Venting about the Senate (go ahead and flame me)

Look, this was a good night in the House, but I can’t look away at all the missed opportunities in the Senate.

First off, we should be thanking our lucky stars John McCain won his primary in AZ. He sucks and is a RINO, but how would you like reading this morning that the ‘rats picked off Hayworth along with Angle going down and Christine O’Donnell losing by 17? This is a state that installed Big Sis as governor – you’re telling me they couldn’t have picked this up?

I’m taking odds on anyone who thinks Buck is going to pull it out in purple CO. Whatever you think about gay marriage, what the hell is he doing talking about it on Sunday morning talk shows when the ‘rats are sprinting from their record? Their agenda is imploding and you give them a sound bite on gay marriage?!

This is a year where our senate margins should have been wider than normal. Candidates matter. If the media can find anything on you, they will exploit it to the hilt – never more so the case in statewide races. If you are perceived as a weak candidate, the media will make you weaker. If anyone thinks beating Obama is going to be a breeze in 2012, they’re dreaming. Look at the way all of Harry Reid’s machinery and corruption carried him to victory last night. When was the last time Rasmussen showed him ahead? You’re telling me Obama is going to play it straight up? He’s just as sleazy and corrupt as Reid.

With the exception of Rubio (arguably our best new conservative ambassador) and Johnson (another strong candidate), look how close these pretty safe R pickups in PA and IL. The only reason Kirk won in blue IL is because he is a RINO that was fortunate enough to get the nomination before RINO hunting season opened, or we’d be talking about Senator Giannoulias along with Senator Coons. Rossi is an establishment guy, and look how close he’s been able to keep it in blue WA. If Angle were running against Murray, this one would have been called when the polls closed.

I’ve been on the record here about this before, but if you seriously value social issues, as I do, then you need to fight to win: get as many fiscal hawk R’s in power as possible (along with the social R’s in solid red states) to hold our majorities. They will appoint originalists to the courts, and we won’t have Sotomayors or Kagans creating abortion and gay marriage laws by judicial fiat. Or would you rather have smaller, concentrated numbers of R’s who will be helpless against activist courts? You decide.

Reid has a lot of powerful friends. He called in all the favors at the end, including a lot of Republicans party operatives in NV to endorse him at the end probably because he’s got the dirt on quite a few of them.

Angle was not a great candidate (I like her but she’s not great at persuading people), but taking Reid out would have been a tough job no matter who it was.

Angle was not a great candidate (I like her but she’s not great at persuading people), but taking Reid out would have been a tough job no matter who it was.

I think in many ways Angle was a terrible candidate. A Sarah Palin also has her troubles and weaknesses (as has any candidate), but she always has a smart move or a soundbite up her sleeve to control the story. Angle let the Reid camp frame the story.

E.g. there are ways to answer a question like "what's your stance on the wars?" without really taking a position (historical context, progress made yadda yadda yadda). But saying "I'll tell you once you elect me." is a major fauxpas. An independetn / non-ideological / issue-oriented voter could never vote for such a candidate. And even if you cock up, there are ways to charm yourself out of the predicament. But not for Angle.

The fact that she got within 5% of Reid is a testament to Tea Party strengh.

Bottom line, winning senate races is tough, winning senate races against entrenched and powerful incumbents is near impossible.

People who thought we were going to draw the straight flush and take out Reid, Boxer, Murray, Bennett, Feingold and Lincoln in one swoop were simply not being realistic.

The fact that we got two, and possibly 3, and came very close in another, and won the large majority of the open contests, is a great night. Any other election cycle without this much anticipation, a +6-7 would have been hailed as a tremendous victory.

So I’m a troll now because you’re the one who thinks it’s only going to take 51 seats to get an Obamacare repeal through the Senate? It’s going to take 60. There are 20 democrat seats in play in 2012 with 10 Republican. We will almost certainly lose Scott Brown, whether or not you electoral kamikazes go RINO hunting in blue states again. So, let me hear some more that you’d rather have Coons and Giannoulis. Let me hear how because Norton or Lowden aren’t Jim DeMint, we might as well have Bennet or Reid. Come on - let me see you say it.

You are incorrect.

I never said it would take 51 seats to get an Obamacare repeal through the Senate; although it *might* happen if Reid and Coats force through the redefinition (elimination of) the filibuster during the lame-duck session, and then the GOP takes the Senate in 2012.

I'd prefer it not happen that way, for obvious reasons.

Instead, we can kill it via de-funding in the House, until we re-take the Senate and get President GOP (hopefully Palin) in 2012.

As far as electoral kamikazes? It's fun to see how the RINOs cheerfully blame Delaware on the conservatives, and in particular Palin -- though she didn't endorse COD until a day or so before the election; and yet keep mum over the millions of dollars wasted on so-called "self-funded" and "rational, sensible" high-profile GOP candidates for governor and Senator in CA; and the turmoil in AK caused by the existing RINO crew encouraging Murkowski by not stripping her of leadership roles once she lost the primary.

It's funny -- the RINOs demand that conservatives hold their nose and vote for a RINO in the election, but never return the favor.

And the rumors that Bachus is being considered for a key appointment in the House makes me see red.

FUKR. FUMR. FUDF. FUNG.

...oh, and Krauthammer too.

Let’s go over some math:

Obama won with 53% of the vote - he now has about 8-10% points less now in approval rating. That means, there is a crucial middle that will go with the ebb and flow of elections, depending on a number of factors and these are people who will determine the outcome of an election. You can tell yourself all you want that Palin can get most of these people against Obama, but polling data indicates otherwise. And, I don’t even think there’s any amount of mayhem he can still unleash on us still that would move the needle further against her. These independents want to vote with us - this is still a center-right country but may vote against us if they don’t “like” the person we put up there (even if her positions on the issues is identical to someone they prefer). So, you can gamble all you want with Palin, but it is going to be a tremendous risk in a year where this man has no business getting reelected.

If democrats never got elected in national elections and republicans did with 70% of the vote, you know I’d agree with you and we should start purging all the RINO’s for fear they dilute the message. But, that’s not the reality we live in.

It never mattered in Delaware if we ran Christine O’Donnell or an experienced conservative, relatively baggage-free politician like Jim DeMint. Castle would have been the best we could have hoped for, and now we have the bearded marxist instead. Palin had nothing to do with DE. You’re not going to turn a deep blue state bright red especially when your candidate is running commercials saying she’s not a witch.

We can cut funding to Obamacare, but the problem is once it’s on the books, a democrat congress can start funding it again. It is very unlikely the filibuster rules will change. So where does that leave us? If we have 55 senators in 2013, do you honestly think we’re getting it repealed? Maybe D’s will be under such pressure that they’ll at least allow a vote, maybe not. I’m starting to think our best shot is Justice Kennedy, who I think stands a fair chance of pulling out the rug on this thing.

Are you old enough to remember Gulf War I and President George Herbert Walker Bush?

He went from 88% - 90% approval ratings -- so strong that all the "realistic" Dem candidates ran for the tall grass, leaving the field open for Bill Clinton -- to losing to Bill Clinton in a year and a half or so.

What's funny is that the RINOs do the same selective amnesiac, whatever-argument-plays-at-the-moment tactics that the left does.

When Palin lost, it was "you purists ran away and left us in the lurch and the Arctic Hillbilly drove away the middle."

Then when she got attacked personally by a torrent of knowingly frivolous lawsuits to the point she had to drop out of the Governor's office, it became "that's the end of THAT dingbat, and good riddance."

Then when she wrote a best-selling book and went all over the country promoting it, it was "how *crass* to make money off of your fame when your fifteen minutes is *over*, beyotch."

Now its "she's unelectable."

Yeah, right. Refresh the timeline, and the comments her detractors make look like spoon-fed talking points.

Remember when the Carter campaign in 1980 ran ads with "man-on-the-street" interviews saying "I'm voting for Carter, he won't get us into a nuclear war."

And then 1983's The Day After complete with Reagan soundalike over the radio saying "God bless America" after the nukes have hit.

And yet the Berlin Wall fell -- due to Reagan -- without any nukes exchanged.

Over time I've learned not to rely on ex cathedra announcements from the cognoscenti and the chattering classes.

Oh, and speaking of Delaware ? Why aren't Biden and Obama taking full credit for their visits stopping the COD campaign?

Cheers!

So, you’re telling me that Palin will flip the numbers on Independents to her favor against Obama within the next 2 years? Not going to happen, and I’ll be happy to put money on that one.

Harry Reid was rooting for Angle in the primary, and everyone said it was just a ruse and that he really feared her. Where are those people now? The White House is saying the same thing about Palin - you think they’re bluffing too?

This isn’t the early 90’s - this is the Internet and 24 hour news cycle Era, and perception is reality. If Palin is perceived as weak among the body politic, she will be weak. What we need is a skilled and experienced politician, fluent on all the issues that won’t have any Katie Couric moments that serve to reinforce the caricature the state run media puts out there and will actually influence undecided/unaffiliated voters.

Call me a RINO all you want, but I’m on your team. If you want Obama appoinging two more Kagans and Sotomayors because he got another 4 by virtue of your vote for Palin, you go right ahead. I’m keeping the big picture in mind and going with our best shot to beat him, whomever that turns out to be. I’m not going to gamble another 4 years on him because you think she’s the most conservative. The number one goal is to stop democrats, and if you think we might as well have Obama if not this “purist” (hello Fiorina!) Sarah Palin, you’re delusional and we’re screwed.

Biden and Obama taking bows for DE would be stupid when they got destroyed in the House, and DE is a blue state that they should win either way.

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.