|
|
| Republican sweep? (517967) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
| (517967) | |
Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 05:12:46 2009 Christie up by 6 in NJ Hoffman up by 12 in NY-23 The former simply underscores the momentum towards Christie seen over the last 5-7 days. The latter is a bit harder to believe. In the end, I still predict both will win close races. |
|
|
| (517968) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Nov 2 05:28:12 2009, in response to Republican sweep?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 05:12:46 2009. Heh. Check PPP's methods ... they're the robocall folks ... :) |
|
|
| (518001) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by cortelyounext on Mon Nov 2 10:29:22 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Nov 2 05:28:12 2009. Here's another one. FWIW, I still think Corzine will win but I got no horse in the race. If I did - Daggett... just because.Quinnipiac Bobcat Lacrosse |
|
|
| (518021) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Mon Nov 2 13:14:36 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by cortelyounext on Mon Nov 2 10:29:22 2009. If Corzine loses after all the work Obama did for him on Sunday, it may indicate that Obama himself is damaged goods. |
|
|
| (518026) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Mon Nov 2 13:21:34 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Nov 2 05:28:12 2009. Have you seen the television ads for the Virginia race? They are basically Obama for President ads, trying to relive the incredible momentum he and the Dems had a year ago. |
|
|
| (518039) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by docstox on Mon Nov 2 13:55:02 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by LuchAAA on Mon Nov 2 13:14:36 2009. Very true.I think that's why the many frantic trips by Obama, Clinton et al to help Corzine out.If Dagget wasn't in the race, Christie would win by a landslide.However, NJ, as I stated before, is a solidly blue Democratic minority and union state.I still say Corzine squeaks in. |
|
|
| (518040) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Nov 2 13:56:21 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by docstox on Mon Nov 2 13:55:02 2009. Obama thinks he is still on campaign. It's crazy how he ran to New Jersey. |
|
|
| (518042) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by docstox on Mon Nov 2 14:00:33 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Nov 2 13:56:21 2009. He realizes that his mandate for change depends on the momentum he created during the election.If Corzine loses in a solidly blue state, it portends trouble.So far, Obama is a brand that has to be sold. |
|
|
| (518045) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Mon Nov 2 14:09:47 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by docstox on Mon Nov 2 13:55:02 2009. Without victories in NJ and VA, it will create a problem for dems in 2010, who need Obama's money raising abilities, but must consider the fact that he might drive Independents away. |
|
|
| (518046) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Nov 2 14:10:44 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by docstox on Mon Nov 2 14:00:33 2009. Obama needs to stick to his job. His "momentum" is in the toilet anyway. |
|
|
| (518049) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Mon Nov 2 14:11:28 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Nov 2 14:10:44 2009. hmmmm, hmmmm, hmmmmm. |
|
|
| (518063) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Nov 2 16:03:51 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by LuchAAA on Mon Nov 2 13:21:34 2009. Heh. I'm too busy watching the republican ads for NY-23 ... sorry, Virginia TV via DX doesn't come in here anymore since the switch to digital. :)I'm sorta rooting for the GOP to win ALL of this year's races so that they'll be encouraged to put up even bigger nutjobs for 2010. :) |
|
|
| (518064) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Nov 2 16:06:36 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by cortelyounext on Mon Nov 2 10:29:22 2009. Like I said in the other post, I'm rooting for the republicans. If they win, they're going to go totally bozo for next year with even bigger nutballs. I wonder if they can find Perot's addled Admiral? :) Admiral James Stockdale - "Rurrit! Why am I here?" |
|
|
| (518074) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by docstox on Mon Nov 2 17:52:31 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Nov 2 16:03:51 2009. The Republicans are fighting amongst each other, moderates and conservatives.Whatever comes out of it better appeal to the Independents out there because that huge group swings elections.Obama got elected with their support as Reagan did in '80.If Obama and the Dems screw up the rest of this year and 2010, it gets easier for the Republicans to gain ground.I remember Reagan being portrayed as a 'nutjob" in 1980, but people were so fed up with Carter and the Dems, he got elected.Still, it was very close in '80 until Reagan blew away Carter in the debates ("there you go again"). |
|
|
| (518076) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Nov 2 18:03:19 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by docstox on Mon Nov 2 17:52:31 2009. Reagan definitely had the ability to read a script, and compared to "deer caught in headlights" that went over well. But in the end, Reagan was the perfect puppet for the party. No point in going over the details as to why I say that, ancient history and revisionism make it not worth the arguing. :)But yeah, as the republicans go more hardcore with their "ethnic cleansing" they'll probably see a revival amongst those who aren't paying attention. |
|
|
| (518080) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Nov 2 18:13:15 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Nov 2 18:03:19 2009. Reagan definitely had the ability to read a script, and compared to "deer caught in headlights" that went over well. But in the end, Reagan was the perfect puppet for the party. No point in going over the details as to why I say that, ancient history and revisionism make it not worth the arguing. :)Sounds like our current president's rise to power. |
|
|
| (518081) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by docstox on Mon Nov 2 18:14:31 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Nov 2 18:13:15 2009. Except he reads a teleprompter,LOL! |
|
|
| (518082) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 18:18:41 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Nov 2 05:28:12 2009. So is Rasmussen, and Rasmussen has an excellent track record for accuracy. The sample is a little small. |
|
|
| (518083) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 18:19:40 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by LuchAAA on Mon Nov 2 13:21:34 2009. Obama bailed on Deeds weeks ago. Too bad he didn't bail on Corzine, he was surging, until Obama came to Jersey. |
|
|
| (518084) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Mon Nov 2 18:20:27 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Nov 2 16:06:36 2009. maybe palin can come back .......................LOL |
|
|
| (518085) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 18:21:02 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Nov 2 13:56:21 2009. He needs to keep the Democrat in Trenton. NJ was the first Democratic state to turn rightward in 1993, which brought on the GOP takeover of 1994. History might be repeating itself, if the GOP can manage to NOT fuck it up. |
|
|
| (518086) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 18:24:18 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Nov 2 18:03:19 2009. Reagan definitely had the ability to read a script, and compared to "deer caught in headlights" that went over well. But in the end, Reagan was the perfect puppet for the party.Reagan wrote a lot of his own stuff, and he was adept at improvising. And he was no puppet for the party, he was the puppet master, forcing the GOP over to the right after the fiasco of Watergate and the disastrous Ford administration. Everything you attribute to Reagan is wrong. |
|
|
| (518088) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Nov 2 18:28:48 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 18:19:40 2009. Too bad he didn't bail on Corzine, he was surging, until Obama came to Jersey.LOL! Obama is becoming the kiss of death for campaigning for people....almost as bad as if Bush would have come out in favor of people last year! |
|
|
| (518089) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Nov 2 18:29:47 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 18:21:02 2009. History might be repeating itself, if the GOP can manage to NOT fuck it up.That's a lot to ask. |
|
|
| (518090) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Mon Nov 2 18:31:32 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 18:24:18 2009. LOL, the eyes of a child. Alzheimers.your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (518092) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by cortelyounext on Mon Nov 2 18:35:16 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Nov 2 16:06:36 2009. I really felt bad for Stockdale. He led an honorable life - US Naval Academy, Graduate Degree from Stanford, 7 years of hell in the Hilton (Hoa Lo), President of the Naval War College. Maybe it's my shared military heritage but I have trouble with the caricature. The responsibility as SRO at Hoa Lo was immense, and the physical trauma and mental anguish and emotional scarring nobody should endure. On the other hand, I understand the point you were trying to make. |
|
|
| (518097) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Nov 2 18:41:36 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by docstox on Mon Nov 2 18:14:31 2009. So did Reagan ... he never went anywhere without one ... even his inauguration. I know this is blasphemy to those who weren't around back then, but Reagan was his own favorite vegetable from day one. :(And so Barack learned from the expert ... a memorable President is ALWAYS scripted. And knows where the X on the floor is to hit his mark. 
|
|
|
| (518098) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Nov 2 18:43:53 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 18:24:18 2009. I call bullshit ... I was there. I covered Reagan, was in the room too. The man was an idiot. Nancy and his handlers did a VERy good job at hiding it, as did a friendly media who liked him because he gave them cookies. |
|
|
| (518099) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Nov 2 18:45:10 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 18:18:41 2009. Rasmussen is similarly not a decent pollster, but they side with you guys. Now that all said, do I think the republican will win? Dunno. But I sure HOPE so ... you guys need to get rid of the rest of the center in your party for 2010 and so I'm all for you guys pumping up. :) |
|
|
| (518101) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Nov 2 18:51:10 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Mon Nov 2 18:20:27 2009. I have faith ... she seems to be quite the "motivator" for them even though she's become a cartoon. Makes ya wonder who ripped these folks off for their education. :) |
|
|
| (518102) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Nov 2 18:52:28 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by cortelyounext on Mon Nov 2 18:35:16 2009. Absolutely ... when Perot was running, I looked into his background and it was pretty serious indeed. But when he was picked, he definitely wasn't up to the job. Then again ... Joe the Biden. :( |
|
|
| (518105) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Mon Nov 2 19:08:49 2009, in response to Republican sweep?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 05:12:46 2009. PPP is way off; everyone else has Christie within the margin of error. Prediction: absentee ballots will be needed to determine the seats.VA is not a surprise, and the only surprise in NY-23 is that the Democrat is even making it a race. It should have been Doug Hoffman by 40. |
|
|
| (518121) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 19:41:00 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by Fred G on Mon Nov 2 18:31:32 2009. Nope, through the eyes of someone who doesn't hate the man. I'm not a Reagan apologist, he had his failures, but he deserves credit for rescuing both the economy and our national self-worth after a bruising two decades of decline and self-doubt. |
|
|
| (518141) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Mon Nov 2 20:55:46 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 18:24:18 2009. Reagan wrote a lot of his own stuff,I did't know Reagan was a woman.  |
|
|
| (518144) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Mon Nov 2 21:04:29 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Nov 2 19:41:00 2009. I don't hate Reagan but don't believe the hype of his greatness either. He had his good points and I agree that he changed the country's mood after the two decades of rough times for the US. At the time I admired him for firing the air traffic controllers. I thought that was Truman-esque.your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (518145) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by cortelyounext on Mon Nov 2 21:08:57 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by Fred G on Mon Nov 2 21:04:29 2009. IAWTP |
|
|
| (518217) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Tue Nov 3 03:02:24 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by AMoreira81 on Mon Nov 2 19:08:49 2009. the AP just came out with an article about the GOP being in serious trouble regardless of the outcomes today. talk about liberal MSM spin. |
|
|
| (518272) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Nov 3 11:33:00 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by LuchAAA on Tue Nov 3 03:02:24 2009. It's called pre-spin. Launch it before the inevitable bad news hits to make it sound less desperate.If the GOP leadership and it's "tea bag" base can end their hostile relationship and work together, the Democrats will lose big next year. |
|
|
| (518274) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Nov 3 11:39:17 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by Fred G on Mon Nov 2 21:04:29 2009. I fault Reagan for three things:- Not doing more to fight Congress on domestic spending - The slow response to the AIDS epidemic - Anthony Kennedy |
|
|
| (518275) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Nov 3 11:40:45 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Nov 2 18:29:47 2009. I know. Gingrich did much to unify the GOP going into the '94 midterms, 2010 will require even greater leadership. |
|
|
| (518305) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Nov 3 15:49:18 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Nov 3 11:39:17 2009. LOL! Thank God for Anthony Kennedy. We can thank Ted Kennedy for that. |
|
|
| (518307) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Nov 3 15:53:20 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Nov 3 15:49:18 2009. All the good Kennedy's were shot. |
|
|
| (518308) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Nov 3 15:54:04 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Nov 3 15:53:20 2009. All the good Borks don't exist. |
|
|
| (518312) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Nov 3 15:55:45 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Nov 3 15:54:04 2009. It's amazing that the Bork hysterics still exist, after all these years. |
|
|
| (518313) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Tue Nov 3 15:58:26 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Nov 3 15:53:20 2009. You admire Bobby Kennedy?And Joe and Kathleen died violent deaths but weren't shot. |
|
|
| (518367) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Nov 3 17:14:24 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Nov 3 15:55:45 2009. It's amazing that Anthony Kennedy hysterics still exist, after all these years.If Bork had been there instead, things would have been a lot different. For one, Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992) would have been decided differently. I'd rather live in Anthony Kennedy's America. |
|
|
| (518371) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Tue Nov 3 17:32:52 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Nov 3 15:53:20 2009. The right in the 60s did not think any Kennedys were good. |
|
|
| (518374) | |
Re: Republican sweep? |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Nov 3 17:41:04 2009, in response to Re: Republican sweep?, posted by italianstallion on Tue Nov 3 17:32:52 2009. Impeach Earl Warren! :) |
|
|