Beck, Palin and Limbaugh lose one for GOP

Last post 11-07-2009 4:49 PM by MsMagoo. 34 replies.
Page 1 of 2 (35 items) 1 2 Next >
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  • 11-04-2009 12:51 PM

    Beck, Palin and Limbaugh lose one for GOP

    Lets all applaud the three stooges in the title. And Sarah Palin, (as she would put it) the mostest. Yes thanks to  Elle Mae Clampett Palin the GOP lost one of the safest republican seats in the country. 

    In New York’s 23rd Congressional District, Douglas Hoffman, a little known accountant running on the Conservative Party line, conceded after midnight to his Democratic rival, Bill Owens, after driving a moderate Republican from the race.

    The district has been a Republican stronghold for generations, (like over a hundred years). Way to go Sarah.....

    I just had a great idea,... hmmm. yes i'm starting a.... a presidential 2012 campaign to raise money for a Palin/Beck ticket. (details to come later.)

  • 11-04-2009 1:07 PM In reply to

    Re: Beck, Palin and Limbaugh lose one for GOP

    Ouch, aren't you the brave one saying that on here considering all of the Limbaugh/Palin/Beck fans on here.

  • 11-04-2009 1:21 PM In reply to

    Re: Beck, Palin and Limbaugh lose one for GOP

    How about mickey mouse and donald duck !
  • 11-04-2009 5:21 PM In reply to

    Re: Beck, Palin and Limbaugh lose one for GOP

    Ok so a 4 point win over an accountant running in a third party is a victory. The lasttime I looked the winner didn't even receive a majority of the votes and that was with the Republican candidate giving her support to the Democrat. If this is the best you can do to glote then congratulations. By the way how did those governor's races work out fo you.
  • 11-04-2009 5:29 PM In reply to

    Re: Beck, Palin and Limbaugh lose one for GOP

    Democrats took a seat held by republicans for over 100 years.    That is worth a few congratulations.

    Congrats on the two governor wins for the republicans also, especially the more moderate republican who ran on a platform similiar to Obama's campaign platform.

  • 11-05-2009 6:42 AM In reply to

    Re: Beck, Palin and Limbaugh lose one for GOP

    New York's 23rd congressional district

    93.8% White 2.7% Black 0.6% Asian 2.1% Hispanic 0.9% Native American 0.1% other

     

    US House election, 1996: New York District 23
    Party Candidate Votes % ±%
    Republican Sherwood Boehlert 124,626 64.3
    Democratic Bruce W. Hapanowicz 50,436 26.0
    Independence Thomas E. Loughlin, Jr. 10,835 5.6
    Right to Life William Tapley 7,790 4.0
    Majority 74,190 38.3
    Turnout 193,687 100
    US House election, 1998: New York District 23
    Party Candidate Votes % ±%
    Republican Sherwood Boehlert 111,242 80.8 +16.5
    Conservative David Vickers 26,493 19.2 +19.2
    Majority 84,749 61.5 +23.2
    Turnout 137,735 100 -28.9
    US House election, 2000: New York District 23
    Party Candidate Votes % ±%
    Republican Sherwood Boehlert 124,132 60.5 -20.3
    Conservative David Vickers 42,854 20.9 +1.7
    Democratic Richard W. Englebrecht 38,049 18.6 +18.6
    Majority 81,278 39.6 -21.9
    Turnout 205,535 100 +48.9
    US House election, 2002: New York District 23
    Party Candidate Votes % ±%
    Republican John M. McHugh 124,682 100 +39.5
    Majority 124,682 100 +61.4
    Turnout 124,682 100 -39.2
    US House election, 2004: New York District 23
    Party Candidate Votes % ±%
    Republican John M. McHugh 160,079 70.7 -29.3
    Democratic [Robert J. Johnson] 66,448 29.3 +29.3
    Majority 93,631 41.3 -59.7
    Turnout 226,527 100 +81.7
    US House election, 2006: New York District 23
    Party Candidate Votes % ±%
    Republican John M. McHugh 106,781 63.1 -7.6
    Democratic [Robert J. Johnson] 62,318 36.9 +7.6
    Majority 44,463 26.3 -15.0
    Turnout 169,099 100 -25.4
    US House election, 2008: New York District 23
    Party Candidate Votes % ±%
    Republican John M. McHugh 129,991 65.3 +2.2
    Democratic Michael P. Oot 69,112 34.7 -2.2
    Majority 60,879 30.6
    Turnout 199,103 100 +17.7
    New York's 23rd congressional district special election, 2009
    Party Candidate Votes % ±%
    Democratic Bill Owens 61,666 49.2
    Conservative Doug Hoffman 57,073 45.2
    Republican Dede Scozzafava [1][2] 6,976 5.5
    Majority 4593 4.0
    Turnout 125,715 100

     

    The above chart speaks for itself my friend rajx2. Fact is that before D&ick Armey's, army of tea-baggers, Beck, and Palin invaded the state like a bunch of crazy locusts in heat,  the moderate republican candidate was probably heading for a 20%+ victory.

    Yes I too congratulate New Jersey's Chris Christe another moderate republican who beat an incumbant who had dropped the ball a number of times during his terms...not to mention having been a former big-boy on Wallstreet probably didn't help. 

    In Virginia not really any surprise there. Let me take that back... there will be a surprise in Virginia when Virginians realize the've been duped. Bob Mcdonnell a well known conservative in his inner-circle played it to the middle, completely avoiding social issues and sticking to a middle of the road  focus on economic issues, transportation, and public safety rather than social issues. We"ll see.

     

    rajx2:

     

    Ok so a 4 point win over an accountant running in a third party is a victory. The lasttime I looked the winner didn't even receive a majority of the votes and that was with the Republican candidate giving her support to the Democrat. If this is the best you can do to glote then congratulations. By the way how did those governor's races work out fo you.
  • 11-05-2009 8:48 AM In reply to

    Re: Beck, Palin and Limbaugh lose one for GOP

    Seti03, I think the ratio should be 2 to 1. Don't you? LOL.

  • 11-05-2009 8:55 AM In reply to

    Re: Beck, Palin and Limbaugh lose one for GOP

    I like his goofy idea of a moderate republican, the fool announced she would swith parties once elected so she shot herself in the foot. BTW I think the episode of cops was on again where seti got dragged out of his single wide...love the mullett
  • 11-05-2009 9:00 AM In reply to

    Re: Beck, Palin and Limbaugh lose one for GOP

    iceman, everyone knows that no "liberal" has ever donned a mullet. dreads or an afro, absolutely... mullet, no. only teabaggers sport the 7.

  • 11-05-2009 9:15 AM In reply to

    Re: Beck, Palin and Limbaugh lose one for GOP

    kris, had his 1 tooth brushed for the camera too
  • 11-05-2009 6:02 PM In reply to

    Re: Beck, Palin and Limbaugh lose one for GOP

    Don King was very liberal, Jewda.

  • 11-05-2009 6:53 PM In reply to

    Re: Beck, Palin and Limbaugh lose one for GOP

    Congrats for the governor wins, since there are still more democrat governors than there are republican governors last time I checked they did need a couple of wins.

    I like the more moderate one myself also,  I am afraid like Seti03 the other one wasn't quite open enough to the people and they might be in for a surprise that they will not like.

    I hope not though, hopefully both of them will do a good job for their states.

  • 11-05-2009 7:25 PM In reply to

    Re: Beck, Palin and Limbaugh lose one for GOP

    Yes BJ, I'm sure these politicians will have their constituents benefits well above their own.

  • 11-05-2009 7:28 PM In reply to

    Re: Beck, Palin and Limbaugh lose one for GOP

    Time to make sure they make the efforts or vote them out, no consecutive terms,  or any political office  ?

  • 11-05-2009 7:35 PM In reply to

    Re: Beck, Palin and Limbaugh lose one for GOP

    Really BJ, I can see in your idealistic world efforts (ie: non-results) will be your measuring stick. (Although effort, in the political world is subjective). Personally I choose actions/production with a clear, Constitutional based, purpose.

  • 11-06-2009 12:09 AM In reply to

    Re: Beck, Palin and Limbaugh lose one for GOP

    Back to the defeat caused by Palin, Beck and Limbaugh.......

     

    Conservative GOP activists say they are not defeated by N.Y.

    By Aaron Blake - 11/05/09 06:00 AM ET

    Conservative Republicans bent on moving their party to the right in 2010 showed no signs of backing down Wednesday, as GOP leaders sought to push the movement toward primaries, rather than third-party candidacies.

    The aftermath of Tuesday’s special-election loss in New York’s 23rd district proved disappointing for both sides — for conservatives because their candidate lost and for Republicans because they wound up losing a seat.

    But any illusions of a peace accord are unrealistic at this point.

    Unapologetic, conservatives pushed forward and insisted they were emboldened by Conservative Party nominee Doug Hoffman’s near-miss loss to Rep.-elect Bill Owens (D-N.Y.).

     

    “I have said all along that the goal of activists must be to defeat [GOP nominee Dede] Scozzafava. Doug Hoffman winning would just be gravy,”  Erickson said. “A Hoffman win is not in the cards, but we did exactly what we set out to do — crush the establishment-backed GOP candidate.”

    Erickson and other Hoffman backers have now turned their attention to Florida, where former state House Speaker Marco Rubio is battling establishment-backed Gov. Charlie Crist in the state’s Senate primary. Rubio is gaining some momentum.

    Marjorie Dannenfelser, the president of the Hoffman-backing Susan B. Anthony List, said the result was a split decision for Hoffman’s supporters. But she said the movement succeeded by keeping Scozzafava out of the seat and laying the groundwork for future conservative candidates.

    “Given what we’ve seen in this election, the momentum is building for a Rubio victory whether we support it or not,” Dannenfelser said.

    With that and other intra-party battles looming, the message was clear from GOP leaders: Constructive primaries are healthy, while contentious primaries and third-party candidacies are destructive.

    Former Rep. Amo Houghton (R-N.Y.), who serves on the board at the centrist Republican Main Street Partnership PAC, said Hoffman cost the GOP a seat.

    “If we are to be successful in rebuilding our congressional majorities in 2010, then we must come together as a party,” Houghton said. “To win, we need the support of conservatives and centrists.

    Republican National Committee (RNC) Chairman Michael Steele echoed other GOP leaders Wednesday in lamenting the lack of a primary process in New York.

    “Republicans, I believe, believe more importantly in an open, vital primary process,” Steele said Wednesday morning. “We’re seeing it play out in races that are developing around the country. It is a healthy part of the process for us.”

    In that effort, actually, Steele appears to have a partner in Erickson. Erickson said in his blog post early Wednesday morning that conservatives should shy away from third-party candidacies because they have little chance of succeeding.

    Another GOP leader who has decried the selection process in New York is National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) Chairman John Cornyn (Texas).

    Cornyn has distributed several endorsements in key races around the country, and some of them have drawn the ire of conservatives.

    But Cornyn made a point Wednesday to say that the NRSC would not spend any money in these primaries, and will instead save the money for the general election. That could help mitigate some tension between the conservative grass roots and the committee, but it could also create problems for candidates like Crist if tight primaries ensue.

    NRSC spokesman Brian Walsh said the primary process is open to all groups.

    “Party leaders and committees and outside organizations can express their preferences, as the NRSC has done,” Walsh said. “We believe Charlie Crist, who is pro-life, pro-Second Amendment and pro-family, represents Republicans’ best opportunity to keep this seat.”

    Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (R) is backing Rubio over Crist, but he abstained from the New York race. He said the primary process can be healthy, if handled the right way, but third parties are not the way to go.

    “If it was a straight-up race, it probably would have gone to Hoffman,” Huckabee said. “But the contentiousness of the process is what led” to the result.

    Huckabee headlined a dinner for the New York Conservative Party toward the end of the special election, but made it clear he was neutral in the race.

    Potential 2012 foes Sarah Palin and Tim Pawlenty both backed Hoffman, while Newt Gingrich supported Dede Scozzafava. Gingrich supported Hoffman after Scozzafava withdrew from the race.

    Huckabee cautioned conservatives launching third-party candidacies in several key races that it would only hurt the GOP.

    “There is a potential danger,” Huckabee said. “If people believe the way to get the attention of Washington is through third-party candidacies, I hope they will rethink that.”

     

    Steele called the portrayal of the conservative resistance a “phony fight” and said he takes no pleasure in seeing the Conservative Party nominee lose after ousting a Republican nominee.

    “I don’t see a victory in losing seats,” he said. “I’m not in the business of division and subtraction. I’m in the business of multiplication and addition. I want more Republicans going to Congress.”

  • 11-06-2009 1:38 AM In reply to

    Re: Beck, Palin and Limbaugh lose one for GOP

    Really BJ, I can see in your idealistic world efforts (ie: non-results) will be your measuring stick. (Although effort, in the political world is subjective). Personally I choose actions/production with a clear, Constitutional based, purpose.

     

    LOL,  and the above is your response to my post below,  after I spent half an hour trying to think of something to post that you would find acceptable and agreeable, non-confrontational.

     Just something that could actually be discussed without the back and forth bashing contest. 

     

    Time to make sure they make the efforts or vote them out, no consecutive terms,  or any political office  ?

     

    Tends to prove my point, that if the no insults rule was dropped like you made it clear you wanted that the forums would just deteriorate into nothing more than a back and forth bashing contest with no real content ever being discussed.  Thank you, more to add to the records.

    It remains to be seen how long WSS will allow this to continue. 

     

  • 11-06-2009 10:10 AM In reply to

    Re: Beck, Palin and Limbaugh lose one for GOP

     Really BJ, as far as I know the "no name calling" rule is still in effect. And I am honoring that rule.

    Secondly, you assume too much.  And I am continually amazed how a people just assume things other that what is actually posted. I did not post for the "no name calling rule," but I can't remember posting against it either. I did post about you warning (telling?) us/me that confrontational or sarcastic posts were not OK. These are defined differently than name calling or insulting. Examples below....... (full posts at the thread time & date referenced.)

    "10-23-2009 8:31 AM

    surveybob 

    Well it has come to this.....

    What did I do wrong?? Start a confrontation??? Yeah right. I guess I'll just agree with everything posted.

     

    @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

    "10-23-2009 7:59 PM

     Barbara Jones

    Re: Well it has come to this.....

    Yes,  Surveybob, your post was directed to Kellybrowns and it was very sarcastic, and was meant to goad him into a confrontation with you. "

    ==============================================================================================

    "Your post was deleted by Barbara Jones.

    Subject: LOL

    Reason: Please do not try to start a confrontation with another member of the forums.

    Thank you.




    Thanks,
    Wall Street Survivor Forums team."

    What did I do wrong?? Start a confrontation??? Yeah right. I guess I'll just agree with everything posted.

    ==============================================================================================

    "Your post was deleted by Barbara Jones.

    Subject: LOL

    Reason: Please do not try to start a confrontation with another member of the forums.

    Thank you.




    Thanks,
    Wall Street Survivor Forums team"

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 

    Barbara Jones:

    Really BJ, I can see in your idealistic world efforts (ie: non-results) will be your measuring stick. (Although effort, in the political world is subjective). Personally I choose actions/production with a clear, Constitutional based, purpose.

     

    LOL,  and the above is your response to my post below,  after I spent half an hour trying to think of something to post that you would find acceptable and agreeable, non-confrontational.

     Just something that could actually be discussed without the back and forth bashing contest. 

     

    Time to make sure they make the efforts or vote them out, no consecutive terms,  or any political office  ?

     

    Tends to prove my point, that if the no insults rule was dropped like you made it clear you wanted that the forums would just deteriorate into nothing more than a back and forth bashing contest with no real content ever being discussed.  Thank you, more to add to the records.

    It remains to be seen how long WSS will allow this to continue. 

     

  • 11-06-2009 10:23 AM In reply to

    Re: Beck, Palin and Limbaugh lose one for GOP

    It seems we need to develop the Surveybob Abridged Dictionary that contains alternate definitions from the globally accepted ones and leaves some words out all together.  the "SAD" would leave words like "sarcasm" and "lie" out altogether, while including new definitions for words like "Geezer" and "Insult"

  • 11-06-2009 11:28 PM In reply to

    Re: Beck, Palin and Limbaugh lose one for GOP

    Surveybob,  yes, at that time the rule was NO insults, and you, Magoo, Iceman, did NOT like that rule, so it was changed to accomodate ya'll. 

    Now you are the only ones complaining again ?    I looked for name-calling, I saw plenty of the insults that you said you wanted, but I didn't find anything that stood out any more than what anyone else is doing. 

      What name-calling would YOU be referring to ? 

    I am trying to understand, do you want the rule changed back to no insults now or NOT ?

       The noun SARCASM has 1 sense:

    1. witty language used to convey insults or scorn

     

    sar⋅casm  /ˈsɑrkæzəm/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [sahr-kaz-uhm] Show IPA

     Use sarcasm in a Sentence See web results for sarcasm See images of sarcasm –noun

    1. harsh or bitter derision or irony.

    2. a sharply ironical taunt; sneering or cutting remark: a review full of sarcasms. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Origin: 1570–80; < LL sarcasmus < Gk sarkasmós, deriv. of sarkázein to rend (flesh), sneer; see sarco- Synonyms:

     1. sardonicism, bitterness, ridicule. See irony 1 . 2. jeer.  3.goading

    And yes, all of the above qualify as most definitely CONFRONTATIONAL.

Page 1 of 2 (35 items) 1 2 Next >