Only the 50 most recent replies are currently shown. Click on this text to display hidden posts as well.
62
Tree
ID: 248472317 Thu, Sep 02, 2010, 00:58
"primary defeat of incumbent Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski (confirmed by her concession yesterday) by former judge Joe Miller"
Incumbents don't get defeated easily.
actually, in the case of Alaska's Class 3 senators (Murkowski's class), they do.
Three of four people who have served in Class 3 - including Lisa Murkowski - lost in one of their renomination bids. Only Murkowski's father - who resigned to become Governor, did not.
sorry to burst your bubble.
63
Perm Dude
ID: 5510572522 Thu, Sep 02, 2010, 01:26
Miller's win actually gives Dems a chance to take the seat. Murkowski would have blown away Scott McAdams in the General Election, but it looks like McAdams is about 6 points or so away, in a state that a Democrat should never really be within 10 points in a Senate election.
64
Building 7 Leader
ID: 171572711 Thu, Sep 02, 2010, 07:54
Incumbents win like 80% of the time. I doubt Boldwin was referring to Class 3 senators in Alaska when he made that statement.
65
Tree
ID: 248472317 Thu, Sep 02, 2010, 08:36
I doubt Boldwin was referring to Class 3 senators in Alaska when he made that statement.
oh, so do i. his lack of research on this boards in recent years is well established.
66
Boldwin
ID: 1183027 Thu, Sep 02, 2010, 08:40
Well, yeah, except for class three senators from Alaska, of course I didn't mean them.
67
Building 7
ID: 229152116 Thu, Sep 02, 2010, 09:07
Doing research is required to post on these boards? Who made that rule?
And an incumbent running in a primary wins like 90% of the time.
68
Mith
ID: 28646259 Thu, Sep 02, 2010, 09:15
Tree are you saying there is something inherent to being a class 3 senator from AK that makes one more susceptable to losing an election? Or are you just noting an irrelevency for the purpose of pointless nitpicking?
69
Building 7 Leader
ID: 171572711 Thu, Sep 02, 2010, 09:31
We only have two senators where I live, so a class three senator must be pretty bad.
70
Perm Dude
ID: 5510572522 Thu, Sep 02, 2010, 09:34
Senators are divided into three classes, depending upon when they get re-elected. A third of the Senate is elected every two years.
71
Boldwin
ID: 1183027 Thu, Sep 02, 2010, 09:37
Lol....what would we do without PD?
72
Perm Dude
ID: 5510572522 Thu, Sep 02, 2010, 09:57
Live a richer, fuller life?
73
Boldwin
ID: 1183027 Thu, Sep 02, 2010, 10:00
Awww, give us a hug!
74
Tree
ID: 248472317 Thu, Sep 02, 2010, 10:29
Tree are you saying there is something inherent to being a class 3 senator from AK that makes one more susceptable to losing an election? Or are you just noting an irrelevency for the purpose of pointless nitpicking?
i was pointing out specifics. while in the bigger picture, what happens with Class 3 senators from Alaska is an outlier, in the specific picture of Alaskan politics, it doesn't seem so unusual for an incumbent to lose in a primary.
The difference between O'Donnell and other tea party-backed Senate candidates is she's running in a state that traditionally elects moderates. O'Donnell, a perennial candidate who once argued against masturbation on a MTV special, is not likely to move toward the middle, as Rubio has, and she doesn't look to benefit from the same anti-incumbent wave that's driven Angle's poll numbers against Harry Reid in Nevada. That's the key reason why national Republicans are so loathe to embrace O'Donnell's candidacy.
76
Boldwin
ID: 35816155 Wed, Sep 15, 2010, 08:37
Castle co-founded a group with George Soros. Winning a majority but being beholden to Soros is not winning at all.
Beware of any poll saying the Tea Party candidate has no chance this year.
Because those polls have a habit of sliding in favor of the Tea Party candidate.
77
Tree
ID: 248472317 Wed, Sep 15, 2010, 09:47
Beware of any poll saying the Tea Party candidate has no chance this year.
Rubio 43, Crist 27, Meek 21
Because those polls have a habit of sliding in favor of the Tea Party candidate.
and, as most articles about Rubio and the Tea Party have pointed out, he has attempted to shift many of his positions into a more moderate realm than they were when he ran with the Tea Party backing.
much like Scott Brown, who indeed proved to be the relative moderate many said he was, you'll stop cheering for Rubio too as his middle-ground positions become more obvious.
I [Glenn Reynolds - B] talk with Scott Rasmussen about his new book, Mad As Hell: How The Tea Party Movement Is Fundamentally Remaking Our Two-Party System, and about how much to trust the polls. Plus, what went wrong for Obama....it’s interesting that he notes, both in the book and the interview, that voters aren’t as flighty as politicos claim. They keep voting for people who promise lower taxes and smaller government, and they keep seeing those promises broken. - Instapundit
79
Boldwin
ID: 57852158 Wed, Sep 15, 2010, 09:58
Tree
Have you been following Crist's movements as well? His trustworthiness polling numbers are plumbing new depths.
80
Tree
ID: 248472317 Wed, Sep 15, 2010, 10:27
Have you been following Crist's movements as well? His trustworthiness polling numbers are plumbing new depths.
this isn't about Crist. This is about the Tea Party, who are through a monkey wrench in the plans of the GOP, which is fine.
it's also about Rubio, who is without question becoming more moderate as the election draws nearer. the smart Tea Party candidate will do that.
81
Mith
ID: 28646259 Wed, Sep 15, 2010, 10:37
They keep voting for people who promise lower taxes and smaller government, and they keep seeing those promises broken.
? Like Barack Obama?
82
Boldwin
ID: 57852158 Wed, Sep 15, 2010, 17:23
It's not like he was up front about his socialism. Besides peope were just voting for the charisma. The bloom is off that rose.
83
Tree
ID: 248472317 Wed, Sep 15, 2010, 18:23
It's not like he was up front about his socialism. Besides peope were just voting for the charisma. The bloom is off that rose.
all three of those comments are based in absurdity.
Tim Kaine, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, said: "There are seats that six months ago we would have lost that we will now win in November because Republicans are picking candidates outside of the mainstream."
“I’ve met her. I wasn’t frankly impressed by her abilities as a candidate,” Rove said during an interview with Fox News’ Sean Hannity. “One thing that O’Donnell is now going to have to answer in the general election that she didn't in the primary is her own checkered background.”
“There were a lot of nutty things she has been saying that don't add up,” Rove added. “Why did she mislead voters about her college education? How come it took nearly two decades to pay her college bills so she could get her college degree? How did she make a living?”
Former WSJer Tunku Varadarajan, in the Daily Beast:
The Tea Party has won its precious primaries. And I am stomping my foot as I write this, because that party has succeeded in handing American democracy back to the floundering Democrats.
Frum Forum also sees a dark day for the GOP:
The real action in this election cycle was in the Republican primaries, they are almost over, and we already know who won: (drum roll, please!) President Obama. There's your Tea Party Tally.
please, for the love of God, let Sarah Palin run for president in 2012.
85
Boldwin
ID: 57852158 Wed, Sep 15, 2010, 19:54
Can someone please interpret this for me?
Bill Clinton at a Dem fundraiser -
Former President Bill Clinton said Tuesday that the Republican Party is embracing "ideology over evidence" and pushing out pragmatic voices that would make even his White House successor seem like a liberal.
Clinton, speaking at a Democratic fundraiser in Minneapolis...Clinton, speaking at a Democratic fundraiser in Minneapolis, said there was no mistaking that Republicans have tacked hard right and questioned whether former President George W. Bush would fit in among the party's candidates this year.
"A lot of their candidates today, they make him look like a liberal," Clinton told an enthusiastic crowd at a downtown hotel as he campaigned for Democratic gubernatorial candidate Mark Dayton...
functioning brain cells and functioning brains are not entirely coterminous
They would not even close to coterminous - if that were something that would be relevent. But it's not, because fully functioning stem cells and fully functioning brain cells aren't anything close to coterminous, either.
Those not following science what political candidates actually say mock those of us who do.
96
Boldwin
ID: 258301821 Sat, Sep 18, 2010, 23:41
My point was that her statement was close enuff for government work. The average person reading that story would easily draw that conclusion. I will say that there is something deeply disturbing about human brain cells in mice. Twisted.
I will also say that very nearly zero of you were aware of that story which puts her ahead of you in science awareness.
That's crap. In fact I believe it's been discussed here/
98
Razor
ID: 265539 Sun, Sep 19, 2010, 23:22
This statement, apparently:
American scientific companies are cross-breeding humans and animals and coming up with mice with fully functioning human brains.
is close enough to this:
Less than one-tenth of one percent of the test mice's brain cells are human.
It's honestly tiresome to have morons like O'Connell in the public eye because their followers share the same charactersitics and can't identify facts when they see them or make sound logical arguments, leaving the rest of us to waste our time trying to go through all this rubbish.
99
Seattle Zen Leader
ID: 055343019 Mon, Sep 20, 2010, 01:24
American scientific companies are cross-breeding humans and animals and coming up with mice with fully functioning human brains.
Seriously old news...
Hell, Steamboat Willie was able to navigate a vessel back in the 20's.
100
Boldwin
ID: 118532113 Tue, Sep 21, 2010, 14:54
Razor
That was probably imprecise speech making a rushed sidepoint. If you really think she believes there might be little english speaking einsteins in labs you are probably doing less critical thinking than she is.
On the otherhand once you are putting them in there where does it end? If you can't see how unethical and distasteful this is...off to the Island of Morreau. The power elite have been playing godlike situational ethics games that they don't have the right or ability to handle.
101
DWetzel at work
ID: 49962710 Tue, Sep 21, 2010, 15:02
Well, Here's the actual transcript. It doesn't look to me like it was a "rushed side point", but opinions can differ, I suppose.
102
Razor
ID: 57854118 Wed, Sep 22, 2010, 10:04
Like I said, no sense in going through this rubbish.
103
Boldwin
ID: 448192421 Fri, Sep 24, 2010, 23:20
“We knew they were desperate, but no one suspected the Left would turn this into a literal witch-hunt.” - Robert Stacy McCain
104
Mith
ID: 28646259 Fri, Sep 24, 2010, 23:46
When she's accused of familial ties and nefarious cnspiracy with Kenyan dictators, then you can call it a witch hunt.
105
Boldwin
ID: 1610122510 Sun, Nov 25, 2012, 11:12
#MarkLevin: "You tea party purists? You know why you're hated? Because you're the only thing standing b/t our liberty & their #Tyranny."
Add Saxby Chambliss and Peter King to the list of people who need to go in order to save the country.
The rampant denial by the GOP, is absolutely mind boggling. Then you have the far right, which while mystifying to begin with, has since shown itself to be utterly unable to grasp reality AT ALL.
*IF*, the GOP fractures with the TP forming it's own party, and only those they call RINO remaining as GOP, then the GOP is doomed. There are not enough moderates or TP types in the GOP, to allow either one to carry the day without the other.
Honest question Boldwin: Is it your intent, to be so disagreeable that the rest of us grow so frustrated in responding to your nonsense, that Dave Hall decides to just shut down this forum? Is THAT, your real purpose here?
as a quick follow up, you've more or less refused to respond to counters to your points - whether i make them, Sarge makes, PV, MITH, PD, whomever - you either change the subject, or flat out ignore it.
that doesn't make for good discussion. when you posted "so and so has gone underground", and then someone else posts a photo of that person at a polling station during a recount, you conveniently ignore that FACT.
if you were in interested in actual discussion, you would confront the counter-posts to the many you post. instead, you'd prefer to ignore them when you're proven wrong.