Get PJ Media on your Apple

The PJ Tatler

by
Stephen Kruiser

Bio

November 5, 2013 - 7:17 pm

As I told the Twitter hordes, I can congratulate Chris Christie for being reelected without conferring electoral sainthood upon him for 2016.

There are already throngs of people absolutely giddy about the fact that Christie did well with Hispanic voters and women. That’s very nice but the presumption that it would play out the same in a national election is…hopeful at best. Christie is obviously an anomaly in New Jersey and before we get too deep in the weeds about what motivated the electorate there remember this: New Jersey’s senators are a guy who likes underage foreign hookers and a dude with an imaginary friend.

We knew that Christie was going to win, however.

In Virginia, the state that has most financially benefited from having a massive government expansionist in the Oval Office, Terry McAuliffe was supposed to have an early-evening cakewalk. A big victory for him was also supposed to show that the Clinton Death Star was fully armed and operational.

The shutdown probably did play a bigger role in Virginia than it would have in any other state, but it didn’t cost Cuccinelli the election. He lost a couple of points as a result, but McAuliffe was already far ahead at the time.

That huge lead evaporated because of the Obamacare train wreck. They stopped talking about it at most McAuliffe rallies a week ago.

During next year’s midterms the shutdown will no longer be an issue.

Guess what will?

Stephen Kruiser is a professional comedian and writer who has also been a conservative political activist for over two decades. A co-founder of the first Los Angeles Tea Party, Kruiser often speaks to grassroots groups around America and has had the great honor of traveling around the world entertaining U.S. troops.

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
So here's another way this pooch got scrued.

The Establishment GOP decided that Cucinelli was "unelectable" and abandoned him fund-wise.

But Cooch was VERY electable. The Establishment GOP was WRONG, like they were wrong about Romney and McCain being "electable".

And to their shame, more than a few actively supported McAwful.

Why is Christie supposed to be forgiven his departures from the orthodoxy while Cucinelli is marooned and left twisting in the wind generated by the DemocRat money machine?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Thats what I thought when I read that. The question is WHO will get the blame. And 'blame' will be whatever the flavor of the month panic issue the dems can cook up leading into the election season 2014.

As for the Cuccinelli loss the RINO's handy dandy scapegoat will be the Tea Party which the RINO's view as being as dangerous to them as the dems. And guess what? They are right. Never mind that the 'Libertarian' was a shill from democrat operatives.


1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Congratulations to the Libertarian purer in thou crowd. Once again they voted in a losing cause and handed the election to a socialist. Ross Perot redux.

That's why the Dems funded their campaign...wake up! Once again you peed in the gravy and you are so proud of yourselves. Perfection is the enemy of good.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (38)
All Comments   (38)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
Final VA numbers I just saw:

McAuliffe 48%

Cuccinelli 45%

Libertarian Candidate: 7%

The Democrat Funded Fake Libertarian candidate cost the genuine Conservative Republican the election, PERIOD!
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
There are already throngs of people absolutely giddy about the fact that Christie did well with Hispanic voters and women. That’s very nice but the presumption that it would play out the same in a national election is…hopeful at best.

I hate to say but Christie won the 2016 nomination if he wants it last night.

As in 2012 the conservatives will split over 2-3 strong candidates while the establishment will be united behind Christie by December of next year.

So, last night Christie won the GOP nomination and Elizabeth Warren won the White House.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
"During next year’s midterms the shutdown will no longer be an issue.

Guess what will?"

Okay. I'll take a shot at it. It will be Iran's successful test of a nuclear weapon. Or the total collapse of the stock market. Or maybe both.

Did I get it right?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
How much was Cucinelli hurt by distancing himself from Cruz and Lee during the 17% shutdown? Did that reduce conservative/Tea party turn out?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Nah, only single mother and government dependent turn out matters. Didn't you get the memo?

Teatards always turn out for the OPG and when they don't they're just proving they're infantile losers we don't need.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
So here's another way this pooch got scrued.

The Establishment GOP decided that Cucinelli was "unelectable" and abandoned him fund-wise.

But Cooch was VERY electable. The Establishment GOP was WRONG, like they were wrong about Romney and McCain being "electable".

And to their shame, more than a few actively supported McAwful.

Why is Christie supposed to be forgiven his departures from the orthodoxy while Cucinelli is marooned and left twisting in the wind generated by the DemocRat money machine?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
It is worse than that.

The Establishment GOP wanted Cucinelli to lose to teach the peons a lesson, and they made sure it happen.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I learned the lesson in 2012 and they just reinforced.

Sad thing is, I think they really want to be in the minority: all the perqs of office with none of the responsibilities.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I think it would be more accurate to label the divisions within he Republican party as being between the Tea Party and the Neo-Whigs. The Tea Party wants to talk about substantive issues no matter how uncomfortable that makes people. The Neo-Whigs want's to talk about matters of image and process in the hopes the tough issues will solve themselves. They won't. Indeed, that McAuliffe's margin of victory is almost entirely attributtable to single women is telling. Single women both disproportionately depend upon government services and are most likely to be swayed by the scare tactics preferred by the media/Democrat complex.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
You can point to single women. I would point to the number of Virginia voters now on the Federal payroll. This isn't a problem you can fix by targeting soccer moms or single mothers under the poverty line. You need to slow the growth of Federal employment rolls, lower the benefits (particularly retirement) paid to such workers, get them paying social security and medicare taxes, so that the rules they vote for will also impact them personally. I'm sure this message will be a difficult sell, in the foreseeable future. It's necessary, nevertheless.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
The OPG seems to prefer the opposite given recent history so, yeah, it's a hard sell made harder by loyalty to the OPG.

I get the whole "a vote not for the OPG is a vote for Democrats" but having proven a desire to govern like the Democrats the OPG has also made a vote for them a vote for Democrats.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
It was Cuccinelli that didn't want to go through a primary and the R State Honchos agreed with that.

The man needed to be primaried. A primary is more than just trying to oust an unloved incumbent: it is about testing the readiness of a candidate to compete at a certain level and to get name recognition in a wider region for that office. For both of those things Cuccinelli desperately needed a primary. It would have shown the obvious flaws in his campaign structure (which cannot even be called 'lackluster' but more on the lines of 'non-existent') and to get his name out along with what he is running on. You know, a campaign platform of things you are looking to do?

So, yes, the RNC has some blame in this, but so does the candidate who thought that an easy election at one level State-wide would mean an easy election at a higher level. Even with his non-campaign, his non-shoe leather, his non-response to the massive DNC campaign buys he comes within a couple of points of his opponent. Plus all the DNC ad buys at the LOCAL level seem to have fallen short, particularly at the outer districts that are being encroached upon by the Metro region due to the expansion of government. That makes the D legislative agenda tough in any event, and those candidates who got a scare put into them may just realize that by not campaigning hard (and many didn't until the NRA showed up to point out their non-campaigns) they had close races.

Really I have to give credit to the NRA in the last two weeks lighting a fire under all the R campaigns to actually start, you know, contacting people in precincts and districts... because I hadn't even seen a campaign worker for Cuccinelli or my local delegate BEFORE the NRA started contacting people. The job of the NRA is NOT to save the butts of Republicans who can't figure out how to campaign at the local level. At this point if the NRA formed a political party I would join it in an instant as it 'gets' local politics. The Republicans? Not so much.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Does VA have closed or open primaries? I agree with your point in general but I'm not sure an open primary would have been any better than what happened.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Nope, the Libertarian did not cost Cuccinelli the election. The Dems relentless war on his votes, proposals, and legal stance on birthcontrol and abortion cost him the election with women and that, as the saying goes, was that. Also, the faux Republican otherwise known as Mayor Bloomberg sent McAuliffe about $2 million via Independence USA PAC to use against Cuccinelli. Overall, the Dems outspent the GOP by at least two to one, and it showed. Saying the Libs cost the election is just not true and is a CYA for what really did shut down Cuccinelli.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Disagree. The phony Libertarian candidate was bought and paid for by the Dems to siphon votes away from Cuccinelli. Everything else didn't help but it was a winnable election that got screwed up by the GOP Establishment cutting bait too soon and the Dems relying to almost IMO unethical practices.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Married women voted for Cucinnelli. What gave McAuliffe his victory was how his media effort targeted single women. Such women often get all their news from entertainment outlets.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I believe I will run for high office. Winning should be easy just so long as I can get the “single-women’s vote”, so I am told. I could run on a platform that projects their future as perpetual poverty, unemployment, dependency, lousy medical care, high crime with the constant threat of rape, and miserable living conditions similar to a gulag. But if I offer them FREE ABORTIONS I will have their absolute and eternal support! Apparently, the whole universe is about nothing but ABORTIONS with these ladies. Gee, this is simple. And so are they.

Is that about right?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Did you my Medicare Part E proposal: free abortions and birth control? I'm sure that's the ticket to a victory for a more limited federal government.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Congratulations to the Libertarian purer in thou crowd. Once again they voted in a losing cause and handed the election to a socialist. Ross Perot redux.

That's why the Dems funded their campaign...wake up! Once again you peed in the gravy and you are so proud of yourselves. Perfection is the enemy of good.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I'm not in Virginia so I didn't cost anyone the election. That being said, please explain why I should vote for someone who does not represent me or my point of view because it helps you? I don't owe you my vote. I'm not to blame if your prefered candidate can not convince me he'll actually do a better job in serving the interests of the people than his opposition.

You want my vote, then support a candidate who supports my point of view. Otherwise, I am going to vote my conscience, not your convienence.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
So you really support the Democrats. Why not just vote for them then? Your vote for a Libertarian candidate with NO chance, is essentially a proxy vote for the Dems. Why hide behind the charade of conscience when your vote has the same effect either way?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
If the Republicans are going to present a candidate who isn't going to represent me I have four choices. 1) I can take their crap sandwhich candidate like a good team player. 2) I can sit at home and pout about it. 3) I can vote for the opposition candidate who is most likely to win. 4) I can vote for the candidate closest to my political position.

1) I'm and independent voter, and I have always been an independent voter. My political views are fiscally conservative, and socially moderate. No party represents my views. The modern "establishment" republicans are socially conservative and fiscally liberal. They are not on my team, I'm not voting for their team.

2) If you don't vote, then you just don't count as far as the political parties are concerned. Thus I still Vote.

3) The Democrats are socially liberal, and fiscally liberal - aka just as bad a fit for my political views as the "establishment" Republicans.

4) The only way to get people to lean toward more fiscally conservative views is to vote for the most fiscally conservative candidates to make my political point. If the Republicans choose to leave fiscal conservatism out in the cold, then they will lose, and continue to lose elections.

It is that simple, and the Republican party is choosing to lose my vote because the Democrats will never care to win it.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
YOu utterly miss his point. Didn't you READ his post? I faced the same dilemma these past two pres elections. NEITHER of the two mainstream candidates was worth the powder to blow them off the point of a pin. WHY? Because the mainstream old guard GOP power-lever-pullers REFUSED to endorse a candidate that would even offer a faint hope of TRYING to reduce the size of government, intrusion, conrtol, debt, foreign meddling, spend-into-oblivion poilcies we've had for far too long. We HAD a good, solid candidate with widespread support.. but the GOP ruling class decided he was 'unelectable" and refused to get behind him... playing dirty trick politics, marginalising him, changing rules as they went along, breaking prodeecural rules to get their own "golden boy" into the ring.... who failed miserably because there wasn't a dimes difference beteen Robama and Omney, nor between Mc Bama and O'Cain. His point, once again (because you pbviously MISSED it first time round) is GIVE US CANDIDATES WHO WILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE, not who will perpetuate the status quo, which ISN"T WORKING.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
So, if I really support new entitlements and constantly increasing government spending I should just vote for Republicans, right? That's what OPG majorities gave us in 2003-2007.

The "a vote not for the OPG is a vote for Democrats" only sells if there is not a recent (ie less than a decade) OPG majority in both houses of Congress and a OPG President who didn't behave in the same manner as Democrats: trying to buy a majority with a new entitlement and increasing spending every single year.

They couldn't even muster a freeze on the size and scope of the federal government. So, in the end, I have to conclude a vote for the OPG is a vote for the Democrats in the end, just on a longer time line.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
"Once again they (people who cast a Libertarian Party vote) voted in a losing cause and handed the election to a socialist."--Allan Crain

The typical vote cast for the Libertarian line on the ballot is a proxy for None Of The Above. (This is true of all so-called third party candidates.) Just look around you and you'll see many, many voters disenchanted with Obama's national socialist crony capitalism and Bush's TARP big business bailout-mania. If you take away the freedom of Libertarians to have their candidate on the ballot and take away the freedom of voters to cast a Libertarian vote, then you simply (a) get more voters who stay home and (b) less freedom. Tell me how those outcomes benefit you.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
And Bush's, Rove's, Lott's, and Hastert's Medicare Part D.

Would we have Obamacare if the OPG hadn't endorsed expanding government funded healthcare just 7 years earlier?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
How much RNC support did Cuccinelli get? It didn't seem like a lot, especially due to that he was 'Tea Party'. Some even thought the RNC preferred MacAuliffe to him. The divisons are killing us, but so are the compromises.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Recently the so called war on women seems to effect the whig wing of the Republican party the same way cries of racism dampened all criticism of Obama in 2008 and 2012. Let the Democrats brand a Republican candidate with the tag and the Republican financial support to them dries up.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
1 2 Next View All

One Trackback to “Quick VA And NJ Post Mortem”