Forum Settings
       
1 2 3 4 Next »
Reply To Thread

What a DealFollow

#77 Nov 03 2009 at 4:18 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Want to lay down odds that if the Dems were doing well in the elections today, we would be tripping over all the stories talking about how significant they are in terms of support for Obama and the Dem Congress? The near dearth of coverage in the mainstream media with a massive amount of "Oh. It's not that important... Really!" when they do talk about it is pretty darn telling.


Can they be a bit less obvious?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#78 Nov 03 2009 at 4:23 PM Rating: Excellent
Nope, none of the races are that significant, except in terms of how Republicans are eating their own.

Except the probably new governor of NJ, who eats anything apparently.
#79 Nov 03 2009 at 4:26 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Want to lay down odds that if the Dems were doing well in the elections today, we would be tripping over all the stories talking about how significant they are in terms of support for Obama and the Dem Congress?

OMGOMGOMG.... And what are the odds that the pigeon wizards would turn everyone into greyscale rainbows?!?!?!?!

I bet it's 67:93 against with a chance of showers in the late afternoon!!!!!!

Excellent point though. If the imaginary world matches the one in your mind, it really proves you right! Smiley: thumbsup
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#80 Nov 03 2009 at 4:32 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I did, however, adore how "every political pundit in the country is reading the races going on today as a referendum..." turned into "The mainstream media is ignoring this election except to say it's not important" Smiley: laugh

Maybe Gbaji thinks the Cook Political Report, National Journal and Congressional Quarterly are the "mainstream media" so he changed his opinion when he saw my sources. Or maybe he figures all the real political pundits work for Fox so the ones on every other network (who I guess are saying it's not important) don't count into "every".
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#81 Nov 03 2009 at 6:01 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Pundits don't generally write the front page stories Joph. There's a difference between what the folks who write political commentary in the editorial section are saying and what the folks making decisions about what stories to run somewhere nearer the front where the masses tend to congregate are doing.

The amusing aspect to this is that those who are suddenly saying it's not that significant only started saying that *after* it became apparent the the GOP was likely to win big. Funny, huh?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#82 Nov 03 2009 at 6:03 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
The amusing aspect to this is that those who are suddenly saying it's not that significant only started saying that *after* it became apparent the the GOP was likely to win big. Funny, huh?

Are you implying that Stu Rothenberg, Charlie Cook and Bob Benenson are plugging for the Democrats?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#83 Nov 03 2009 at 6:39 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
The amusing aspect to this is that those who are suddenly saying it's not that significant only started saying that *after* it became apparent the the GOP was likely to win big. Funny, huh?

Are you implying that Stu Rothenberg, Charlie Cook and Bob Benenson are plugging for the Democrats?


I have no clue who any of them are Joph. Don't really care either. It seems incredibly important to you though...
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#84 Nov 03 2009 at 6:55 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

The amusing aspect to this is that those who are suddenly saying it's not that significant only started saying that *after* it became apparent the the GOP was likely to win big.


I'm not sure holding a house seat that hasn't gone to a democrat in the last half century can be qualified as "big". The Democrats will win the CA 10 special, too, what a momentum swing for the Bammer! This will change the balance of power in the House....not at all!!! AMAZING!!!

Virginia is good for the GOP and not insignificant, NJ would be much more significant.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#85 Nov 03 2009 at 7:34 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
I'm not sure holding a house seat that hasn't gone to a democrat in the last half century can be qualified as "big".


Maybe I missed someone talking about the NY district race, but we were mostly talking about the Governors races, weren't we? I mean, that particular race is interesting only because of the middle/liberal position of the GOP choice, and the flipping of support to the Conservative Party candidate as a result. I don't think anyone's suggesting the result is significant, but the theatrics definitely are.


Quote:
Virginia is good for the GOP and not insignificant, NJ would be much more significant.


Tell that to the other posters who seemed indignant at the very suggestion that a couple governors races might have any impact at all on national politics.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#86 Nov 03 2009 at 7:39 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
I have no clue who any of them are Joph.

That's not surprising.
Quote:
It seems incredibly important to you though...

Oh? You were the one gloating that all the pundits were claiming this election was a referendum. I was just giving some counter-examples of analysts who were noting that, no, it's not. Since then you've been engaged in some bizarre backpedaling routine of insisting that none of the pundits are really talking about it at all or that they're only talking about it now that the GOP is expected to win or whatever you're currently babbling about.

A rather classic case of Gbaji claiming the world is what he wants to believe it is ("All the pundits agree with me!") and then, when shown wrong, getting mad and coming up with excuses as to why it's everyone else's fault that reality doesn't meet his imagination ("It's all the mainstream media! They refuse to talk about it! Everyone is only saying that because the GOP will win!")
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#87 Nov 03 2009 at 10:48 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Well, Democratic losses in VA and NJ.

But it looks like the Democrat is going to win NY-23. I'm sure Varus & Gbaji will say this was a referendum showing that voters prefer Democrats over hard line conservatives Smiley: wink2
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#88 Nov 03 2009 at 11:09 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
Yes, but at least the New York voters were spared from electing a got-damned RINO.

Whew, dodged one that time.

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#89 Nov 03 2009 at 11:32 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I'll give Hoffman credit for conceding the race and not dragging it out through all the absentee ballots, recounts, etc. It's his right to do so, of course, but he saw the writing on the wall and knew that things weren't going to change for him.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#90 Nov 04 2009 at 12:30 AM Rating: Good
Redstate is calling the Hoffman loss a victory in spirit. Smiley: lol

Seriously, though, they fell victim to the same thing that caused Bush to win in 2000, although in that case Gore didn't drop out and endorse Nader at the last minute. But you cannot split up a political party and expect to win.

Thankfully, last year the Democrats realized that the PUMAs were actually mostly Republican moles, and rallied around Obama instead of splintering into factions and demanding Hillary run as a third party or something ridiculous.
#91 Nov 05 2009 at 12:54 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Jophiel wrote:
publiusvarus wrote:
What they are is warnings to rino's in other states up for election next year that they will not get the GOP support if they push liberal values and plans.

You realize, of course, that this is the attitude Democrats are praying for in states like Florida and Pennsylvania. Hell, in Illinois you have conservatives calling Mark Kirk a RINO for supporting the climate bill. If they ran Kirk out in the primary, the GOP has no chance of winning the IL senate seat.

Local news this morning was that Mark Kirk has asked Sarah Palin to endorse him. Hilarious. Kirk doesn't stand a chance running as anything other than a moderate and he's already doing a spooked lurch to the Right Smiley: laugh
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
1 2 3 4 Next »
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 266 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (266)