• 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!

Sen. Lisa Murkowski mounting write-in bid for Senate

texmaster said:
Explain how those two relate in any way.
Click to expand...

I agree with texmaster again. Stop asking reasonable questions, you're supposed to be a kook.

I was just reading that Murkowski might actually siphon votes off the Democratic candidate as well, supposedly based on some polling of each candidate against eachother. It sounds like this will be an interesting race. Being Alaska, it's also WAY easier to run a write-in campaign because the media area you need to cover is so small. It really is conceivable for someone to win via write-ins up there. (although I don't expect it in this case.)
 
danarhea said:
Actually, this is going to end up helping the Republican nominee by siphoning off votes of those who are more moderate Republicans from the Democrat. In a two way race, I would call it close, but in a three way race, the GOP wins by a landslide.
Click to expand...

Your analysis fails on three fronts:

1. Historically, in a two party Race, when faced with a Choice between three Candidates, the one whom is ideologically alone (i.e. in this case the Democrat) benefits. Case in Point, 1992. Perot syphoned votes from Bush leading many to believe he cost him the election.

2. That "Moderate" Republicans would vote for the Democrat instead of Mr. Miller. You're implication is that Moderates only vote for liberals.

3. You're vested in this failed notion that Conservative Candidates cannot win, and that we must embrace the Olympia Snowes, Susan Collins and the like to make a difference.

And feel free to report my other post sir. It wasn't a personal attack, it was a dismissing of your political reasoning. There is a difference.
 
MrVicchio said:
Your analysis fails on three fronts:

1. Historically, in a two party Race, when faced with a Choice between three Candidates, the one whom is ideologically alone (i.e. in this case the Democrat) benefits. Case in Point, 1992. Perot syphoned votes from Bush leading many to believe he cost him the election.

2. That "Moderate" Republicans would vote for the Democrat instead of Mr. Miller. You're implication is that Moderates only vote for liberals.

3. You're vested in this failed notion that Conservative Candidates cannot win, and that we must embrace the Olympia Snowes, Susan Collins and the like to make a difference.

And feel free to report my other post sir. It wasn't a personal attack, it was a dismissing of your political reasoning. There is a difference.
Click to expand...

This is what no one pays attention to your political views and analysis, it's based on... nothing.
Click to expand...

That was your post. Sure looks like a personal attack from here. But thank you for reposting in an intelligent manner.

As for your 3 points, I disagree in that moderate Republicans are a little frightened of Miller, and would have voted for the Democrat on that basis. The Democrat in the race is not a Liberal, but what would be a blue-dog who would frequently vote against the party. My contention is that he would be seen as an acceptable alternative. With Murkowski in the race as a write in, she takes those votes, and denies them to McAdams, thus securing victory for Miller, although Miller would most likely win in either case. The 3 way makes it even more likely.
 
danarhea said:
That was your post. Sure looks like a personal attack from here. But thank you for reposting in an intelligent manner.

As for your 3 points, I disagree in that moderate Republicans are a little frightened of Miller, and would have voted for the Democrat on that basis. The Democrat in the race is not a Liberal, but what would be a blue-dog who would frequently vote against the party. My contention is that he would be seen as an acceptable alternative. With Murkowski in the race as a write in, she takes those votes, and denies them to McAdams, thus securing victory for Miller, although Miller would most likely win in either case. The 3 way makes it even more likely.
Click to expand...


She's a very left leaning Republican:

Political positions

Murkowski is considered a moderate Republican. She is generally pro-choice on abortion and supports embryonic stem cell research. She is also a member of the Republican Majority For Choice, Republicans For Choice, and The Wish List (Women in the Senate and House), a group of pro-choice women Republicans. She was one of ten Republican Senators who refused to commit to Bill Frist's "nuclear option" to end judicial filibusters, and she supported H.R. 810, the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act, which would have permitted the Secretary of Health and Human Services to support taxpayer-funded research on embryonic stem cells. Congress passed the bill, but President George W. Bush vetoed it.
[edit]Healthcare
Murkowski voted with Democrats and moderate Republicans on H.R. 976, which called for the expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) to provide coverage for additional uninsured children.[9] That bill passed both the House and the Senate, but was vetoed by President Bush. She supports health care reforms in her native state as well, largely because health care costs for Alaskans are up to 70% higher than costs in the contiguous United States.
[edit]Hate Crimes Bill
Murkowski was one of five Republican senators who voted with Democrats for the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act.[10]
[edit]Abortion
On abortion, Murkowski has a "mixed record" rating (50%) from the National Right to Life Committee, and a pro-life rating (14%) from the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL).[11]
Click to expand...
Lisa Murkowski - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Which leads one to assume to be a moderate, one must be rather liberal. I find that, interesting. Also, the reality is, she lost, she knows GOP Voters will vote for her, that takes votes from Miller. Not McAdams.

That's how she's betraying her party, for personal reasons.


Also, get thicker skin Dan or report me. I wasn't attacking you, I dismissed you.
 
MrVicchio said:
She's a very left leaning Republican:


Lisa Murkowski - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Which leads one to assume to be a moderate, one must be rather liberal. I find that, interesting. Also, the reality is, she lost, she knows GOP Voters will vote for her, that takes votes from Miller. Not McAdams.

That's how she's betraying her party, for personal reasons.


Also, get thicker skin Dan or report me. I wasn't attacking you, I dismissed you.
Click to expand...

Sure you were. You can call it dismissal all you want, but that is just cloaking the attack inside another word, such as "dismissing", so you can say it was not an attack. As for your "nobody listens to me" rant (the attack itself), my almost 9,000 thanks, some of them from such members as jamesrage, councilman, and others on the right, all disagree with you.
 
Last edited:
danarhea said:
Sure you were. You can call it dismissal all you want, but that is just cloaking the attack inside another word, such as "dismissing", so you can say it was not an attack. As for your "nobody listens to me" rant (the attack itself), my almost 9,000 thanks, some of them from such members as jamesrage, councilman, and others on the right, all disagree with you.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, are you still hurt by my cold dismissal of your belief that having two Republicans running in an election is somehow detrimental to the Democrat in the race? Oh you are. And further more it seems to have really bothered you that I did so. I think it bothered you more when I took the time to deconstruction your fantasy assessment.

Thus instead of backing your claims up you are now focused on deflecting the conversation from your illogical conclusion to a debate over whether or not I insulted you. That people have thanked you in the past on threads is immaterial. I have thanked you before, and I'm sure at some future point I will again, you don't only post political analysis of races...

I'm boggled by this defense, is that the best you have to offer? That out of 20k posts you got thanked a sometimes so your political analysis of races is of merit? More likely your sense of humor on non-important issues garners you the most thanks.
 
MrVicchio said:
She's a very left leaning Republican:


Lisa Murkowski - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Which leads one to assume to be a moderate, one must be rather liberal. I find that, interesting. Also, the reality is, she lost, she knows GOP Voters will vote for her, that takes votes from Miller. Not McAdams.

That's how she's betraying her party, for personal reasons.


Also, get thicker skin Dan or report me. I wasn't attacking you, I dismissed you.
Click to expand...

Wait. To be miderate, you have to be liberal?

...there's no middle anymore?
 
Deuce said:
Wait. To be miderate, you have to be liberal?

...there's no middle anymore?
Click to expand...

Ask Dan, I'm only going by his standards... Castle in Deleware and now Murkosky in Alaska, Moderates either vote for the Liberal Republican or the Democrat.

But dont' try to stay with the conversation Deuce, that detracts from your tangent.
 
MrVicchio said:
Ask Dan, I'm only going by his standards... Castle in Deleware and now Murkosky in Alaska, Moderates either vote for the Liberal Republican or the Democrat.

But dont' try to stay with the conversation Deuce, that detracts from your tangent.
Click to expand...

Moderates give Republicans the seats they need to take the Senate. It's very simple.
 
danarhea said:
Moderates give Republicans the seats they need to take the Senate. It's very simple.
Click to expand...

And then vote with the Dems on big votes that matter...

Also I reject your notion that we need Moderates to win seats. I believe that we have seen the failure that approach brings, and should reject it out right. The GOP needs to stand for something other than "Win at any cost, and we're really not that different from Democrats".

Also, ever find anything to back your claim I used CREW to go after Murtha? I couldn't find it... maybe you can? Or retract your claim.
 
MrVicchio said:
She's a very left leaning Republican
Click to expand...

So left means you're for individual liberty, not leaving children to die out there in the cold, and thinking that your mom's life is more important then a bunch of cells.

Got it.

The more people like you post, the more you define "Conservative" as "Only Social Conservative."
 
obvious Child said:
So left means you're for individual liberty, not leaving children to die out there in the cold, and thinking that your mom's life is more important then a bunch of cells.

Got it.

The more people like you post, the more you define "Conservative" as "Only Social Conservative."
Click to expand...

I'm sorry did you want to comment on the issue at hand or just make pointless commentary to feel good?
 
jallman said:
Who exactly is she backstabbing?
Click to expand...

You're not stupid, so don't play stupid.

It's perfectly obvious the spiteful bitch is trying to siphon votes away from the real Republican candidate in a petty attempt to thwart the will of the voters who chose against her. She's knows perfectly well that she doesn't have a chance in hell of winning. How many people stupid enough to support her spitefulness are going to be able to spell "Murkowski" correctly, let alone the fact that she didn't have enough support to win the nomination so she's not going to get the support to win this election.

In all honesty, there are two possibilities in November. Miller wins, or the maggot the Democrats are putting up wins.

That's it.

Won't be a third option in the end.
 
Moot said:
Really. Well, if you have enough money like Club for Growth does you can buy almost anything, including an election....
Click to expand...

Yeah, if you're a Democrat, everything's for sale, even your dead Uncle Ernie's vote.

Republicans don't usually work that way, especially not the grass roots, and Americans never behave in that manner.
 
jallman said:
The people haven't voted in a general election yet. She isn't undermining anyone.
Click to expand...

Can you explain why what can be a convincingly sensitive and alert commentator on current events can suddenly melt into the spineless jellyfish that can post what you just posted?
 
The Giant Noodle said:
Anything you say on this thread holds no weight. Your hatred and lack of understanding towards anything Liberal is an absolute.
Click to expand...

That's because I'm a libertarian.

A real one.

Libertarians are opposed to liberalism.

That's because we grew up a long long time ago.
 
There is no doubt about it the better Lisa Murkowski does the worse it is for the needed change in the Balance of power in the Senate. Dividing the vote because of personal vanity is selfish and childish at best.
 
Last edited:
danarhea said:
Actually, this is going to end up helping the Republican nominee by siphoning off votes of those who are more moderate Republicans from the Democrat. In a two way race, I would call it close, but in a three way race, the GOP wins by a landslide.
Click to expand...

No. Obviously not.

The mind-numbed robot Democrats look for the D, just like is on their dunce caps. Murkowskin won't get any of those votes.

But there are, believe it or not, one or two mind numbed robot-like Republicans who can't tell the difference between the D and the R and signed up for the wrong party. They'll vote for The Spoiled Brat spoiler because that's what they did last year.

Do I really need to explain how ticket splitting works?

Really?
 
MrVicchio said:
She's a very left leaning Republican:

"Murkowski was one of five Republican senators who voted with Democrats for the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act.[10]"
Click to expand...

Ah.

That explain's Jallman's lust for the wench.
 
Deuce said:
Wait. To be miderate, you have to be liberal?

...there's no middle anymore?
Click to expand...

Ain't no such thing as an American moderate.

Moderation means compromising someone else's principles so you can feel good about yourself, and we all know that only the conservatives and Americans have principles.

So, yes, only liberals are moderates.
 
I say someone with money should start up a significant "Democrats for Murkowski" campaign to highlight all the good things Murkowski has done to promote the Democrat cause of Damage The United States.
 
Councilman said:
There is no doubt about it the better Lisa Murkowski does the worse it is for the needed change in the Balance of power in the Senate. Dividing the vote because of personal vanity is selfish and childish at best[/B].
Click to expand...
LOL It's hysterical to see righty's call other righty's selfish and childish. Dem's have been calling them that for years.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
I say someone with money should start up a significant "Democrats for Murkowski" campaign to highlight all the good things Murkowski has done to promote the Democrat cause of Damage The United States.
Click to expand...
So you like to tell other people how to spend their money? tsk, tsk, tsk, that's not very libertarian of you.
 
MrVicchio said:
I'm sorry did you want to comment on the issue at hand or just make pointless commentary to feel good?
Click to expand...

Merely pointing out a painful truth. Merely because you don't like it doesn't make it any less true. Your whole list of why she's on the left was summed up nicely by me.

If we assume the left is diametrically opposed to the right, right means that you are for less individual liberty, are for leaving children to die in the cold and would rather see your mother die then conduct research on a bunch of cells.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom