Let's also remind ourselves that the 2012 DNC Convention organizers gave her a PRIMETIME speaking slot, just before Joe Biden was about to speak.
Posted on 02/02/2014 7:34:49 AM PST by SeekAndFind
It sounds almost too good to be true, but it is plausible. The oh-so-smug contraception-devouring Georgetown Law graduate is contemplating a run for the Congressional seat being vacated by Henry Waxman. John Fund outlines a scenario in National Review by which it is possible that this decision could lead to a GOP nominee capturing the vote.
Up to a dozen candidates will run in the non-partisan June primary, in which the top two finishers, regardless of party, then advance to a November runoff. Two possible surprising outcomes: Feminist icon Sandra Fluke going to Congress or the district electing a small-business-owner Republican-turned-independent.
(snip)
Even though several elected Democrats are lining up to run, name ID in the expensive L.A. market is everything and Fluke trumps almost all of her potential challengers in that category.
What worries some liberal strategists is this: Fluke rides her fame and her fundraising advantage with feminists into one of the two spots in the November runoff for the seat. The other slot is taken by Bill Bloomfield, a businessman who spent millions of his own money and held Henry Waxman to an eight-point victory in 2012 - a banner Democratic year in California. While both candidates would be newcomers, Bloomfield would have the money and name ID to be competitive.
Bloomfield told the Los Angeles Times last night that he is "leaning towards running" again and is taking a poll to gauge his chances. The district is winnable for an independent like Bloomfield, given that 28 percent of its voters are registered Republican and another 28 percent are independent or registered with minor parties.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
That ought to be entertaining.
must be using Venezuelan exchange rate, LOL
Rush made her famous. Thanks, Rush.
...and the GOP could hand it right back by wringing their hands and declaring that district to be one where people want liberal policies and nominating someone just like Fluke
With CA’s jungle primary, I do not see what the GOP has to do with it. If nostrilitis won there as much as he wanted, Bloomfield looks like the best conservatives can get. I hope the GOP does not waste any money on this district and let him self-fund.
I was shocked that she passed the California bar exam.
When you really stop and think about it, spending $3000 a year in taxpayer money to keep Sandra Fluke out of the gene pool is a worthy investment.
The candidate running against him spent millions of dollars so he had a full-scale campaign operation going and air war (blanketing waves with ads like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCRIMVX30hQ - pretty good except the cheesy visual of him walking on the beach...)and he was an “independent” - so perhaps people in this liberal district weren’t as adverse to voting for him as they would have if he had “Republican” next to his name.
Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!
“You’re breakin’ my heart, you’re tearin’ it apart, so Fluke you...”
Thanks, interesting.
Waxman certainly is one of those exceedingly noxious liberals that makes me cringe every time I see him.
In a league with Pelosi, Schumer, Baraq, Dingy Harry, etc.
.
So....let me get this straight:
Fluke wants to sleep around and demands that I, as the taxpayer, must pay for it.
And when she gets pregnant, she must get an abortion, and I as the taxpayer, must pay for it.
If she does not get an abortion, she must have doctor's care until birth, and I as the taxpayer, must pay for it.
And she will raise this bastard child(did I actually say that),and I as the taxpayer, must pay for it.
BUT...I have no say so as to when and where she can, er, procreate.
I have no say so as to how she should treat her body when she is in pregnancy.
I have no say so as to who shall be her doctor. Or the babies religion.
CAN I NAME THIS BABY, for crying out loud. And what name shall I choose?
Which is $82.19 every day.”
It is?
Oops. $8.22 every day. Sorry about that, and thanks.
.
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.