Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

VIRGINIA GOVERNOR RACE A HUGE VICTORY FOR THE TEA PARTY
TPNN - TEA PARTY NEWS NETWORK ^ | November 5, 2013 | Matthew Burke

Posted on 11/05/2013 9:08:54 PM PST by SaveOurRepublicFromTyranny

The Virginia gubernatorial race was a huge victory for the Tea Party movement. Wait a minute! Democrat McAuliffe “won,” you say. How could this be a victory for the Tea Party movement and a positive precursor for the 2014 mid-terms? Here’s how:

(Excerpt) Read more at tpnn.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Virginia
KEYWORDS: cuccinelli; governor; teaparty; va2013; vabluestate; virginia
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240241-254 next last
To: Fledermaus
He was a plant paid for by Dems to hurt Cucinelli, which he did. Mission accomplished.

He won the libertarian nomination right?

The Libertarians for Virginia website seems to be excited about pushing Sarvis.

http://lpva.com/

You know Democrats poured money into Todd Akin's primary campaign. Do you think he was a plant?

I agree Sarvis was bankrolled by Democrats up to no good, but all the libertarians I know in Northern VA went and voted for him. They obviously didn't feel he was a plant.

Most libertarians are actually social liberals first and foremost. You will almost always find, especially among the young crowd (which is the bulk of their support) that drug legalization, abortion on demand, peacenik foreign policy, etc, is really what drives them. Infact the fastest way to drive a libertarian from their party is to point out that actual libertarian positions call for an end to federal government social welfare programs.

221 posted on 11/06/2013 11:45:37 AM PST by Longbow1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 216 | View Replies]

To: CedarDave
Cuccinelli would have won if the so-called Libertarian (maybe a Rat plant) hadn’t pulled 6% of the vote.

I'll agree with you about the 'rat plant thing but not about the vote. It's possible that absent a libertarian some of those people simply would not have turned out to vote. It's also possible that some of those people voted libertarian because the Democrat was not socialist enough for them.

I don't automatically assume that the libertarian picked up votes exclusively from the Republicans.

222 posted on 11/06/2013 1:36:07 PM PST by MeganC (Support Matt Bevin to oust Mitch McConnell! https://mattbevin.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ZULU

Nationwide, that Muslim “small impact” is about the same as the Jewish vote.


223 posted on 11/06/2013 1:56:32 PM PST by Does so (Soon, we'll be looking like Detroit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

Stangest stand on issues for a libertarian. And why would he let a big Obama bundler back him?


224 posted on 11/06/2013 1:58:33 PM PST by Fledermaus (If we here in TN can't get rid of the most worthless Lamar, it's over.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 218 | View Replies]

To: Longbow1969

http://www.hoover.org/publications/hoover-digest/article/7991

So I take it you know more than Richard Allen?


225 posted on 11/06/2013 2:03:49 PM PST by Fledermaus (If we here in TN can't get rid of the most worthless Lamar, it's over.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

No, but the dynamics in this country have been fundamentally transformed. Through indoctrination, immigration, and welfare, the Democrats have circumvented the democratic process and shredded the constitution.

Barack Hussein Obama got reelected after he got 4 people killed and lied about it, gave us zero jobs, doubled our debt, and a whole bunch of other crap.

And now the machine is squarely behind Hitlery. The problem with the theory that mild turmoil will drive people back to the conservative side ignores one thing. ‘The Limbaugh Theorem’, in which Obama and Democrats as a whole, are not ever seen by the public as having had anything to do with some failure. Its always Republican obstructionism or just bad luck, and to think otherwise is racist. This wasn’t really the case before. Yes, Slick Willy got away with adultery, but what if he had done all the things Obama has done, if he had failed so miserably? Would he have been reelected, even against the hapless Dole??? No.

My analysis is that there are certainly areas where we can win. I think senate seats and house seats and statewide elections are still very winnable, and in some states, are trending our way (2014 may be the death of the red state Democrat). But when it comes to the massive presidential cycle, with so many electoral votes already locked up on the other side, the Democrats have a formula that is new and cutting edge and I predict it will take one of two things to overcome it.

1) Some miracle strategy
2) A Greek-style crisis


226 posted on 11/06/2013 2:05:52 PM PST by Viennacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: Longbow1969

I think it was Ann Coulter who was debating John Stossel on some of these issues. She pointed out that as long as we’re a socialist welfare state, it’s a bad idea to legalize much of what they want and she’s right. As long as we’re collectively responsible for others’ behavior it isn’t fair.

Want to do or engage in ..X...? Fine. But don’t make the rest of us pay for the bad outcome.


227 posted on 11/06/2013 2:14:41 PM PST by Nickname
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 221 | View Replies]

To: Does so

According to the census of 2010 about
.8% of the American population is Muslim and 1.7 % is Jewish.

Keep in mind those Muslim figures also include the “Nation of Islam” the black racist Muslim group which has been around a long time whose theology is rejected by Orthodox Muslims.

With respect to Judaism, there are religious Jews, secular Jews, etc which makes that figure difficult to interpret.


228 posted on 11/06/2013 2:21:13 PM PST by ZULU (Impeach that Bastard Barrack Hussein Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 223 | View Replies]

To: Viennacon
My analysis is that there are certainly areas where we can win. I think senate seats and house seats and statewide elections are still very winnable, and in some states, are trending our way (2014 may be the death of the red state Democrat). But when it comes to the massive presidential cycle, with so many electoral votes already locked up on the other side, the Democrats have a formula that is new and cutting edge and I predict it will take one of two things to overcome it.

1) Some miracle strategy
2) A Greek-style crisis

Obamacare just may provide that Greek-style crisis, and much sooner than Democrats would like.

I just see Obama's chickens coming home to roost over the next three years. The effects and fallout from his "fundamental transformation" are going to accumulate into one gigantic failure of our economy and our system of government. We're already seeing these effects pile up in every sector, including the cultural area.

You simply cannot do this much fundamental damage to a country and a people, without the deleterious effects compounding into multiple crises that become too huge for anyone to spin away or ignore. The backlash against it began with the birth of the Tea Party, and will continue to grow into something even larger, as the pain on average citizens grows more and more.

The path the country is on, is not sustainable. Something, at some point, is going to break. It remains to be seen whether the people can endure the sweeping and dramatic changes to their way of life that this regime is ushering in, or whether the pace of ruin is too fast, and the people decide to pull the plug on the whole Progressive agenda.

I honestly don't know what form the larger response is going to take. We could see secession by one or more red states. We could see widespread civil disobedience and rioting. Perhaps millions and millions will simply go Galt, and starve the beast. The balance of political orientation could shift to the Republicans' favor. Or, we could even see the regime do the unthinkable, and attempt to use force to compel the citizens to submit to their Brave New World.

Who knows?

I just know that what we have today, can't be defined as a status quo. Our country is in a state of flux. We're actually living in a moment of revolutionary change that is based upon an ideology that has proven to be destructive and bankrupt wherever it's been tried. Only death, contraction, and suffering can come of it.

The only question is, at what point will a large number of people draw their own line in the sand, and say, "Not another inch. Across this line lies war."

229 posted on 11/06/2013 2:36:49 PM PST by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 226 | View Replies]

To: chris37

Speaking of women voters, my son told be of a study he read where within 10 years of women getting the vote, at local, state, and federal level, at all levels, we started overspending. (Surprise, women spend.)

I mentioned to him that we went off the charts, basically, when the first woman speaker of the house took over the national credit card.

I should ask him to find the study for me. May be good to keep around.


230 posted on 11/06/2013 2:53:02 PM PST by JustSurrounded (And for Christmas this year we get amnesty for the locust people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: Longbow1969
I'm talking about people that blather on about civil war, revolutions, etc.

Besides average citizens who post on Free Republic, what political candidates or office holders are talking about such things? In your previous post, you insinuated that voters were turned off by "crazy" talk. Ok. What politicians are you referring to, specifically?

What I am saying is that if we want to make inroads in purple and blue states, we are going to need to attract some voters that don't ordinarily vote for us. Being a happy warrior is a good start. Talking calmly and with an even temper gets you further. Paying lip service to "working with the other side" is another winning position...

That is some of the squishiest RINO speak I've ever read on Free Republic. What wins elections, is staying true to your principles, and having the courage to give voice to them at every opportunity. Ronald Reagan taught us that, and more recently, Ted Cruz proved that lesson is still valid today.

You're suggesting we adopt the McCain/Graham/Romney model, which gains you lots of friends on the left, but undermines and ultimately destroys everything Republicans supposedly stand for.

As I said earlier, you're trying to analyze American politics through the lens of a bygone era. You're no longer dealing with people who fundamentally agree with you on American basics, but with hardened radicals who want to burn the Constitution and our history books. It's not even possible to reason with such people. You can't attract them to the party by any amount of happy talk and compromise.

No, the only thing that rings their bell is Socialism, and if you think we can out Democrat the Democrats, you're as deluded as the GOP-e (which you sound exactly like).

231 posted on 11/06/2013 3:06:45 PM PST by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies]

To: Cold Heart

Boycott his Austin-based software firm (Trilogy).


232 posted on 11/06/2013 3:15:44 PM PST by rfp1234 (Impeach We Much!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: JustSurrounded

Makes perfect sense to me.

However, in all fairness, 99.99 percent of the men there are just as bad if not worse.

The entire ruling class needs to go, right now.


233 posted on 11/06/2013 3:18:08 PM PST by chris37 (Heartless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 230 | View Replies]

To: Fledermaus

Um, this was actually a very interesting read and completely destroys your argument. Reagan didn’t pick Bush to poke a stick in anyone’s eye as you claimed. His campaign had spent a long while trying to find the best nominee and at the end it emerged that Bush was that guy. Reagan wasn’t enthusiastic about him at first, but came on board at the very last minute when he rejected the Ford deal. This, Reagan reasoned, was the best choice to give the ticket it’s best shot.

Thanks for the link though, that was an interesting perspective.


234 posted on 11/06/2013 4:06:47 PM PST by Longbow1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies]

To: Windflier
Voters are turned off by conservative firebrands like EW Jackson - ESPECIALLY in purple/blue states! Good grief, did you not learn anything from Alan Keyes repeated failures? And they tend to avoid left wing firebrands too. That's the reason Obama is so dangerous, he makes radical positions seem reasonable to the sheeple.

What wins elections, is staying true to your principles, and having the courage to give voice to them at every opportunity.

You think that's it? You think that's mostly what it takes? You are so naive. Good grief man, the average citizen is a political idiot. Not just here, almost everywhere. Human nature is the first consideration. You have to determine which, among your slate of possible candidates, is ELECTABLE in said district/state/etc. Alan Keyes stayed true to his principles as much or more than anyone around - why isn't he a Senator in Maryland or Illinois? Why is he not President for that matter. There are candidates all over the country - left and right, that absolutely adhere to principles and they get destroyed election cycle after election cycle. The most important thing about a candidate is whether they are capable of being a skilled, charismatic politician.

Politics is a skill. Most people take a long time to get good at it, some people are naturals. How many times do we hear from people "oh how I wish regular people would run and win elections"? Quite a lot. We've all probably even read that sentiment here. The problems is, people won't, usually, actually vote for those kind of candidates. They don't have the political skill to avoid gaffes that destroy their campaign. All it takes is one stupid comment and an entire campaign is ruined. Just ask Akin or Murdoch.

235 posted on 11/06/2013 4:17:35 PM PST by Longbow1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 231 | View Replies]

To: Longbow1969
Voters are turned off by conservative firebrands like EW Jackson - ESPECIALLY in purple/blue states!

Which is why Reagan lost to Carter in 1980.......oh wait.....he didn't lose to Carter. He whupped him soundly from coast to coast by speaking the plain and unassailable truth to the voting public.

You need to come out of the closet. It's pretty obvious by your posts to me that you're a dyed-in-the-wool establishment GOPer. I'll bet you were one of Mitt's staunchest supporters on FR during the last election. I'd probably have a hard time finding a single cross word from you about John McCain. Scathing posts about the Bush's in your posting history? I'll bet I'd have a hard time finding any of those either.

Like I said, you seem not to have noticed that we're living in a time, and under a presidential regime, that isn't comparable to any other in our history. There is a radical, diabolical deconstruction, and out right dismantling of our Constitutional foundations occurring right before your eyes, yet you believe people are being hysterical.

It's why you're still trying to operate on an obsolete political model that has no relevance to the situation our nation is in today. The very notion that we even have a functioning civil system is even debatable now. This moment in time could rightfully be called a 'calm before the storm', but despite the fact that you're exposed to the best aggregation of information on the web, you're not seeing it for some reason.

I can't help you. Politics is nearly a side story to the rapid and fundamental changes that are taking place as we speak. There's every chance that it's going to take something a lot larger than a few elections to bring it to a halt and turn it around.

We've now reached a point where the Declaration is more relevant than the Constitution. Think with that and proceed accordingly.

236 posted on 11/06/2013 4:37:01 PM PST by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 235 | View Replies]

To: lonster

Hate to see what a loss looks like.


237 posted on 11/06/2013 4:40:42 PM PST by Luke21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Fledermaus

Why would the libertarians turn down free money from the democrats, or anyone else?

Did you read post 209, libertarians and democrat victories go back decades.

Remember that the libertarians are even to the left of the democrats, on some issues.


238 posted on 11/06/2013 5:02:31 PM PST by ansel12 ( Democrats-"a party that since antebellum times has been bent on the dishonoring of humanity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 224 | View Replies]

To: lonster

True. It is a loss.

But, on the bright side. His governance will probably be so horrible that in a few years we will get a win.


239 posted on 11/06/2013 5:29:53 PM PST by Pikachu_Dad (Impeach Sen Quinn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Windflier
Which is why Reagan lost to Carter in 1980.......oh wait.....he didn't lose to Carter. He whupped him soundly from coast to coast by speaking the plain and unassailable truth to the voting public.

Reagan, as I already pointed out, is EXACTLY the kind of candidate we need in as many places as possible. He's a happy warrior who sounds reasonable. He makes ideas that people who are currently not with us sound like something they could support. He came across as stable, friendly, approachable. NOTHING like a firebrand preacher like EW Jackson or Alan Keyes. Can you seriously not see the difference? Think of a guy like Scott Walker in Wisconsin (the home of the public sector union). He took on those powerful unions and won, and he did it by sounding calm, reasonable, thoughtful, pragmatic, etc.

Reagan also was open to compromise when necessary - willing to take a deal if he could get 75% of what he wanted. He was an well learned conservative ideologue who understood pragmatism was necessary in politics. You listen to purists here who believe it's all or nothing. Every day people on FR are writing off another conservative for saying something they don't agree with. It almost seems like, among many grass roots conservatives, that there is more criticism of people either on our own side or allied with us than there is attacks on the left.

We've now reached a point where the Declaration is more relevant than the Constitution. Think with that and proceed accordingly.

Again, your alluding to some sort of civil war, and it's just not likely to happen. And if the voting public even suspects that conservatives believe that it is necessary, the vast majority will never, ever vote for us. Think what conservatives and originalists must have thought during FDR's reign. FDR was a real socialist. Ever read his second bill of rights? Read your history man. That guy was a real socialist.

I agree this nation has lost its moorings and we are headed for collapse. But it isn't likely to happen anytime soon and it isn't the kind of thing the public believes. Just look at Europe - that is the path we are on. You may not realize just how far a the can can be kicked - even with a moribund, broken economy.

I'll bet you were one of Mitt's staunchest supporters on FR during the last election. I'd probably have a hard time finding a single cross word from you about John McCain. Scathing posts about the Bush's in your posting history? I'll bet I'd have a hard time finding any of those either.

Well, you'd be wrong on all counts.

240 posted on 11/06/2013 5:34:44 PM PST by Longbow1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 236 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240241-254 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson