Delaware Election Results Explode Christine O'Donnell Myths

Cure Socialism ^ | November 6, 2012 | Jonathon Moseley

[Moseley]

Delaware election results just dropped a nuclear bomb on political theories among Republican moderates and liberals.

In 2010, Christine O’Donnell got 40% of Delaware’s heavily-skewed Democrat electorate for US Senate, despite nasty civil war within the Republican party nationwide and in Delaware.

No, this is not about her. This is about YOUR understanding of how elections work and what is going on politically in Delaware.

In 2012, even Republican Mitt Romney only equaled in Delaware Christine O’Donnell’s vote — both at 40%.

How do all the “haters explain how Mitt Romney did no better in Delaware than Christine O’Donnell did for US Senate? Both got 40% of the vote.

In 2012, Republican candidate for US Senate Kevin Wade = 29%

Republican candidate Tom Kovach candidate for US Congress = 33.4%

Republican candidate for Governor Jeff Cragg = 28.6%

Republican candidate for Lt. Governor Sher Valenzuela = 37.1%

Republican candidate for Insurance Commissioner Benjamin Mobley = 36.8%

Now, let’s REVIEW.

WHY? TO LEARN. To PLAN for next time. To do better next time. To build a house on a firm foundation of sound strategy, not on clouds of self-delusion.

So if we put all the theories to the test…. Are all those theories wrong?

Why under the various theories did Christine O’Donnell do BETTER than all of these Republican statewide candidates?

If one's theories don’t work, do you re-examine our political theories, or do you dig in and believe in fairy tales?

[Moseley]

Corrected link:

http://www.curesocialism.com/2012/11/delaware-election-results-explode.html

[SoConPubbie]

As Rush USED TO BE FOND OF SAYING, Moderates don’t win.

[CitizenUSA]

I’d love to hear one of the Christine O’Donnell bashers explain how she did better than a lot of other Republican nominees. I mean, we keep hearing how we must nominate liberal Republicans in order to win blue states. Yet, we seem to do WORSE the further left we go. Hmmmm.

[Paladin2]

LSD

Lower, Slower Delaware.

[CitizenUSA]

If we’re going to lose either way (and in some states that appears to be the case), I’d rather give voters a clear choice. When will moderate Republicans learn you can’t out Democrat the Democrats?

[DManA]

Today I listened to about 10 minutes of Medved and out of no where he took a gratuitous swipe at O’Donnel. Apropos nothing.

This guy is sooo soooo nice to liberals and so snarky when it comes to conservatives he doesn’t like.

To HELL with him. I can’t stand him and he offers HORRIBLE advice to conservatives.

[Wayne07]

What is says is that if you have a candidate who can actually win in a very liberal state, even if is he a squishy RINO, it is better than having a liberal democrat instead.

You should hunt rinos in texas when you can get a real conservative elected, but if it is Massachusetts or Delaware, take what you can get.

I supported Mourdock over Lugar for Indiana, and he should have won. But it was pointless to support O'Donnell who never had a chance.

[ansel12]

As a sitting Senator, Rick Santorum lost by a larger margin (17.4%), than Christine O’Donnell did as a candidate (16.6%).

Santorum has serious issues.

[Antoninus]

O’Donnell had a real shot at that race had the Karl Rove pukes just shut their stinkin’ traps.

[Moseley]

What is says is that if you have a candidate who can actually win in a very liberal state, even if is he a squishy RINO, it is better than having a liberal democrat instead.

Then why did moderate Mitt Romney get the same percentage of the vote (40%) in Delaware as Christine O'Donnell got in Delaware (40%) for US Senate?

Mike Castle's last opponent spent only $26,000 yet Castle got only 61% of the vote. When you get only 61% against an opponent spending only $26,000 for a Congressional seat, Mike Castle was a dead man walking, politicall. Mike Castle would have been down in Jan Ting territory. Castle would have lost by a WORSE margin than O'Donnell. For one thing, Castle could not have raised any serious money for the campaign.

[WOSG]

This is stupid argument. COD had millions of dollars thrown at her by Tea Party supporters and made a big name (notorious one) and lost in a cycle that was a wave for the GOP.

This year alas is NOT a GOP wave.

On the contrary, this is another 2000-type close race, and we got punk’d.

I am very disappointed. And if Akin and Mourdock both lose, MORE disappointed, because bascially socialists can win Colorado but conservatives cant win Indiana and Missouri. WTF?!?

[SoConPubbie]

On the contrary, this is another 2000-type close race, and we got punk’d.

You got punked by Mitt Romney with his support of Abortion and the Gay Agenda, and his total lack of limited Government credentials.

He was just a piss-poor candidate period.

Given the horrible record of Obama, this would have been a cake-walk for an actual Republican.

[WOSG]

“yet Castle got only 61% of the vote”

61% is a win in my book.

Between the 3 losses in 2010 and the losses in 2012 we could have won, the GOP Senate selection process has managed to entitle Harry Reid as majority leader (indeed we could have knocked him off as Senator with better candidates).

[Moseley]

This is stupid argument. COD had millions of dollars thrown at her by Tea Party supporters

But so did Mitt Romnney. Mitt Romney had endless amounts of money -- and early on, which O'Donnell did not have.

As of September 14, 2010, Christine O'Donnell had only $20,000 on hand and had run a shoe-string operation throughout the year.

The credit card companies did not release the funds raised after the primary until almost September 30, 2010.

Mitt Romney began a year ago flush with cash and the ability to loan himself as much as he wanted.

Super-PAC's spent hundreds of millions of dollars in support of Mitt Romney.

So I fail to see how this factor supports your view. Mitt Romney had far more money, even adjusting for the scale of the different races, for a year instead of a month, and far more outside money supporting him.

Yet Mitt Romney got the same 40% that Christine O'Donnell got -- in spite of massive attacks, nastiness, in-fighting and some major mis-steps.

In spite of the clear and deliberate sabotage by the NRSC getting Fred Davis into Christine's campaign to make the "witch" ad -- over Christine's objections -- Christine O'Donnell got the same 40% in 2010 as Mitt Romney in Delaware in 2012.

and made a big name (notorious one)

Mitt Romney has a big name, and has had a big name for decades.

and lost in a cycle that was a wave for the GOP

There is no such thing as a "wave" year or cycle. Each State is different.

The "wave" you refer to was Republicans making the 2010 election a referendum on Barack Obama.

In 2010, in Delaware, Barack Obama's approval was 57% -- exactly the same percentage of the vote the Democrat candidate got to fill Vice President Joe Bidens seat.

[deweyfrank]

Bottom line is NC County sucks and it always will be liberal. And it will get worse. Time to talk about secession below the canal.

[Moseley]

61% is a win in my book.

Irrelevant.

There are Democrats who won State legislature races today won by 90% over an actual opponent.

An incumbent Congressman who has been in office for decades who gets only 61% of the vote against a Democrat spending only $26,000 is dead meat. In 2008 he should have immediately started planning his successor, and the DEGOP should have demanded it.

When your opponent spends only $26,000 for a US House seat and you get only 61% of the vote, you need to take a hint and go into retirement.

Running for Joe Biden's seat while Obama was saying his agenda was at stake, in a State with 57% approval for Obama, Mike Castle would have joined Jan Ting in the high 20's percentage-wise.

[Moseley]

Bottom line is NC County sucks and it always will be liberal. And it will get worse. Time to talk about secession below the canal.

Actually, there is a solution, but it would take a hell of a lot of money, it would probably take 5-10 years, and it won't ever happen because the person who could have made it happen is not diligent or realistic.

Unfortunately, to mention it would hurt its chance of ever getting done.

[WOSG]

If you think that Santorum or Gingrich would have done better up against Obama’s “war on women” lies, you are an idiot.

Look at the Senate races as well.
There’s a bunch we should have won, and we didnt.

Splitter did make the difference. Obama may well win Virginia and the margin of difference will be those 3rd party splitters.

Enjoy our new United Socialist States of America.

[SeminoleCounty]

Very good research. And more solid proof that Liberal/Moderate GOP cannot win elections,