voting trends. We know this to be false. and 2) It would be another move closer to actual one party rule, because if we have to compromise our principles (something that lost us the control in the first place) then how are we any different than liberals?

    j-mac
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  6. #36
    pirate lover
    liblady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    St Thomas, VI
    Last Seen
    03-14-16 @ 03:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    16,165
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Dems thrilled as tea party win stuns Delaware GOP

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    Does a Republican candidate have to have a liberal stamp of approval to be "electable" in a,... let me edit that, any state?


    j-mac
    who is discussing a liberal stamp of approval? i'm talking about a candidate with wide appeal, which o'donnell is not.

    Originally Posted by johnny_rebson:

    These are the same liberals who forgot how Iraq attacked us on 9/11.


  7. #37
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,343

    Re: Dems thrilled as tea party win stuns Delaware GOP

    Quote Originally Posted by liblady View Post
    who is discussing a liberal stamp of approval? i'm talking about a candidate with wide appeal, which o'donnell is not.
    Good God, come on, you guy's aren't this obtuse are you? I know you aren't saying it, I am asking it....So how about you answer it?


    j-mac

    Oh BTW, ABC is reporting:

    The National Republican Senatorial Committee will support the O’Donnell campaign, according to a statement that was just released by its chairman, Sen. John Cornyn.

    http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2010...nnibalism.html
    So I guess it's on.


    j-mac
    Last edited by j-mac; 09-15-10 at 01:14 PM.
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  8. #38
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: Dems thrilled as tea party win stuns Delaware GOP

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    Here is the problem - Without a little pragmatism, the Republicans are going to fizzle. With it, the sky is the limit.
    The Republicans aren't going to fizzle, get a grip. For someone that bashed Bush 24/7 for the last 100 years, you better damn well go for the gamble.....or never complain again...EVER.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  9. #39
    Doesn't go below juicy
    tacomancer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Cleveland
    Last Seen
    05-20-16 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    31,781

    Re: Dems thrilled as tea party win stuns Delaware GOP

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    The Republicans aren't going to fizzle, get a grip. For someone that bashed Bush 24/7 for the last 100 years, you better damn well go for the gamble.....or never complain again...EVER.
    Just how old are you dana?

  10. #40
    Sage
    PeteEU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,092

    Re: Dems thrilled as tea party win stuns Delaware GOP

    Seems she is a jew hater. Great choice GOP and the Tea Party.



    IZZARD: What if someone comes to you in the middle of the Second World War and says, ‘do you have any Jewish people in your house?’ and you do have them. That would be a lie. That would be disrespectful to Hitler.

    O’DONNELL: I believe if I were in that situation, God would provide a way to do the right thing righteously. I believe that!

    MAHER: God is not there. Hitler’s there and you’re there.

    O’DONNELL: You never have to practice deception. God always provides a way out.
    Damn anti-semtic bitch.
    PeteEU

Page 4 of 17 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •