Lessons from Virginia

T

Timshel

New member
Obviously, Cuccinelli, is too liberal and is not turning out the conservative base. Maybe if they had a candidate that had the conservative backbone to advocate slavery and a repeal of the 19th amendment. /sarcasm

http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/04/opinion/avlon-virginia-cuccinelli/

(CNN) -- Virginia is a cautionary tale for conservatives this year. And those Republicans who always argue that their party wins when it moves further to the right are going to have a lot of explaining to do after Election Day.


Polls show that "teavangelist" Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli is going down to a decisive defeat in the governor's race against an exceptionally flawed Democratic candidate, Terry McAuliffe, the former Democratic National Committee chairman and Clinton fund-raiser.


The reason is simple: Cuccinelli is too extreme for swing voters in Virginia -- and that neatly symbolizes the GOP's problem as it looks to the congressional midterms of 2014 and the presidential campaign of 2016.


The problems have been long brewing in Virginia. Once a Republican bastion, the Old Dominion began to turn from red to purple in 2008 when Barack Obama became the first Democrat to win the state since Lyndon Johnson in 1964. But in true swing state fashion, Virginia turned around and elected conservative Bob McDonnell governor in 2009; he managed to win by 17 points, cloaking his conservatism in a family-friendly demeanor.


Obama won the state again in 2012, buoyed by demographic changes and the increasing wealth in the region around Washington. Nonetheless, a centrist Republican might still have been well-positioned to win Virginia's governorship in this off-year election. But that does not remotely describe Cuccinelli.http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/04/opinion/avlon-virginia-cuccinelli/
 
obama-lies.jpg
 
if we can keep the republican party cheating from working then the oparty will have to completely reform from the ground up and be an honest party again
 
evince said:
if we can keep the republican party cheating from working then the oparty will have to completely reform from the ground up and be an honest party again
Click to expand...

Desh, no political party is honest. It doesn't exist in politics. You happen to view the Democratic Party as god like and above reproach for some reason while ignoring it's long history of cheating. The Republican and Democratic Party's exist to win elections and will do so by any means necessary. Politics is dirty and that is a fact.
 
cawacko said:
Desh, no political party is honest. It doesn't exist in politics. You happen to view the Democratic Party as god like and above reproach for some reason while ignoring it's long history of cheating. The Republican and Democratic Party's exist to win elections and will do so by any means necessary. Politics is dirty and that is a fact.
Click to expand...

While your claim is accurate over a generalized and long historical perspective the current GOP has made the sort of cheating Desh refers to a part of their principles and a primary tactic. It's a desperation move and one they will be punished for over a long period. The partisan "your side does it too" stuff is dishonest at this point. The way they are trying to disenfranchise voters should make any person of principle recoil.
 
Professor Baxter said:
Obviously, Cuccinelli, is too liberal and is not turning out the conservative base. Maybe if they had a candidate that had the conservative backbone to advocate slavery and a repeal of the 19th amendment. /sarcasm

http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/04/opinion/avlon-virginia-cuccinelli/

(CNN) -- Virginia is a cautionary tale for conservatives this year. And those Republicans who always argue that their party wins when it moves further to the right are going to have a lot of explaining to do after Election Day.


Polls show that "teavangelist" Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli is going down to a decisive defeat in the governor's race against an exceptionally flawed Democratic candidate, Terry McAuliffe, the former Democratic National Committee chairman and Clinton fund-raiser.


The reason is simple: Cuccinelli is too extreme for swing voters in Virginia -- and that neatly symbolizes the GOP's problem as it looks to the congressional midterms of 2014 and the presidential campaign of 2016.


The problems have been long brewing in Virginia. Once a Republican bastion, the Old Dominion began to turn from red to purple in 2008 when Barack Obama became the first Democrat to win the state since Lyndon Johnson in 1964. But in true swing state fashion, Virginia turned around and elected conservative Bob McDonnell governor in 2009; he managed to win by 17 points, cloaking his conservatism in a family-friendly demeanor.


Obama won the state again in 2012, buoyed by demographic changes and the increasing wealth in the region around Washington. Nonetheless, a centrist Republican might still have been well-positioned to win Virginia's governorship in this off-year election. But that does not remotely describe Cuccinelli.http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/04/opinion/avlon-virginia-cuccinelli/
Click to expand...

I love your logic, more of the voters are going to vote for the liberal, so clearly the Conservative was not Conservative enough!
 
If the Conservatives keep believing that the answer is to get more Conservative, when the voters are clearly preferring the more liberal candidates, the Conservatives will continue to lose.
 
Jarod said:
If the Conservatives keep believing that the answer is to get more Conservative, when the voters are clearly preferring the more liberal candidates, the Conservatives will continue to lose.
Click to expand...

Shhhh. Don't listen to lieberals like jarhead. Ditzy and ila are right. Cuccinelli was too friendly to homosexuals, women and minorities. That's why he is losing.
 
Professor Baxter said:
Shhhh. Don't listen to lieberals like jarhead. Ditzy and ila are right. Cuccinelli was too friendly to homosexuals, women and minorities. That's why he is losing.
Click to expand...

What was I thinking, if Republicans are going to have a chance they have to get way less friendly to homosexuals, women and minorities. They have to get WAY more conservative.
 
Just look at Governor Christie, he got more and more liberal and look at how badly he is going to lose in New Jersey today!
 
I think the lesson is obvious......if the candidate does not appeal both to GOP and Libertarian conservatives, liberals win with a minority of votes.....
 
Jarod said:
If the Conservatives keep believing that the answer is to get more Conservative, when the voters are clearly preferring the more liberal candidates, the Conservatives will continue to lose.
Click to expand...

In 2012 conservative candidates went from far-right to right-center, i.e. Cain to Rmoney. If the country was crying to be more conservative, one of the farthest-right should have been a shoo-in. Didn't happen.
 
If the GOP has only been carrying the craphole state since 1968, how does that make it an historically Republican state?
 
Professor Baxter said:
While your claim is accurate over a generalized and long historical perspective the current GOP has made the sort of cheating Desh refers to a part of their principles and a primary tactic. It's a desperation move and one they will be punished for over a long period. The partisan "your side does it too" stuff is dishonest at this point. The way they are trying to disenfranchise voters should make any person of principle recoil.
Click to expand...

First off I have no problem with people having to present And identification To vote. If that bothers you then we differ. The Republican Party has never been an honest party nor will it. It is made up of a group of self interested individuals looking for power and economic gain. If you think Democrats are somehow different I'm open to hear that.
 
cawacko said:
First off I have no problem with people having to present And identification To vote. If that bothers you then we differ. The Republican Party has never been an honest party nor will it. It is made up of a group of self interested individuals looking for power and economic gain. If you think Democrats are somehow different I'm open to hear that.
Click to expand...

That's not the extent of it.

It's not so much that I have a problem with it as it is that I don't have a problem with them not requiring it. Republicans only want it to eliminate voters. It could be done in ways that would increase participation, like combining it with election day registration, and eliminate that criticism, but they don't want that.

I don't see that Democrats are openly attempting to suppress the will of voters in the ways Republicans are. Your excuse is nothing but an ugly rationalization. What isn't okay?
 
Professor Baxter said:
That's not the extent of it.

It's not so much that I have a problem with it as it is that I don't have a problem with them not requiring it. Republicans only want it to eliminate voters. It could be done in ways that would increase participation, like combining it with election day registration, and eliminate that criticism, but they don't want that.

I don't see that Democrats are openly attempting to suppress the will of voters in the ways Republicans are. Your excuse is nothing but an ugly rationalization. What isn't okay?
Click to expand...

Which part of Republicans are interested in power and economic gain is confusing? And with respect spare me the will of the people line. As a libertarian I would you assume you of all people would recognize the two party's don't care about that.
 
cawacko said:
Which part of Republicans are interested in power and economic gain is confusing? And with respect spare me the will of the people line. As a libertarian I would you assume you of all people would recognize the two party's don't care about that.
Click to expand...

Again, only one party is at open war on the right to vote. What isn't okay? This crosses a line towards communism or one party rule and the next step is outlawing opposition parties. Apparently you would rationalize that as okay because the other side would do it too, if they could.
 
Professor Baxter said:
Again, only one party is at open war on the right to vote. What isn't okay? This crosses a line towards communism or one party rule and the next step is outlawing opposition parties. Apparently you would rationalize that as okay because the other side would do it too, if they could.
Click to expand...

ONE PARTY RULE IS ONLY ONE PARTY LESS THAN TWO PARTY RULE. IN END, SAME EFFECT.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top