Tea Party Candidates Must Learn the Art of Fencing
Tea-Party favorite Christine O’ Donnell lost her bid to become Delaware’s newest senator by a whopping 16% margin. She lost it to a condescending, nasty fellow that nobody in Delaware actually likes very much.
In Nevada, Sharron Angle — another Tea Party favorite — also lost, by a narrower margin, her Senate race against Harry Reid, a condescending, nasty fellow that nobody in Nevada actually likes at all.
Angle ran against an established senator and lost by only 5%, while O’Donnell, vying for an empty seat, lost by three times that. One would expect the results to have been exactly opposite: that the established candidate would crush his opponent, while the empty seat would bring a squeaker.
Had the economy in Nevada been better, or the mood of the electorate a bit less angry, it is doubtful that Angle could have challenged the incumbent Reid as effectively as she did. Considering both, however, Harry Reid should have been unseated this year, and the only reason he was not — machine politics aside — was because of Angle’s own weaknesses.
Both Sharron Angle and Christine O’ Donnell were running long-shot campaigns in states that habitually send goofball Democrat men to the senate. Both women, unfortunately, carried their own goofball-vibes with them. Angle, on paper a stronger candidate than O’Donnell, had a perpetual deer-in-headlights look to her; she had problems taking questions or working outside of a script, and she ran some questionable ads.
O’Donnell, scrappier and more confident than Angle, was more willing to jump into the fray, but often unable to communicate her thoughts clearly. She also ran some questionable ads. The problem was never that O’Donnell was “not a witch,” but that her “I’m you” was unconvincing and did not resonate beyond her base.
Some are blaming the O’Donnell defeat on the GOP establishment, which was lukewarm to her candidacy. If only Karl Rove and Charles Krauthammer had given O’ Donnell their seals of approval, the whine goes, she would have won.
Well, had O’ Donnell lost by a point or three, that argument might be valid, but when a candidate loses by 15 points — particularly against so unlikable an opponent as Senator-elect Chris Coons — the blame needs to be a bit more inwardly directed. On the stump, in debate, and even in her concession speech, Christine O’Donnell came off as a platitude-spouting lightweight, fine for a morning talk show (in fact, perhaps too smart for some of them) but not for the Senate.
I think you are giving too much credit to the intelligence of the electorate in the case of O’Donnell in Delaware. A state that elects Joe Biden repeatedly has to be as dim intellectually as the one that elects gay pimp Barney Frank or the one that elects the lying, poseur Dick Blumenthal. And in the case of Angle in Nevada, you turn a blind eye to those nefarious organizations SEIU and ACORN.
I respectfully disagree, Patrick. Just because your opponents may be dumb, liars or worse is not an excuse for having inept candidates. Angle and ODonnell were not good enough. Not even close.
However, conceding Patrick’s point about the electorate probably strengthens Elizabeth’s point concerning the qualities needed to succeed, and probably strengthens yours as well. Criticism of Patrick’s point lies in its hyperbolic nature: uncharitable, and certainly untrue with its broad-brush characterization of intelligence.
It would have been “hyperbolic” of me if I had called the every voter of those states an idiot. I didn’t do that. But by electing people with serious character flaws, (and I guess it’s uncharitable to name names) people who are plagiarists, impostors, killers of a young woman, gay bordello operators, it would seem that questioning the intelligence of the electorate as a whole is not unreasonable.
How does that make you different from Obama, John Kerry, Bill Maher and other liberals who come in for a heap of rightwing criticism for suggesting the electorate isn’t smart enough to understand the “nuances” of politics?
I live in one of the states you are deriding, and like every other state, it has residents of varying intellectual abilities. I get the sense that they could all be MENSA members, and if they didn’t agree with your opinions, you’d consider them “bad people.”
Please, save the condescension.
It is widely accepted that Angle won the single debate allowed by Reid. That is not inept. She may have had bad advice and she may have made gaffes but she looked competent when I saw her.
I’m a Nevadan active in GOP Politics and a tea party supporter. By the end of the campaign, Angle had so thoroughly proven her total lack of competence that even I was tempted to vote for Reid. (I didn’t, of course.) She was completely ineffective in her 12 years in local politics. She didn’t just avoid the press, she LITERALLY ran away from them on several occasions. She is neither bright nor intellectually curious. She lies easily, incredulously denying things she said that she’d said many times on tape (she didn’t even call it a “clarification – she just out and out denied things which were obviously true).
None of the major local tea party groups supported Angle in the primary, because they knew these things about her. Reid himself actively involved himself in the GOP primary, and his campaign openly acknowledged they’d love Angle as their opponent. Angle had spent the last decade poking nearly every other Republican in the state in the eye, including some very solid individuals, because she didn’t think they were pure enough. She burned bridges unnecessarily. When she lost a primary in ’08, she couldn’t even be bothered to make a frickin’ phone call to the other Republican. If elected, she would have been a dividing force, and her careless loose lips would have provided endless ammo to anti-tea party forces.
I’m not glad Reid won. I voted for Sharron. But I’m also relieved in some ways she didn’t win. Outside groups like the Tea Party Express, without whom Sharron would have got about 5% in the primary, need to spend more time on the ground locally before they stick their noses in unfamiliar territory next time.
“Intellectually curious” is a phrase lefties use, as in lack thereof about W. It was not true about W, not that it would have particularly bothered me if it was true.
In my art, its a very useful quality, yet not quite essential. But I write SF/F. A President needs other traits more.
As to Elizabeth’s point about deftness with words, it is outstandingly useful, but again not neccessary. Her request that everyone be Reagan like is duly noted, and circular filed as utopian.
And she goes way too light on the Establishment types.
What’s your point? I’m not asking for a rocket scientist, but I’m asking for more than a handful of brain cells to rub together. Sharron didn’t have ‘em, and that’s one of the reasons she lost. She was unable to truly understand conservative principles, and therefore unable to articulate them in a way that made any sense at all. And she was completely ineffective when it came to turning conservative principles into any kind of policy while she was in the state Assembly. She talked a lot about “fighting” for them, but the worst coach in the NFL “fights” for a Super Bowl ring, too.
Just because a particular candidate shares our general political philosophy doesn’t excuse us from not being honest about their flaws. If we pretend some of these losses (and this one very much in particular) weren’t the result of incredibly poor judgment on the part of certain tea party groups, we will create fatal blind spots for ourselves in the future. You know, like Obama continuing to believe that it was something other than his policies which led to his electoral repudiation.
I’m having to reply here to P2′s comment below for some reason.
Publius,
My first point is that your first para talking about how you don’t want a rocket scientist sounds like a lefty wrote it. Its the same baseless slur Palin has to deal with: She stupid.
From your description, I’m supposed to believe she’s not your ex-wife who got the house, the car, and the dog. Your vision of her is so unremittingly negative, so awful that either She’s HORROR!! or you’re not being accurate.
The fact that a bunch of Nevadan GOP high ups supported Reid tends to make me think that her charge of them being insufficiently pure was accurate.
What I saw was a woman who was uncomfortable, but not a HORROR.
@ Patrick of Atlantis…………you are so right. I am starting to think that PM is a 50+1 typr media org. They just dont get it……leave DC and open an office in S. FL outside the belt-way for a more down to Earth perspective!
yeah, and it’s one of the only places where people make sense and aren’t off trippin on pie in the sky ideas. People that actually understand the work a day world, paying taxes, know that we can’t have people like obama in charge or our republic will fall on it’s collective face.
Reid got re-elected by a state with 14.4 unemployment!!!, total brainless actions. Absolutely no excuse for his reelection.
And what percentage of the Nevada election results was the product of fraud?
………just enough to win my brother! SEIU and no DOJ investigation? UnAmerican
there will be no investigation, it would be un AMerican to call a politician to task, esp a democrat,ie, Waters, Frank, Boxer..
respectfully disagree with your analysis.
if the media is hostile to the truth then maybe no honest person has a fair chance.
the voters only need a little help to never give a person a chance and Rove and Krauthammer made sure O’Donnell didn’t get any fairness in the press.
…an aside in the case of Angle (and others) there was enough vote fraud to keep the democrat in power.
…Unless the media can be bypassed. They seek a monopoly over the dissemination of news and opinion, but they don’t necessarily have to get one. Otherwise, why are we here at Pajamas Media?
Sorry but you’re preaching to the choir. A vast majority of the electorate is getting their “news” from perky Katie and/or the daily show. And, they actually believe that Stephen Colbert is a conservative. If the media did their jobs we would not have the sleazy ads run by the unions and the dscc flooding the airwaves. If the media did their jobs we would be welcoming Senators Buck and Rossi to the party.
You’re here to agree with each other, to tell each other how wonderful you all are and how bad everybody else is. You’re here to lie with impunity and anonymity and mindlessly push forward the volcanic misinformation of Fox News. I’m here to tell you I know why you’re here, and to lay bare the relentless hypocrisy of self righteous right wing extremists. And I think that’s just plain fun.
You’re here because you’re nuttier than a fruit cake. Stop deluding yourself.
OK, I’ve stopped. Why doesn’t anything seem different?
Hmmmm …., have you checked yourself in a mirror yet today? Betchu look different, what with your bright, positive, new outlook and all. You might even pass for a Republican now …, although, if you want to pass for straight, too, you’ll need more of a makeover than we can offer you here.
BTW, don’t get discouraged. You’ve been delusional for so long that it will take up to a week for its effects to wear off. But you’ll see, you will feel differently, too, by not this Sunday, but by next Sunday if you keep practicing at not deluding yourself anymore. Trust me. I know. I grew up in San Fernando Valley, and it took me until a week after I moved here to realize that it was my new neighbors who were sane.
Truly inspired analysis and analogy.
If I were running, I ask myself, how would I deal with the press? Answer: adversarially. I imagine I would view them as the enemy more than my actual opponent. The reason it appeals to the base, is because they agree. The Old Media is the enemy. Without them, these Socialist trash could never win any office.
Unfortunately, the mushy-middle do not apprehend their own imminent danger. When you point it out, or react to the threat, they see you as a bit unstable or weird. No man can be a prophet in his own land.
So, perhaps you are right. When you react to the press, the press fences. They redirect it and show the public, “See how unstable he is.” Reagan was referred to as Teflon. Nothing stuck to him. We on the Right have to be happy warriors. Then, all their smears lose their power, because they do not stick.
Frankly, I’m sick of hearing how saintly Ronald Reagan was, and besides, that was like what, 1980? Was there even much media then to speak of to make this comparison valid? I was only a child, but I recall three netowrks, maybe HBO, and public broadcasting for TV, and the local newspapers. I don’t know much about the state of talk radio or national papers in those days. Did USAToday exist back then? It is nothing like the 24-7 news cycle online like today. I’m sure even Reagan would have had trouble with that, especially when he was having memory problems in his later years.
Furthermore, some of O’Donnell’s problems with the media aspect of her campaign were not that self-inflicted. She tried taking it direct to voters with her informercial which was forgotten somehow by public access, and there’s something rather special about having Bill Maher start his own narrative with old tapes because she wasn’t supposed to have even won the primaries in his mind, so he was going to make sure he was going to cause trouble with the witch and other comments. Not so easy to just parry on that one.
I couldn’t agree with you more, Anchoress. I would also add that one part of a politician’s job description AFTER he or she is elected, not just during the campaign, is the ability to deal with a hostile press. If you can’t do that, you should go look for other work. You’re not doing anybody any favors by whining about it, particularly your supporters. Personally, I can’t stand Harry Reid and feel terrible he’s back in office. But if you’re going to win, you need better candidates. The tea party, we hope, will learn that. They’re only getting started.
Roger, you make probably the most important point here. The key now is to learn, both from the successes, and the failures.
As for O’Donnell, I think this is all for the best. Repeatedly, I’ve heard conservatives saying that they want to “send the Republicans a message”. They did this by not voting for substandard candidates, which led to the House and Senate takeover by the Democrats, and then by not voting for McCain. The Republicans never got the message. I hope conservatives don’t decide to “send the GOP a message”, by sending Obama back to the oval office.
Now however, they seem to understand O’Donnell being put on the ballot instead of Castle. The lesson we should learn is to keep the internecine fights within the primaries, not the general election.
We need to start preparing for the 2012 elections, and start today. The left is in a constant campaign mode, and we need to be also. We’ve seen what they’ll do to inexperienced candidates, and we’ve seen how many people fell for the left’s attacks. Don’t ever expect fair treatment on television. They’re campaigning, not reporting.
Get ready for the left to put the Republicans through the meat grinder. I can only hope we will stand behind them when the going gets tough. All too often, we send them there, only to let them face the left alone. Without our constant reinforcement, they’ll naturally believe we no longer care. Let’s be sure we keep the pressure on, and them focused this time.
Christine O’Donnell was a bad candidate. The only worse candidate in Delaware, apart from Coons, was Mike Castle. He was an old tired sell out who pretended to be a Republican. And Republicans in Delaware, and in the media. enjoyed playing along with the pretend game. Christine O’Donnell just happened to be the only conservative with guts in the state. So, she ran. Twice. In one of the bluest states. And the second time she won the primary. Sadly, the Delaware Republican state party, and certain media elites, don’t like people with courage who take on the system. So Christine put up with a month of so-called conservative elite criticism of her. What I saw of her was a courageous, articulate candidate with guts. What I see now in the blogosphere is cowardly weak disgusting trashing of a very good campaign run in a state that has never seen a conservative run. In a moral world, conservatives would be supporting her for her pioneering work, not trashing her. Roger – you truly disappoint me.
Kent I agree,
Christine was an enormous long-shot, it took big BIG balls to even try what she did knowing how Palin was treated…
But remember even among conservatives, the Clique of “professionals” like this author, Rove, Krauthammer etc etc, are elites themselves to one degree or another. They travel in distinctly different social and economic circles than us, and are also are afflicted with that condescending attitude that “the little people” are too unsophisticated to be politicians…
Rather than call out the media for being so partisan, they prefer we become more like THEM….smug insiders that know how to play the game better
It aint a game, its my country, get it?
” . . . after how Palin was treated.”
How was she treated? We keep hearing about all of these terrible attacks . . . like what?
We keep hearing about all of these terrible attacks . . . like what?
You’re kidding us? How about that she was secretly carrying her daughter’s child; that she and Todd were getting divorced; that her underage daughter was having sex with ballplayers; that she had to spend who knows how much defending herself against frivolous lawsuits and criminal investigations; that a famous, well-paid author looking to write very negative book about her rented the house next door for the summer.
I, mean, where have you been these last two years?
Geez, Sensei, that you didn’t notice says a lot about you.
Are you serious? Did you spend the 2008 campaign in a spaceship? Palin was subjected to the most vicious smear campaign American politics has seen in decades, perhaps ever. One web site counted over 80 separate smears that had been circulated against her. She was the most hated person in US politics since at least Richard Nixon, and probably since FDR. To this day almost everyone I know thinks she’s some sort of uninformed dolt. And you ask how she was treated?!
” . . . after how Palin was treated.”
How was she treated? We keep hearing about all of these terrible attacks . . . like what?”
I would tell you, but with your head stuck in the ground like that, I doubt you’d be able to hear me.
In other words, you, Mike, Craig, Milhouse, Bill and Polly are so ignorant, uninformed, shallow, ditzy and clueless that you’ve resorted to smoke, mirrors and baloney to save face and to deflect attention away from the fact that none of you, not one of you has the knowledge to address Sensel’s question properly.
Can’t make this stuff up folks. You can read this silliness every day here on this website.
Incidentally, I would have helped you out, but c’mon, guys, you’re so lame that you’re practically on life support. Why should I resuscitate you if you’re just going to die on me anyway? LOL
BTW, I suspect that moon carrot already knew the answers to her question before she asked it, but anticipated that all of you would be so clueless that you would stutter, stammer and say “Duh” collectively.
Which other candidates had a onetime respectable, major national magazine (Atlantic) publishing numerous stories questioning whether the candidate’s children were actually theirs?
You have got to be kidding or trying to be ironic. How about hacking her cell phone and publishing all her e-mails and her address book ?
Dope.
Sentsy, quit playing dumb, even for you this is a silly statement/question.
Or my presonal favorites…
A well known, multi million dollar multi platinum album selling favorite celebrity anouncing into a microphone on stage in front of thousands of concert goers “…Fu&% Sara Palin..”
MMM yeah, like Tobey Kieth or someone of HIS political bend would have said that to his audience about Geraldine Ferrarow (if you even know the connection, I doubt it, before your time)
Or how about a very well known stand up comic suggesting if Mrs Palin ever showed up in the city, her bla@K boyfriends would Gang r@pe her…
Nice, always the left that stoops to racist, violent, ugly and intolerant hate speach, then plays dumb when called out…
You are no Sensei, you are too un-observant to survive anywhere but in your mothers basement.
PLEASE dont try to instruct ANYONE, in ANYTHING… you are simply putting their lives in danger with your ignorance
Apparently I need to instruct you . . .
“like Tobey Kieth or someone of HIS political bend would have said that to his audience about Geraldine Ferrarow”
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=757_1187963465
You were saying?
Sarah Palin irks me. She says that she wants men to consider her as their equal, but only when it serves her purposes. Otherwise, she wants to receive preferential treatment, because she is a woman, and she becomes a whining crybaby seeking the support of momma’s boys like Sean Hannity whenever she gets into trouble, usually by her own making. She is a selfish, self-centered, spoiled brat, who is accustomed to always getting her own way, and who become spitelf and viciously vendictive whenever she doesn’t. In fact, by anyone’s definition and to anyone who knows that phoney, little Miss Cutesy is actually a classic bitch, whose agenda has absolutely nothing to do with what is in the best interests of this country.
Well, perhaps I was being a wee bit too strident there. But she is a real piece of work IMHO.
Senseli: a rosid dicot genus that includes moon carrots. That explains it.
I’ll give ODonnel some credit for having the guts to run, but she was still a lousy candidate. She let the election be about her, and not about fiscal conservatism, and came across as a flake. Dont blame it on the state either. In a big repub year like this, repubs can win in dem states, just look at Scott Brown, governor Cristie, and that guy that beat Feingold in Min.
The real problem in Deleware may be that the repub organization there is so atrophied that they can’t come up with any decent repub candidates that aren’t complete RHINOS. Hopefully a good Tea Party organization is there to rebuild them from the ground up. One good way for dem leaning states is to go for candidates that are fiscally conservative, but socially moderate, like Scott Brown. They are more likely to win in dem leaning states, and are not RHINOS on the issues that matter, like fiscal conservatism. It also helps to get candidates that managed to make a good living outside of politics/law/media, which ODonnel was not.
Scott Brown won primarily because he promised to vote against ObamaCare, and I don’t doubt that he would have if the Senate hadn’t wormed their way around “reconciliation” and another vote. Aside from that, I’ve seen no signs of conservatism from Brown, which would make him another RINO.
I hate to think there’s any state in which only a RINO “Republican” can win and I hope you’re right about the Tea Party finding the right genuine fiscal conservative. There are some who believe social conservatism is a must, always. Unfortunately, that’s a sure turn-off to too many people. (Actually, it’s something of a turn-off to me, too, but I continue to value fiscal conservatism too much to switch to Dem; not everyone is that fiscally conservative.)
Oh really? Well, an “old, tired out” Rhino who voted with Republicans most of the time would have been a helluvalot better than a liberal Democrat who will NEVER vote with Republicans.
Man-up and concede that you showed incredibly bad judgment by supporting that ditz, O’Donnell.
The Tea Partiers are screw-ups. They shouldn’t have endorsed Angle, Fiorino or O’Donnell, and they sure as hell shouldn’t have stabbed Murkowski in her back for no other reason than to satisfy Palin’s petty, bitchy, senseless and vicious vendetta.
I will say it loud and often: every one of the other 49 states in the Union need to follow the example of Texas’s True the Vote group that sprang up and organized itself expertly and fast. We were given crash courses in election law and very well-organized materials to make sure we only exercised our rights and didn’t set a toe across the line. I was very disappointed to not be able to hear of any other state with a similar group and am going to try to push TTV leaders to venture into other states and help them set up before 2012. If we don’t do something, we will wake up in a banana republic of rigged elections–soon if not already.
And when you do, please consider making Cleveland, Ohio your first stop. Elections there are frighteningly Third World. In contrast, yesterday I participated in an awesomely well-run (think of an old-time American civics class textbook or short film feature, only with state-of-the-art machines) voting experience here in flyover country, to which I have had the incalculable blessing of being able to relocate.
agreed. I am going to make contacts and see what can be done in my area.
Exactly right, and a perfect model to follow would be Michele Bachmann.
I sure do agree about Michele Bachmann. Chris Matthews did his best to get under her skin, accusing her of what Dems always do, responding to every question with an answer completely unrelated to the question. And HE sounded angry.
She turned it right around on him and it appeared that she got under his skin. One of my favorite post-election interviews.
Elizabeth, I’m an Anchoress fan, but to equate Sarah Palin with Sharron Angle and Christine O’Donnell is, I believe, hitting way below the belt.
You say, “Palin is perfectly capable of deft bladework, but too often chooses to attack when a parry-and-feint will do.” Is that so?
When I consider the utter, on-going, and diabolical degradation to which Sarah Palin—not perfect: she’d be the first to admit—and her family, including her children, have been subjected, and then consider, more than two years out, her quite considerable grace under fire, I’m at a complete loss to understand why you would stoop to such a low, unsubstantiated attack on another decent, Christian woman.
What’s going on?
I don’t think that was an attack. I don’t necessarily agree with the Anchoress on this one, but if we can’t offer constructive criticism, we’re just like the other side. Is that what we want?
bob, I’m all for constructive criticism too: I altogether agree that Angle and O’Donnell were not ideal—not by a long shot—candidates. (But they were the ones chosen by their constituencies.)
You believe that the Anchoress’s unsubstantiated assertion that “Palin . . . too often chooses to attack” is not an attack. On what grounds? Perhaps you could provide evidence that Sarah Palin “too often chooses to attack”. (The Anchoress chose not to.)
From where I sit, considering the avalanche of incredibly vicious libels, slanders, and even illegal actions (hacking her private emails) directed at her—see above, the responses to Your Sensei @ 6:33 a.m.—Sarah Palin’s behaviour has been positively irenic. Considering that the Anchoress is a discerning person, I’m puzzled that she doesn’t seem inclined to give Mrs. Palin more credit for her, in my opinion, quite restrained behaviour under extreme duress.
While O’Donnell had her failings, the national Republican leadership sold her out within hours of her winning the primary. They signaled to the people of Delaware that they were ceding the seat to the Dems with their public attacks. They weren’t required to financially support her or aggressively campaign for her but loyalty demands they keep their damn mouths shut. They were disloyal so they deserve no loyalty. When something better comes along, I say dump the bums. Until then use them as needed.
Hey, it’s politics. Maybe in the future the DC crowd will keep their temper tantrums private.
There is something wrong with the O’Donnell case. The republicans should have accepted the voters mandate and stand with this woman in her bid for office.
Has the party that I ‘use” to donate to become one that picks and chooses who it supports despite what the people say? Carl Rove was a pig, and becomes worse everyday.
Granted Christine was naive with the press, but she was the voters choice. The media chose to destroy her and the republican party sat by and let it happen. So much for party loyalty. We like the GOP less and less..
Exactly right,
They just threw their hands in the air, and said “have at her boys”.
With that kind of green light from the GOP “leadership”, is it any wonder they potrayed her so nastily? So gleefully?
No one contested or questioned her on issues or message, it was “kook, witch, weirdo” time, 24/7
….How many previous SNL skits were there on a small state’s Senate race before?
Answer: NONE
Like her or not, it was a dispicable thing to do to someone from your OWN PARTY, and reflects badly on how trustworthy the GOP can possibly be in getting the country back in order.
The “anti Obama” thing worked for them this time, but they are NOT our allies….they are smug arrogant assholes(that goes double for Krauthammer and Rove) who see all this as a game….
They all DO live in the same neighborhoods as the “liberal elites” they claim to oppose
“While O’Donnell had her failings …” LOL!!! Wow, is that an understatement.
Hell, she isn’t even qualified to be the leader of a sewing circle. Get real.
By endorsing her, Palin and Tea Partiers showed that they’re as Ditzy as O’Donnell is, and add Angle and Fiorino and the senseless back-stabbing of Murkowski to that fiasco and it becomes evident that Tea Partiers and Palin have such incredibly lousy judgment that they no longer have any credibility whatsoever …, well, except to Sean Hannity, who sees each one of those gossipy women as his beloved, domineering mommy.
Mostly Scalia is right. For any Republican the press will be hostile. For a conservative Republican, the press will be bloodthirsty. For a female or minority conservative Republican the press will be drooling, raving, sociopaths baying at the moon. The only thing missing from Angle and O’Donnell coverage was the volume, color and smell of intestinal gas they passed while in training diapers. Oh, and one should never forget, the only legitimate female politician to the media is Hillary.
How a conservative neuters the press mostly will indicate how successful the candidate is in a blue state. But also note: anyone the media deems a threat to Democrat power they’ll go after with everything including diaper diving. The threats are women, blacks and especially Latinos. They’ll be beyond viciousness. It may be hard to imagine but it will get much worse over the next two years.
I agree the press was horrible. How dare they repeat what the candidates had said in the past. The nerve of some people.
Bearded Marxist. Bill Ayers ‘we didn’t do enough’..
The only time the press quotes something from the past is when it will hurt the Republican or Tea Party candidate.
Then where did you hear the Ayres quote?
Y e a h, I’m trying to remember what the press said about Obama’s past.
Unfortunately, his Republican opponent seemed to believe bringing up anything in Barack’s past–or even his middle name–was toooo impolite. I blame McCain for the fact that no one knew a thing about Barack Obama, other than that he was clean and articulate, and I believe we learned that from the wise Senator Biden.
What the press said about Obama’s past? Let me help you . . . he’s a Muslim. he’s a Kenyan. he went to a madrassa. He’s a drug addict. He’s a Marxist. He hates America. He wants to destroy this country. He’s stupid. He’s a liar. He hates the Constitution. He wrote that the current economic system was “tyranny.” He’s an atheist. He’s a terrorist. He kills babies.
And you think Palin was maligned? Not even close. Butch up you pansies. Own your lies.
I believe you are quosphere on those, quite inaccurately, not the MSM. I always heard it said that one is a Muslim because one’s father is a Muslim, so that sounds like a fairly reasonable assumption. It was “paling around with terrorists”, not that he was a terrorist, also factual since he was strongly associated with Bill Ayres and other Muslim radical sympathizers. The baby killing comes with being so strongly supportive of partial-birth abortions, de facto infanticide, from the pro-life segment, hardly an MSM affiliate. So your complaint is rather deceptively inaccurate.
“at least in part”
Best hedge ever.
No one should have to take a class to learn not to call ones self a witch. That babe is dumb.
Why? Aren’t we supposed to tolerate and accept all religions? Is it OK to have dabbled in Buddhism but not in Wicca?
First of all, she didn’t “call [her]self a witch,” she smiled and countered Maher’s revelation that she had said that in high school, “she dabbled in witchcraft.” His charge, of course, was absurd, even idiotic, and perhaps she should have ignored it–but don’t forget the power of the MSM, either, to amplify the charge if necessary.
Second, she is less-dumb than 90% of the Dem candidates. In fact, she appeared both smart and warm, despite her noticeable lack of teleprompters, in every live appearance I saw. She had a terrible uphill battle to fight and mostly she did it with class, if not the slickness a bit of experience might have given her.
It wasn’t Maher’s revelation, it was hers. Warm and smart? No, dense, judgmental and out of her depth, hopelessly provincial and out of the mainstream.
By trying to defend O’Donnell’s indefensible behavior, Polly, you’re looking foolish.
…if the voters of Delaware want to send a hard left liberal to DC to represent them, conservatives everywhere are best served if that politician wears a (D) on his lapel.
Completely agree! It was amazing that the Republicans stood together in opposing ObamaCare, but I suspect the RINOs would have capitulated if their votes had been needed to pass the destructive legislation. As it is, Republicans will deserve NO blame for the devastation caused by ObamaCare, though I’m sure there will eventually be complaints that Republicans offered no constructive suggestions that might have improved the bill.
Sigh, overcoming determined, unrelenting MSM opposition is such a battle.
Neither of these women would even talk to the press. Decoys for god’s sake! They turned to Fox and Fox didn’t deliver. THAT is something to think about for 2012.
Given the press’s collaboration with their opponents, “Sensei,” I’d say for them to refuse all press contact would have been understandable…if it had happened. But in point of fact, O’Donnell and Angle did cooperate with the Old Media, for quite a while…and entirely to their ultimate detriment.
Remember that O’Donnell was twice promised a purchased, scheduled half-hour of outreach material on Delaware “public access” channel 28…and it was not aired. Anyone who believes that to have been merely an honest oversight should contact me privately, as I have a wonderful opportunity for you. No checks, please. Cash only. Small bills.
You have proof of some nefarious left-wing cabal that kept her 30-minute Hail Mary off the air? Bring it. (Sorry, PJM column conjecture isn’t proof.)
Of course we could believe that the failure to air O’Donnell’s ad–TWICE–was accidental (“oops”?), but the simplest explanation is usually the correct one. And that kind of “accident” is hard to have–TWICE.
Adopting Democrat strategies just this once, I demand that you prove it WAS a mere accident. TWICE. (I assume you will adopt the Democrat strategy too and refuse to even acknowledge my demand.)
I saw that O’Donnell ad. It was very nice, very positive. Can’t have something like that airing, can we.
Oh Sensei, Master of the Dark, and Clueless,
Lord of all impotence, perpetually struck by mighty confusion and weakness.
ARISE! And be learned!!
Proof, you seek, of some nefarious left-wing cabal that kept her 30-minute Hail Mary off the air?
Was it not a PBS station? One that useth taxpayers funds to present programming on GLBT lifestyle issues as a top priority, often in prime time slots?
Were they not of the same tribe that fired Juan Williams? Robbers of the public purse, with which they promote their false agenda, one that cannot exist unsubsidized?
Didith they not CASH thy check, and yet we should believe TWICE they forgotteth?
Oh Sensei, with such nievete’you even defend yourself? Lest be the teacher of others?
Struck once in the face by one who denies doing so, would you then allow them to walk BEHIND you? The kick in the pants you then receive is then plausibly from another assailant? Wax on, Wax off, do you not SEE the obvious before you?
The “Force” you pretend to know of is not strong within you….Its exists not. You are indeed the opposite of knowledge, strength, and discipline……Common sense, judgement, decisiveness, none.
Away to your basement game board…paint your figurines…arrange your warlocks and dragons into battle formations…pretend some more, with your “light saber” flashlight, that YOU are a Warriors Sensei .
I shall strike you no more, as MY SENSEI taught me, I shall not harm the weak and feeble who threaten me not.
I said “proof”. You offer opinion and conjecture. It is the way of the student. You will learn. Slowly, I fear, but eventually. Allow me to illustrate: Do you have a problem with Obama spending$200 million per day to go on his trip?
Think first, young Mr. Toad. Perhaps a morning spent at the water’s edge.
O’donnell claims that the stations claimed to have “forgotten”. David reinert, the production manager at channel 28, says she missed the submission deadline by two days, leaving them only a couple of hours to get the media to comcast, who actually did the broadcasting (or failed to, as it turned out).
She also claimed to have a spot on WBOC, which is a fox affiliate. That didn’t appear either (or so I believe).
So we’ve got TWO tv stations that “mysteriously” failed to air the spot, not one.
I’ve got to give you that one. Christine O’Donnell has a history of being a liar, and of never accepting responsibility for the consequences of her extremely irresponsible behavior. She is an adult with the mind of dishonest, small child, who is an unconvincing actress and con artist, well, except to those who are too stupid to see what a phoney she is. She should be an embarrassment to anybody who was foolish enough to have supported her. THANK GOD that she lost that election!!!!
Actually, ACO, I would have preferred that she DID win because, while it would have cost the dems a seat, it would have entertained the heck out of us rational atheists. I’d like nothing better than to see a naive candidate who who was informed by not much more than her faith to actually get to sit in the senate for 8 years and say really dumb things. Folks might have discovered what electing a candidate purely on the basis of religious identification can get you.
Conservative candidates need – first and foremost – to understand that the media ARE THE ENEMY, and treat them as such, communicating with them only when absolutely necessary and then only in scripted format.
If you can’t handle Katie Couric, how can you handle bin Laden?
Obama could handle Katie very well. How do you suppose he would handle bin Laden? Certainly with the kid gloves reserved for genuine enemies, not the bludgeon used on U.S. citizens who disagree with his policies (THOSE he describes as “enemies).
[BTW, Bush's policies kept bin Laden hiding in a cave somewhere. If he's still alive, shouldn't he be out defiantly walking the streets again? Or maybe not, since the military has not yet been completely neutered.]
Sparring with hostiles like our MSM is way trickier than confronting the enemies most Americans agree are enemies. Liberals mostly agree that the MSM is fair and balanced, with only Fox News being politically biased; the politically ignorant most likely agree. Bin Laden, on the other hand, is an acknowledged bad person, even if America forced him to do what he did/does.
“Bush’s policies kept bin Laden hiding in a cave somewhere
Actually, Bush’s policies let him out of the cave to stroll across the border to Pakistan. You should learn to read. It would help with the Fox dementia you have.
You know better than that, moon carrot. Nobody could produce any definitive proof that Osama bin Laden was even in Tora Bora before it was overrun. That was just MSM gossip, rumor and speculation.
But now that you’ve raised that issue, how would you explain or justify the Clinton Administration’s decision to decline the offers of two different countries which were willing to detain, capture and turn over bin Laden to the CIA on three different occasions between 1996 and 1999? That wasn’t rumor. That was documented fact, corroborated by, among others, France’s DGSE and the governments of Saudia Arabia and the U.A.E, all of which would have liked to have captured and executed bin Laden for reasons of their own, and, therefore, they were more than just exasperated when Clinton stalled on taking action, presumably because he was preoccupied with getting blow jobs from Monica, which isn’t just conjecture either, considering those coinciding events.
You can’t send a drone or a hit team to take Couric out, unfortunately. The only way to handle her is to refuse to be interviewed. But Palin was ambushed; the McCain campaign set up the interview, assured her that it would be a friendly puff piece, prepared her for that, and then sent her into the lion’s den. Couric taped for three days, and then put together what amounted to the blooper reel and showed it as if it were the interview.
What is it with conservative men picking on women? First you’re stomping on some lady’s head, now you want to send a drone to kill Katie Couric. Maybe if you got that penile implant you wouldn’t feel so impotent.
Chastity? Chastity Bono, is that you?
Chasity? No. It’s me, David Vitter. Don’t you recognize my diaper?
You do live in your own isolated little world, don’t you?
That would explain your very, very strange perceptions.
You need to get out more. Or won’t they let you out? LOL
Yes, Vitter in a diaper. Makes you all queasy in side don’t it? Imagine how his family feels. And yet, you fools keep re-electing him.
A silly “point” by an unserious troll – but typical of the liberal conceit that verbal cleverness is equivalent to good judgment and leadership. How’s that working out for Barry?
I know you folks don’t like your own words and methods thrown back in your face, but there you go. you better get used to it, because you’re gonna be hearing (and denying) a lot of your own crap in the near future.
Good judgment and leadership? Are you suggesting that those are qualities of O’Donnell?
I agree with Elizabeth Scalia on her analysis. On the other hand, if we don’t have a better alternative, we should support the candidate as best as we can. It is not a total loss – not by a long shot. The message is very clear to the Republican Party establishment that the party base is not going to accept the likes of Specter, McCain, Scozzafava, Castle, etc., as their candidates. This is a time for conservatives to elect representatives with steadfast principles.
The Tea Party movement has just begun. It will get better. More capable candidates will come forward.
You are absolutely right on this one. As a reaction to George W. Bush’s lack of conservatism, the message was sent by handing the house and senate to the Democrats. When McCain ran on a Democrat-lite platform, the message sent was to elect Obama. We’re paying the price for those messages now, but the Republicans didn’t understand the message at all. Despite many years of sending messages, rejecting the liberal Republican in favor of a true conservative in the primary is the first time the Republicans seem to understand the message.
You are correct. My hubby laments that Kerry did not beat Bush in ’04. Kerry would certainly not have allowed any restraints on Fanny and Freddy, and their failure and the subsequent financial meltdown would have been “credited” to Kerry.
On the other hand, the Dems worked very hard to bring down the banking system during the last two years of Bush’s term, probably hastening the crash. If a Republican had been elected president in ’08, it’s very possible he (or she) would have shortly thereafter presided over the inevitable meltdown. And at least we avoided having Kerry as president for 4 years.
The Repubs and the Dems are like the Corleones and the Barzinis: sometimes you win, sometimes you loose and sometimes somebody gets killed, but you always protect the game from outsiders.
BINGO!!
I don’t understand the criticism of this post. O’Donnell and Angle lost, and while Palin has obvious strengths and strong supporters, she also has some image problems that are used very effectively by opponents. It’s a lot better for conservatives to do some self criticism now than to wait until they are in the heat of another battle. Factors that led to defeat should be in the subconscious of candidates as they go about defining issues and choosing strategies. This will help them respond spontaneously to nasty questions and op/eds.
Conservatives also have to hone their skills in bringing good candidate responses to public attention. We all know that Palin made suckers of the MSM with her 1773 remark. How can we get these types of things on the public radar screen? How did O’Donnell become a figure of ridicule while Alvin Green’s election by a brilliant electorate went unnoticed? O’Donnell herself couldn’t point out the uneven coverage, but we can. That’s what PJM is about.
Now is the perfect time to talk about these things. Later in the election cycle, such comments are spun as divisiveness within the party. We need to see them as constructive criticism. As Roger said, the Tea Party is just getting started.
Karl Rove’s and Krauthammer’s tagging of Christine O’Donnell as “unelectable” right after she won the primary was a self-fulfilling prophecy that became true as soon as they said it, and I have lost all respect for them. On the other hand, I have more respect for Christine O’Donnell and for her courage than for all of the “elite” Republicans and the Old Media put together. Bravo, Christine!
Exactly.
What the O’Donnell contest taught me: that the loyalty required of conservatives is a one-way street. Independents and tea partiers turned out for O’Donnell, it was Republicans who stayed home in Delaware. So, the same folks who told me to hold my nose and vote for McCain, wouldn’t vote for a conservative candidate.
And why? Because they thought the democrat Coons was better. Republicans.
I’ve learned my lesson. No more Castles. Everyone who calls himself a republican is not a republican.
Very well said, Carolina Kathy.
I am NOT a Republican. I’m a CONSERVATIVE!
You’re a lemming.
…., and you’re not? LOL
You’re not brainwashed. Naw. There’s so little grey matter in your gord that a light rinse sufficed.
I saw Rove and the RNC step up right away and provide some people to help them. You know, people with experience like the two candidates didn’t have? The fact is, in both cases the national party didn’t want to do what it would take to make them competitive and they were both competitive in spite of it.
Yes, O’Donnell needed to handle the press better, but to a large extent it was Rove and Krauthammer having a tantrum that set the tone from the get go. It also let the media know that no one would be running interference for someone with little or no experience in dealing with them. Angle needed the support of absolute hordes of poll watchers and attorneys on the ground on election day, and both had to have experience and be obviously from outside. Fencing is nice, but having the national just act like stand up guys instead of being as bad as the demorats themselves would have gotten Republicans one and possibly both of these fencing or no.
Here’s a thought. Maybe fencing is the wrong way to look at it. Perhaps opening a lemonade stand with the lemons you have been handed is the ticket. O’Donnell is now in the national press, so why not go full-blown Palin? Sure they tarred and feathered her, but they inadvertantly gave her influence and has become a household name because of their attacks, so she ought to stay in their faces. Where can she go from here that will use that name-recognition and influence politcally? That would be far more effective than a parry. Time to see if that Facebook/Twitter thing Palin has used will work for O’Donnell, too. Let the left fall on their sword over that one.
Since the left gave her the national name-recongition as they tried to destroy her, perhaps O’Donnell should go Palin on them and stay in their faces. Where can she go to use that now? Will the Facebook/Twitter thing Palin has used so effectively work for her, too? Better than a parry, let the left fall on its sword.
I think Elizabeth and Roger’s point here is quite clear.
There’s a big difference between being motivated and being politically savvy. And as far as differentiating between republicans and democrats is concerned, the fact that not a single republican in the House or Senate voted for the final Health Care bill should speak for itself.
Now the question is, would you rather have Mike Castle in the Senate who’ll vote ‘No’ on such legislation or Chris Coons who’ll vote ‘Yes’? The answer, “I want Christine O’Donnell!” sounds very good in the comments section of a political blog, but it does not equate to much in real life terms.
The bottom line – and I don’t think that’s what this post is about – is that Sharron Angle and Christine O’Donnell are both very motivated. So are their die-hard supporters. But you need more than motivation and die-hard supporters to win an election. You need to have the political, people and media skills to win elections, get in the game, then, play it. Can’t play it from the outside.
If you really want to know how good this article is, just try to picture Chris Coons in your mind. Do you have a mental picture of the guy? Have you seen the guy on TV much? I sure as hell haven’t. But Christine O’Donnell is a household name thanks to her gaffes.
(I actually had to go to wikipedia a few minutes ago to see what the guy looks like.)
‘Nuff said.
I have to respectfully disagree.
First, the Old Media took on the weakest candidates they could find and savaged them. This usually means a woman. O’Donnell was not a bad candidate. Does she have some flaws? Yes? Compared to the other guy? Hardly. The Old Media has power still in the Blue States. It gives a huge advantage to the Dem candidate, estimated to be worth 15 points in an election. It is free advertising for the Dems.
Second, Coons had the full support of the entire Dem Party and their allies. O’Donnell had none. Thus her first ad was dumb, not because she’s dumb, but because she lacked the real professionals who do know how to play the game. Although she has run before, she has not run in this environment of being target #1. The Republicans threw her to the wolves.
Angle in NV was a similar case. There were so many other candidates to highlight. The Old Media chose the “kookiest” ones to highlight, in order to make them representative of the entire Tea Party movement. The Republican establishment let them get away with it, because they, too, resented these amateurs.
So, tell me how either of these ladies were supposed to win? There is a REASON we have organized Parties.
As to playing the game, the game is the problem. We have already seen how that movie ends. The purpose of this election was to change the game; to say that we will not tolerate this game anymore. O’Donnell won the minute she beat Castle. She had served her purpose. Reform is the name of the new game. Power was the name of the old game. Guys like Castle are not to be tolerated anymore. This is a fight between the actual Conservatives and the Leftist Republicans, a fight for the soul of the Party.
Btw, if any of you accept the Dem Media propaganda that they are kooky or stupid, then you are even more kooky or stupid, because you bought the lie.
Dear Mr. Malone,
Excellent points, sir. Christine is not a national figure, she obviously needed help and guidance, and she deserved it too….her opponent got the Vice President of the United States. Although a human Putz, I’m sure lots of professional political services attached with the stature of his office were useful in the campaign.
Christine got nothing but the back of the RNC’s hand, for which I myself well not forgive them (Rove and Krauthammer too)
Correction: O’Donnell is now a national figure who had been running for local election, and no one knows much about her opponents outside of her home state. Consider that a gift from the left. Time to make that gift work for her.
We have primaries to select candidates. Mike Castle lost the primary. Christine O’Donnell won the primary, and actually offered a fresh vision that was conservative. Republican operatives and certain self-anointed conservative pundits decided to punish Delaware for it’s primary decision by working to elect Chris Coons. Karl Rove, Charles Krauthammer, Dana Perrino campaigned for Chris Coons, the bearded Marxist.
It will be a tough job to elect conservatives in blue states, but it can be done. It won’t be done however if we don’t try. I live in Ohio. Cap and trade is deadly for Ohio and the whole country. Mike Castle supports this insane and tyrannical tax scheme, that would benefit certain big financial entities in Delaware, while destroying the manufacturing sector of the country. And he was rejected by Delaware Republicans. So I do not mourn his loss. Let bad policy be voted for by Democrats, not Republicans. That is the key lesson of the last few years.
And to those so-called conservatives who did target practice on Christine O’Donnell while she was in the arena, fighting a lonely battle for conservative values, I say you should be ashamed. To Christine, I applaud your courage and I proud to have supported your effort. You will be heard from again. Many great leaders have had to wage several losing campaigns before achieving success. Do not let the sad and pathetic words of others discourage you. You brought Delaware a new and optimistic idea – freedom. One day Delawareans will understand the simple truths you told. Thank you for your effort, your grace under pressure, and your example. It was all good.
Suffice to say, O’Donnell is ditzy. She and Palin are two peas from the same pod.
The contrast between them and the dynamic duo, Rubio and Paul, is truly stunning.
Got picture in your mind of the Koch brothers?
’nuff said.
What does that even mean? That Coons looks like one of the Kochs? What have the Kochs got to do with anything?
Common guys – stop feeding this Troll – at least for his mom’s sake. If you don’t he will never get of the couch in his mom’s basement and return to his job in the fast food industry.
Coons comes from a good family. He’s in childish idiot mode now, but that may change. I’m guessing he’ll become more a blue dog type.
Castle was no good choice, a quisling in your camp is worse than an enemy outside.
Christine O’ Donnell running was FAR better than Mike Castle, for the long term, including the truths of this fine post.
Rove & Krauthammer were unexpectedly and unfairly bad to Christine; the press was even more unfair but at least it should have been very expected, just as the Dems were expectedly unfair.
Had Reps wanted to win with a better pro-life, small-gov’t conservative, they should have had a better one in the primary. The primary that allowed Reps to vote for O’Donnell rather than likely winner RINO Castle.
Coons is likely to lose the next time, but one thing Reps need to do is repeat, again and again, how unfair the media was to O’Donnell, just as it continues to be to Palin.
“She is dumb” — this is deadly for conservatives. “Goof-ball vibes”, well said(!), need to be avoided. The Tea Party needs to have candidates who can be principled conservatives (as both were) AND to attract the independent, inconsistent, more pragmatic than principled swing voters.
The press will continue to help Dem mud stick to Reps, and the Dems will keep throwing it.
Yes to the advice given here: Parry, deflect, and laugh at the Press. How did Reagan do it? “There you go again, … ”
The fact the Rep Nat Committee was so utterly unable, and even at first unwilling, to offer better training and support to these candidates after the primary, is a clear example of Steele incompetence.
They, like the (really good, much better) Sarah Palin, were not ready for the press attacks. They should have been; and all conservatives should be.
Christine, Sharon, Thank YOU, both, so much, for running. I hope conservatives and Tea Party folk learn better ways to be more teflon against the entirely expected, unfair attacks that Dems will use and the Press will amplify.
And better checks against voter fraud should be required, too — paper ballots should always be an option.
No, Elizabeth, they lost because they were lousy candidates, hand-picked by Sarah Palin, who is not qualified to determine which people are the best candidates.
You are SO right. If only their states had had primary elections where the voters could have . . . oh wait, they did!
You don’t suppose actual voters are looking for non-RINO candidates, do you??
Still, Palin did endorse McCain, so her judgment is not always perfect.
It’s called gratitude, and loyalty. She owed it to McCain to endorse him, and everyone knew it.
Sarah Palin supported the guy who made her national political career.
Proving she is an honorable person.
Think about it, Miss Polly: Which would have been better, a Rhino (Castle) who would have voted with Republicans most of the time, or a very liberal Democrat (Coons) who will NEVER vote with Republicans. With your ditzy choice, you opted for the latter, ’cause O’Donnell (the ditz) didn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of winning.
Your logic and your rationale are, at best, ditzy and extremely irresponsible. Clearly, common sense is not one of your virtues.
It must be infectious: That’s just one consequence of heeding the advice of that other ditz, Sarah Palin, whose self-serving agenda does NOT coincide with the best interests of this country.
(BTW, it is “Miss”, isn’t it?)
Sarah Palin gave a very late endorsement to the O’Donnell campaign. Christine was definitely not someone recruited or planted by Sarah.
That isn’t true, and you know it. You just made that up. But why? You’re weird.
ROTFLMAO
Christine O’Donnell almost had to beg for the endorsement you twit. This article doesn’t reflect the begging but it does state that she had to ask for it, which btw only came 5 days before the election.
Didn’t you follow the election?
So, Palin didn’t endorse her? Lied about endorsing her? Didn’t mean to endorse her? It helps to have a point. Here, let me give you one. All the people Palin endorsed who won are the ones she meant to endorse. All the ones who lost were typos. Run with it.
Your Sensei, to understand the point it’s best to read the comment to which the replies are addressed.
To save you this burdensome effort I will spell it out: Christine O’Donnell was not “hand-picked by Sarah Palin”.
And since you seem to be confused I’ll spell it out further: “hand-picked” and “endorsed” are not synonymous.
A distinction without a difference. Perhaps you should get off the floor, put your ass back on, and open your eyes.
IOW, different words meaning different things are not different in your view.
The one thing we can be certain of is that you vote Democrat
Wrong again. I’m a registered independent and vote that way.
– I’m a registered independent and vote that way.
You didn’t vote for Obama?????? The “hand-picked” candidate of Hillary Clinton????
Sensei is a registered independent alright ..; an independent loony,
because he/she is so loony that other loonies have disowned him/her.
And my point is: how does Sarah Palin get lumped in with Angle and O’Donnell? I’d agree that neither of the latter were strong candidates. They were also, as usual, utterly savaged by the leftie press.
Palin? Not only was she a governor who accomplished many worthwhile things, she has leveraged her political influence very successfully. And, is there a female politician anywhere who’s been more savagely attacked by the media than she has? I was totally surprised—but pleased—the other night when she, uncharacteristically, called the media skunks “bastards”—with a smile on her face–for what they were trying to do to Miller. I don’t agree with or appreciate the Anchoress’s suggestion that she’s too often on the attack. In fact Sarah Palin is far more likely to “do a 1773” on the media—a great a parry-and-feint—than make a frontal attack. (When she does—as she did with Letterman, who made a joke about her daughter being raped—it was pretty low key.)
I detect an animus to Sarah Palin in this article, which I find puzzling—and unbecoming.
> If only Karl Rove and Charles Krauthammer had given O’Donnell their seals of approval, the whine goes, she would have won.
Look, Scalia: nobody is whining about this. Certainly not O’Donnell. If anyone was whining, it was Karl Rove on Fox News the night of O’Donnell’s primary victory, pitching a hissy fit because Delaware voters did not follow the script he had crafted for them. Like most establishment GOP mandarins, Rove thinks the voters exist to do the bidding of the Party. He’s the tail, wondering why the damn dog doesn’t wag.
Good analysis and I agree. I feel quite sorry for O’Donnell and was really hoping she could win but when the witchcraft statements came out I knew it was over. I really thought Angle could win until I saw the very dark negative anti-illegal immigration ads. I was cringing. What she had in mind I don’t know but really all she had to do was just keep her mouth shut for the last couple of weeks of the election cycle and run positive ads and she might have won. I think those ads scuppered her. A candidate simply can not alienate the entirety of the Hispanic voting population in a southwestern state and expect to win. The unions are a different matter and conservatives can win the union vote as Regan proved.
All in all, I think the various Tea Party organizations did quite well and reflected a genuine grass roots movement. The challenge will now be, as was mentioned in the article, to become much more media savvy and begin looking for good competent candidates. A good example of a successful run with the backing of the Tea Parties is in my home state of New Mexico. The conservative Republican, Susana Martinez, was able to handily defeat the incumbent Democrat Lieutenant governor who should have been a shoe-in. Martinez ran a smart well run campaign, stayed on message and successfully tied her opponent to the corruption of the Richardson administration.
And I notice Susana Martinez handled all those old tapes of her courtesy of Bill Maher like a pro too. Good comparison.
Sharon Angle and Christine O’Donnell both did great!
Reagan lost his first time up for Presidential election, Abe Lincoln lost his first time running for Illinois House. The years? 1968, 1832.
Obama lost too, once. In 2000, running for a US House seat from Illinois.
Stop the ridiculous morning after regrets!
As others replying here have noted, forces greater than even a Reagan or a Lincoln can keep a good candidate from winning. Corruption in Nevada, treasonous back-biting by the entrenched GOP establishment.
Try dancing Swan Lake with leg chains and an oak neck yoke before you complain. These gals did! They danced. And they almost pulled it off. Next time, they can pull it off.
And the Easter Bunny, The Great Pumpkin, Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy will be holding their annual coonvention at bvw’s home next year.
Democrats will support a Patty Murray or a Joe Biden or a Little Bobby Casey all of whom are exponentially dumber than Miss O’Donnell on her worst day. The problem is that there is a segment of the Republican Party, that deep-down inside, are simply snobs.
She still may have lost with vocal establishment endorsements but it is very much appropriate to blame people perceived as serious who want 0-Care overturned and don’t want cap and tax & such for failing to give her even the mildest support. Rather than calling her a flake or creepy liar & such as Karl Rove did they could have simply said “she’s a lot better than her opponent and we expect her to grow in office so it’s important that you vote for her”. This is basically what former Gov. Pete du Pont did to his credit.
Christine, as I have heard reported, won independents but did get anywhere near the number of Republican votes that were expected.
Suffice to say, Bill, your ignorance is stunning. Obviously, you don’t know squat about the issues which you raise.
For example, for all of his shortcomings, Joe Biden is a pretty good guy, and there was a time when he was a hawk, who helped Republican hawks to get vital legislation through Congress. In fact, he is a moderate who was chosen to counter balance Obama’s liberalism. Learn your country’s history and read up on current events.
This is also a call for members of the TEA party movement to move more forcefully in taking over the Republican party establishment, but also in contesting elections at every level. People will eventually wonder why every candidate for mayor, councilmember, school board, State legislature, judge, etc. is being deamonized, especially when they may actually know the person running, or the reality of the person’s views, record and action is not in accord with the media’s “narrative”.
Finally, the TEA party movement should consider buying shares and taking over the legacy media, one newspaper, radio station and TV or cable station at a time. Might as well use your power to create (which is the greater use of power anyway).
As a (sometimes) fencer and mom of two competitive fencers myself, I agree wholeheartedly with this analogy. The Tea Party needs to carefully study their opponents, learn and memorize their own target areas as well as their opponents’, the parries that they must use to protect themselves, and not be afraid to riposte with great speed and accuracy.
We are. Right now we’re riposting against Elizabeth’s attack. Of course, this duel is only to first blood because a friend has impugned our honor. With the Dems, we’ll skewer like kabobs.
I agree with the main post. Angle and O’Donnell were not the best candidates. They were selected by primary voters eager to change the policies of the current administration in states where room for change was small. It is better to have elected officials that caucus with your party and agree with you 50% of the time, than it is to have elected officials that caucus with the opposition and agree with you 10% of the time.
Doug Santo
Pasadena, CA
Yeah, Doug. We have to learn to go along with safe, sensible establishment picks like Carly Fiorina and Meg Whitman.
Then victory is assured
You made an excellent point, Doug, and I’m shocked, ’cause I see you’re in La La Land.
To rephrase your point, since several polls showed well in advance of the election that Rino, Mike Castle, was favored by a huge margin to win in Delaware, a rational and reasonably intelligent person would have figured that it would be better to go with a sure thing and to elect a well known and well established Rhino who would vote with Republicans MOST OF THE TIME than to take the huge risk of choosing an untested, conservative. extremely immature and extremely irresponsible unknown with very questionable credentials, who would probably lose and thereby ensure the election of a Democrat, who would NEVER vote with Republicans. (That’s most of the time versus never for you dummy Tea Partiers.) In fact, in view of those circumstances, only a fool or an imbecile would have voted for O’Donnell in the primary, of which there certainly aren’t any shortages among Tea Partiers, who think that they know it all, but who don’t know squat, and who were too stupid to even figure out what you and I stated, Doug. In fact, when one looks at the bigger picture, one can clearly see that those shallow and clueless Tea Partiers did more harm than good all across the country. Their ignorance is stunning.
Looking at O’Donnell’s opponent, Coons, is instructive. If Rove, Frum, and other so-called leaders of the conservative monvment had gone gung-ho after Coons as an unelectable extremist, the reults in Delaware might have been different. Instead, they went after O’Donnell. Wrong move. Eating your own is not a good election strategy.
Was O’Donnell flawed? Of course, everyoone is. Coons was, and is, more flawed. Doesn’t matter now, the elections over, and there’s another might as well be Communist in the senate from Delaware.
Speaking of “eating their own”, it was little help when the head of the Delaware GOP trashed his own nominee from the start. Castle was the anointed candidate from the start, since the party has a spring convention where they pick the candidates to endorse.
The disconnect between the party elites and actual GOP voters showed best when neither of their chosen candidates (Mike Castle for Senate and Michele Rollins for the House seat) survived the primary…instead it was TEA Party favorites O’Donnell and Glen Urquhart.
The next step for the Delaware GOP is going to be addressing the disparity between them and their voting base.
You and Bill and Harold are clueless. The three of you don’t know squat about the dynamics of that election, and you can’t even figure out the real reasns why O’Donnell lost. Hell, you don’t WANT to know the reasons why she lost. You would rather have your delusions. Ignorance is bliss, eh guys?
Instead of getting all hot and bothered as to why Christine lost, maybe you ought to do some thinking as to why Castle lost.
I’m not even sure I would have voted for Castle in the general.
If Rove, Frum, and other so-called leaders of the conservative monvment had gone gung-ho after Coons as an unelectable extremist, the reults in Delaware might have been different.
Dittos to that.
No, no, no, no, no . . . it’s “mega dittos.” You can’t expect to be welcomed as a card-carryign member of the brain dead unless you offer the appropriate feasance to He Who Tells Us What To Say.
I love fencing but 2012 calls for smash-mouth. If nothing else 2010 has demonstrated the party of Soro’s willingness to lie and get ugly and the unwillingness of the media to hold them accountable. If that is the game they want to play then I say bust them in the mouth so they know without reservation we have no intention of taking their crap. Their intent is to provoke. The proper response is to beat them so badly that the thought or mention of provocation forces the pansies into the fetal position.
We should be running libertarian Republicans in more liberal states. Not social conservatives.
Take Mark Kirk in Illinois:
http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/2010/11/mark-kirk-closet-libertarian.html
Do “we” have a bunch of candidates in a can somewhere that we open up when elections roll around?
Free people decide to run, and “we” decide whether we support them.
Trust me. The Republicans will offer choices of some outstanding and extremely impressive candidates for POTUS and VPOTUS in 2012, so many great choices, in fact, that you will have a tough time trying to decide which one you want to win the primary – most of whom will be superbly qualified, and the electorate will see it.
Mark Kirk, a libertarian?
As usual, you are allowing your anti-social conservative bias to color your thinking. As a member of the House Appropriations Committee, Kirk was exactly the sort of pork-barreling, ear-marking, tax-and-spending Congressman who gave the GOP a bad name. As a Senator he will be a reliable member of the fiscally liberal wing of the party. Frankly, I object to your describing Kirk (and yourself, for that matter) as libertarian.
You should contact the Club For Growth and inform them of their error. They seem to be under the impression that Kirk racked up one of the most fiscally liberal records of any Republican in the House last year.
Link
(You need to scroll all the way down to find Mark Kirk)
A Republican candidate needs an extra amount of “better” than their Democratic opponent does in order to win an election, because they also have to overcome the media bias. O’Donnell and Angle didn’t have that extra amount of “better.”
In DE primary voters’ minds, O’Donnell had that extra ‘better’ than her opponent.
Good article. I dont buy it when candidates blame the media or the repub establishment. Reagan constantly dealt with a hostile media, and also hostility from the repub establishment initially. ODonnel lost because she let the election be about her, rather than about the issues. She should have ignored the witch business, and if the press asked, point to some answer in her website, then go right back to the issues, which were on her side. She also spent too much time on cultural conservative issues (where a left leaning state like Delaware was not on her side), and not enough time on fiscal conservative Tea Party issues.
Sharon Angle should have concentrated less on immigration, and more on jobs, and Reids role in passing health care.
Rand Paul had a hostile media, and hostile repub establishment too, but it didn’t stop him, because he stuck to what mattered, fiscal conservatism.
The hostile media is less important nowdays anyway, since there are alternate ways, like Fox, talk radio, and bloggers, to get out the truth. Stick to the issues, and make sure they are the issues that matter, like spending, obamacare, big government, and other fiscal conservative issues.
Why haven’t I seen Lisa Murkowski’s name in this thread? She lost her primary, yet when she chose to run as an Independent, the Republican Establishment Senators did not relieve her of ALL of her committee assignments. There is a stench there. Here was a woman who was favored by the Republican Establishment over her more conservative opponent. I am sure that had Rove and his cronies not trashed Christine O’Donnell, she would have done better. How could O’Donnell make Obama and his policies the issue when Rove was making her personal story the issue? Coons was given a pass.
As for Christine O’Donnell, perhaps she needs a quite place to set out the next few years, sharpen she weapons and gather strength. I would humbly suggest The University of Iowa, in Iowa City, Iowa. They have the wonderful Iowa Writers Workshop there. She can develop her communications skills. Since many are undoubtedly liberal, it will give her a daily opportunity to sharpen her debating skills. I’ll be moving there myself in January, and will be in the Lindquist Center. Look me up. Or you can see me at Mass.
In response to this article Iagree in Part.The main reasons though they didn’t have A chance.Is Delawarians,And nevadians Like,California,And New york.See America,As A Free for All,Take From All Orgy.As Liberal Kris Kristoferson Wrote in his song”Bobby McGee”Quote;Nothing Ain’t Worth Nothing,Unless Its Free”They Believe Freedom Means Free Ride Through Life.And When Anyone Explains the truth of what Freedom really means.America suddenly becomes An Oppressive tyrant.President Gerald Ford Said of the Presidency,And I’ll add Congess,judges,And special interst to his statement.Too Many See The Presidency,As A prize to win,And not as A Duty to serve.Couldn’t be A better Sign to Watch for in our leaders.The Character he’s Speaking of Regarding Running for the Prize,Are those Politicians Who were to Blinded By their Own Ambitions,and Obsessions to Obtain the Crown.They Didn’t see the Aggressive hate Filled Character,And Intentions Of Barack Obama,From The Beginning.Didn’t see It.Because Their Eyes Were On the Prize,Of Their Own Self-Preservation.And Not On the Best Interest,And Duty to their Country.First these Eye on the Prize Leaders.Tried to Jump On the Barack Obama Love fest In the beginning,Wanting him to Succeed.While trying to Silence Opposition to Barack Obama.That saw him for who he was from the beginning.Those silencers of the truth,about Barack Obama’s History,And Character.Were having a slobbering love affair with him in the beginning.Then when the american lion woke up.Suddenly these same Obama Zombie Johnny come lately’s Jump in on the success of those who saw this man for who he was,In the Beginning. The same Johnny come lately’s have been hell bent on destroying those who saw the truth ,While now trying to sabotage the Duty to country first Visionary’s,Truth Seekers,And people of good judgement.To Install themselves,To grab The brass ring, They are All about the strategy,Prize,Money,And Power.Who are More Concerned with being liked than being right.Who See Principals,Good Character,Honor,Duty,And truth,Vision,And Good Judgement,As A Character Flaw.Not A necessary Qualification.Those like Christine O’donnell Also lost because these same johnny come lately,Eye on the Prize Intentionally sabotaged,And tried to ruin her character.To Annoint Another Obama Zombie Eye on the Prize,Sell-out.For money,And Powers sake.The Eye on the Prize Politicians,and Johnny come lately’s,Are The R.N.C. The Republican Senate National Committee.Karl Rove,Charles Krauthammer,Bill O’reilly,Dick Morris.Mike Huckabee,Newt Gingrich,Hayley Barbour,,And Mitt Romney.The duty to country Visionary’s are; Rush Limbaugh,Sean Hannity,Glen Beck,Mark levin,Ann Coulter,Sarah Palin,Michelle Bachman,Mike Pence,Jim Demint.GOV.Christie,Of New Jersey,And Gov. of Louisiana.If you don’t know the difference too bad. But here’s a hint;Look at our Histories greatest sacrificial lambs,As today’s sacrificial lambs In Iraq,Afghanistan,and around the world.Look at our firefighters,border security,CIA,Police etc.Those willing to put it all on the line for Duty to Country,Truth,Justice,And the American way.You don’t,And won’t get that kind of courage,wisdom,vision,and judgement from any of these cross the aisle comprimising Eye On the prize sell-outs.Where was these same know it all genius’s When democrats would falsely accusing our hero’s of War Crimes.Silent,Hiding under their desk,scheming their next “EYE ON THE PRIZE” Ambitions.Jimmy Joe/”The Liarfryer”
Excellent metaphor for the thrust and parry of politics. Your analysis of Angle’s and McDonnell’s leadership deficits resonates — unspecified but implied between your lines — in the president’s own graceless whining and counterproductive flailing against Rush, Fox, the “teabaggers” & Co.
I disagree with you for the most part when it comes to Palin, though. Her energetic embrace of the full panoply of media, old and new — from Twitter and Facebook to Fox News, Entertainment TV, her forthcoming TLC “Sarah Palin’s Alaska” series and even her daughter Bristol’s appearances on Dancing with the Stars — allows her to disintermediate the gateway media and reach the hearts and minds of the Country Class on her own terms. PLUS, unlike the president’s unpresidential attacks on us “folks” he calls “enemies,” her colorful, targeted attacks on the legacy media have the ring of truth.
More here in my post “What do Oprah Winfrey, Glenn Beck and Bristol Palin have in common?” http://bit.ly/c2o94F
Don’t get me wrong.I’m not saying,And yet have not Endorsed Sarah Palin,As president.I’m just saying she has a greater,level of Proven Success,Independence,Character,Vision,Truth,Honor,And Duty to Country.Then Every wanna-Be,And has been Politician I spoke of since Ronald Reagan.If You Know American History.There has been Only two true Duty to country First,Leaders/Presidents.IN The last 100 years;Both Constitutional Conservatives;RONALD REAGAN,And Calvin Coolidge.Both were Constantly Discouraged,And sabotaged By Not only Democrats.But by Establishment,Eye On the Prize.Republicans,SO-called Independents,And Libertarians.Even by their own;(I never saw A Godless Lawless,Predatorial,Deadbeat,Destruction-A-Holic,Socialist Program I Didn’t Like)Wives.Yet the same Change Parties,As Often as they cheat on,And lie to their spouses,And Constituents.Claiming we Constitutional Duty to Country Conservatives,Are to Radical,And Extreme.Which Means unless you Despise God,The Creator of Our lives,Liberty,And Rights,And Hate,And Blaspheme Jesus Christ,Who is Our Deliverer/Savior.Unless you believe in LUCIFER’S LAW;To Exalt their will above God,Human life,Human liberty.Submit to their will,Or Are Inconvienient to their lives,agenda’s,Or EYE ON THE PRIZE.You shouldn’t have the right to exist.Thats why they hate Rush,Sean,Mark levIn’Glen Beck,Ann coulter,And Sarah Palin,Conservatives Because they shine a Bright light of truth,To their bizzarro Fantasy satanic cult world view.If You Call A Conservative Woman(A RealIndependen Minded Woman)Not A Coattail/Affirmative Action Ride to the Eye on the Prize,Deadbeat,And Predatorial Woman.Like Hillary Clinton,Nancy Pelosi’Barbara Boxer,And Maxine Waters.If you call these Conservative Woman,A whore,A Bitch,And A Slut.That Is An Automatic Qualification to Congress,And The White House For All of these Thin Skinned,Elistist Establishment,So-Called Intellectual Rainmen.Jimmy Joe/”The Liarfryer”
Strange. My eyes glaze over, and I go into a coma whenever I see your name.
Look, you go with the candidates have. As much as I like the writing of Mrs Scalia, she spent years hiding behind an assumed name, unwilling to have her real identity exposed.
Maybe they didn’t know how to fence, but these candidates, O’Donnell and Angle, put it all on the line — time, reputation, and privacy. They did know how to charge and face the press and their critics. For their guts and action they should forever be supported. Maybe they weren’t the best candidates in the country, but they were the one’s that stepped forward and took the risk. And now they face the ridicule of anonymous bloggers and opinionistas? Who among their critics is willing to do what they did?
How is this supposed to bring new candidates to the front? Who will be willing to step into the line of fire when you have to watch for “friendly fire?”
The Tea Party and their candidates won’t get it all right–no one will. The real question is: What can we be doing to help them make the right decisions, help them make the right answers, stand with them when under attack, and and make sure we’ve got their back? It’s the least we can do when they are stepping up in our name.
I agree that Angle and O’Donnell made many mistakes in their campaigns. However, I’m curious what factors allowed much better success for Governor and House candidates. I had read somewhere that the NRCC had a candidate school to help get their team prepared for battle. Did the NRSC make any effort to prepare their Senate candidates?
Here in Texas in 2004 Pete Sessions bought lots of early positive ads on local cable, targeting just the areas he needed to win, in his successful campaign against Martin Frost. The goal was an under-the-radar effort to establish a positive image before the media and the democrat could define him. I wonder if he had the NRCC http://www.nrcc.org/ replicate the define yourself on cable before the media tries to trash you strategy across all those House races.
Rove and Krauthammer lost and big time with these two elections. The press is dispicable and patheltic. Coons is an absolute *ss. But, the real lossers are Rove and Kraut. They are as good as dead to me. The them and all the rinos out period. If we can’t have a conservative, then I do not care what they are selling it is not for me. If we lose out to communisium so be it…as we are certainly not going to avoid it with rinos just acting like they don’t want it.
One thing I noticed in this election was that when a Teapartier lost a primary, the candidate went on to support the next most conservative person, who was usually the Republican. They did NOT pitch a hissy fit and whine and moan about how crazy the voters choice was and how unelectible. Who did act like that? Across the board it was the establishment Republicans. Crist in Florida, refused to bow out of the race. Murkowski in Alaska, refused to bow out of the race. Mike Castle acted like a real jerk and refused to endorse. Rove and Krauthammer blew collective gaskets about how horrible the voters choices were.
I think that the Republican Party is full of people who are hostile to anyone who is not part of the insider group. Sarah Palin was treated the very same way by insiders in McCain’s campaign.
So while I take your point, Anchoress, I think there is a lot more than just learning how to smile cutely to disarm the hostile media. It won’t help enough. I think it will take people in the Teaparty actively working with/against the Republican insiders to blunt the damage they do.
The Tea Party nearest to me did throw a hissy fit when the candidate they endorsed for Congress lost the primary. They sat on the rear ends for the general election. Other Tea Parties in the District did come on board, however. The local Republican party organizations were also energized. North Carolina’s state legislature is now in Republican hands for the first time since 1870. That’s right. 1870. Not 1970.
Please do not give too much credit to Rove and Krauthammer for Angle’s loss in Nevada. I am a resident and voter in the state of Nevada. My family and I voted for her but we didn’t have the confidence in her that we did the other candidates who were not Tea Party candidates and running in the primary and didn’t win. Harry Reid had the backing of the unions here in the Las Vegas area and I imagine Reno as well. In one instance we heard a hotel provided a bus to take the employees to the voting places. We were flooded with advertisements from the unions to support Reid. Also, the ads run by the Reid group scared many of the people who are poor and on social security which warned that Angle would take away their funding. These are people who are not savy and would not know how to check information. I know this for a fact that they were scared of Angle.
Reid is a fixture here in southern Nevada and Angle did come across as a dingaling sometimes. Reid was a good Senator for the state at one time, but as he has gotten into the power structure he seems to lack common sense. He has said things that were not appropriate. With the unemployment rate being the highest in the nation and the housing problems so drastic, it is unbelieveable to me he was re-elected except for the fact he was the lesser of the two evils – Angle, an unknown and seemingly weak leader vs someone the workers and union people needed.
I am frustered the unions would continue their support for a man who refused to stand up again a president who so obviously said stupid things to ruin the economy of our city – Las Vegas. President Obama’s comments against Las Vegas was so shocking. It was even a worse issue for the Senator to do nothing.
Being a Tea Party candidate had nothing to do with my vote for Angle – I wanted Reid out. I did not vote for her in the primary.
I had my own issues with Tea Party types locally. I tried to explain that demurring on a highly technical proposal does not necessarily make a candidate unreliably fuzzy on the issues. It can make him a smart campaigner when the answer you want to hear can be turned into a sound bite the other side can use in attack ads. As it turns out, the Tea Party candidates who supported the Fair Tax saw it used like a club against them in ads that blasted He supports a 20% tax on everything you buy!
With O’Donnell I find both Rove and Krauthammer to be guilty of a common failing among pundits. They really don’t like genuine news. They each know long time DC fixture Mike Castle. They each had a road map in their heads as to how the Delaware Senate race would play out. Then wham! This unconventional woman comes out of nowhere, torpedoes an acquaintance’s career plans and makes mockery of their predictions.
As Krauthammer has never been anything but a pundit and can be a bit of a snob, I am more forgiving of him. As a former political operative, Rove knows the ropes about bringing surprise candidates up to speed in dealing with major media attention. I bet he had some safe venues in Texas where he took political neophytes for a thorough grilling before taking them before a hostile press. Most campaign managers do. Rove also had to be aware that his comments would lead to a firestorm of negative coverage for O’Donnell before she was prepared for them. He probably should have reminded himself that Mike Castle wasn’t his client and that O’Donnell was not John McCain before the make or break South Carolina primary. It can be hard to be gracious after someone you know loses their primary but the winner is no longer your opponent once the votes have been counted.
I’m acquainted with a few Tea Partiers who didn’t even vote and who joked about it, which affirmed my belief all along that Tea Parties were strictly social events, not political events, for bunches of bored, restless, lonely, bitchy, dumpy and gossipy housewives, who aren’t very bright, and for nerdy, dufus men who don’t have a life.
Mr. Simon,
We are hearing this in various corners yesterday and today. I couldnt disagree more. Why are we not hearing about the highly suspect moves behind the Lisa Murkowsky campaign?? If you put O’Donnell and Angle up against that slimeball, they stand head and shoulders above her. These two had the sharpest of laser beams on them; one because the opposition owned the Senate, and especially whatever machine exists in Nevada; in the other case, every liberal, marxist mouth in the country came to excoriate Christine, as that seat would have immediate influence with respect to the lame duck session. The NRSC was not only NOT benign, but ran constant interference for both these candidacies. Millions of dollars were wasted in CA, while even a percentage of that amount could have produced magnificent results with Joe Miller, Christine or Sharon. Instead, Cornyn was sending complaints and problems Christine’s way, just to name one betrayal. Think what you may, these two are rising stars, and they will be back. You and your buddies had better come to grips with that, or you will be left in the dust, with these new stars leaving you in that cloud. Please, wake up and smell the roses.
Can’t we say the same for Sean Bielat?
He was trounced and was a far better candidate against a “condescending, nasty fellow.”
And didn’t Sarah stay away from that race?
I understand your point and agree, however……
Can’t we just add “condescending and nasty” to most D’s?
Angle ran against an established senator and lost by only 5%, while O’Donnell, vying for an empty seat, lost by three times that. One would expect the results to have been exactly opposite: that the established candidate would crush his opponent, while the empty seat would bring a squeaker.
Not when you consider that the established candidate was running in a swing state while the open seat was in a Democratic Party bastion.
The Cook Partisan Voting Index measures to what extent a state (or Congressional district) leans to one party or the other. Nevada is “D+1″, meaning a very slight tilt to the Dems. Delaware is “D+7″, showing that it will always be an uphill climb for any Republican.
Thanks for the reality check flenser! The Old GOP candidate in Delaware had no chance whatsoever. That Christine came close was awesome.
“Out out damn spot!” is the lament of bloody handed Old GOP as they try to hold their castles against the advancing trees, leaves and forest of our Tea Party!
—
And in Nevada — Reid won by fraud and massive bribe and illegal conspiracy.
Reality check? The reality is that Mike Castle would have trounced Coons in the general election. Nominating O’Donnell cost the Republicans a Senate seat.
The fact that Delaware is D+7 doesn’t mean Republicans have to lose the seat, it just means they should be tolerant of a moderate Republican who more closely matches the views of the electorate.
Go back and watch the video of the Coons/O’Donnell debate and try to tell yourself that O’Donnell showed any sort of competency with regards to the questions about the Constitution. That sort of ignorance is unacceptable for any Senate candidate. For O’Donnell, who a) is a representative of the Tea Party, and b) has supposedly studied the Constitution, it’s completely absurd. The woman has no business anywhere close to national office.
…, kudos, Aaron. A rational and smart voice here in a wilderness of ditziness.
The fact that Delaware is D+7 doesn’t mean Republicans have to lose the seat
Then you should have no problem pointing to all the states with a CPVI of D+7 or greater which have Republican Senators, and House districts with a CPVI of D+7 which have a Republican Congressman. But you can’t. Because while D+7 does not “mean Republicans have to lose the seat”, it does mean Republicans are highly unlikely to do so.
Unlike others on the blogosphere, I have faith in you, flenser.
I figure that if, after pounding all of the keys on a typewriter keyboard thousands of times every day for a couple of months, a monkey can accidentally type one or two words in English spelled correctly, surely it will be only a matter of time before you will leave a cogent comment on a thread on one of the internet’s websites.
But hey, I could be wrong. By comparison, some of those monkeys are pretty clever.
You heard about Bill Clinton coming into Florida 2 weeks ago and trying to convince the dem primary winner to drop out of the senate race. Clinton wanted the dem senate votes to go to the REPUBLICAN gov Charlie Crist!!!!! Huh? Why would Clinton do that????
Look at and remember this name: Marco Rubio. That’s why.
Rubio came out of nowhere to take on a popular sitting governor (Crist) in the Republican primary. And damn if Rubio didn’t win!
No one could believe it, especially Crist. So Christ ran as an independent.
This Marco Rubio is Reaganist. He touts the 100% conservative line…but he doesn’t go OVERBOARD! No obsession with teaching creationism in the public schools. No talk about “Abstinence only”. No talk about overturning Roe vs Wade. No talk about homosexuality being a choice. In short…nothing “kooky”…nothing FAR-right. No AFA extremism.
And Marco Rubio won! The dems wanted to prevent him from entering the national spotlight…hence Clinton’s interference.
Keep your eye on Marco Rubio…he CAN go up again Obama and WIN! Watch him!
This Marco Rubio is Reaganist. He touts the 100% conservative line…but he doesn’t go OVERBOARD! No obsession with teaching creationism in the public schools. No talk about “Abstinence only”. No talk about overturning Roe vs Wade. No talk about homosexuality being a choice. In short…nothing “kooky”…nothing FAR-right.
He does not sound very “Reaganist” then. Reagan actually was a “kooky far-right extremist” who wanted to overturn Roe vs Wade and opposed homosexuality, along with other “kooky far-right extremist” ideas such as defeating the Soviet Union. Of course up until a few years ago even the Democrats opposed homosexuality.
Reagan was NOT a “kooky far right extremist” memories are convenient and he’s idolized now, but during his presidency, many on the far right found him to be too centrist.
during his presidency, many on the far right found him to be too centrist
Sure, if by “far right” you mean “the libertarians”.
Libertarians were a very obscure, tiny, practically unknown group when RR was POTUS.
It didn’t evolve into what it is today until the mid 1990′s. Your comment was nutsy.
Not true, flenser. I worked for Reagan beginning in ’76 (when we lost the Republican primary) as a VERY INVOLVED daily volunteer…and both abortion & homosexuality were low low low on his priority list. You mentioned his breaking the Soviet Union and I concur…Defense was high on his list. He understood that religious social issues were election loser issues.
Daddy Bush was much more involved with social issues. He began to telephone activists to encourage the activists who protested in front of abortion doctors’ homes. He supported the extremists, threw up on the Japanese prime minister…and LOST THE ELECTION!
A successful candidate can talk the talk but not walk. Walking equals losing. This is ESPECIALLY true now that the country is fed up with gov’t intetference in their personal lives!
I worked for Reagan beginning in ‘76 (when we lost the Republican primary) as a VERY INVOLVED daily volunteer
I’m sure you were privy to his innermost thoughts.
both abortion & homosexuality were low low low on his priority list
Homosexuality was universally looked down on at the time. As for abortion, Reagan did everything he possibly could to oppose it short of declaring martial law and suspending the constitution.
Flenser, you astound me.
You can type without activating your brain.
It’s like sleepwalking through life, huh?
I feel jealous Flenser. I don’t have any low calibre attackers who follow me around. Where’d you get this Brian fellow? Adhominem.com or 2ndgrade.com? I’ve thought about going to one of those websites, and buying my own easily crushed ‘Defender of the Status Quo Mooks’ with self-inflating ego, but I thought they were too expensive. Any reccomendations?
Um yeah, Tennwriter, that lame comment was effective. (rolling my eyes and shaking my head here)
BTW, FYI, with his smarmy sock puppets, “flenser” stalked Brian (and me) on another website. What goes around comes around. This time we’re not ignoring him.
This reads like a Peggy Noonan piece, and I don’t mean that as a compliment. Discretion and finesse is not bad advice, but it is often superficial advice, much like Obama’s constant misunderstanding of why the electorate resoundingly rejected him on Tuesday. It’s not just a matter of communication issue. Delaware is extremely blue, Castle ran a very poor race (look it up) and let us not underestimate the massive union “get out the vote” effort in the Nevada. Both women were outsiders and were not exactly helped by the grey suited good ‘ole boy network of the Republican party. They came from nowhere and received very little backing from Republican leadership. Second, no one I know primly criticizes the modus operandi of Christie in New Jersey. He certainly doesn’t “feint and parry.” Here’s my point, it is quite possible that Scalia, Rove and many others in the establishment will accept maverick behavior and blunt talk from men and not from women. Enter Sarah Palin. Palin is much less stinging and adversarial than Christi, yet his assertiveness and his aggressiveness is lauded, and is considered by many conservatives as “refreshing.” For my part I am little tired of the kind of condescending “advice” from the Dear Abbey of the conservative airways.
Seems a lot of folks are forgetting that Gov. Christie was not the more conservative candidate in NJ. Steve Lonergan (I think I spelled it right) was. And to this day, Lonergan keeps the pressure on Christie to go farther than he has so far.
This isn’t to say that Christie’s some sort of lib — on fiscal matters, he’s quite conservative. On social issues, he’s not a strong conservative, but that’s OK because that works in New Jersey.
What is separating Christie (and what separated Palin) from the pack is his willingness to do battle… not quietly, but forcefully, for the issues he believes has to be faced in his state. We know more about Christie because more than half of his state is in the New York media market. On things that matter, this is more of what we need — fencing when appropriate, but make sure the sledgehammer is at hand.
Chris Christie does not need to “feint and parry” because he completely disarms with truth. He does the “josh and push” thing. He’s great, though.
Hmmmm.
“Some are blaming the O’Donnell defeat on the GOP establishment, which was lukewarm to her candidacy. If only Karl Rove and Charles Krauthammer had given O’ Donnell their seals of approval, the whine goes, she would have won.”
After more than a decade of Republicans screaming at conservatives to vote the straight Republican ticket regardless of how we felt about the candidates or how absolutely liberal or even leftist they were … well frankly this smacks of a contemptuous hypocrisy.
So we conservatives have to hold our nose and vote for liberal Republicans but the same cannot be said of the other side?
Karl Rove did not say not to vote for her, he was just honest about the problems she faced. The truth is people got mad at him for being honest. As for people saying you have to vote for the candidate no matter what the party, would the O’Donnell people have supported Castle? I wonder.
Rick Perry had the right idea — tell the MSM (newspaper editorial boards, in this case) to go pound sand. Calling newspapers “yesterday’s news” was a great thumb in their collective eye. Granted, he likely would have won anyway, but a million or so Texans giving you a thumbs-up and hollering “YEE-HAW!” is still a great thing.
IMHO Republican candidates should — to the greatest extent possible — ignore the MSM and speak directly to the voters. Put downloadable PDFs of position papers, statements of philosophy, Q&A, etc. on the Web site and heavily advertise the site. The first time the smarmy reporters badger and harass you on the campaign trail, tell them loudly, “I’m here to speak with and listen to actual people. You Marxist trolls are not worth one second of my time or one joule of my energy. You are irrelevant!” From that day forward, simply refuse to acknowledge their presence, save perhaps to get out a can of Raid and spray it in their direction. (After that, your supporters might even bring their own cans of Raid to rallies and do the spraying themselves.) Wear the MSM’s scorn as a badge of honor; even use it as a campaign tool (“John Smith, Republican — the candidate the lamestream media love to hate”).
Strider, question for you… are you in Texas? Does Perry have national ambitions?
My questions about O’Donnell had nothing to do with Rove or Krauthammer or the GOP establishment. I heard the woman tell a big fat lie on a radio interview. She said she had won 2 counties when she ran against Biden and she did not win any. Why lie about something like that? It just turned me off. And then there were all the other problems with her finances and her law suit and on and on. No one is perfect, everyone has baggage, I get that…but I just did not trust her and I think that a lot of other people felt the same way. And I also think there is something of the con artist in her. She was not a product of the Tea Party, she latched onto them for support.
Angle was weak, she was a weak candidate going up against the Democratic machine.
Most of the Tea Party candidates were great, they really were.
We need the “statesman, feint and parry” types of political leaders, like a Ronald Reagan, Marco Rubio etc. But when facing blood thirsty, cut-throat adversaries like we are now, we very much need the WARRIORS also – the Sarah Palins, Chris Christies etc – to engage the fray and battle the bullies, otherwise they run roughshod over us. George W. Bush was a good man who to his and our detriment failed to engage those intent in this country on destroying him.
Warriors by their very nature are not loved by the masses, who fear them and toss them aside when they’ve outlived their perceived usefulness. Warriors engage their enemies at very great toll and risk to their own well-being. We need more warriors like Sarah Palin. And we need to cover their backs 100%. When we lack the courage to do so, we expose our necks to the ever present jackals.
One quibble, where the article says that a platitudinous lightweight isn’t right for the Senate… I cannot reconcile that with the continued presence in the Senate of Barbara Boxer and Patty Murray, two of the dumbest boxes of rocks on God’s green earth. And while none come immediately to mind, I am sure I could come up with some GOP examples from the last 20 years if I wanted to spend the time and effort.
If O’Donnell is indeed nothing but a platitude-spouting lightweight, she would hardly be unique in the Senate.
Ahhh, yes…the old refrain: “If only the plebiscite would listen to us and accept our hand-picked candidates”; “If only the candidates would do, say, and act in the exactly the manner we tell them to…”
Of course, this analysis ignores a few fundamentals of politics on the ground. First, we have these things called primaries which means that candidates tend to percolate up from the electorate at large in wave-type elections (because the electorate is pissed). Thus, the national party is going to inevitably end up with some egg on their face regarding their hand-picked candidates (Mike Castle anyone?). In fact, it was the failure of the national party to get out in front of the “wave” of voter discontent prior to the primaries that directly led to the Angles and O’Donnells of this campaign via my second point: the national party chose to reward patronage and favoritism instead of seeking candidates appropriate to the situation on the ground. Compare Marco Rubio in Florida to Christine O’Donnell in Delaware. In both situations, the republican national party chose to support, via patronage, the insider over the candidate best reflecting the mood of the electorate. In Florida, the party got lucky because Rubio (despite being an outsider) handled his campaign communications in a Reagan-esque manner. In Delaware, the party got unlucky with a candidate that was completely overwhelmed by the entirety of the situation. Perhaps, the national party will learn to get out in front of voter proclivities and properly vet “outsider” candidates when supporting one is called for.
*as an aside, I still think I prefer a professed marxist representing Delaware than a RINO whose divergences from the House GOP would be lionized at every turn by the lamestream media.
I was born and raise in Chicago which, rightly or wrongly has persuaded me to feel that Democrat politicians are primarily bottom feeding thugs. The events of the last 20 months has done little to moderate that opinion. Since members of the SEIU serviced the voting machines in Nevada I hear echos of Chicago in 1960. For those who don’t understand JFK was elected on the strength of the cadaver vote from Chicago. Please recall 2 years ago in Minn. when misplaced votes appeared as if by magic they were all for the CLOWN they now call Senator. Also, it must be remembered that the voters in Delaware elected and re-elected brain-dead Biden.
Blaming the victims doesn’t cut it.
This thread took off down two separate and distinct pathways.
1)Whether Republican candidates should handle the Journolist media with an attitude and air of detachment, josh with them, let it all roll off your back.
2)The relative strength of the O’Donnell and Angle candidacies and what that meant for the Republican Party.
I deeply admire and respect both Elizabeth and Roger. I agree with many, if not most of their views. I disagree here.
When EVERY debate that is sponsored, eliminates Fox News, talk radio, and National Review Online or Wall Street Journal pundits in every single race, and the choices that remain are almost always hosted by people aligned against you, voting for your opponent and often writing idol-worshipping books, articles, essays about your opponent and/or their Party, running smear campaigns against you and your Party, distorting the news, hiding facts, photoshopping your pictures to make your eyes look red and demonic…sorry, I’m just not ok with simply letting that roll off my back.
Maybe I’m a dinosaur, but I’m of the age where I still believe right is right, wrong is wrong and fair is fair. And I don’t believe, not even a little bit…that ignoring malicious and malevolent distortion and systemic rigging of the information given to the public in the voting arena, is a wise response. If enough people stand up and say this is an outrage, then it will stop. We have become too jaded to even wish to fight for fundamental fairness, then shame on us.
2)Angle and O’Donnell were clearly not the strongest candidates. No argument. However, I have a Darwinian theory about how they helped the Republican Party immensely this year. If the people are not going to just “go along” with your retreads and crony cutout candidates, you might start putting up some folks made of a little sterner stuff.
Hey, had Sean Bielat been running against Harry Reid…I’m a betting man and would lay down some heavy wagers on how that would have turned out. Pete Sessions did a great job putting the Young Guns program into play and I think the “citizen candidate” is a winning strategy.
With hundreds of races in play, you are likely to have a couple of clunkers. But, I bet next time, the Republicans will field stronger and stronger candidates that appeal to the will of the base.
Angle and O’Donnell weren’t “annointed”. They ran in the primaries and the “other guy” didn’t win. Next time, run a better “other guy” and this issue goes away. I believe the removal of the “I’m entitled to this seat” stuff can best be left to the Democrats. It’s not an attitude to emulate.
Put up more Marco Rubio, Chris Christie, Paul Ryan, Sean Bielat, Kristi Noem, Susana Martinez, type candidates…and the Darwinian fitness cycle will take care of itself.
It takes time to learn that art. (For most people; Sara Palin may be an exception).
This is the silliest article of yours that I have ever read. Talk about majoring in the minors. Angle’s verbal fencing could have been as brilliant as Oscar Wilde’s and she still wouldn’t have won. Angle was taken down by the GOP. How do you dare to suggest that the establishment GOP acted warmly toward Angle?
The Nevada State Senate GOP Minority Leader Bill Raggio endorsed Harry Reid over Sharron Angle, as did GOP Mayor, and former State Party Chair, Bob Cashell. The mayor of Sparks, Geno Martini (R), also endorsed Reid. Frank Fahrenkopf, former GOP National Chair, endorsed Reid. Oh, by the way, he is currently the president of the American Gaming Association (Casino Lobby). Nevada’s former first lady, Dema Guinn, also announced her support for Reid, implying in her statement that her late husband would have done the same. I’m not listing them all. You get the picture, I hope. And coming out of this election the subject you see worthy to headline is Angle’s problem fencing with the Fourth Estate? Wow!
The other candidate you mention, O’Donnell, flawed though she may have been, actually won the Independent vote. (Did you know that?) Problem was, she didn’t carry enough of the REPUBLICAN vote to win. They didn’t show up for her. Stunning, no?
In case you haven’t noticed it, old-guard Republicans have shown themselves to be an especially vindictive and self-interested lot. I would think a meditation on THEIR behavior this election year might be more in keeping with your sense of moral duty, ethical behavior, and the practice of humility.
Or it could be that those “old guard Republicans” of whom you childishly spoke so disrespectfully are a HELLUVALOT smarter, more mature, more sensible, more savvy, more rational, more responsible and wiser than ANY of the ignorant, impulsive, hotheaded, inexperienced, juvenile, shallow, dense, extremely irresponsible, wishy-washy, emotionally unstable and clueless Indepentents and Tea Partiers are, you think?
Get a grip and get real. You don’t have any comprehension of the dynamics of that election.
Your title tells it all, casual, not very concerned…Also known as unattentive, and therefore dangerous when operating machinery, like a voting both.
Selling our childeren into slavery at a slighty SLOWER rate the the Democrats does NOT qualify the some of the dead wood “Old Guard” Republicans with any of the qualities you mention….
Castle was an ass of the first order, who would have done more damage to us as a media favored “moderate” republican prototype that others would try to emulate to get good press.
The more people that wake up and see the Democrats for the evil theiving bastards they are, the better. It may take a cycle or two, we didnt get bankrupt overnight….
Stop making excuses, pay attention, or stay home on election day if youre so confused
No frigging quarter in any primary any more
Thanks for making my point.
Any rational and reasonably intelligent person would have realized that it would have been far better to have put a Rhino in office who would have voted with Republicans most of the time than to have made an idiotic blunder that put a liberal Democrat into office who will NEVER vote with Republicans. If you disagree, you belong in a home for the retarded. (Under close scrutiny for obvious reasons, I should add.)
Well I beleive she lost because of carl rove.
instead of putting the right face on the primary, he said she was a terrible candidate.
She was the peoples choice, but he, being part of the old school reps that want an R in there no matter what. That was the way politics was played before the tea party. But he made people believe she wasnt the rioght man for the job.
She wasnt a polished used car salesmen.
Perhaps that is whats needed in washington.
Angle & O’Donnell both lost because they said goofy things:
Sharron Angle suggested massages for prisoners going thru drug detox. And don’t forget her abortion-breast cancer link.
Christine O’Donnell said American companies are cross-breeding humans & animals. And she insists that evolution is a “myth”.
Republicans like (and study) the issues. The Republican voters just couldn’t bring themselves to pull the lever for either of these two women. Dems voted for “Change we can believe in” without even asking the specifics of those changes.
Conversely, Republican voters want thoughtful and intelligent DETAILS re the issues.
THAT’s why Angle & O’Donnell lost. Too goofy.
But there IS an abortion-breast cancer link! The science is well documented, but like the global warming Climategate fiasco, the truth has been suppressed because it doesn’t fit the elite’s politically correct agenda.
I don’t know what Angle actually said about this issue, but if you think it’s “goofy” to tell an inconvenient truth, shame on you.
They were PORTRAYED as goofy by extrapolating their beliefs (like being a christian) as “believing evolution is a myth” Etc Etc Etc.
Everyone has public gaffs that can be used against them, but only Repubicans are harped on them exclusively, endlessly, as “THE” defining element of their persona.
If I wanted to (and controlled a large portion of the narrative like the MSM) couls rip Clinton, Frank, Dodd, Boxer, Pelosi, Reed endlessly on things theyve said, and then denied they said. Running a male prostitution ring from your office would be a game ender for ANY republican, and we all know it.
What Krauthammer and Rove SHOULD have said was “Fresh, new, inexperienced regular folks fed up with the system, who will get savaged by the the D-Machine and MSM” Thst true, but also FAIR.
Dismissing them (the damn peoples choice!) as stupid and unqualified reflects back onto THE PEOPLE who supported her, and gave the press a green light to destroy them, while ridicluling the PEOPLE WHO WANT DEMOCRATS OUT…
Unforgiveable sins for a so called conservative, in my book
For Msmensa:
The following is from a report from the DeVeber Institute for Bioethics and Social Research, a group of Canadian academics, scientists, and physicians:
6. Abortion and breast cancer
• Out of 37 studies up to the year 2003 of the link between induced abortion and subsequent breast cancer, 23 showed a 30% increased risk of breast cancer for women who experienced induced abortion. [WHAA, 26-8].
• Since 2003 five studies have been published showing no link between abortion and breast cancer. However, these studies are either underpowered or use a control group with the same risk characteristics as the women who have had induced abortions.
• The National Cancer Institute denies any link between induced abortion and breast cancer
• However, the National Cancer Institute has itself sponsored two major studies which discovered a 50% greater risk and 137% greater risk respectively of breast cancer among women who aborted their pregnancy. (Daling et al., Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 1994; Pike et al., British Journal of Cancer, 1981) [WHAA, 19]
Also check out the work in this field done by Joel Brind, PhD.
It seems to me that, unlike Msmensa, Sharon Angle declined to follow the Pied Piper and actually did her homework.
You have been put in your place already, but if you think that evolution is science as opposed to a fairytale, you are very short on studying the issues. As far as the moral aspects pertinent to induced abortion are concerned, I wonder if they have ever crossed your mind. If nothing else, Christine O´Donnell has sound principles. But that is what you would like to call, goofiness. Each to his own.
Castle, a much “better candidate”, lost to O’Donnell. She may have been crappy but she didn’t need Karl Rove painting a target on her head and handing the Dems the narrative to shoot her with.
When the “hostile media” aka Roger Simon’s JournoListic Hollywoodville has a machine gun pointed at your head what good is a fencing sword?
That’s about as reasonable as the multitude of pro-choice Catholic Saints piously sermonizing about how they are protectors of the sanctity of life.
And speaking of bad candidates?
California just re-elected a 70 year old dope-smoking, LSD-fried Moonbeam hippy.
Mr Simon and Mrs. Saint Pious Catholic of the Holy Church of Pitiful Double-speak…
when the massive Economic Earthquake shatters your self-worship delusion of smug self-righteous piety it is guaranteed your State of dope-smoking, LSD-fried Hippydom will forget all about Christine or Sharron.
PS: California when you are drowning in a sewer of your own self-made debt DO NOT ASK TO BE BAILED OUT!
California: DO NOT ASK TO BE BAILED OUT!!!!
\
Correct! Correct! Correct! (But of course they will!)
Wouldn’t it be fun to watch if the new Congress refused to bail out California?
Hmmm, I wonder if we could con Mexico into taking California back, giving them Oregon and Washington, too, if they balk at the idea. Hell, I’d even be willing to throw in New York and Vermont. The drug cartels would love that. Those five states are where most of their customers are.
Did I read this article right?
That you demand the Tea Party candidates do better, i.e. be more ‘polished’, with media? And why does everybody accept what the version said media wants you to believe?
So easy for you to write articles making demands. Digusting.
You’ll never get it.
(Double) Sigh right back at you.
I don’t know if you ever participated in one single rally or belong to any Tea party organization, it seems to me you are the one that does not GET Tea Party and the movement.
I agree with another post I read somewhere – “Christine O’Donnell killed a RINO”. This alone makes her run a success. Is it not better to have the clearly identified Bearded Marxist on the side of your opponent than a RINO who will turncoat on crucial votes? Of course the leftie trolls prefer the turncoat.
As for Rove and Kraut, they did their best to kneecap her and the GOP establishment didn’t support their own candidate. She is a solid conservative who could be counted on to vote that way but the establishment joined the slimeball media to ridicule and slime her. Disgusting!
Who was behind the running of the “I’m not a witch” ad? O’Donnell did NOT want that ad run. The two paid for spots she DID want were conveniently not run. “Duh…we forgot.”
Who do you suppose was so afraid of little Christine that they sabotaged her campaign?
I like the helpful info you supply in your articles. I will bookmark your weblog and check again here frequently. I’m rather certain I’ll be told many new stuff proper right here! Best of luck for the following!