Posted on 04/13/2010 9:59:19 AM PDT by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
House Democratic Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D., Md.) says the "negative atmosphere" created by the tea party movement has influenced the retirement decisions of some House Democrats (but not Bart Stupak):
“Do I think that [the] negative atmosphere that’s been created by the Tea Party and by others certainly goes into the thinking of members? I think it does. I think you have to honestly point out that it does,” Hoyer added. “I don’t think that was the determining factor with respect to Mr. Stupak, because again, he was in very good shape in the polls. It wasn’t a question of his losing his election.
“So that I think that other members clearly, you know, have in mind what’s happening in their districts, what’s happening in the country. But I think there are judgments that are going to be made and I would urge all the members that are here to run, to seek reelection. I think the Republicans still have more ... retirees than we do. So if it was the atmosphere, you would think that the opposite would be the case. It’s not.”
“Mr. Stupak did not leave because of the Tea Party.”
Stpak used the same excuse as Bayh did, “I’m tired of the partisanship.”
That’s the “code speak” for me.
"How dare you peons talk back to your betters
How easily they forget the sh*t they were slinging while Bush was in office.
some freeper pointed out that Stupak spelled backwards spells “Kaputs”
The Tea Parties made the Rats do more extensive polling than they ever have. When they saw the results many decided it was best to retire than lose their bid for relection by 50% or greater margins. Their egos cannot handle getting manhandled to that level.
And, you should not run for office while holding another - governor, senator etc.
Nice fantasy, eh.
Just a thought, for what it might be worth.
1-I think Stupak was offered something post November, to roll over.
2-There have been a lot of Dems announcing retirement the last couple of months. Dems who were up for re-election. Figuring that maybe they would lose, after voting for DeathCare, they'd "retire", allowing another Dem to fill their void. Now some people will vote against Dems no matter what, because of DeathCare, but I'm sure there are plenty of life long dems, who are upset about DeathCare, who will vote for a Dem, if the Dem who voted for it retired.
In other words, they've fallen on their swords, thus removing the object of wrath and scorn, allowing life long Dem voters to vote Dem, because there is no longer anyone to hold a grudge against.
Since Stupak is retiring, why NOT VOTE for the guy taking his spot on the ticket?
Is Hoyer up for reeltion this year too?
______________________________________________________________
Yes! Unlike the Senate races which are “staggered” ALL Congressmen have to run for reelection every 2 years.
Clarity bump.
When Abraham Lincoln came to Congress in, um, 1847, the majority of representatives served only one term. A biggish minority served two (I think Crockett served two terms). Congressmen serving more than six years were a tiny, tiny fragment, and John Quincy Adams's long tenure of office in the House was almost unheard-of.
Are you suggesting this is another Rahmbo strategy?
Triaging the wounded to help Nancy Pelosi in November?
.........”We will Remember in November”...........
That’s a pretty catchy phrase.....would make for a great T-shirt and/or sign.
I would also add, if you want a friend, get a dog!
Obama's losing political altitude faster than Flight 1549. It was only a year ago that the Ohaha team was shoveling dirt on Repub conservatism. James Carville was writing books about 40 years of "Democrat dominance," boasting that the Republican Party was dead. Stupid Liberals believed their own hype that Obama would be the black FDR........conniving to keep him in office 3-4 terms.
The fact that infamous liberals like Kennedy (RI), Dodd, Frank and others are "retiring" indicates they are getting negative feedback back home. They know they can't get reelected and campaign contributions are drying up, as well.
Americans are angry at their economic vulnerability. Angry at the deterioration of our culture. Angry that they are forced to subsidize freeloading lawbreakers from Third World satraps so that US politicians can get new voters. Angry at our nation’s deteriorating position in the world, at our debts and deficits, our spending and taxing, our threatened security in a world of weapons of mass destruction.
==============================================
America's Quiet Anger
American Spectator ^ | 3-30-10 | James P. Gannon
FR Posted on 03/30/2010 by kingattax
There is a quiet anger boiling in America. It is the anger of millions of hard-working citizens who pay their bills, send in their income taxes, maintain their homes and repay their mortgage loans -- and see their government reward those who do not.
It is the anger of small town and Middle American folks who have never been to Manhattan, who put their savings in a community bank and borrow from a local credit union, who watch Washington lawmakers and presidents of both parties hand billions in taxpayer bailouts to the reckless Wall Street titans who brought down the economy in 2008.
It is the fury of the voiceless, the powerless, the ordinary nobodies of Flyover Country who are ridiculed, preached to, satirized and insulted by the Celebrity Loudmouths of the two Left Coasts, the Jon Stewarts and Keith Olbermanns, the Paul Krugmans and their ilk.(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
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.