[Phsstpok]

My understanding is that the main shift in voting patterns this year in Missouri involved a very small up tick in Democrat votes (less than 1%), a very slightly more significant downturn in votes for Talent (about 2.4%) and a sharp increase in votes for the libertarian candidate, who went from less than 1% last time to nearly 3% this time. And the margin for McCaskill was about 2.5%.

So, the reason Talent lost was unfaithful Republican voters who wanted to "lodge a protest." I understand the sentiment, but I think it was an extremely foolish thing to do. If they'd wanted to send a message and have a real effect they should have defeated Talent in the primary with a more effective Republican candidate. But that requires real work and real involvement in the process.

Now the protest votes are going to have real consequences and, this time, real people are going to die, quite possibly in large numbers. Not a good plan.

[marajade]

I understand wanting a protest vote, but senate terms are six years long.

[cardinal4]

Talent losing was the hardest thing to take from election day. I really thought he would win..

[AliVeritas]

You're right of course. Yet the voting patterns need to be looked at more closely.

Why is it all the propositions and measures re: gay marriage, immigration etc. passed swimmingly? It's more than the left running to the center, the people are dumb... but not that dumb (with the exception on 2 in Missouri).

Question, with all the fraud we saw in states before the elections (ACORN, etc), why wasn't more races challenged/investigated? We knew about the goings on in Philly 7 in the morning... and were told there wasn't a RNC lawyer there, they were trying to get one to go. And Ohio and Missouri? Please.

At my poll, which was practically empty... two illegals tried to vote (no lie), and were turned away... 8 a.m..
A group of heavy women with short spiked hair in comfortable shoes with lib buttons also came in to vote... trust me, I do a lot of things in the district... they weren't from here. Not denial... facts.

It's almost like a giveaway to advance certain issues as well (where'd I put that tinfoil hat).

I want to see balls from our guys on the hill... and the women too.

I plan on jamming up a lot of emails and faxes.
If their mothers even use aluminum foil on holiday break... email; If their dads raise a pinky while drinking at the bar... fax. /s

[Candor7]

I understand the sentiment, but I think it was an extremely foolish thing to do>>>>>>>>>>>>

I do not think it foolish. The Republican Party has lost its mandate through failing to fulfill the promises it made to ots electorate in 2004. Its a message that the RNC would do well to heed or they will be watching Hillery Clinton being inaugurated in the early months of 2009. And they have only a month or so to get on the stick.

The RINOs conspired with Democrats to get rid of Tom Delay so that they would have an unhindered run at the presidency. There is not one viable Republican candidate who could be president who supports the conservative agenda.Its no accident. The RNC better find one fast, and as far as I am concerned, Tom DeLay sounds fine to me.

If the RNC does not move in this way, the Republican party will not grace the halls of electoral power for another generation.

And we will have a war with an nuclear powered Islamofascist Axis of Nations after the Dems policy of appeasement fails in the face of the Islamofascist movement to establish a World Caliphate.

[Miss Marple]

Probably the Talent loss was due to both "stay at home" conservatives and turned-off moderates. All I will sy right now is that Rush didn't help.