Posted on 04/03/2013 10:35:22 AM PDT by governsleastgovernsbest
I find that the Washington Post's Chris Cillizza usually plays things pretty much down the middle, and subscribe to his Fix email blast.
So it came as an unpleasant surprise to find in my inbox a little while ago a Cillizza email, linking to his current Fix column, tthat referred to Mark Sanford as "the turd in the political punch bowl."
View the screengrab here.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
Yeah, the powers of the SC GOP set us up, again. Can we know the names of his handlers and donors? Who is Sanford going to owe going into his seat in congress? Hope breitbart finds that out.
I’m going to give Colbert what help I can think of to give. I hope republican Sanford loses so he and his disgusting Latin chippie will get themselves out of SC and back to her Buenos Aires cathouse.
Shoot, I’m waiting for the punch! They are all turds!
Is he really a horndog? Or just a dog?
Most likely a rat terrier.
xzins, you posted the district-wide results for the first round, but the run-off results you posted are only for the Charleston County portion of the district, which portion Sanford indeed won with over 60% but with “only” 11,387 votes in favor:
http://www.enr-scvotes.org/SC/Charleston/46117/116028/en/summary.html
In the entire SC-01 (which also includes precincts in four other counties), Sanford won the run-off with 56.6%, with over 26,000 votes cast in his favor. http://www.enr-scvotes.org/SC/46107/116029/en/summary.html
So while there was a drop-off in the total turnout from the first round to the run-off—as is typical of run-offs, particularly when 14 candidates were eliminated after the first round—it wasn’t anywhere close to what you believed.
As for the fact that 16 candidates ran in the first round, that was only because 15 candidates believed they could finish in the top-two and have a chance of beating Sanford in the run-off. Believe me, they weren’t Sanford patsies; and even had they been Sanford patsies, Sanford faced only one candidate in the run-off, and beat him one-on-one with 56.6%.
Like Jimmy Swaggart? Like Jim Bakker? Like Slick and Beast in their "Pretty in Pink No. 1" interview in 1992?
Guess we should keep that in mind for John Edwards, too, eh? He'll want to run again soon, I should think.
The Democrats have their scoundrels and we have to elect a few of our own!!! Even up the score!
Immoral men and scoundrels serve no one but themselves.
Some conservatives wanted a scorched earth policy, Obama would take the country down, the nation would learn its lesson and true conservatism would rise from the ashes. I think that is a very dangerous gamble, it is better to vote for someone who is not as bad while working on changing the party from the ground up. At least voting for a *moderate* Republican would buy some time while the grass roots gets its act together.
Dumb voters are not any smarter when they are under dire circumstances. People panic and grab onto anything—remember how Hitler came to power after the Weimar Republic’s economic colapse.
Waiting since 2008. Make that 2006 when the Dems took over Congress. Well now wait. it might have been since 2004 since we heard we needed to take over the party in order to drill for oil.....or was that 2002?
I hear you but look at the Tea Party movement. It took time for people to realize that we were being lied too. The Tea Party movement is evidence that there is a great awakening in the electorate of the conservative side. There has to be a real grass roots movement that will spread throughout the country but that takes time. Don’t burn your bridges behind you.
In politics the middle way is none at all. John Adams
If it’s genuine, we should forgive them 70 times 7 times. At least I read that somewhere.
Genuine? He got exactly what he wanted. He did NOT reconcile with his wife. That’s not repentance. That’s willfulness.
Only as a stop gap measure while working on an alternative at the same time.
No. It’s not stop-gap. It has become modus operandi while we all tell one another we’ll get control. And it has gone on for years.
Hi Au,
This is the link I used: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Carolina%27s_1st_congressional_district_special_election,_2013#Primary
If it is inaccurate, I was not trying to be so. As you can tell from the page, there’s no indication that there is a difference.
Thanks,
Xzins
xzins, I would never think you purposely would use incorrect information.
The link I gave previously includes the final districtwide results for the run-off; if you are a Wikipedia editor (or would like to become one), I would encourage you to fix the information in that Wikipedia page so that no one else makes the same mistake you did.
Wikipedia can be a great resource, but the same thing that makes it great (anyone can edit it very quickly) makes it dangerous.
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.