1 One of the reasons I like T-Paw is he admits that supporting Cap and Trade was a boneheaded mistake. A politician who can admit when he is wrong is a rare bird indeed. (Take the hint, Mittens.)

2 Agreed.  Please stop calling them "debates."  They are joint press conferences. Period.

3 I would like to see a debate, even a virtual one, in which the rightwing bloggers with over X eyeballs get to ask the questions.

4
Ron Paul continued with his RISing and falLING manner of SPEAKing SOUNDing like a donKEY obsessed with GOLD.


Heh

5 Yeah, and that was already old news by this debate. He'd already said "it was a bad idea, I can't defend it." That's why Wallace pitched it a new way -- Are you lying about your level of support of it? Well, he wasn't. Wallace had absolutley no gotcha at all. But he phrased it as if he'd caught Pawlenty in a lie, which wasn't even suggested by the evidence he presented.

6 Or a real" debate" in which the candidates ask each other questions.

7 Business experience + not being a career politician = a recipe for WINNING!

I'm not ruling him out.

8 I have said it before, we are not running against the demos, we are running against the media. Not surprised this was a dud. The secret to success is marginalizing the media while attacking the record of Sparky. So far, I have seen few in the crowd that can do it. Citing a plan or a philosophy is not campaigning, its low wattage entertainment for wonks and nerds. As in high school, these folks get relegated to the AV or Chess Club. If you want to win remember Pedro: "VOTE FOR ME AND ALL OF YOUR DREAMS WILL COME TRUE.

9 Ace, Keyes is not Cain.  By a long shot.  Cain has had the tacit support of the vast majority of Tea Partiers for well over 3-4 months.  This support is an undercurrent that isn't reported by either the MFM or the alternates.

But it's there.  Boy is it ever there.

10
What we really need in our GOP debates is discussions about heroin.

With allllll the shit we got goin on, legalizing drugs is an important issue for our candidates to discuss.

11

These are professional politicians, most at the very top of the game.

A large part of Cain's appeal seemed to be that he didn't come off like a professional politician. He answers were more direct and less scripted. Or at least the focus group thought so. I have to admit, I liked him.

12 Although I thought Cain did well -- no mistakes, sounded plausible, sounded measured and serious -- I did not see the knockout blow these folks seemed to.

It's probably just a matter of expectations.  When you're not even focused or thinking too much about him and he ends up having all the best responses, it's classified as a 'knockout'.

13

why don't they just put them all in a locked room with a bunch of rusty butter knives and whoever comes out alive.....thats the candidate?

honey badger would approve

14 I can easily see Cain as a VP.

15
If someone stood up, looked at Ron Paul, and said, "STFU, dunce," he'd be the nominee.

Heroin.

Heroin?

We talkin about heroin?

16 The candidates are going to be swarmed with left wing journalists looking to play "gotcha", especially after the primary. I'm all for putting our candidates through a trial-by-fire now when normal people aren't much attention, that way they can get used to the game by this time next year.

17 These are professional politicians, most at the very top of the game. (And also, Ron Paul.) [Sits up on bed in basement and clutches half-eaten bag of Cheetoes] Hater! Ron PAUL is the only man who can save America! [begins sobbing]

18 why don't they just put them all in a locked room with a bunch of rusty butter knives and whoever comes out alive.....thats the candidate?

To be honest, that sounds a lot like what we do now...

19 WTF Ace? No hate for me?

20
Did one of Pixy's hamster die?

21 I must have watched a different debate than you.

Pawlenty is a joke.  Weird arm and hand gestures.  Strange obsession with middle class upbringing.  Milquetoast, canned responses.

People liked Cain for the same reason they like Palin and Trump.  He speaks like them.  No canned responses.  You could envision him taking on Obama.

Ron Paul is a flake.  Johnson seemed better than Paul.

22 Well, at least Pawlenty paid attention to the voices coming from out here in the ether that said that repentance on C&T was a necessary but not sufficient condition to be taken seriously.

23 Think Gary Johnson is still whining like a lil bitch this morning??

Good lord that was embarrassing for him.

24 20
Did one of Pixy's hamster die?

Posted by: Soothsayer at May 06, 2011 11:07 AM (uFokq)

Oops!

25

Ron Paul is a flake.

And a geezer.

26 "The secret to success is marginalizing the media while attacking the record of Sparky. "

Goober, you hit the nail on the head. 

27 It's probably just a matter of expectations.  When you're not even focused or thinking too much about him and he ends up having all the best responses, it's classified as a 'knockout'.

Posted by: Tami at May 06, 2011 11:02 AM (VuLos)

Knockout is probably a bad term for a debate this early. They aren't scoring points off of each other at this stage, they are positioning themselves relative to the audience's expectations (or the lack of them). Its way too early to expect anyone to be out of the game. From the responses, Cain managed his part well, which was primarily to look like more than a fringe player. At least here, Ron Paul and Santorum treaded water at best. Johnson seemed to lose ground.

28 ace, O/T, but the subject of taking care of the childless when they became old came up on the DOOM thread and I have volunteered to take you in when you become a doddering old ewok.   Two conditions: you have to leave NYC and you have to change your own litterbox. 

29
it was...
The Debate Of The Also Rans

30 Pawlenty is the only candidate with real conservative executive success and a shot in hell at being elected.

 And yet, he's weird and unexciting so he puts people off. It's frustrating. If Bobby Jindal ran, he'd probably get the same response from conservatives.

31 "Todd, suit up!"

32 People liked Cain for the same reason they like Palin and Trump.  He speaks like them.  No canned responses.

Which is what you'd expect of him.  Isn't he a radio or some kind of media guy now? 

I looked into him and I just can't get behind the candidacy of someone who ran a pizza company I never heard of and who never worked in a position where he was accountable to the public.  Not for POTUS.  I don't care how glib he is, I have no reason to believe he'll be an effective or reliable POTUS. 

33
I got the impression that Pawlenty went on with Laura Ingraham this morning to do damage control.

34 Rand >>Ron Paul. Ron came off as crazy. Like usual. The fact we actually discuss Monetary policy all the time is awesome. Ron, you served your purpose.

I thought Tpaw did reasonably well considering, that yes this is what Meet the Press should be. And yes it's not crazy that this guy isn't far removed from meat packing. He's from South St. Paul/Eagan. Thats what they did until very recently. 30 years ago, when he was growing up that was it. You farmed, or you processed.

Beyond Global Warming and Ethanol shit, It's the little things like smoking bans that you need to throw up at Tpaw. Private Property Rights.

Mitt can't fight him on that, he ceded tons more government control on your life than Tpaw did.

35
Did I hear right, or was I dreaming?

Mitch Daniels opted out because he's gonna be the pace car driver?

36 This debate was terrible. I only watched two pres debates before. The 2008 dem youtube and this. Pawlenty is a joke. He is a panderer, see his gw position. Milky milquetoast. Not even gingrich or bachmann came.

37 don't agree about Pawlenty, agree 100% about the "debate" format.

38 31, lol

Made me think of ... Quick! Gordon! The Bat Signal

39

Two conditions: you have to leave NYC and you have to change your own litterbox. 

Mistake number one:  Loosing him on the rest of the planet.

Mistake number two:  Assuming he uses the litterbox.

40

A large part of Cain's appeal seemed to be that he didn't come off like a professional politician. He answers were more direct and less scripted. Or at least the focus group thought so. I have to admit, I liked him.

Posted by: maddogg at May 06, 2011 11:02 AM (OlN4e)

Yep, and I haven't been a big fan. He always appeared a bit too simplistic

but that wasn't the case last night. Race may work against him, now that Holder et al have crapped in that particular punch bowl.

41 28 ace, O/T, but the subject of taking care of the childless when they became old came up on the DOOM thread and I have volunteered to take you in when you become a doddering old ewok. Two conditions: you have to leave NYC and you have to change your own litterbox. Posted by: Y-not at May 06, 2011 11:10 AM (pW2o What about the flea dip and the Valu-Rite?

42 You do know who this helps?

43 @#6 Jean

EXACTLY!

These clowns (all of 'em) need to look up the word "debate".

If this was anything like my college debates they'd get incredible ratings and we'd actually learn something about the candidates.

This always turns into a pathetic Q&A about what's important to lefties, read gay marriage and abortion, with a little carbon mixed in.

44 What about the flea dip and the Valu-Rite?

Well, I plan to have him shaved, so I think fleas will be less of an issue, and Valu-Rite is no problem.  We can cover that.  :-)

45

Although I thought Cain did well -- no mistakes, sounded plausible, sounded measured and serious -- I did not see the knockout blow these folks seemed to.

. .  .

My boy, Pawlenty, . . .

Mike Castle deja vu?

Cain 2012.

46

Herman Cain should be elavated to the top tier of canidates, screw Romney and Gingrich and i'm a little disappointed Bachmann wasn't there.

 

47 Y-not, Cain sounds good to start with, but it's the same routine.  He doesn't have any meat on his policy bones.

48

Fox has gone to shit ever since Brit Hume left.  All four moderaters were God awful.  I think Cain did well and people liked his straightforward answers.  He doesn't sound like a slick politician.  People are sick of slick politicians. 

49 Well, I plan to have him shaved, so I think fleas will be less of an issue, and Valu-Rite is no problem.  We can cover that.  :-)

Posted by: Y-not at May 06, 2011 11:16 AM (pW2o

Not shaved - a lion cut.  It's way more trendy.

50 6 Or a real" debate" in which the candidates ask each other questions.

I have an idea.  Why not have a debate, but turn the tables?  Give the candidates general topic areas at the beginning of the debate, and have them ask questions of the journalists.  Seriously.  This would accomplish several worthwhile goals. 
1) Knowing how to ask intelligent questions is often a better way to show command of a subject than answering them with the pablum with which politicians usually respond.
2) Politicians would compete with each other to be penetrating, not wimpy as usual.  They can do this because they're just asking questions, not saying where they come down on an issue. 
3)  It would instantly expose the journalists as the preening, empty-headed fools they are. 

51 I think Mitt Romney was the big winner. Any time he can avoid giving that goofy answer on Romneycare is a plus for him.

52 Alright, I'll admit it. I voted for Alan Keyes in the 2008 NC primary.

But only because our friend McCain was the presumptive nominee, and I didn't feel like figuring out how to write myself in on the touch screen.

53 30 Pawlenty is the only candidate with real conservative executive success and a shot in hell at being elected.  And yet, he's weird and unexciting so he puts people off. It's frustrating. If Bobby Jindal ran, he'd probably get the same response from conservatives. Posted by: Crazee at May 06, 2011 11:11 AM (xsoRi) Not. Just replace puhlenty with mccain. He wont fightt obama and his campaign will be lackluster. Not to mentio ethanol support. He wont cut spending and will make excuses like he did with ethanol

54 He doesn't have any meat on his policy bones

That was my impression. 

I suppose he might be a reasonable VP, although I would vastly prefer Allen West if you are looking for a tough, straight-talking VP candidate to balance off someone who needs that.  I am really gun-shy of voting for people to such a high post (even to the Senate, frankly) when they have no public service track-record. 

55 Romney/West 2012

56

Posted by: pep at May 06, 2011 11:17 AM (GMG6W)

But nobody gives a crap what journalists think about anything.

57 "I think Republican primary voters have a tendency to go ga-ga for black candidates."


That's for sure - I saw it among the rank-and-file activists here, who went gaga over Powell and then Rice, for no particular reasons re issues, but just because it would be Neat!  And name recognition.  They want so badly to prove they aren't raaacist that it's scary.

58 What are you idjits lookin for, the usual fashion show?

Pawlenty was the one with the weird mannerisms. Johnson was articulate and sensible and he's got the economic issues nailed.

Cain was impressive and got to the point. First time I've seen him in action and I'll be looking for him in the future.

Say what you want about Ron Paul's optics, he's got the mind for the issues that need dabating. He was right on in his closing remarks that the economic issues are not a matter of accounting, they are a matter of philosophy - how big should gov be and what should it NOT be doing that it is doing now? He's the only one who cuts to the substance of every issue, which is probably why people don't get him. They're focused on sound bites. Dumbing them down for debates is insulting to the voters.

59 My boy,

racial dog whistle alert!

60
“Are you suggesting that heroin and prostitution are an exercise of liberty?” [asked moderator Chris Wallace in a follow-up up question]

After tripping up a little, Rep. Paul replied “yes,” then found himself arguing in favor of legalizing heroin, asking, “if we legalize heroin tomorrow, is everyone is going use heroin? How many people here would use heroin if it were legal?”

The question was greeted with cheers, to which Wallace replied with a smile, “I never thought heroin would get an applause in South Carolina.”




I do recall reading about George Washington and his fondness for drug addicted prostitutes in AP History....

61 52 Alright, I'll admit it. I voted for Alan Keyes in the 2008 NC primary.

That's fine.  I worked for Bob Dole's POTUS election campaign back in the day. 


Actually, I don't find Alan to be all that nutty when I see him on tv, but it may just be that I've mostly seen him talking about things in which we're in alignment. 

62 Semi-OT: Another stupid response from Jay Carney:

markknoller Briefing reporters on Air Force One on the flight to Indianapolis, WH spksmn Jay Carney said the unemployment report is obviously good news.

On what planet?

63 It's like voting for Chess Club president. Do you vote for the guy who plays chess real well or do you vote for the skanky chick who likes nerds and really doesn't play chess? Or is this metaphor completely mangled?

64 CAIN!!!

65 I knew Cain would break through once he got up on the stage with the other candidates. I've been a big fan for a long time, and hope he is successful.

66 I agree with Ace, Paul has a hard time getting his message out. I did like Cain, to be honest I never listened to him before but he did a great job. Definitely has one of those speaking voices that draws a listener in

67 @56
True, but it's not about what they think, it's about exposing them.  In any case, see reasons 1&2. 

68

Well, I plan to have him shaved, so I think fleas will be less of an issue, and Valu-Rite is no problem.  We can cover that.  :-)
Posted by: Y-not at May 06, 2011 11:16 AM (pW2o

 

You might want to reconsider the shave. Some things are best left hairy.

69 Cain: 100% black

/

70

Posted by: pep at May 06, 2011 11:17 AM (GMG6W)

Point 3 negates your point 1, as once the journalists couldn't answer the questions, they'd immediately stop the debate and then whine how they were ambushed.

Besides, I don't give a crap about what the journalists think (if I did, I'd read their Op-Eds), I watch debates to know what the candidates think and how to react.

Having the candidates ask each other questions would get your desired outcome though methinks. 

71 Romney/West 2012

I would vote for that ticket.  I think if West agreed to be Mitt's running mate, it would only be because he believed Romney's assurances on getting rid of Obamacare and governing as a conservative. 

It would be a strong ticket and would win in the general, I think. 

But West keeps saying he's not going to be on the ticket in 2012.

72 Alright, I'll admit it. I voted for Alan Keyes in the 2008 NC primary.

That's fine.  I worked for Bob Dole's POTUS election campaign back in the day.

--

My first foray into politics was volunteering for Steve Forbes' campaign in 1996 and 2000.

73 Cain could plausibly win an election

Well, if that election were for Senate, not President. Though as someone put it on Twitter last night, "I hear the guy who lost the GA Senate Primary to Johnny Isaccson did well".

Santorum was awful. His, "I can beat Democrats" shtick was funny until you remember he lost to, um, some guy whose dad was Governor by 19 points in Pennsylvania.

Pawlenty was Pawlenty which to me means, more acceptable the less he talks. And why was he Charlie Crist orange last night?

Paul and Johnson should be running for the Libertarian nomination. There's no shame in that, well, yes there is but still.

Is that everyone that was there?

When you have a debate and are left with the thought, "Dear God where is Mitt Romney when you need him?" you're in trouble.

For the love of God, won't someone forge Paul Ryan or Chris Christie's signature on the entry forms already and let's get this thing started.

74 Is this a therapy session?

75 Cain wont go anywhere. I dont like it when you consider running when you have never won a primary. That is like taking my neighbor who owns a small chain of stores and having him run.

76 69 Cain: 100% black

What's the over/under on Cain having Oreos thrown at him at campaign rallies by young and "intelligent" liberals if does become the Republican Nominee? 

77

Say what you want about Ron Paul's optics, he's got the mind for the issues that need dabating.

Everyone raise your hand that knows all of the following:

1. Ginormous budget deficits are bad.

2. An overextended military is bad.

Now--who thinks the answers are the gold standard and isolationsim?

Yeah, he's got a RAZOR mind for pointing out the obvious problems and then coupling at best unworkable at at worst batshit crazy solutions to to them.

78 The Republican crop is full of boring candidates and fringe weirdos. It'll only get worse as Obama's poll numbers rise. With the death of OBL (something the bonehead Bush could never accomplish) under his belt, he's a shoe-in for reelection. 4 more years, baby.

79 32: You never heard of Godfather's? Seriously? For a fast-food chain, it's pretty damned good. Way better than Pizza Hut or Domino's. It's probably in the same general quality range as Round Table.

80 Gary Johnson really failed entirely, as he came off as Ron Paul as played by Jm. J. Bullock. Ouch, baby. VERY ouch. r3VO_Iution! Now with 40% more sodomy!

81

government work is not rocket science, the Elites would very much like you think it is but it isn't.

Herman Cain has every bit of the experience, intelligence and character that would make a great POTUS

 

don't let the Ruling Class fool you into thinking only they can handle the reins of government, they are the ones who have gotten us into this mess, if it's going to change it's going to have to come from outside that group of overeducated idiots.

82 Y-not, part of the problem is that we keep electing professional politicians. The government has plenty of policy winks and lawyers to sort out the details. We need someone, somewhere in the process who represents the rest of the people- not another wonk layer.

83 Johnson was articulate and sensible and he's got the economic issues nailed. Are we talking about the same Johnson? Looks like Garry Shandling after smoking a bowl of Humboldt County Chronic? That Johnson?

84

Posted by: DrewM. at May 06, 2011 11:23 AM (WNzUA)

Buzzion said it best - the winners last night were the people who didn't show up. 

85 My first foray into politics was volunteering for Steve Forbes' campaign in 1996 and 2000.
---

I feel like we're at an AA meeting.


I saw Forbes speak a few years ago at my old B-school (this would've probably been circa 2006) and he was pretty good.  He lost me a bit on something to do with employer benefits - I forget the specifics now. 

86 I thought Cain did well.  TPaw has that whole milquetoast thing going which gives me the heebie-jeebies, and Johnson went all whiney bitch, which made me think of the jackass we have in the WH now.  Totally turned off by the braying Ronulans in the audience.  Santorum sounded good, but watching him made me nervous....he looked like his teeth were clenched together.

Cain/West or Cain/Bolton....for now.

87 For the love of God, won't someone forge Paul Ryan or Chris Christie's signature on the entry forms already and let's get this thing started.

Posted by: DrewM. at May 06, 2011 11:23 AM (WNzUA)

If you think Christie could win the nomination you truly are deluded.

88 ace, O/T, but the subject of taking care of the childless when they became old came up on the DOOM thread and I have volunteered to take you in when you become a doddering old ewok.   Two conditions: you have to leave NYC and you have to change your own litterbox. 

Posted by: Y-not at May 06, 2011 11:10 AM (pW2o

You don't need to worry. Ace has been living off loans from the Hobos Banking Alliance, those guys make more than you think panhandling, and the loans have a stipulation  that they must be paid in full by Ace's 45th birthday. If he fails he has to submit to a Hobo Hunt and the Hobos are the hunters for a change. So if you really want to help him hit the tip jar as time is running out. Ewoks don't run very fast, short legs.

89 Point 3 negates your point 1, as once the journalists couldn't answer the questions, they'd immediately stop the debate and then whine how they were ambushed.

Not if you tell them the format up front.  Again, they might say no, but that simply exposes their cowardice. 

Yes, candidates asking each other questions is good too, but this twist would let us see how they handle an unaccustomed setting, and that's something President's need to be able to do.  Witness the inability of the current empty suit.

90 >>A debate would consist of three broad sections -- Foreign Policy and War, Economy and Taxes and Jobs, and Social/Moral Issues. Then just let each candidate answer about broad issue categories, and allow them to ask each other questions. The moderator (and we only need one) should just be there to insure the keep on point, do not filibuster, and do not unduly monopolize camera time. Absolutely. I'm sick of these non-debate debates about silly stuff. I don't want to hear endless questions asking the candidates to explain their biggest mistake. I can read, I know what their records are. I want to know what they plan to do in the future and I want to hear it in detail. I know Pawlenty supported cap and trade and I know he will never make that mistake again. I have no idea what he plans to do about the middle east, entitlement spending, the debt, things that actually make a difference to me going forward and that's what I want to hear about.

91 >>> Strange obsession with middle class upbringing. Not strange at all. A middle-class, blue collar upbringing is a good thing for a politician, particularly a republican. It's not a game-winner or anything but it is a positive thing to hit. An awful lot of decision-making is not based on surface policy positions but whether the candidate, in his bones, is "like" the voter, whether he "shares the voter's values." If I were Pawlenty I'd hit that every appearance too. If you think that people process this stuff all cerebrally and intellectually you're just wrong from the jump. A large part of Palin's appeal was that she WAS a "commoner" who made it big.

92

Dude, Pawlenty?  For real ?!?

 

rOn PauL!11!1! FTW!1!11!

No seriously, I saw it, and thought Cain and Pawlenty did well.  Johnson came off very bad, and you correctly assessed Paul and the Ronulans verse/chorus displays.

Santorum looked the part, but some of his answers seemed like non-sequitors; I don't think he was as well prepared as he may have thought.

All that said, I too preferred Herman Cain out of the whole bunch, but found Pawlenty exceeding my expectations and his candor refreshing.  But he really needs to shed the milquetoast demeanor.

93

Are we talking about the same Johnson? Looks like Garry Shandling after smoking a bowl of Humboldt County Chronic? That Johnson?

Ok, that's funny right there, I don't care who you are.

94 45: I'm not all that impressed by Pawlenty, but Mike Castle he isn't. Mike Castle was an extreme leftist and a deliberate insult to the Republican Party base. Pawlenty is just a moderate conservative who isn't very charismatic and is of questionable toughness.

95

Santorum looked the part

He always looks like one of those Star Trek aliens that are our long-lost cousins through a freak asteroid impact or something.

96 You have your Johnson. I have mine.

97 We need someone, somewhere in the process who represents the rest of the people- not another wonk layer.

How do you know they will represent the people if they've never done that before or ever been in any position where they are accountable to the public?  In that sense I think I would prefer a Representative who has to keep being re-elected every other year over a Senator. (Draft Ryan!) 

Also, the devil is in the details.  A person may intend to govern a certain way, then find when s/he's in office that the reality is they can't.  Then they're relying on the "experts" staffers (whom I beginning to loathe, btw) to guide them... which I think is a bad way to govern. 

98 First off I will say that my view of Frank Lutz and his "focus groups" have become more and more negative over time. I'm sure I could pick a focus group who would think just like I wanted the outcome to be. They have people now who specialize in that. They are experts at picking juries in civil trials.

As for the so-called debates we have now, I agree, they have NOTHING to do with classical debates. They are almost worthless. Here is what I would like to see.

Each candidate is given 10 minutes to speak on the issues of his choice first. Then each candidate is given 5 minutes to respond to specific questions not answered in their 10 minute period.

Lastly, each candidate is given 5 min to respond to points made by the other candidates.

Moderators should be there for only one thing, cut the microphone of the candidates at the end of their allotted time and to insure that the speaking candidates are not interrupted by the audience or the other candidates.

As for who won? I don't know, the big guns were not there anyway. Herman Cain did amass a major negative with me for support of the "unFair Tax". 

99

Cain has not much at all in common with Keyes -- Cain could plausibly win an election

Well, there's a first time for everything...

I expected better out of Cain- he's a talk show host, and in this stupid non-debate debate format he should have shined.

He didn't.  His first answer (foreign policy) was terrible- he dodged the question with a "I'd have to consult my advisors" dodge.  Hint:  If you're not comfortable even talking about foriegn policy, you're not ready to be President.

His immigration answer was boilerplate that didn't really tell us much.  His schtick about never held office somehow making him more qualified didn't resonate with me.  If having no experience in elective office before becoming Leader of the Free World is somehow a bonus, why not pick a name randomly out of the phone book?

Were people that impressed with him because he exceeded low expectations?  I don't get it; he did pretty well, but I wasn't that impressed.

100 I don't know who were trying to kid...Mittens is going to get the nod and we're all boned.

101 Cain also said he would not let in muslims. Big fail. That is pretty much saying you'll ignore the "no religious tests" rule. But anyway, we wont have a full campaign slot till july

102 None of these shlubs can take me. Cuz I got the 'it' factor, baby.

103 We need someone who can go up against The Greatest Orator in history!!11111eleventy!!111!!!! and the Chicago machine.

104 Flapjackmaka. I might vote for your neighbor, tell us more.

105 26 "The secret to success is marginalizing the media while attacking the record of Sparky. "

Goober, you hit the nail on the head. 
  Unfortunately, to do this you first have to have a candidate that can fill auditoriums and arenas by their mere presence. So far, I know of only one that can do this. To marginalize the media you have to put them on the outside and create a really big desire in them to be allowed access. The only one doing this is Sparky and the Gang. Media are like moths, build a bigger porch light and you get more moths. Republicans need to build a bigger Bug Zapper. As the media approach, zap the one's carrying zingers. Marginalize them through humor and humiliation. They hate you already so we need to instill in them fear of missing the train. Only then will they behave themselves.

106 @79
Seriously had never heard of it.  Is it an East Coast thing?  I've been living west of the Mississippi for quite a long time now (since the mid 90s). 

107 48

People are sick of slick politicians. 

Amen.....

Paw... my family is this and that and I come from a union family background.

I am sick of this kinda of crap.

None of them were anything to get excited about.

Paul = incoherent answers... needs to call it quits.

Johnson = weird... maybe he toked a few beforehand?

Cain = ok, but still was weak on some of his answers and seemed to get confused a little.

108 Cain wont go anywhere. I dont like it when you consider running when you have never won a primary. So, only incumbents and proven losers should run? No fresh candidates? Sounds like the formula that's worked so well for the GOP!

109 Fox now reporting on their TV show that the responses of their poll show that most people think Cain "won". This is not surprising since he is a professional "speaker".

What would be thought provoking is posting the script of the show and then asking people who won.

110 Ron Paul was really agitating for the legalization of heroin? Wow. Just when you thought he couldn't get any stupider. Because ALL the Founders had a Golden Arm, baby! If you want to restore this country to its former greatness, we're going to need legions of junkies sucking dick in bus station bathrooms for smack money. Fucking Ron Paul. RON PAUL!

111 Not strange at all. A middle-class, blue collar upbringing is a good thing for a politician, particularly a republican. It's not a game-winner or anything but it is a positive thing to hit. ------- True. See preznit BJ. But at least bj was not raised by commies

112

No fresh candidates?

"Fresh"

"Viable"

"Capable"

Not synonyms.  I looked it up.

113 Do you vote for the guy who plays chess real well or do you vote for the skanky chick who likes nerds and really doesn't play chess? How hot is she?

114 I looked into him and I just can't get behind the candidacy of someone who ran a pizza company I never heard of and who never worked in a position where he was accountable to the public. It's weird that you think someone who successfully ran a chain of restaurants is somehow "not accountable to the public". Are there a lot of profitable liver flavored sno-cone stands in your area?

115 Cain did have a deep voice. There's that.

116 What am I looking for in a candidate? 1. Must be a governor or former governor. 2. Must not have been educated in one of the ivies; Harvard and Yale in particular are instant disqualifications. 3. Must not be a Bush, Clinton, or Washington insider. Do any of the candidates fit this bill? Does any POSSIBLE candidate fit this bill?

117 This always turns into a pathetic Q&A about what's important to lefties, read gay marriage and abortion, with a little carbon mixed in.

Posted by: Clutch Cargo

Journowhore: I want to talk about intelligent design.

Candidate: I'm not aware of any research that indicates that this is one of the major concerns held by the American public. I ask that the 'moderator' please return to the debate or he/she/it/other will be replaced by another from the pool.

118 The debate would have been better if Gary Johnson had been replaced by Gus Johnson.

119 So, only incumbents and proven losers should run? No fresh candidates? Sounds like the formula that's worked so well for the GOP ------ Lets draft my neighbor then. He owns a small chian business and with him we carry PA!

120 I feel like we're at an AA meeting.

Nah, I mean the shit we have now is no different than the shit we had back then, really. Flip Johnson, Paul, etc for Forbes, Buchannan, and Gary Bauer. Hell, remember Morry Taylor in 96?


I saw Forbes speak a few years ago at my old B-school (this would've probably been circa 2006) and he was pretty good.  He lost me a bit on something to do with employer benefits - I forget the specifics now.

I used to show video clips of Forbes in class when talking about the flat tax (I use a lot of video when I can to help the students pay attention). Being his pet concept, you'd think he could explain it in an interesting and informative way that was easy to understand, and could keep your attention. I started with a ~10 min clip. Then went to a 4 min clip. Now I just do it. I was even falling asleep.

121 113 Do you vote for the guy who plays chess real well or do you vote for the skanky chick who likes nerds and really doesn't play chess?

How hot is she?   Hey, if you are in the Chess Club does that really matter?

122

The debate would have been better if Gary Johnson had been replaced by Gus Johnson.

Gus is moving to Fox.

March Madness is going to suck without him.

123 I was not aware that Cain was with the Federal Reserve.
Not sure that's a plus in my book.

Herman Cain (born December 13, 1945) He is a former deputy chairman (1992–94) and chairman (1995–96) of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City.

124
Leather UGG lace DVD batch format wigs.

Yet regular posts get rejected as spam.

125 Agree generally on debates. “I’d have to consult my advisors” What was the actual question? Because that’s generally a good answer. When I make fun of debates, I use this example: “Next question, Mr. President. Two minutes. The military hands you photographic evidence of Russian nuclear missiles in Cuba. What will be your response?” “Jim, I’d call the Russian Foreign Minister…” My own preferred debate: written questions, and they put their answers up on their web sites, and then debate each others’ answers on their web sites. They can write them, they can speak them, they can act them out in pantomime. But real situations with real answers and real debate with real fisking going on from the peanut gallery.

126

You guys still think Palin sucks after watching the "debate"?

I've never said she sucks.  I like her.

She can't win.

127 124 You guys still think Palin sucks after watching the "debate"? Wonder how she would have done. I'm not a Palinista but I don't grasp the outright hostility of her. Just wondering what she might have been like in comparison to this crew.     One thing is for sure, the MSM would have covered this thing heavily if she were there. They'd be snarky and all, but they would be there. I wonder why they would be attracted to non-electable bimbo? Never have figured that one out. Oh yeah, what's Dole doing these days?

128 >>So, only incumbents and proven losers should run? No fresh candidates? Sounds like the formula that's worked so well for the GOP Actually, yea, it has worked well for the GOP for the last few decades. Nixon, Reagan and Bush 1 all ran and lost before they came back and won the next time. Bush II was unique because he had so much name recognition due to his dad. Donks are the party where candidates come out of left field Kennedy, Carter, Clinton, Barry, not Republicans. It's a conservative thing.

129 And the important issue of the day: colonizing Mars with stale socks.

130 OT sorta (I stole this):

Palin: Release the photos as a reminder to our enemies what happens when they mess with us.

Romney: DonÂ’t release the photos because it might make our enemies mad.

131

I'll probably get flamed for this... but I think it's time the RNC took more control over the primary and debate process.

Yes, they've screwed us before- more than a few times.  However, the primaries are becoming a joke.  Every fucking politico with an ego and a desire to sell books and fund a PAC seems to jump in, without regards to their chances.

Does anyone really think that Ron Paul or Gary Johnson is going to be the nominee?  Why let them participate?  Short of it lasting four hours, how can we possibly have a good, informative debate with 30 fucking people (only 3-4 of which might be worth considering) on stage?

Someone needs to have a chat with Paul, Johnson, Bachmann, Trump, and all the other no-chance vanity candidates and let them know that no, they won't be participating in the "debates".

132 It's like voting for Chess Club president. Do you vote for the guy who plays chess real well or do you vote for the skanky chick who likes nerds and really doesn't play chess? Or is this metaphor completely mangled?

Posted by: joncelli at May 06, 2011 11:20 AM (RD7QR)

Wow, the Chess Club had girls?

133 57  They want so badly to prove they aren't raaacist that it's scary.

I believe that's how we ended up with Teh Won as precedent...........

134 re: Juan Williams

Was on the panel partly because he's bestest buddies with Brit Hume and seems to serve as official FNC pet liberal. He seems a pleasant guy, but he's just as wrong-headed about almost everything as most hard left liberals are, he's just usually more pleasant about how he says stupid stuff.

Also, he gets to be on the panel for a Republican debate because Republicans are, after all, The Stupid Party™.

135 Someone needs to have a chat with Paul, Johnson, Bachmann, Trump, and all the other no-chance vanity candidates and let them know that no, they won't be participating in the "debates". Posted by: Hollowpoint at May 06, 2011 11:42 AM (SY2Kh) And then their supporters start howling and the MSM writes stories about how the GOP is rife with dissension. Paul, Johnson, Trump, Bachmann, etc. will run out of money by March 2012 and the issue will be moot, and hopefully by then we'll find out which of Daniels, TPaw, and Mitt are less boring and unelectable.

136

All in all I think it was a worthwhile debate. Everyone got some experience and they can study it and see where they failed and where they didn't. Guys like Johnson will realize he has a bunch of work to do or to quit wasting his time. Santorom might figure out he needs to amp down the angry but I think that is always how he has come accross.

I don't know what to do about debate format. In intramural debates our guys pretty much agree on everything so you can't really have a debate. Maybe you could give each guy 5 or 6 minutes to explain their economic or foriegn policy and his opponent a minute or two to explain where and why they differ. I would rather see something like that instead of random questions of the day.

137 I thought Cain did well, and anyone who disagrees is a Raaacissst!!!111!!!eleventy!!

I wanted to like Santorum, but he came off angry and a bit stiff. He didn't seem like the happy warrior we need. T-paw was a standard Washington Pol, and in this season that's the kiss of death. People want fighters. Ron Paul seemed more like a crazy ole coot, and Johnson his stoner nephew.

I really dislike this form of "debate" but with so many contenders I don't know how you'd go about a true debate. Round-Robin? Maybe when the field thins out, you can do that sort of thing.

I think Cain's most important zing was against Romney, when he dinged him for losing the last time around. I think those are big knocks against Rick and Newt too. They all lost or are perceived as having lost so they're not viable.

Maybe Santorum can be Cain's AG, with Palin the Energy Secretary, Bolton the Secretary of State, and Bachman as VP. I'd love to see the lib press twist itself into knots attacking a full black man (As opposed to barry's half-master) and a woman (as opposed to Joe Biden). It'll be the standard "not authentic" line, but it'd still be cool.

138 127 You guys still think Palin sucks after watching the "debate"? I've never said she sucks.  I like her. She can't win. Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at May 06, 2011 11:40 AM (B+qrE) Quick! What does yiur crystal ball say about this weeks lottery?!

139 It's like voting for Chess Club president. Do you vote for the guy who plays chess real well or do you vote for the skanky chick who likes nerds and really doesn't play chess? Or is this metaphor completely mangled? Well, like my grandpa always told me, "In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man can masturbate in public without getting caught."

140

94 Ken I'm not all that impressed by Pawlenty, but Mike Castle he isn't. Mike Castle was an extreme leftist and a deliberate insult to the Republican Party base. Pawlenty is just a moderate conservative who isn't very charismatic and is of questionable toughness.

My comment at 45 is directed more to the commentators at this site.  They tend to drift toward the wishy-washy middle during primaries despite being vocal conservatives outside the primaries.

My first choices are Cain, Bachmann, Santorum, and Palin.  Absent those candidates, my next choice would be Pawlenty.

I just find it ironic that the commentators on the site when faced with a choice of conservative or a moderate-liberal in a primary, they waver and go for the moderate-liberal despite their complaints, e.g., that the current elected leaders are not fighting sufficiently against the democrats.  Either they are not as conservative as they protest or are merely Rovian pocket puppies.

141 Each candidate is given 10 minutes to speak on the issues

Well you see the problem for the networks - the viewers would get BORED and change the channel! 

142 My spelling is sometimes ofg. Iphone typing

143 >>Quick! What does yiur crystal ball say about this weeks lottery?! Since you keep insisting that she can win in the face of overwhelming evidence she can't I'm more interested in seeing yours.

144 Well, like my grandpa always told me, "In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man can masturbate in public without getting caught." Posted by: Empire of Jeff at May 06, 2011 11:48 AM (FI38b) Such an awesome grandpa.

145 Dave. A CEO is far more accountable then most pols

146 Cain did well, he is likable. I think he'll be the 2010 fringe candidate, like Huckster was in 2008. He has the conservative Tea folk with him mostly. And he cuts into Huck's FairTax support, a big thing in Iowa and SCarolina. As for the huge response to Cain, does anyone imagine that a sixtyish white former CEO of a pizza chain and current talk radio host could get that same response? No, his blackness was a factor. We got some coalburning Tea folk out there, fascinated by his sheer blackitude. Kind of a reprise of the Alan Keyes thing but not as wacky. Pawlenty was a snoozer. Santorum (not that kind of santorum) sounded smooth enough but he probably can't even carry Pennsylvania. And, like Cain, being a radio talk host isn't a good place to run from. Or his occasional FNC gigs. Ron Paul is simply too old to get elected. The seniors won't vote for someone who will turn 78 the year he's sworn in and would be 76 after two terms. Not to mention that we don't elect presidents from the House. Same applies to Bachmann if she ventures in. Some of these candidates are running for something else, not VP. A cabinet slot, a higher profile at FNC, VP, etc. Or just book sales. They all seem to have books.

147

I think Cain's most important zing was against Romney, when he dinged him for losing the last time around. I think those are big knocks against Rick and Newt too. They all lost or are perceived as having lost so they're not viable.

I'm not a Romney guy, but I thought it was one of the dumbest answers of the night.

Cain lost the only election he ever ran, and quite a few Republican Presidents- including Reagan- previously lost a primary.

148

I think Pawlenty and Cain did well. Pawlenty I think will grow on people. No he's not Chris Effin Christie but nobody is. People are clamoring for Ryan but he's as dull as Pawlenty. So we're going to base whom we want on whose not dull? I think I'd rather vote for someone who is solid where it counts in the majority of areas. I won't discount one candidate because of one thing I disagree with them on. Right now it's all about the economy and our massive freaking debt.

Face it, we all like seeing someone go in front of a microphone and light up Barry. Is that enough to get him elected? I doubt it. It's early, candidates are simply trying to get their names out their and outline positions. There's plenty of time for T-Paw etc. to go after Obama hard. But you don't shoot off all your ammo in the first minutes of a battle.

149 re: Juan Williams

Was it just me, or did it seem like Juan Williams was the designated "ask the black guy" (Cain) panelist?

150

the ones who need to step aside are the Party Insiders like Pawlenty, Romney, Gringrich and Huckaboob.

people want a real outsider, unless the GOP wakes up to that fact the upcoming election is not going to go well for them, and they are going to be left out on the street, scracthing their heads, wondering what the hell happened.

the current political establishment is done, they just can't accept it.

151

>> designated "ask the black guy" (Cain) panelist?

He was the guy who wanted to focus on jobs by asking about creationism.

152 Actually, yea, it has worked well for the GOP for the last few decades. Nixon, Reagan and Bush 1 all ran and lost before they came back and won the next time. Bush II was unique because he had so much name recognition due to his dad. Donks are the party where candidates come out of left field Kennedy, Carter, Clinton, Barry, not Republicans. It's a conservative thing. No, it's an establishment thing. And it gets us establishment candidates. Sometimes they win, although generally when they win it's either because the Dems have totally screwed the pooch (196 , because the Republicans have done a great job (198 , or because we take advantage of incumbency. Reagan was the exception: he was not an establishment candidate, he was from the conservative wing of the GOP. Thus, he lost twice before finally winning a historic victory in 1980. Bush II was an exception in a sense: he was establishment, but he won in the 2000 election against all odds mainly because Clinton and Gore pissed off virtually every gun owner in the nation, allowing the GOP to carry a bunch of swing states and win a slim victory. The downside of always picking establishment candidates is that, although we sometimes win, we seldom win big, and, except in the case of Reagan, we never move the country to the right once elected. The GOP, which theoretically stands for a revolutionary free-market agenda, gets by-the-book candidates and presidents who are most concerned with not rocking the boat. Meanwhile, the Democrats, who are trying to "progress" to a 1930s economy, get candidates who seem less hide-bound and give the false impression of being fresh.

153

And then their supporters start howling and the MSM writes stories about how the GOP is rife with dissension. Paul, Johnson, Trump, Bachmann, etc. will run out of money by March 2012 and the issue will be moot, and hopefully by then we'll find out which of Daniels, TPaw, and Mitt are less boring and unelectable.

It doesn't take much money to show up to a debate.

If supporters of Ron Paul or Gary Johnson (all 8 of them) don't like it, fuck 'em.  They're probably not voting R in the general anyways.

Regardless of how one might feel about them individually, there are at most 5 candidates worth paying attention to.  The rest are just wasting time and space on the "debate" stage.

154 I see that the cookies were automatically inserted because of my parentheses. I meant to type in 1968 and 1988.

155

the ones who need to step aside are the Party Insiders like Pawlenty, Romney, Gringrich and Huckaboob.

One of these days, someone is going to have to explain to me what makes one an "insider".

156 It isn’t so much that we need a real outsider, as that we need a strong leader who will not compromise for the sake of compromise. This is the big problem I see: the people in Washington seem to think that making deals with their colleagues is the actual end goal, regardless of what those deals are. From the outside, Washington looks like a culture that has taken the “you can’t win unless you compromise” so to heart that they no longer see it as a nod to the necessity of compromise to further real goals but as a command: even if they’re winning without compromise, they panic, because you can’t win without compromise, so they throw some in.

157 144 >>Quick! What does yiur crystal ball say about this weeks lottery?! Since you keep insisting that she can win in the face of overwhelming evidence she can't I'm more interested in seeing yours. Posted by: JackStraw at May 06, 2011 11:50 AM (TMB3S) Hey buddy, polls change. Live with it. Whether she falls or rises depends on her campaign. I'm bettin the latter. Gotta go. Later

158

Regardless of how one might feel about them individually, there are at most 5 candidates worth paying attention to. The rest are just wasting time and space on the "debate" stage.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at May 06, 2011 11:59 AM (SY2Kh)

 

which five is the question... your five or my five.

we've all ready been through this in 2008, the moderate LOST!

get it? McCain lost!

you might want to write that on your hand or something for future reference.

 

159

Someone needs to have a chat with Paul, Johnson, Bachmann, Trump, and all the other no-chance vanity candidates and let them know that no, they won't be participating in the "debates".

Posted by: Hollowpoint at May 06, 2011 11:42 AM (SY2Kh)

Good to know you think that anyone has the right to tell candidates that are Constitutionally qualified that they don't have a right to be heard, because you think they are just "vanity" candidates.

160

>>  I'm not a Palinista but I don't grasp the outright hostility of her.

I don't either since I'm not outright hostile toward her.

I do not think she can overcome her negatives.

161 >>>we've all ready been through this in 2008, the moderate LOST! I'm sick of this meme. My meme is that conservatives elected McCain because he was the only major candidate with an acceptable, on paper, social issues profile, while others had been disqualified (Romney, Giuliani) and Huck, while also having the right social issues profile, had a bad record on clemencies and taxes. Stop this crap that "moderates" elected McCain. MODERATES DO NOT VOTE IN LARGE NUMBERS IN PRIMARIES. Usually only the harder right-of-right partisans vote in GOP primaries.

162

The "debate" was ok, but unbalanced. Asking Johnson what his reality show would be was a slap and a message that they don't take him seriously. It is awful that even the FOX media is acting like the MFM in that they are trying to FORCE Pawlenty down our throats and not even give the newcomers a chance to actually answer valid questions. Pawlenty is a slime ball politician of the ilk we need to quit supporting. He has slick answers designed to lull people into thinking he is our ONE. He isn't. But it appears some people here have already been mesmerized and are not taking the opportunity to even LISTEN to the others. Pawlenty did horribly last night. He side stepped questions, speechified, completely ignored the subject of question posed to him and swung his arms around like a chimp going tree to tree. Johnson might have had something to say....I don't know because he was shoved off to the side and asked stupid stuff. Santorum did quite well and answered every question he was asked, did not get swayed by the question and never once stuck his finger in the air to see which way the wind was blowing before giving his answer. In my mind, it was a night for Cain and Santorum.

163 It isn’t so much that we need a real outsider, as that we need a strong leader who will not compromise for the sake of compromise. This is the big problem I see: the people in Washington seem to think that making deals with their colleagues is the actual end goal, regardless of what those deals are. From the outside, Washington looks like a culture that has taken the “you can’t win unless you compromise” so to heart that they no longer see it as a nod to the necessity of compromise to further real goals but as a command: even if they’re winning without compromise, they panic, because you can’t win without compromise, so they throw some in. This. I can understand just plain political cowardice, although I don't support it. I can understand, say, running like a little bitch from reforming Social Security, on the grounds that you don't want to piss off the entire over 65 group, who always vote. I don't support it...but I can understand it. What I don't understand is running like a little bitch from the six or seven gun control supporters in the nation. Or from the pro-immigration lobby, when the majority of Democrats support restriction. Or--this is you, Tim Pawlenty--running like a little bitch from Greenpeace when we're facing $4 a gallon gasoline. (Yes, I know you don't support C&T now. I'm talking about 200 . If you are incapable of fighting on issues where you have massive public support, how are you going to fight for unpopular positions? And who is going to believe you when you say that you can be trusted to stand up to tyrants abroad, when you can't stand up to a handful of impotent weirdos at home? Even the non-conservative voters know a wimp when they see one.

164 >>>ou guys still think Palin sucks after watching the "debate"? Wonder how she would have done. Well she wasn't there so that's all we can do is wonder.

165 If that group was the best the GOP has to offer, we may as well focus 100% on getting the Senate majority.

166 There I go again. 200-sunglasses should be 2008. Damn the cookies!

167 You know what I'm looking forward to? Same thing as with Christine O'Donnell -- being BLAMED for having CAUSED something I merely PREDICTED. Palin will almost certainly not run. Notice FoxNews doesn't seem to think she needs to quit her show. And when she doesn't run, because, as predicted, by resigning as governor she was telegraphing a withdrawal from running-for-office elective politics, I and other people not on Team Palin will be blamed for having caused the decision we told you she made two years ago, but you didn't want to listen. There will be a Villain for the True Believers, as there was with Christine O'Donnell. And that Villain will be anyone who didn't *believe* hard enough to will it to happen.

168

"The downside of always picking establishment candidates is that, although we sometimes win, we seldom win big, and, except in the case of Reagan, we never move the country to the right once elected. "

Good point. The problem with the half a loaf crowd is the loaf keeps shrinking with each compromise. Time to do some baking. Grow the pie instead of slice it.

169 168  Notice FoxNews doesn't seem to think she needs to quit her show.

Posted by: ace at May 06, 2011 12:14 PM (nj1bB)

What show would that be?

170 Stop this crap that "moderates" elected McCain. MODERATES DO NOT VOTE IN LARGE NUMBERS IN PRIMARIES. Usually only the harder right-of-right partisans vote in GOP primaries. So do Democrats, but I see what you're saying. You should clarify that a small plurality, if that, of conservatives chose McCain. He was largely the beneficiary of winner-take-all primaries that had been intended to help Giuliani--and in fact might well have lost if all the primaries had been winner-take-all, instead of just the ones in left-wing states. And yes, he did benefit from running against Romney.

171 162>>> we've all ready been through this in 2008, the moderate LOST!

I'm sick of this meme.

My meme is that conservatives elected McCain because he was the only major candidate with an acceptable, on paper, social issues profile, while others had been disqualified (Romney, Giuliani) and Huck, while also having the right social issues profile, had a bad record on clemencies and taxes.

Stop this crap that "moderates" elected McCain. MODERATES DO NOT VOTE IN LARGE NUMBERS IN PRIMARIES. Usually only the harder right-of-right partisans vote in GOP primaries.

Posted by: ace at May 06, 2011 12:08 PM (nj1bB)

 

 

the GOP Leadership are all moderate/progressive republicans, they manipulated and triangulated their chosen canidate, McCain, into the nomination, they will have a lot harder time doing that this time around, if they try (and they will/are) it's going to blow up in their faces... again.

that's not a meme, that is reality.

 

172

Romney: DonÂ’t release the photos because it might make our enemies mad.

I'd really like to know where this comes from re Romney; guess it's just "I don't like him, so he'll clearly do what I wouldn't want to be done."

173 ace, you are chumming the water.

174

Pawlenty had that whole rehearsed politician thing going on, and his arm movements were just weird.  He seemed just too much of the run of the mill, word parsing, try not to offend anyone politician.  Even though he seems to have some good conservative positions, he just makes me feel uneasy. 

Santorum - hard to get excited about.

Ron Paul is a loon!  How did he manage to sire Rand?

Thought Cain did well.  He stumbled some, but I'd rather see a "real" person stumble, than a polished politician bloviate.

175 Stop this crap that "moderates" elected McCain. MODERATES DO NOT VOTE IN LARGE NUMBERS IN PRIMARIES. Usually only the harder right-of-right partisans vote in GOP primaries.

Actually Ace he won with 70% of the base opposing him and there lies the problem.

176

There will be a Villain for the True Believers, as there was with Christine O'Donnell. And that Villain will be anyone who didn't *believe* hard enough to will it to happen.

 

Okay Ace, I expect Ryan to fill the seats with his impassioned power point presentation. I am sure that is what America is waiting for. "Now if I can direct your attention to slide 4, you will see the effects of inflation and unemployment on blue-collar working class American's that don't respond well to the President. On slide 5 I outline my magnetic qualities to make these folks change their voting patterns for me. On to slide 6, one of my favorites...

177

TPaw looked like he had fake arms moving about randomly out of sync with his words.  Very very odd.

178

168 --You know what I'm looking forward to?

Same thing as with Christine O'Donnell -- being BLAMED for having CAUSED something I merely PREDICTED.

No, it was when you and your pals trashed O-Donnell AFTER she beat Castle in the primary.  Just like Rove did.

As moderates tell us, after a primary we should unite against the Democrats.  Shame moderates don't practice what they preach.

179 No, Ace@168. You’ll be blamed if Palin does join in, wins the primary, and you, after writing so many clear-headed explanations about how the narrative matters, and after so many public mea-culpas about accepting the media spin when it turns out to be outright lies, you still offer them support for their dishonest narrative. If you want to support the media narrative when you already know it’s a lie, do so. What we’ll call you on is when you support the media narrative and then say “I told you so” when the media wins, using a narrative that conservatives should have mocked it was so silly.

180 Ace, if the Republicans had been serious about not wanting a Christine O'Donnell candidacy, they could have tapped someone other than Mike Castle to run. You probably believe that O'Donnell won the primary because she was a conservative superstar, due to being guest host on some Fox News show. She wasn't. I had never heard of her before. I had heard of Mike Castle, and I live across the nation from him. My reaction to hearing that the GOP was pushing him was, "You gotta be fucking kidding me." Apparently the DE GOP primary voters had the same reaction.

181 Palin will almost certainly not run. Notice FoxNews doesn't seem to think she needs to quit her show. --------- My my ace. Palin said she would run an unconventional campaign, so i doubt you or i know she will run. She does not have a show on fox. The reason i dont think fox has been talking to her about dropping her contract is because she has not been trolling in early states or going to fundraisers. Unconventional campaign? Maybe

182 FYI, I don't worship Palin and would be glad to accept someone else as candidate...provided that someone is a fighter.

183 BTW....can someone tell Frank Luntz to get a suit that fits and put on some dress shoes? This is NOT MTV.

184

Say what you want about Ron Paul's optics, he's got the mind for the issues that need dabating.

Everyone raise your hand that knows all of the following:

1. Ginormous budget deficits are bad.

2. An overextended military is bad.

Now--who thinks the answers are the gold standard and isolationsim?

Yeah, he's got a RAZOR mind for pointing out the obvious problems and then coupling at best unworkable at at worst batshit crazy solutions to to them.

My hand is raised. Apparently some people can't understand anything more complicated than "Republicans good, Democrats bad".

185 I can sorta of see Ace's point about the inelectability of Sarah. I had the same opinion of Sparky in 2008. We all know how that worked out. The only reason I bothered to vote for Granpa Simpson was because of Sarah. Same thing with Dole and Kemp. The establishment got their chance and screwed the pooch. The new bloods will win the nomination. The question is will the establishment support or ambush the candidate? Never underestimate the suicidal tendencies of an infallable plutocracy. (see Japan circa 193

186

With Romney gut shot and Daniels garroted I expect alot of wonk-flogging the crazies on stage with Timmy, dragging Goldilocks down.  But frankly the GOP isn't going to be credible with any of the three on account of 1.) lack of human interest 2.) presenting the same old, same old.

The 10% of Indies that are actually swing voters voted MEssiah because they hate the GOP's guts.  This fact has not only not changed it has fossilized.

We have tried the political party outsider twice in my lifetime with roughy similar similar results on all issues contingent to Executive leadership-Malaise Carter and Red Wasungo.

Although I like Cain, he's shares an Achilles Heel with Trump.  A pat answer to that criticism, requiring prior election to public office, "How's that working for you?", doesn't mitigate reality.  The bully pulpit aint much compared to moles in Congress.

187 Frank Luntz is a poster boy for why Republicans can't win. He looks and acts like a wimp. Sometimes he does have interesting panels, however. Bottom line, though: letting pollsters run a campaign is as stupid as letting accountants run a business. They are useful for getting information, but are useless for telling you what the information means.

188

182 Palin will almost certainly not run. Notice FoxNews doesn't seem to think she needs to quit her show.

All this talk about Ryan, has he even stated that he plans on running? Or is he sneaking up on the WH like Sarah?

189 Herman Cain may not be our next president but if it happened, wouldn't it would be fun to accuse any dem and lib who disagree with his policies of racism.

190

Good to know you think that anyone has the right to tell candidates that are Constitutionally qualified that they don't have a right to be heard, because you think they are just "vanity" candidates.

Now you know.

They can be "heard" all they want though other means, but filling the debate stage with a bunch of no-chance vanity candidates does the process and voters a disservice.

Instead of 9 people in the "debate", why not 19?  Or 90?

Hell, I'm sure I could find a ghost-writer, maybe I should throw my hat in the ring too.  Then I could sell me some books, get a gig on Fox and take advantage of that sweet, sweet PAC money.  Nevermind that I'm completely unqualified and unelectable, I'm constitutionally eligible, and I have the right to be heard.

191 As moderates tell us, after a primary we should unite against the Democrats.  Shame moderates don't practice what they preach.
Posted by: Scoob at May 06, 2011 12:22 PM (T7+JL)

So in other words no one should ever run a write in campaign against a Republican like, um, Christine O'Donnell did.

Awkward, huh?

192 Good to know you think that anyone has the right to tell candidates that are Constitutionally qualified that they don't have a right to be heard
Posted by: Steph at May 06, 2011 12:06 PM (AkdC5)

I'm unfamiliar with this "right to be heard". Right to speak? Sure. Right to be included in a debate and be heard? Not so much.

193 Waitaminute...."my boy, Pawlenty"...?  Isn't that racist.  oh wait, nevermind.

194

i don't blame Ace for anything, Ace and this blog are a boon to the conservative movement, can we just stop tearing down canidates that don't meet the expectations of the Ivy League set?

doesn't the MBM do a good enough job of that?

why do our own people have to join the chorus?

195 "Ron Paul was really agitating for the legalization of heroin?

Wow. Just when you thought he couldn't get any stupider. Because ALL the Founders had a Golden Arm, baby!

If you want to restore this country to its former greatness, we're going to need legions of junkies sucking dick in bus station bathrooms for smack money. "


So you think it's only the drug laws that keep people straight? Cuz they can't get the junk if there's, like, a LAW against it? Yeah that works for guns pretty well.
The drug war funnels ginormous amounts of cash to the federal government which gives it huge power over innocent people and it then fails to prevent
-drugs
-guns
-people
from crossing the borders at will. They're all part of the same pathology and it's costing us billions and getting us nowhere.
They can't keep that shit out of PRISONS, man. If you turn the whole country into a prison you won't stop the flow.
Try thinking outside the box. Legalize and regulate drugs like you do alcohol - price comes down, sin tax revenue goes up, the jails can be used for actual criminals, and Mexicans can get back to picking America's fruit crop.

196

191, 194

Let me educate you.  We have a Republican primary.  We support the winner.  We don't trash our nominee to aid the Democrat.

I am not blaming Ace for O'Donnell losing.  O'Donnell lost that campaign.

During the primary, I was quizzed on this blog string whether I would support Castle in the general.  I said yes.  And then after the primary, all the morons trash O'Donnell.  Just like Rove.  That is not helpful, and contrary to your positions during the primary.

Second, the commentators all complain about the current GOP leadership.  So, you support moderate-RINOs during primaries?  How does this help?  What message does this send?  The current representatives can vote against our interests because their are no repercussions.

The only conclusion that I draw due to these inconsistencies is either you are not as conservative as you profess outside the primary or are influenced by inside-the-beltway pundits/commentators.

197

186.  190.  Ryan is the Rep. for two sisters, both political animals, and much of my relations.  He may privately be flattered but has no interest in POTUS soon.  Twenty years who can say?

Walker is a certain future pick.  Too bad for the GOP he's not ready.

Lincoln was a Whig in 1858 when elected to IL House and immediately ran against Douglas for the Senate.  I don't think the TEAs are quite ready for a national convention, but a repugnant Insider nominated in opposition to the popular vote will guarantee a run from the Right.

 

198

Hey 201

See 199

199 Posted by: Shoey at May 06, 2011 12:54 PM (jdOk/)

I share your anger about how our candidates are treated by the MFM. On the other hand, I don't think that means we shouldn't hold our candidates to some standards. Just because O'Donnell doesn't have an Ivy League education doesn't mean she gets a pass for other stuff.

I'm not saying you personally did this but a lot of O'Donnell defenders acted as if anyone criticizing her was either disloyal or only doing doing so because they were elite snobs (or wanted to curry favor with elite snobs). It's possible to have good faith issues with any politician...even 'real' ones.

200

Hey 203

See 199

201

204

Oh, and the "your not as conservative as you profess line" translates to "yes, you have valid points, so I am just going to besmeerch you with cheap ass rhetoric".

The other word that comes to mind is "loser".  Because you do not have the testicular fortitude to fight for your beliefs and try to educate people of your conservative principles. 

Quote:

I am a democrat, I do not think.

I am a republican, I do not fight.

202 Posted by: Scoob at May 06, 2011 12:56 PM (T7+JL)

There was a lot less knocking of O'Donnell after the primary. The only thing I remember posting about her was the "I'm not a witch" ad.

Was I supposed to ignore what was obviously a story? Just post it and not comment on it at all? Or maybe you would prefer I post it and lie about what I thought about it to preserve your preferred narrative?

It boils down to what you want out of a site like this...news and honest opinion or sticking our hand in the sand to ignore bad news and maybe a little propaganda thrown in.

203

208

Maybe supporting the "team" like we are told to do for Mike Castle prior to his losing the primary.

If you don't like O'Donnell, don't say anything.

204

209

Until the general election is over.

205

#201

why are you so focused on O'Donnell?

without any evidence at all you seem to imply that folks like Scoob, Ken and I are somekind of rabid O'Donnell supporters, personally I don't think she was that good of  canidate, but still better than Castle, you and others are actually doing exactly what you accuse us of.

 

i think maybe what you don't understand is that, we don't care if someone like O'Donnell loses the general, we can stand a loss here and there, better to be rid of someone like Castle.

honey badger gets stung hundreds of times, but by God honey badger IS going to eat that honeycomb and nothing or no one is going to stop him.

206 Time to close the thread. Another flame war over O'Donnell.

207

212

Thank you for your efforts in working your precinct.  Being a precinct captain myself in a 2:1 dem precinct, I know the frustrations.

But I also savor the great victories, such as in 2009.

Keep up the great work.  Keep fighting.

208

"My meme is that conservatives elected McCain"

And he's sticking with it.

OTOH,  even after 'adjustments'  the 2012 selection process will only provide 3/4 of the electors be chosen via open primaries.  The East, apart from MA, are all closed and mostly lost causes in the general election.

The Elites hope to pull the same march to vainglory as in 2008,  have the East and Left coasts choose the Nominee.  Mr. Happiness was at 42% prior to selecting his VP as a soporific to the base and one that is manifestly not available this time out.

Ace is perfectly comfortable with 42% against Dear Leader tho.  The Manchurian was at 61% approval and just 52% voted for door Three.  He should tally high thirties at current trends.

209 Better: "provide 3/4 of the electors [necessary to nominate, i.e., 800-odd of 1200 needed to nominate, be chosen via open primaries."

210

"I've worn out too much shoe leather working precints to meet so called "true conservatives" like you who don't get that 75% of something is better than 100% of nothing."

 

 

so where is that 75% percent?

you claim that if we play it your way we can get 75% of what we want, up to now we have played it your way for years and years,

so where the fuck is that 75%?

 

no where, that's where, the progressives always win becauase we always cave.

time to try something different.

211 If you don't like O'Donnell, don't say anything.
Posted by: Scoob at May 06, 2011 01:10 PM (T7+JL)

Hey, remember when we used to mock the left for pretending Democrats could do know wrong and being intellectually dishonest.

Good times, eh?

If you don't want to see people say your favorite candidate does something dumb, don't read any new blogs. You'll have to go to dedicated fan sites like Conservatives4Palin where it's always good news and nothing bad ever happens.

212

218.  Could it be the Internet is replacing Shoe Leather.  The argument seems to be "Work harder not smarter." 

 My State Rep.(the current Minority Whip) came to the house and sat down with us.  I was very impressed.  He did not change a vote in my house.

213

>> If you don't like O'Donnell, don't say anything.

O'Donnell was a fucking goof.

214

219

Drew,

During the primary, you and the others urged us to get behind Castle if he won.

Castle loses, and you trash O'Donnell before the general.  Like your hero Rove.

Hypocrite?

P.S.  I could care less if you trash O'Donnell after the general election.  And yes, Castle sucked.

215

" You'll have to go to dedicated fan sites like Conservatives4Palin where it's always good news and nothing bad ever happens."

Or in Timmy Plenty's case, Powerline.  Bloggers, like today's Jazz Shaw toss, love his quick, effective answers. "See that, I like this guy!"

Then they turn around and Amerikkka is raiding the fridge.  "Got any beer, Coors gives me farts?"

216 Posted by: Scoob at May 06, 2011 01:41 PM (T7+JL)

If Castle has won the primary and say been done something goofy as shit that made news, I would have posted and commented on it.

It's not that complicated really.

More to the point...I didn't support Castle as much as I knew he was very flawed (policy wise) and would win while O'Donnell was very flawed (personally) and would lose.

Simple math really.

Politics is about choices. Imperfect victories almost always trump feel good loses (by the way, did anyone really feel good about O'Donnell by the end?)

217

What a tragedy  52% in a closed primary vote against the career tick they've known for 40 years because they're bitter uniformed adolescents and the GOP was denied the worst rated conservative in DC as their 48th Senator.

Get a friggin life.

218 225 I am more concerned how the politician will vote rather than what they look like and what they say. Just me. If Castle has won the primary and say been done something goofy as shit that made news, I would have posted and commented on it. Fair enough. I will be watching

219

227

Reposted:

I am more concerned how the politician will vote rather than what they look like and what they say. Just me.

If Castle has won the primary and say been done something goofy as shit that made news, I would have posted and commented on it.

Fair enough. I will be watching

220 I am more concerned how the politician will vote rather than what they look like and what they say. Just me.

Well, O'Donnell was NEVER going to get to vote in the Senate so it's sort of moot, right?

I was on board with Rubio from Day 1 because he was in a state that had some history of being open to conservatives*. Delaware had zero such history.  In fact every bit of evidence was the exact opposite. I'll take Mike Castle voting with us 40% of the time than Coons voting against us 100% of the time.

It comes down to are you more interested in racking up as many wins as possible or making a futile point?

*I'm not comparing Rubio to O'Donnell. He's a rock star who could be competitive in just about any state. O'Donnell is simply a flake. I'm just saying I'm not supporting someone just because the establishment says so. I'm on board with more conservative challengers when they are sane and have a prayer in the general.

221 ... Cuckoo for Cocoa Pols thing going on to. Yeaaaah, I'm pretty sure Ace isn't running for elective office.

222 I think we should all give up, because ALL possible candidates are unelectable.

Personally, I think Romney is unelectable.  I think Sparky and the Gang will absolutely rip him to shreds in the general election.  He'll get the Palin Treatment.  I don't think anybody who's not gone through it has any real idea what it will be like in 2012.  I currently have the same opinion of Pawlenty, Daniels, and pretty much any other Republicans you could consider traditional, mainstream, establishment candidates.

Ron Paul is unelectable.  Johnson is unelectable.  Libertarians who act too libertarian are unelectable.  Truth scares people too much.

Trump has had the Sparky and the Gang firestorm treatment, but I think there are too many skeletons in his closet.  Plus he's a circus performer.  Unelectable.

Cain is interesting.  Radio talk show host.  Faced down cancer.  Skin melanin content is higher than Sparky's.   That combination gives some indication that he might be able to stand up to The Firestorm.  Has said some arguably dumb things so far.  Not definitively unelectable.

Palin. 
Has had one of the most outrageously extreme propaganda campaigns in American political history executed against her.  Needs a voice coach.  Has developed a coherent foreign policy (do people who are not running for President have foreign policy adivsors?)  Still draws large, enthusiastic crowds, and (as shown at the recent White House Correspondents dinner weekend events) draws even hostile reporters in like moths to a candle). 

If it were anybody else who had been slandered the way she has, I would agree that she would have been hopelessly tarnished by the smears.  But I think it's obvious that she's a totally different cat from everybody else in the field.  She seems to me to be playing a different game, in an entirely different league.

Personally, I think she's running, and she's quite intentionally going to do it in a way that's very different from how other people have run before.  I don't know exactly what that's going to be, but I suspect that a lot of the usual rules, conventional wisdoms, and political calculations don't matter very much to her.

She could completely crash and burn but she hasn't done it yet even after the very worst her political opponents could throw at her.  The worst she's done is flub an interview with Couric.  Show me a politician who hasn't flubbed an interview.  Except Sparky, of course.

So, after all that, yeah, everybody's unelectable.  Let's just coronate Sparky as King and be done with it.

Or, hey, I have an idea!  Lindsey Graham!  After all, he's McLame's protoege, isn't he?  Jeb Bush!  Yeah!  Hell, let's draft Bill Clinton!  The Constitution's a Living Document after all, and that silly two-term thing is just like everything else--void where prohibited by law!

Enough exclamation marks!

223 damn socks.  I gotta remember to change the damn things.  They're starting to smell.  The dog's getting really interested.

224 224

time to try something different.

You mean like Alan Keyes, Al Salvi and Kurt Obernweise........

been there, done that.

The "different" gave you Barack Obama and Dick Durbin

So, you prefer those 2 to say a Mark Kirk?

Keep up the great work. Keep fighting.

You too.

Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at May 06, 2011 01:47 PM (OWjjx)

 

 

nice try but, planting phony strawmen and then knocking them down is just meaningless make-work and doesn't say anything about me or what I believe, you have decided for yourself what it is you think i believe and then knocked it down, it's pointless.

put this in your pipe and smoke it:

the TEA Party handed the GOP a massive victory last november, how has the GOP repaid them?

1. promised 100 billion in cuts to last year's budget.

2. almost immediately lowered that number to 61 billion, for no apparent reason.

3. with no fuss at all, they then chopped that number almost in half.

4. settled on 38.5 billion only 359 MILLION of which were actual cuts

 

no, i will not support any of the GOP Leadership or any canidate they attempt to foist upon me.

i support conservatives only, and that means someone who has NO progressive tendencies, who hates big government and who has always done so, that applies to none of the current establishment-backed canidates.

 

 

225

229

I was on board with Rubio from Day 1 because he was in a state that had some history of being open to conservatives*. Delaware had zero such history.  In fact every bit of evidence was the exact opposite. I'll take Mike Castle voting with us 40% of the time than Coons voting against us 100% of the time.

Ok, then why do you and your cohorts complain when the Republican leadership cuts deals with Dems and undercut conservative principles?

With more Republican senators like Mike Castle, doesn't that undercut conservatives when they try to defund Obamacare, cut spending, and reform entitlements?  Hell, Castle even sponsored the Disclose Act, which would regulate companies free speech rights while not touching the unions.

Using your philosophy, if we are willing to accept 40%, than we should not complain when the Republican leadership fails pursue conservative legislative agenda, because we should be happy with 40%.

Only problem with this theory, is that the left keeps pushing their big government agenda, pushing the rachet further to the left.  When Republicans are in charge, we never roll it back.  So, we are slowly, over time, pushed to a socialist utopia.  But hey, at least we will get those chairmen seats in the Senate!!

226 Pawlenty needs to speak through a beaver handpuppet to rediscover his personality.

227 Posted by: Scoob at May 06, 2011 02:44 PM (T7+JL)

I don't complain when they cut deals, that's politics in divided government. I do complain when they exercise poor strategy or don't cut very good deals.  But you not going to see maximum conservative positions reflected in legislation when there's a Democratic Senate and President.

I said it before and I'm being proven right almost daily...people were overestimating the impact of having one house of Congress. You simply can't get everything when you control 1/3 of the levers of power.

BTW-Castle voted against ObamaCare.

228

237

I said it before and I'm being proven right almost daily...people were overestimating the impact of having one house of Congress. You simply can't get everything when you control 1/3 of the levers of power.

Particularly, when the Rep. leadership doesn't use their leverage points, such as shutting down the government because they have to protect their liberal members--Snow, Collins, Brown, et al.

How inspriring is that?  How does that build momemtum for the next election?

Doesn't it make the Republicans look like, losers???

 

229 The True Conservatives^TM remind me soooo much of Libertarians.

Yes, at one time, during and just after my college years, I was a card-carrying member of the Libertarian Party.  And then I figured out "if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao, you ain't gonna make it with anyone anyhow."

If you're so locked into your own beliefs that you must cast out anyone who doesn't instantly and totally agree with everything you believe, you're not going to win many elections, and you're going to win fewer friends.

The problem that "the right" has is that there really isn't a common understanding of a single, unifying idea around which all of the various factions (evengelicals, libertarians, budget hawks, defense hawks, etc.) can really rally around.

I propose:  The Government IS TOO DAMN BIG.

That's it.

Nothing about abortion.  Nothing about the War on Drugs.  Nothing about immigration.  Nothing about any of the "wedge issues" that Democrats delight in tossing into discussions to confuse and divide the majority of people who basically agree that The Government IS TOO DAMN BIG.

So, USAConservatism2012 is:  The Government IS TOO DAMN BIG.

That's it.  That's all.  Keep pounding and pounding and pounding that message, and never, ever, ever get off-message.

(And, what we need to do to push this idea is NOT pull out the charts and graphs (although that has to happen, too)--it is to start trotting out sob stories of people whose lives have been destroyed due to government actions--day after day, story after story--big stories, little stories--that's how the Democrats do it.  People whose property has been legally stolen.  People who've been abused by bureaucrats and regulators.  People who've been attacked by SWAT teams.  People who've been fondled by TSA.  People who've lost their fortunes because of government mismanagement of the economy.  People who are held in permanent serfdom by welfare system combined with the incompetence of local governments.  And so on and so on.

Enough with the fratricide.  Enough with the circular firing squad.  We all know what the problem is and we all know where it comes from.  Don't we?

230

there you go again, you keep putting words in my mouth.

 

moving the Overton Window is hard, it's harder when half of your own team is pushing the other way... but your welcome anyway.

231

235. "Welcome to the permanent minority."

I.e.,  that minority of the Right controlling the GOP purse, would never walk their talk and support their base.  Same.old.tune.

If you can't get Walker to run you are dead.

232 I am sorry I am late for the grenade party.

However, I do have this...

(ping!)

233 Posted by: Scoob at May 06, 2011 03:06 PM (T7+JL)

Shutting down the government is a card you can play once.

You want to use it to save 40 billion more or so*. I'd rather save it to fight for the Ryan plan and next year's budget (which is due by Oct 1) when we'll be talking hundreds of billions per year.

It's the difference between ANGRY! SMASH! and strategery.

Your call.

234

yes, I reject progressivism in all it's forms, i'm not ashamed of that nor will i back down from it.

does a politican have to be perfect to get my vote, nope they only have to fight the progressives and not back down from them.

235

243

How about defunding Obamacare by $105 billion that Pelosi stuck in the implementation bill?

The Republican leadership promised that in 2010??

236 248

does a politican have to be perfect to get my vote,

Sounds like they do.

Tell you what..I'm a fair guy. You tell me where a Republican can stray from your ideology and not be caste out.................

Posted by: Samuel L. Jackson at May 06, 2011 04:14 PM (OWjjx)

 

I voted for Tim Johnson (R-IL 14th) and he's about as spineless and wishy-washy as any moderate could hope for, you think that i am unbendable but that is only an invention of your own mind. where we really differ is in what we each consider "possible"

I consider it possible to return the government to the confines of the Constitution, some say that is a pipe-dream that we have to accept the progressive precedent set over the last 100 years or so, I say we can take the "progressive" out of the government and move on into a much brighter future, in fact we have no future as long as we are saddled with a "progressive" government.

 

237 EoJ's comment brought back Ole Dirty Bastard's epic song for Dum Dum. It's still a classic. If you want to restore this country to its former greatness, we're going to need legions of junkies sucking dick in bus station bathrooms for smack money. Fucking Ron Paul.

238 Remember the histories very first murder was commited by a vegetarian(cain)agaisnt a meat and potatos manable)so put that in your pipe and smoke it PETA wackos

239 I'm not ruling him out.


this website is very good, you can go and see it




http://www.shoes4world.com/

240

The Drew/Mallamutt argument herein that we can't expect much from owning one 1/2 of 1/3 and need more Repugnants whatever their credentials is tripe no one believed in 2008.

Speaker Boner had a rock solid majority yet managed $375 Million in 2011 savings by going for Dimmi support losing entire TEA caucus.  Senate GOP killed PP drawdown before it could ever be offered for vote.

RINOs will unquestionably make Ryan's closure of the deficit by 2050 a pipe dream.

GOP reformation is exclusively more important than near-term majorities. 

241 http://watchespoint.com/index.php/watch-maintenance-suggestions.html