Posted on 01/27/2014 6:46:58 AM PST by SoFloFreeper
Cortez Masto is a meatpuppet for Dingy Harry. She served her purpose in sandbagging Brian Krolicki, who was initially the frontrunner to challenge Reid in 2010. I expect now there will be enormous pressure on Gov. Sandoval to run in ‘16 against Reid. If he declares, Reid might actually decide to retire. Making sure the GOP retains the Lt Governor office is paramount (since if the Dems win it, Sandoval may not run).
I’ve never heard of Byron Donalds. But Connie Mack IV announced that he won’t be running again.
Heh. This is interesting little trivia. I just googled who the candidates running in FL-19 are, and I discovered Alan Schlesinger (of the “lone Republican candidate running against LIEberman” fame) is trying to make a comeback by running for Congress in FL-18.
Not only did the RNC treat that poor guy like a third party candidate, a bunch of gullible “conservatives” supporting Al Gore’s buddy because the war on terror was “the most important issue”. Hope they’re pleased with Reid as Speaker after re-electing his lackey.
I checked the website (http://schlesingerforcongress.com/), yep, same Alan Schlesinger. I’ll always remember Schlesinger for the infamous CT Senate debate where he shouted down that heckler while LIEberman stood by helplessly whining about it.
Say what you want about Schlesinger, he’s not even that conservative, but at least he’s a real Republican.
I noticed that too.
Dude pulled a Bob Smith moving to Florida and running for office again. Weird.
I sure as hell would have voted for him over Liarman. That race disgusted me.
Given his station (recent transplant, scandal tinged, probably broke) he is not a serious candidate but I also would have preferred him to Mack (who is thankfully out).
Florida seems to be a popular place for out-of-office carpetbagging politicians lately. I guess Jeb lead the way. If he can pretend to be from there, anyone can.
I suppose I prefer it to all the non-New Yorkers that run in New York. The Empire State really doesn't need to import MORE politicians, but they do anyway. And the worst case scenario: the number of beltway insiders/lobbyists/career politicians/etc. who claim to be "from Virginia" when they file for office, because their Washington D.C. area residence is technically within northern Virginia state lines (nearly always this means Fairfax Co.) Hey, don't you DARE call Newt Gingrich a Georgian! He's "from Virginia" now!
Other "Virginia" residents include Pat Buchanan, Bill Kristol, Colin Powell, Terry McAwful, etc., etc. The live 10 mins. away from their D.C. office in "Virginia".
I'm actually starting to see why real Virginians are really starting to resent those phonies (too bad they keep electing them anyway).
What I remember about Schlesinger in the 2006 race is that he was an obscure, “moderate” (pro-abortion, of course) former state rep with no achievements and who was noteworthy only because he had been banned from Foxwoods Casino for card-counting (which he tried to get around by gambling under an alias). RAT Congressman Murphy would be guaranteed reelection if Schlesinger won the FL-18 nomination. Fortunately, he’s not getting any traction.
I campaigned with/for Alan for about one month .... in July when I was guessing a 3-way race would be a good thing and I assumed Liarman would lose the primary.
Then when Liarman lost, the GOP rushed to HIM. I went and did something else. He was a successful mayor.
He’s a wretch, but not as bad as most politicos. He’s got the energetic personality for 1-on-1 campaigning ...
who had the transplant and what organ?
I honestly hold the pro-LIEberman Republicans directly responsible for the RATs taking control of the Senate in 2006. Even if Ned Lamont had won in CT, a single victory by either George Allen in VA, Jim Talent in MO, or Conrad Burns in MT would have made the difference and resulted in a Republican controlled Senate. All three lost by 1%, but the GOP nationally was too focused on kissing LIEberman's butt to care about those races.
If Republicans who would have given money to Talent, Allen, etc. gave to Lieberman instead, then you’re correct that it hurt us. But had the GOP gone all-in for that loser card-counter with no chance of winning (it would have been miraculous for someone like Schlesinger to get 34% in CT in 2006, and if he somehow got 34% it almost certainly would have been because Lieberman was getting less than 25%, in which case Lamont would have coasted to victory), it would have meant people giving money to Schlesinger *instead of to Talent, Allen, etc.*
When Schlesinger refused to drop out, the GOP’s decision to bail was the correct one. And had I lived in CT at the time,I probably would have voted for Lieberman in order to keep Lamont from winning (just as if I lived in a district in which the GOP has no chance I would try to get the least bad Democrat elected); keeping Lamont out was especially important because of his age, since if Lieberman won again we’d likely have another bite at the apple soon (and we did in 2012, when RINO Linda McMahon managed to blow a second straight winnable race). But I wouldn’t have given Lieberman a dime: I’m pretty sure that the only pro-abortion candidate to whose campaign I’ve ever made a monetary contribution has been Scott Brown in the special election (when I had been informed that he was pro-choice with restrictions, and when the alternative was 20+ years of Coakley), and I’m certain that the only Democrat to whom I’ve ever contributed was socially conservative, economically moderate Democrat Henry Cuellar of TX when he faced a rematch against moonbat Ciro Rodriguez in the Democrat primary in a district that the GOP wasn’t even contesting.
I REMEMBER thinking at the time that Schlesinger was in an unworkable position. The moderate-conservative vote was motivated by Fear of Lamont in making their choice in August polling.
If they became placated that Lamont could not win ... some would return to Schlesinger. At that point Lieberman would drop back close to Lamont and the fear again would force them back to Lieberman.
Schlesinger would have had to move into 2nd place by switching Lamont people over (and Alan played a war Hawk in the race). And if Lamont imploded to get rid of the fears of the conservatives ...
Alan or some theoretical candidate had to turn it into a 2-way race to beat Looserman. that was not possible as Lamont seemed to have a floor due to anti-war sentiment.
Most were convinced that the rumors about Casinos were leaks coming from the Bush administration that put the cabosh on him.
Looserman 50%
Lamont 40%
Alan 10%
it is a good model for beating Lefties in lefty areas. Which is why the Independent party in CT has much potential if they could get financing and also grow brains.
“Is it possible he is still struggling with addiction demons?”
I’ll say this. Next week I celebrate 20 years sober.
The guy may want nothing of his old life. He may have realized the cutthroat, crooked, manipulative, dishonest life of bigtime politics is no longer for him.
When I got sober, I wound up cutting my ambition way down to size, along with the matching ego, stress etc.
I maintain that a 52-48 GOP controlled Senate with Lamont as the new junior Senator from CT (and Talent, Allen, and Burns winning re-election) would have been a much better scenario than a 49-49 RAT controlled Senate, with "Independent" LIEberman putting the RATs in charge (which is what we got when the NRSC and national GOP focusing all their efforts on "stopping Lamont" and figured guys like George Allen were "safe" anyway)
Even a 50-50 GOP controlled Senate (with Lamont as the junior Senator from CT, Cheney casting the tie-breaking vote, and the GOP winning only ONE of the three "down to the wire" Senate races with Republican incumbents) would have been better than what we got. The RATs have managed to do an enormous amount of damage by controlling the Senate since 2006.
As an isolated Senate race, sure, having a younger, more liberal Lamont would be "worse" than LIEberman (though not nearly as "worse" as Lieberman's fan club made it out to be.... it was a choice between 100% socialist Lamont vs. 95% socialist LIEberman, and Lieberman voted reliably with the RATs on every issue besides the war on terror, no matter how much he feigned being "independent" and an "undecided" swing vote) But in the long run, I can only think of maybe 2 or 3 times where Lamont would have voted differently.
CT GOP was derelict (what else is new) in not getting a top tier candidate (all of them were RINOS but still) into that 2006 race.
I think it was deliberate.
Something like Rell’s top aide is married to Lieberman staffer.
If you think about it, what you’re saying is that we *shouldn’t* have supported the card-counting Republican nominee (at least not monetarily) so as to send the money to Allen, Burns and Talent (and Santorum, DeWine, etc.—we didn’t have a crystal ball). I agree with that. But Republicans in the state wouldn’t want Lamont, so given that the GOP nominee couldn’t win, they’d naturally support the less repulsive Democrat in Lieberman. But I agree with you that no Republican (at least no Republican outside CR) should have dinated to Lieberman’s campaign, since it’s money that could have beenused to save our Senate majority.
Had a top-tier, or even a second-tier, Republican been running, he or she would have had a real chance of winning a plurality in the general even in 2006, which obviously would change the equation drastically. Under such circumstances, Republicans should have supported the GOP nominee and not even given a second thought to Lieberman being a bit less bad than Lamont. But nobody with a decent chance to win ran, and then Schlesinger won the nomination, was found out to be a scumbag, and refused to drop out and be replaced with a viable candidate, thus making it clear that either Lieberman or Lamont would win the election.
they wanted Schlesinger to drop out so they could leave the spot blank on the ballot.
Lamont got 40%. A better Republican woulda taken votes from him?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.