Posted on 06/07/2014 5:36:42 AM PDT by cotton1706
After long-time (and I mean long time) Mississippi Senator Thad Ive been senile for years Cochran was cajoled into running one last time (after having announced his retirement) against Tea Party-type Chris McDaniel, only to lose just enough to be in a run-off (giving him close to around multiple of zero change of winning), the crusty old Big Government Progressives in the Republican Party cant be too happy about the following news:
Eric Cantor, long thought of by the Haaavahd and Yale elites that have been jacking up the country since about 1900, to be the next Speaker, should they have to concede John Crybaby Boehner to appease the Republican rank-and-file, isnt doing so hot in his own primary challenge In just two years, hes fallen from about 72 support to just barely topping 50% vs. Dave Brats 40%.
Maybe, just maybe, Americans want an option to the Democrats Progressivism, and its zero-calorie version in the GOP.
(Excerpt) Read more at scottrhymer.wordpress.com ...
Like whom? Greg Abbot in Texas? Chris McDaniel in Mississippi? Ben Sasse in Nebraska? Joni Ernst in Iowa?
How about Ted Cruz a couple years ago? I bet you about fall out of your rocker when he's on the tube, hey? Do you find yourself moaning Dewhurst, Dewhurst instead of "Rosebud"? Lol...
lol
I don’t get the guy.
You can ask him what we should expect or hope for from McConnell, Boehner and the boys if we put them in the majority-—no response. No ideas. Not a wish list, not a principle, not a wavy line in the sand.
He’s got nothing.
But somehow the rest of us are damn fools because we want to put up a fight. How do these tired old RINOs think we got in a position to fight anyway?
“But somehow the rest of us are damn fools because we want to put up a fight. How do these tired old RINOs think we got in a position to fight anyway?”
I don’t expect anything to change with a republican congress and senate. Nothing they pass of significance would be signed into law by Obama. But, at least, they would prevent the democrats from doing even more damage.
In order to pass any of your wishlists, you need a majority in the house, sixty votes in the senate and a republican in the white house. Until you get that, you get nothing, but nothing is better than the something you would get from Speaker Pelosi.
What are you talking about, Speaker Pelosi?
If you really see that as a possibility this fall, it’s no wonder you sound so clueless in every other regard.
There is simply no sense to your statements here. If conservative America can see no meaningful change without sixty senate seats and a Republican president, then we may as well settle back and be contented with the occasionally obstructionist House that we have.
Which, come to think of it, is precisely your position.
“There is simply no sense to your statements here. If conservative America can see no meaningful change without sixty senate seats and a Republican president, then we may as well settle back and be contented with the occasionally obstructionist House that we have.”
Yes, that’s pretty much my position. I am willing to change if you can provide a reasonable path to any other outcome.
Also, please refrain from calling me clueless.
Check the post.
I didn’t call you clueless.
I said you sound clueless, which is materially different.
I notice another poster used the same term in reference to you, and you may be mistaking me for him—not that I would ever call you mistaken.
No worries. You see the world one way and I see it another, for which I am most grateful.
Good luck.
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.