Did Cooter bring down Eric Cantor?

[birddog]

I still think Cantor got ambushed by the Dems

Polls have a margin for error but the swing with Cantor was close to 40%. Something happened behind the scenes and it wasn't voter disgust

Just another example how sneaky and unethical the dems are!

 

[rightwinger]

I still think Cantor got ambushed by the Dems

Polls have a margin for error but the swing with Cantor was close to 40%. Something happened behind the scenes and it wasn't voter disgust

Just another example how sneaky and unethical the dems are!

Seems ethical when Rush tries it

 

[IlarMeilyr]

LOL. If a Tea Party backed candidate wins over an establishment Republican, it couldn't POSSIBLY be that the Republicans in a Republican district were sending a message to the GOP that the direction of the GOP is all fucked up.

Oh no.

It HAS to be that some liberal/Democrat/"independent" organized a cross over vote in the primary to oust the mainline establishment Republican.

So the outcome of a GOP primary is a mark of success for the ever-devious Democratics.

Yes. Yes.

Certainly. That MUST be it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Cantor in a district did not take the TeaPs seriously who were aided by thousands of Dem votes.

Graham, who is seriously hated by the TP, does take them seriously enough to campaign well and smash them at the state level.

As did Cornyn to Steve Stockman, a man I know and like yet who has proven to be antithetical to the interests of Texas.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

NOW we see the liberal Democrat aparatchik, The New York Slimes, headlining a story about the GOP worrying that Party "infighting" may take a "toll" on them down the road.

The GOP establishment is stupid like that. Sounds very much like the kind of blathering bullshit offered by Fakey, in fact.

The establishment GOP is determined to NOT see the "message" from the voters who eject guys like Cantor.

But the message is rather stark and clear just the same:

We already HAVE a liberal Democrat Parody.

We do not NEED for the GOP to be a weak-ass pale imitation and duplicate of the fucking liberal Democrat Parody.

Not only do we not NEED it, we flat out don't WANT it.

Liberal Democrat policies (as enabled all to often and for far too long by a rudderless GOP) have taken us to THIS point in our history:

• People cant get jobs.
• A proposed "solution" to a health care "system" problem is making the problem vastly worse and more expensive and inefficient.
• We have a tax system that has taken us to the edge, if not OVER the edge, of socialism.
• We have a fake economic policy complete with devalued money and a printing press for more valueless money.
• We have weakened our military and the rest of the world HAS taken notice and reacted accordingly.
• We have no foreign policy worthy of the name, but we project weakness to our allies and enemies alike.
• We have pretty completely abandoned the required notion of a LIMITED Government of ENUMERATED powers.
• We have a President who thinks he can RULE with a pen and a phone.
• We have a pathetic excuse for a Legislative Branch that offers the Executive almost no opposition.

We don't need more of the same. Fuck. We can't AFFORD more of the same. We NEED to prevent the liberal Democrat policies from progressing ANY further. THEN we need to retrench. We NEED to move BACK to the fundamentals that HAD taken us to more lofty heights.

For every tiny step that some socialist Alinskyite community organizer takes to move America even deeper into the morass of what we laughably call "progressivism," we need to make sure that we position ourselves to take a giant step BACK toward the fundamentals and AWAY from their hideously inept "vision."

 

[rightwinger]

LOL. If a Tea Party backed candidate wins over an establishment Republican, it couldn't POSSIBLY be that the Republicans in a Republican district were sending a message to the GOP that the direction of the GOP is all fucked up.

Oh no.

It HAS to be that some liberal/Democrat/"independent" organized a cross over vote in the primary to oust the mainline establishment Republican.

So the outcome of a GOP primary is a mark of success for the ever-devious Democratics.

Yes. Yes.

Certainly. That MUST be it.

I don't question whether a TeaParty candidate can win in a district that is 57% Republican but how it could do so without any previous indication of a power shift. Polling asks a simple question...Who are you going to vote for?
If polling right up to the election showed Cantor with an 18% lead and he ends up losing by almost 20%, something is wrong with the poll
Namely, they did not ask the right people
I suspect those people may have been Democrats

 

[IlarMeilyr]

LOL. If a Tea Party backed candidate wins over an establishment Republican, it couldn't POSSIBLY be that the Republicans in a Republican district were sending a message to the GOP that the direction of the GOP is all fucked up.

Oh no.

It HAS to be that some liberal/Democrat/"independent" organized a cross over vote in the primary to oust the mainline establishment Republican.

So the outcome of a GOP primary is a mark of success for the ever-devious Democratics.

Yes. Yes.

Certainly. That MUST be it.

I don't question whether a TeaParty candidate can win in a district that is 57% Republican but how it could do so without any previous indication of a power shift. Polling asks a simple question...Who are you going to vote for?
If polling right up to the election showed Cantor with an 18% lead and he ends up losing by almost 20%, something is wrong with the poll
Namely, they did not ask the right people
I suspect those people may have been Democrats

In all candor, I have demonstrated a willingness to underestimate the clarity of "polling" in the past.

I wonder if what just happened is indicative of your willingness to over-estimate the clarity of polling?

There HAD been signs and portents that Cantor could be in trouble, in fact.

Perhaps they were simply not heeded or recognized at the time for what they were.

 

[manifold]

NOW we see the liberal Democrat aparatchik, The New York Slimes, headlining a story about the GOP worrying that Party "infighting" may take a "toll" on them down the road.

The GOP establishment is stupid like that. Sounds very much like the kind of blathering bullshit offered by Fakey, in fact.

The establishment GOP is determined to NOT see the "message" from the voters who eject guys like Cantor.

But the message is rather stark and clear just the same:

We already HAVE a liberal Democrat Parody.

We do not NEED for the GOP to be a weak-ass pale imitation and duplicate of the fucking liberal Democrat Parody.

Not only do we not NEED it, we flat out don't WANT it.

Liberal Democrat policies (as enabled all to often and for far too long by a rudderless GOP) have taken us to THIS point in our history:

• People cant get jobs.
• A proposed "solution" to a health care "system" problem is making the problem vastly worse and more expensive and inefficient.
• We have a tax system that has taken us to the edge, if not OVER the edge, of socialism.
• We have a fake economic policy complete with devalued money and a printing press for more valueless money.
• We have weakened our military and the rest of the world HAS taken notice and reacted accordingly.
• We have no foreign policy worthy of the name, but we project weakness to our allies and enemies alike.
• We have pretty completely abandoned the required notion of a LIMITED Government of ENUMERATED powers.
• We have a President who thinks he can RULE with a pen and a phone.
• We have a pathetic excuse for a Legislative Branch that offers the Executive almost no opposition.

We don't need more of the same. Fuck. We can't AFFORD more of the same. We NEED to prevent the liberal Democrat policies from progressing ANY further. THEN we need to retrench. We NEED to move BACK to the fundamentals that HAD taken us to more lofty heights.

For every tiny step that some socialist Alinskyite community organizer takes to move America even deeper into the morass of what we laughably call "progressivism," we need to make sure that we position ourselves to take a giant step BACK toward the fundamentals and AWAY from their hideously inept "vision."

[youtube]g4bftQ4xxFc[/youtube]

 

[IlarMeilyr]

NOW we see the liberal Democrat aparatchik, The New York Slimes, headlining a story about the GOP worrying that Party "infighting" may take a "toll" on them down the road.

The GOP establishment is stupid like that. Sounds very much like the kind of blathering bullshit offered by Fakey, in fact.

The establishment GOP is determined to NOT see the "message" from the voters who eject guys like Cantor.

But the message is rather stark and clear just the same:

We already HAVE a liberal Democrat Parody.

We do not NEED for the GOP to be a weak-ass pale imitation and duplicate of the fucking liberal Democrat Parody.

Not only do we not NEED it, we flat out don't WANT it.

Liberal Democrat policies (as enabled all to often and for far too long by a rudderless GOP) have taken us to THIS point in our history:

• People cant get jobs.
• A proposed "solution" to a health care "system" problem is making the problem vastly worse and more expensive and inefficient.
• We have a tax system that has taken us to the edge, if not OVER the edge, of socialism.
• We have a fake economic policy complete with devalued money and a printing press for more valueless money.
• We have weakened our military and the rest of the world HAS taken notice and reacted accordingly.
• We have no foreign policy worthy of the name, but we project weakness to our allies and enemies alike.
• We have pretty completely abandoned the required notion of a LIMITED Government of ENUMERATED powers.
• We have a President who thinks he can RULE with a pen and a phone.
• We have a pathetic excuse for a Legislative Branch that offers the Executive almost no opposition.

We don't need more of the same. Fuck. We can't AFFORD more of the same. We NEED to prevent the liberal Democrat policies from progressing ANY further. THEN we need to retrench. We NEED to move BACK to the fundamentals that HAD taken us to more lofty heights.

For every tiny step that some socialist Alinskyite community organizer takes to move America even deeper into the morass of what we laughably call "progressivism," we need to make sure that we position ourselves to take a giant step BACK toward the fundamentals and AWAY from their hideously inept "vision."

[youtube]g4bftQ4xxFc[/youtube]

^ the sophisticated level of unmanli's debating prowess is always entertaining.

 

[manifold]

at Taffy and Winger both acting like it's a one or the other debate here.

You can pretty much take it to the bank that both Republican dissatisfaction with Cantor AND democrat sandbagging contributed significantly to his loss.

But by all means, carry on.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

at Taffy and Winger both acting like it's a one or the other debate here.

You can pretty much take it to the bank that both Republican dissatisfaction with Cantor AND democrat sandbagging contributed significantly to his loss.

But by all means, carry on.

^

We can "take it to the bank" on the personal assurance of unmanli?



I have little doubt that some asshole Indys and Democratics crossed-over to make some effort at impacting the GOP primary. "Open primaries" is a remarkably stupid idea, frankly, but it does allow for that possibility.

Nevertheless, unmanli couldn't support his notion if his life depended on it.

Indeed, the "numbers" seem to indicate the CONTRARY of the self-serving lolberal Democrat claim to having shoved Cantor out:

Virginia's lack of party registration makes it difficult to pin down whether Democrats crossed over in large numbers, but local level turnout provides some indirect clues on whether this phenomenon was widespread. On two counts, the data cast doubt on whether Democratic cross-over voting caused Cantor's loss.

While Republican primary turnout spiked by 28 percent over 2012, according to the State Board of Elections, Cantor received nearly 8,500 fewer votes this year than he did in the 2012 Republican primary, a drop that was larger than Brat's 7,200-vote margin of victory. Regardless of how many Democrats turned out to oppose Cantor, he still would have prevailed had he maintained the same level of support as in his 2012 landslide.

If Democrats showed up in large numbers to vote against Cantor, turnout should have spiked highest from 2012 in Democratic-leaning areas, with Cantor seeing an especially large drop-off in support. In fact, turnout rose slightly more in counties that voted more heavily for Mitt Romney in the 2012 presidential election.

Did Democratic votes doom Eric Cantor?

 

[manifold]

I don't know why you call it a self-serving democrat claim.

Are you implying that this Brat guy doesn't stand a chance in the general?

 

[rightwinger]

at Taffy and Winger both acting like it's a one or the other debate here.

You can pretty much take it to the bank that both Republican dissatisfaction with Cantor AND democrat sandbagging contributed significantly to his loss.

But by all means, carry on.

^

We can "take it to the bank" on the personal assurance of unmanli?



I have little doubt that some asshole Indys and Democratics crossed-over to make some effort at impacting the GOP primary. "Open primaries" is a remarkably stupid idea, frankly, but it does allow for that possibility.

Nevertheless, unmanli couldn't support his notion if his life depended on it.

Indeed, the "numbers" seem to indicate the CONTRARY of the self-serving lolberal Democrat claim to having shoved Cantor out:

Virginia's lack of party registration makes it difficult to pin down whether Democrats crossed over in large numbers, but local level turnout provides some indirect clues on whether this phenomenon was widespread. On two counts, the data cast doubt on whether Democratic cross-over voting caused Cantor's loss.

While Republican primary turnout spiked by 28 percent over 2012, according to the State Board of Elections, Cantor received nearly 8,500 fewer votes this year than he did in the 2012 Republican primary, a drop that was larger than Brat's 7,200-vote margin of victory. Regardless of how many Democrats turned out to oppose Cantor, he still would have prevailed had he maintained the same level of support as in his 2012 landslide.

If Democrats showed up in large numbers to vote against Cantor, turnout should have spiked highest from 2012 in Democratic-leaning areas, with Cantor seeing an especially large drop-off in support. In fact, turnout rose slightly more in counties that voted more heavily for Mitt Romney in the 2012 presidential election.

Did Democratic votes doom Eric Cantor?

Good point but it probably reflects more about the turnout in a Presidential primary year than dissatisfaction with Cantor.

The reason Republican primary turnout would spike in a non-presidential election year is because voters had an incentive to vote in the Democratic primary in 2012. In 2014, if those voters have no Democrat they want to vote for in a primary, they will jump over and vote Republican

 

[BlindBoo]

LOL. If a Tea Party backed candidate wins over an establishment Republican, it couldn't POSSIBLY be that the Republicans in a Republican district were sending a message to the GOP that the direction of the GOP is all fucked up.

Oh no.

It HAS to be that some liberal/Democrat/"independent" organized a cross over vote in the primary to oust the mainline establishment Republican.

So the outcome of a GOP primary is a mark of success for the ever-devious Democratics.

Yes. Yes.

Certainly. That MUST be it.

The way their propaganda arm is portraying it as a huge schism in the GOP (when really the Teabag factions influence within the GOP is waning). Also, the vote totals are higher in a off year primary than they were during a Presidential election in 2012? The pollsters got it so wrong because they didn't include many democrats. Yes I think there is a good possibility that it was Democrats that unseated Cantor.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

at Taffy and Winger both acting like it's a one or the other debate here.

You can pretty much take it to the bank that both Republican dissatisfaction with Cantor AND democrat sandbagging contributed significantly to his loss.

But by all means, carry on.

^

We can "take it to the bank" on the personal assurance of unmanli?



I have little doubt that some asshole Indys and Democratics crossed-over to make some effort at impacting the GOP primary. "Open primaries" is a remarkably stupid idea, frankly, but it does allow for that possibility.

Nevertheless, unmanli couldn't support his notion if his life depended on it.

Indeed, the "numbers" seem to indicate the CONTRARY of the self-serving lolberal Democrat claim to having shoved Cantor out:

Virginia's lack of party registration makes it difficult to pin down whether Democrats crossed over in large numbers, but local level turnout provides some indirect clues on whether this phenomenon was widespread. On two counts, the data cast doubt on whether Democratic cross-over voting caused Cantor's loss.

While Republican primary turnout spiked by 28 percent over 2012, according to the State Board of Elections, Cantor received nearly 8,500 fewer votes this year than he did in the 2012 Republican primary, a drop that was larger than Brat's 7,200-vote margin of victory. Regardless of how many Democrats turned out to oppose Cantor, he still would have prevailed had he maintained the same level of support as in his 2012 landslide.

If Democrats showed up in large numbers to vote against Cantor, turnout should have spiked highest from 2012 in Democratic-leaning areas, with Cantor seeing an especially large drop-off in support. In fact, turnout rose slightly more in counties that voted more heavily for Mitt Romney in the 2012 presidential election.

Did Democratic votes doom Eric Cantor?

Good point but it probably reflects more about the turnout in a Presidential primary year than dissatisfaction with Cantor.

The reason Republican primary turnout would spike in a non-presidential election year is because voters had an incentive to vote in the Democratic primary in 2012. In 2014, if those voters have no Democrat they want to vote for in a primary, they will jump over and vote Republican

Why "probably?"

Why wouldn't it be more "likely" that the GOP base is issuing a clarion call to advise the GOP leaders that the are unhappy with the direction of the GOP?

Obviously, lots of factors may be at play here. But I see zero basis to support your speculation.

The fact that the voters HEARD Professor Brat and then voted OUT the establishment Republican Cantor might (let's continue to speculate here), possibly, support the notion that what we observed was AS intended. The GOP voting base is expressing itself.

In my estimation, the bigger question is WHETHER the GOP establishment is willing or even capable of listening.

 

[manifold]

at Taffy and Winger both acting like it's a one or the other debate here.

You can pretty much take it to the bank that both Republican dissatisfaction with Cantor AND democrat sandbagging contributed significantly to his loss.

But by all means, carry on.

^

We can "take it to the bank" on the personal assurance of unmanli?



I have little doubt that some asshole Indys and Democratics crossed-over to make some effort at impacting the GOP primary. "Open primaries" is a remarkably stupid idea, frankly, but it does allow for that possibility.

Nevertheless, unmanli couldn't support his notion if his life depended on it.

Indeed, the "numbers" seem to indicate the CONTRARY of the self-serving lolberal Democrat claim to having shoved Cantor out:

Virginia's lack of party registration makes it difficult to pin down whether Democrats crossed over in large numbers, but local level turnout provides some indirect clues on whether this phenomenon was widespread. On two counts, the data cast doubt on whether Democratic cross-over voting caused Cantor's loss.

While Republican primary turnout spiked by 28 percent over 2012, according to the State Board of Elections, Cantor received nearly 8,500 fewer votes this year than he did in the 2012 Republican primary, a drop that was larger than Brat's 7,200-vote margin of victory. Regardless of how many Democrats turned out to oppose Cantor, he still would have prevailed had he maintained the same level of support as in his 2012 landslide.

If Democrats showed up in large numbers to vote against Cantor, turnout should have spiked highest from 2012 in Democratic-leaning areas, with Cantor seeing an especially large drop-off in support. In fact, turnout rose slightly more in counties that voted more heavily for Mitt Romney in the 2012 presidential election.

Did Democratic votes doom Eric Cantor?

Good point but it probably reflects more about the turnout in a Presidential primary year than dissatisfaction with Cantor.

The reason Republican primary turnout would spike in a non-presidential election year is because voters had an incentive to vote in the Democratic primary in 2012. In 2014, if those voters have no Democrat they want to vote for in a primary, they will jump over and vote Republican

Exactly.

But I don't know why you'd call his epically flawed logic a good point.

As if a huge spike in voter turnout somehow refutes the notion that the spike included democratic voters.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

LOL. If a Tea Party backed candidate wins over an establishment Republican, it couldn't POSSIBLY be that the Republicans in a Republican district were sending a message to the GOP that the direction of the GOP is all fucked up.

Oh no.

It HAS to be that some liberal/Democrat/"independent" organized a cross over vote in the primary to oust the mainline establishment Republican.

So the outcome of a GOP primary is a mark of success for the ever-devious Democratics.

Yes. Yes.

Certainly. That MUST be it.

The way their propaganda arm is portraying it as a huge schism in the GOP (when really the Teabag factions influence within the GOP is waning). Also, the vote totals are higher in a off year primary than they were during a Presidential election in 2012? The pollsters got it so wrong because they didn't include many democrats. Yes I think there is a good possibility that it was Democrats that unseated Cantor.

>>snore<<

My prior post (citing the Washington POST piece) seems to refute that baseless speculation of yours.

 

[manifold]

My prior post (citing the Washington POST piece) seems to refute that baseless speculation of yours.

And by "Washington Post piece", Ilarwelcher means an opinion blog.

 

[Interpol]

Did the pollsters who had Cantor with a big lead poll only Republicans?

The pollster Cantor hired was the guy who Republicans trusted when he said Romney was going to beat Obama by 5 points.

I don't know what his methods are, but this is like the 4th or 5th huge embarrassment of his in the last couple years.

 

[rightwinger]

^

We can "take it to the bank" on the personal assurance of unmanli?



I have little doubt that some asshole Indys and Democratics crossed-over to make some effort at impacting the GOP primary. "Open primaries" is a remarkably stupid idea, frankly, but it does allow for that possibility.

Nevertheless, unmanli couldn't support his notion if his life depended on it.

Indeed, the "numbers" seem to indicate the CONTRARY of the self-serving lolberal Democrat claim to having shoved Cantor out:



Did Democratic votes doom Eric Cantor?

Good point but it probably reflects more about the turnout in a Presidential primary year than dissatisfaction with Cantor.

The reason Republican primary turnout would spike in a non-presidential election year is because voters had an incentive to vote in the Democratic primary in 2012. In 2014, if those voters have no Democrat they want to vote for in a primary, they will jump over and vote Republican

Why "probably?"

Why wouldn't it be more "likely" that the GOP bases is issuing a clarion call to advise the GOP leaders that the are unhappy with the direction of the GOP?

Obviously, lots of factors may be at play here. But I see zero basis to support your speculation.

The fact that the voters HEARD Professor Brat and then voted OUT the establishment Republican Cantor might (let's continue to speculate here), possibly, support the notion that what we observed was AS intended. The GOP voting base is expressing itself.

In my estimation, the bigger question is WHETHER the GOP establishment is willing or even capable of listening.

Like I said, the 7th is a heavily Republican gerrymandered district. A Tea Party candidate is fully capable of winning

But why did Brat win?

From what I have heard, he is not a highly charismatic candidate. If he got his message across, how did he do it on $200,000? What event provoked an almost overnight reversal of the vote to Brat? There was no "Oh shit" moment for Cantor. If there was an overall disatisfaction, why did it not reveal itself sooner?

Maybe Brat did pull off the upset on his own. But I still suspect something happened behind the scenes