Alexander, outgunned and outspent by Republican opponent, takes 5th Congressional District race

thenewsstar ^ | Posted on December 7, 2002 | GREG HILBURN

[pabianice]

It doesn't. I think "Squat" has it right: "I'd rather sit home and pout and not vote rather than support my party's nominee because my candidate lost in the primary." It doesn't take many of these to result in a loss by 2.8%. The Dems' greatest strength is organization. That is one of the Repub's greatest weaknesses.

[Lancey Howard]

I have to take issue with you.
Lousiana is a pretty sick place, but New Jersey is the mortal lock for "armpit of the United States".

[KQQL]

I am not blaming Mexican Sugar..

I am just saying " Hello " more Mexican Sugar...because now..LA farmers lost out...

Mary can't stop a trade deal which is good for 49 states....
LA lost out a chair at the table...when it comes to Sugar....remember GOP lost a Conservative District too.....

LA ........said ..NO ..to W on 12/7...It's likley W will
say Yes to Mexican sugar now.....I doubt W will Double the
sugar import from Mexico...but if Mexico lifts the tariff on Corn Syrup...I bet Traiff on Mexican Suagr is reduced and amount of sugar comming to US is increases...

[AndrewC]

Good info. Looks like we took good aim at our foot and blew it off.

[VetsRule]

It's hard to win against vote fraud.

Umm, Terrell was in charge of the election procedures. And the margin was 3-4 percentage points. There was no fraud here, not enough to make a difference, anyway.

VR

[hchutch]

Yes, it des look thatway - some heads need to be knocked together.

[Theodore R.]

So,Peekaboo, do you now think Holloway (who seems to have a permanently incurable political bug) will try to oppose Alexander in 2004? The Times-Picayune reported a few days back that some Cooksey supporters, mostly women in Monroe, were sitting out the Senate race but were voting for Fletcher. Yet, in Alexandria, we had Fletcher losing Rapides Parish but Terrell with a small lead. This GOP infighting was potentially disastrous. Had the Cooksey and Holloway people united with Terrell and Fletcher, things could have turned out differently. I understand, however, that Fletcher did not run a smart campaign for a heavily rural district. I can't understand why Republicans sat out these races. It is possible that the Democrat lead did not begin to take shape until after 4 p.m., with the end-of-the-day haulings. Donna Brazile may have masterminded the late hauls to deceive the hapless Republicans into thinking that they were on a winning streak.

[Forgiven_Sinner]

Um, why don't you think the Supreme Court will rule the CFR bill as unconstitutional? I don't think there is a chance they won't.

[rightwing2]

Um, why don't you think the Supreme Court will rule the CFR bill as unconstitutional? I don't think there is a chance they won't.

Today's liberal Supreme Court has a sorry record on ruling in favor of the Constitution. They are so extreme they ruled a state ban on partial birth abortion/infanticide to be unconstitutional. I am shocked that anyone who calls themself a conservative would have any faith at all that the Supreme Court would do the right thing and declare this RAT CFR legislation unconstitutional. There is no chance of that. There is some chance they will declare part of it unconstitutional, but rest assured it will not be those parts most offensive to conservatives which makes it so much harder for them to get elected to public office. President Bush was the last line of defense for conservatives against this unconstitutional monstrousity which he had pledged to veto. Unfortunately, he violated that pledge declaring he thought it unconstitutional even as he signed the bill...

[LibertarianInExile]

Amen on all counts.

Sidebar: I'll never understand why if the President or anyone thinks that a bill is bad, they'd speak against it then SIGN it. It would make sense if they want to be able to negate it as a campaign issue to shut the hell up. Or, if they're really against it, to vote against it or veto it!