O’Donnell came across as a young kid. She might have won a House seat but a Senate seat? Not.
Ping
Look at her wikipedia entry. She has exactly one thing in her background that indicated why she was worthy of support—she is a Christian.
That’s it. After endlessly and properly talking about Barack Obama having no qualifications for his job, we were supporting this shallow, uninformed person (her interviews showed she had no grasp of policy, none) who can’t pay her bills, is being sued for financial irregularities, sued a conservative organization because she didn’t get a promotion, hasn’t paid her staff, uses campaign money to pay her rent, and has accomplished NOTHING that leads one to think she could run a 7-11.
I’ve been saying this for a day, and I have no problem criticizing her now that the election is over. She was a horrible candidate who has no business thinking she is qualified for the senate just because she has nothing else going on in her life. And we have no business supporting such an empty candidate when we’re always going on about how we’re different from the dems, we have standards.
You’re right, she came across as a young kid, and whined about Karl Rove. I look at Palin, and Bachman, and Kelly Ayote—accomplished, smart, articulate women who are starting to forge a new public identity for this party, and then I look at O’Donnell.
Forget what Karl Rove said on one TV show—I blame O’Donnell, whose foolishness provided HUNDREDS of hours of television mockery of Republicans.
I think it can be argued that she did a lot more damage than Rove by being a constant reminder of media cliches about conservatives. Are any of those bitching about Rove have the intellectual honesty to consider that she may have cost us control of the senate?