Hmmmm...let's see what happens

[Annie]

And Kath...

for the record, I don't have any particular affinity for Reid and there are a lot of people who would do better as SML

but... this is what sane, non-histerical, rational assessment looks like:

4. Nevada (D-Reid) -- The reasons why Reid could lose are fairly self-evident, both on a polling and a narrative basis. So here's why he could still win: (1) $$$$$$, (2) it'll be harder to brand him as ineffectual if he passes health care, (3) Nevada is a machine state and Democrats control the machine, (4) Republican candidates are untested.

FiveThirtyEight: Politics Done Right: Senate Rankings, December 2009 Edition

The above may certainly be true for the majority of Democrats in US, but Nevada seems a bit different.

Not seeing how things are playing out, when even inroads are being made in MA of all places, , should be a cause for concern to those of your party.

Problems for the GOP? Plenty:

Weasel Zippers: Poll: 75% of GOP Voters Say Republicans in Congress Have "Lost Touch" With Party's Base...

Difference they are not in power, thus hold out hope, much like Democrats in the last two cycles.

 

[jillian]

i'm sure it will happen around the same time the left does the same.

yeah, i wonder what would happen if someone in the obama administration outed a CIA agent...

seriously... the problem is that you compare apples and oranges. you will never get me to say that politics isn't politics... but

do you really think that saying the country would have been better off had a segregationist been president is the same as what reid said?

(remembering that i think what reid said is pretty goofy).

 

[del]

i'm sure it will happen around the same time the left does the same.

yeah, i wonder what would happen if someone in the obama administration outed a CIA agent...

seriously... the problem is that you compare apples and oranges. you will never get me to say that politics isn't politics... but

do you really think that saying the country would have been better off had a segregationist been president is the same as what reid said?

(remembering that i think what reid said is pretty goofy).

lott said something stupid in an attempt to be nice to an old man on his hundredth birthday. the left decided that it was a racist call to arms. i never agreed with that interpretation, but lott resigned due to the *perception* that he was a racist.

reid said something stupid because, well, harry's not the brightest bulb in the sign. to call harry's statements racist is no greater a stretch than calling lott a racist.

 

[jillian]

And Kath...

for the record, I don't have any particular affinity for Reid and there are a lot of people who would do better as SML

but... this is what sane, non-histerical, rational assessment looks like:

4. Nevada (D-Reid) -- The reasons why Reid could lose are fairly self-evident, both on a polling and a narrative basis. So here's why he could still win: (1) $$$$$$, (2) it'll be harder to brand him as ineffectual if he passes health care, (3) Nevada is a machine state and Democrats control the machine, (4) Republican candidates are untested.

FiveThirtyEight: Politics Done Right: Senate Rankings, December 2009 Edition

The above may certainly be true for the majority of Democrats in US, but Nevada seems a bit different.

Not seeing how things are playing out, when even inroads are being made in MA of all places, , should be a cause for concern to those of your party.

Problems for the GOP? Plenty:

Weasel Zippers: Poll: 75% of GOP Voters Say Republicans in Congress Have "Lost Touch" With Party's Base...

Difference they are not in power, thus hold out hope, much like Democrats in the last two cycles.

difference is also that fivethirtyeight.com is respected and who's "weaselzippers" again?Here's a hint, kathianne, stay away from any wingnutter blog that tells you your party is out of power because of "RINO's". Your party is out of power because it was too extreme and excludes everyone but the wingiest of wingnuts and has taken to pandering to the wackos....allowing them a place at the table.

to put up a credible fight the repubs have to actually offer something.

they pin their hopes on continuing to undermine consumer confidence (intentionally); they pin their hopes on a continued drone of silliness... this issue being one more... in the hopes that if they throw enough at the wall it sticks.

and worst... worst... it appears that as a party the repubs have intentionally tried to make it so that they can't be worked with on any subject...not even this country's safety, because they'd rather see americans die, and maybe get back power, then act responsibly.

 

[Annie]

And Kath...

for the record, I don't have any particular affinity for Reid and there are a lot of people who would do better as SML

but... this is what sane, non-histerical, rational assessment looks like:



FiveThirtyEight: Politics Done Right: Senate Rankings, December 2009 Edition

The above may certainly be true for the majority of Democrats in US, but Nevada seems a bit different.

Not seeing how things are playing out, when even inroads are being made in MA of all places, , should be a cause for concern to those of your party.

Problems for the GOP? Plenty:

Weasel Zippers: Poll: 75% of GOP Voters Say Republicans in Congress Have "Lost Touch" With Party's Base...

Difference they are not in power, thus hold out hope, much like Democrats in the last two cycles.

difference is also that fivethirtyeight.com is respected and who's "weaselzippers" again?

to put up a credible fight the repubs have to actually offer something.

they pin their hopes on continuing to undermine consumer confidence (intentionally); they pin their hopes on a continued drone of silliness... this issue being one more... in the hopes that if they throw enough at the wall it sticks.

and worst... worst... it appears that as a party the repubs have intentionally tried to make it so that they can't be worked with on any subject...not even this country's safety, because they'd rather see americans die, and maybe get back power, then act responsibly.

Who is it that 'respects' your link? Oh yeah, you. Uh, you didn't read the link I sent? Your loss, as it was making a point regarding GOP that you were making, before going off on the rant about wanting Americans dead. BTW Jillian, you are sounding like the inverse of the right freaktoids of a few years ago, reminding me of when you advised them to take their meds.

 

[jillian]

The above may certainly be true for the majority of Democrats in US, but Nevada seems a bit different.

Not seeing how things are playing out, when even inroads are being made in MA of all places, , should be a cause for concern to those of your party.

Problems for the GOP? Plenty:

Weasel Zippers: Poll: 75% of GOP Voters Say Republicans in Congress Have "Lost Touch" With Party's Base...

Difference they are not in power, thus hold out hope, much like Democrats in the last two cycles.

difference is also that fivethirtyeight.com is respected and who's "weaselzippers" again?

to put up a credible fight the repubs have to actually offer something.

they pin their hopes on continuing to undermine consumer confidence (intentionally); they pin their hopes on a continued drone of silliness... this issue being one more... in the hopes that if they throw enough at the wall it sticks.

and worst... worst... it appears that as a party the repubs have intentionally tried to make it so that they can't be worked with on any subject...not even this country's safety, because they'd rather see americans die, and maybe get back power, then act responsibly.

Who is it that 'respects' your link? Oh yeah, you. Uh, you didn't read the link I sent? Your loss, as it was making a point regarding GOP that you were making, before going off on the rant about wanting Americans dead. BTW Jillian, you are sounding like the inverse of the right freaktoids of a few years ago, reminding me of when you advised them to take their meds.

you know, kath, you make silly comments like that every time you get your butt beat. lol..

i'll be sure to take your opinion under advisement.... not.

psssst... fivethirtyeight.com is a legitimate source. nate silver's proven himself.

you need to stop playing on the psycho sites. they're melting your brain.

 

[Annie]

difference is also that fivethirtyeight.com is respected and who's "weaselzippers" again?

to put up a credible fight the repubs have to actually offer something.

they pin their hopes on continuing to undermine consumer confidence (intentionally); they pin their hopes on a continued drone of silliness... this issue being one more... in the hopes that if they throw enough at the wall it sticks.

and worst... worst... it appears that as a party the repubs have intentionally tried to make it so that they can't be worked with on any subject...not even this country's safety, because they'd rather see americans die, and maybe get back power, then act responsibly.

Who is it that 'respects' your link? Oh yeah, you. Uh, you didn't read the link I sent? Your loss, as it was making a point regarding GOP that you were making, before going off on the rant about wanting Americans dead. BTW Jillian, you are sounding like the inverse of the right freaktoids of a few years ago, reminding me of when you advised them to take their meds.

you know, kath, you make silly comments like that every time you get your butt beat. lol..

i'll be sure to take your opinion under advisement.... not.

psssst... fivethirtyeight.com is a legitimate source. nate silver's proven himself.

you need to stop playing on the psycho sites. they're melting your brain.

Check mirror. You are melting down and it's rather annoying how you have crossed the nutwing line. I liked you better in the minority party, you made sense then.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

So true..they never hold their own to the same standard as they hold everyone else. Perfect example...Senator Byrd Democrat a confirmed member of the Ku Klux Klan...is forgiven.

Robert Byrd is not in the KKK.

Was he?

 

[NYcarbineer]

So true..they never hold their own to the same standard as they hold everyone else. Perfect example...Senator Byrd Democrat a confirmed member of the Ku Klux Klan...is forgiven.

Robert Byrd is not in the KKK.

Was he?

Yes and he renounced it and denounced them, several decades ago.

 

[NYcarbineer]

yeah, there's nothing hypocritical about Harry.

That has nothing to do with the classic rightwing hypocrisy occurring here.

spare me the bullshit. when's harry resigning?

he's obviously no more fit to hold office than lott was and the "mom, the other kid started it" meme is getting moth eaten.

Name the conservatives who called for Lott to resign in 2002. I'm open to being shown that the right is being consistent on this.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

Robert Byrd is not in the KKK.

Was he?

Yes and he renounced it and denounced them, several decades ago.

He was a high official in the organization. He basically used them when they were useful, dumped them when they were not, kicked them when it became expedient.
I see no real change in his views over time, or his morals. Just his use of tools.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Was he?

Yes and he renounced it and denounced them, several decades ago.

He was a high official in the organization. He basically used them when they were useful, dumped them when they were not, kicked them when it became expedient.
I see no real change in his views over time, or his morals. Just his use of tools.

Really? When is the latest date you have evidence of Byrd comprehensively endorsing the 'platform' of the KKK?

 

[Annie]

That has nothing to do with the classic rightwing hypocrisy occurring here.

spare me the bullshit. when's harry resigning?

he's obviously no more fit to hold office than lott was and the "mom, the other kid started it" meme is getting moth eaten.

Name the conservatives who called for Lott to resign in 2002. I'm open to being shown that the right is being consistent on this.

I know I did, but seems the archives here are missing 2002. Here's a pretty well known 'Conservative' that did though:

Charles Krauthammer : Trent Lott must resign - Townhall.com

Thursday, December 12, 2002
Trent Lott must resign
by Charles Krauthammer

``I want to say this about my state: When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either.'' --Trent Lott at Strom Thurmond's 100th birthday party. WASHINGTON--Trent Lott must resign as Senate majority leader. It's not just that no one who has said this can lead an American political party. It's that no one who could say something like this should be an American leader. It is a pity that a long and distinguished career such as Lott's should come to this. But there is nothing you can do to Lott's statement--turn it, twist it, flip it, spin it--to make it any less appalling. It was not ``a poor choice of words," as he later pleaded. It was a perfectly clear choice of words articulating a perfectly clear idea. Had Lott stopped with Thurmond-for-president, 1948, this might have been written off as idle and presumably insincere birthday flattery for a very, very old man. But Lott did not stop there. He added, fatally, that America would have been better off had it embraced Dixiecrat segregation. With that, Lott cut off any retreat...

Another:

FTN 12/15/02 - Face The Nation - CBS News

...Well, after hearing that, we go now to the people who've come here to talk about it. Joining us in the studio, William Bennett. Wade Henderson is here in the studio. From Atlanta, professor Merle Black, and in New York, Rich Lowry. We're going to begin with Mr. Bennett.

Well, in light of what you just heard Senator Nickles told me this morning, Mr. Bennett, can Trent Lott survive as majority leader? Should he survive?

WILLIAM BENNETT Former Education Secretary: I don't think he can, I don't think he will, and I don't think he should.

As I said last week, Trent Lott has to explain the statement he made earlier at the Strom Thurmond birthday party, give a satisfactory, an innocent explanation, or he needs to resign his leadership. He's apologized any number of times, but he has not explained what he meant by that statement.

I think the plain meaning of that statement was deeply offensive to almost all Americans. And, therefore, I think Senator Lott should step down.

I don't think Senator Lott is a racist. I think that this country has changed a great deal since the time he was talking about. But both on grounds of principle and politics, Senator Lott should relinquish his leadership position...

 

[garyd]

Jillian neither side in truth is squeaky clean but there is more than enough hypocrisy to go around.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

Yes and he renounced it and denounced them, several decades ago.

He was a high official in the organization. He basically used them when they were useful, dumped them when they were not, kicked them when it became expedient.
I see no real change in his views over time, or his morals. Just his use of tools.

Really? When is the latest date you have evidence of Byrd comprehensively endorsing the 'platform' of the KKK?

Seeing as the outfit was a semi secret terrorist organization, I really doubt such a statement would exist. But seeing as how he was an officer in that organization responsible for policy of said semi secret terrorist organization, I think he would be in favor of the policies he was responsible for formulating.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Ummmmmmm... Lott didn't leave because of his stupid comments...

Lott left so he could go make money:

Republican sources close to Lott said one reason for Lott's decision to resign is the new lobbying restrictions on former lawmakers.

A law kicks in on January 1 that forbids lawmakers from lobbying for two years after leaving office. Those who leave by the end of 2007 are covered by the previous law, which demands a wait of only one year.

"He wants to go make a living; he has no money," a GOP source said. "He'll be acting as a lobbyist and political adviser."

The source also said Lott wanted to leave now so that the person appointed to replace him would have almost a year in the Senate before facing the voters during the elections in November 2008.

Senate's No. 2 Republican to resign by end of year - CNN.com

Even Fox's valentine to Trent didn't say anything along the lines you're alleging:

Trent Lott Resigns From U.S. Senate After Nearly Two Decades of Service - Politics | Republican Party | Democratic Party | Political Spectrum - FOXNews.com

I really hate revisionist history.

I thought he resigned in '02?

Yer link even says so:

Lott, 66, served as Senate majority leader when Republicans controlled that body but was pushed out of the leadership post after he told a 2002 birthday gathering for former Sen. Strom Thurmond that the country would have avoided "all these problems" if Thurmond's 1948 segregationist presidential bid had succeeded.

Lott later apologized for his "poor choice of words."

Yer link even says he was pushed out. Or forced to resign, or however you want to put it.

Well, according to Lott in December of 2002:

LOTT: No senator has spoken to me about the possibility of me stepping down directly, publicly or privately; certainly not any Republican senator. A lot of senators have called to say they're -- frankly, they're praying for me, to offer suggestions and ideas of what we can do to, you know, have something positive come out of all of this.

CNN.com - Lott: Segregation and racism are immoral - Dec. 13, 2002

 

[Annie]

Ummmmmmm... Lott didn't leave because of his stupid comments...

Lott left so he could go make money:



Senate's No. 2 Republican to resign by end of year - CNN.com

Even Fox's valentine to Trent didn't say anything along the lines you're alleging:

Trent Lott Resigns From U.S. Senate After Nearly Two Decades of Service - Politics | Republican Party | Democratic Party | Political Spectrum - FOXNews.com

I really hate revisionist history.

I thought he resigned in '02?

Yer link even says so:

Lott, 66, served as Senate majority leader when Republicans controlled that body but was pushed out of the leadership post after he told a 2002 birthday gathering for former Sen. Strom Thurmond that the country would have avoided "all these problems" if Thurmond's 1948 segregationist presidential bid had succeeded.

Lott later apologized for his "poor choice of words."

Yer link even says he was pushed out. Or forced to resign, or however you want to put it.

Well, according to Lott in December of 2002:

LOTT: No senator has spoken to me about the possibility of me stepping down directly, publicly or privately; certainly not any Republican senator. A lot of senators have called to say they're -- frankly, they're praying for me, to offer suggestions and ideas of what we can do to, you know, have something positive come out of all of this.

CNN.com - Lott: Segregation and racism are immoral - Dec. 13, 2002

A week later:

CNN.com - Lott steps down as majority leader - Dec. 20, 2002

Lott steps down as majority leader
Frist likely to take Lott's place

WASHINGTON (CNN) --Wounded by the political firestorm over his comments criticized by many as racially divisive, Sen. Trent Lott announced Friday he was stepping down as Republican leader in the Senate.

Sen. Bill Frist, R-Tennessee, appears to have enough votes to replace Lott, who had been under increasing pressure to step aside because of the furor, which Republicans feared would distract from their congressional agenda and undermine efforts to reach out to minority voters.

A CNN tally of public commitments from Republican senators found that Frist has the support of more than 26 colleagues -- enough to elect him majority leader. Sources said that Senate Republicans would have a conference call Monday to vote on a new leader -- moving up a meeting that had been scheduled previously for January 6.

...

 

[NYcarbineer]

I thought he resigned in '02?

Yer link even says so:



Yer link even says he was pushed out. Or forced to resign, or however you want to put it.

Well, according to Lott in December of 2002:

LOTT: No senator has spoken to me about the possibility of me stepping down directly, publicly or privately; certainly not any Republican senator. A lot of senators have called to say they're -- frankly, they're praying for me, to offer suggestions and ideas of what we can do to, you know, have something positive come out of all of this.

CNN.com - Lott: Segregation and racism are immoral - Dec. 13, 2002

A week later:

CNN.com - Lott steps down as majority leader - Dec. 20, 2002

Lott steps down as majority leader
Frist likely to take Lott's place

WASHINGTON (CNN) --Wounded by the political firestorm over his comments criticized by many as racially divisive, Sen. Trent Lott announced Friday he was stepping down as Republican leader in the Senate.

Sen. Bill Frist, R-Tennessee, appears to have enough votes to replace Lott, who had been under increasing pressure to step aside because of the furor, which Republicans feared would distract from their congressional agenda and undermine efforts to reach out to minority voters.

A CNN tally of public commitments from Republican senators found that Frist has the support of more than 26 colleagues -- enough to elect him majority leader. Sources said that Senate Republicans would have a conference call Monday to vote on a new leader -- moving up a meeting that had been scheduled previously for January 6.

...

Ok, so who forced Lott to resign?

 

[garyd]

He got voted out or would have had he not resigned. That good enough for you?

 

[Annie]

He got voted out or would have had he not resigned. That good enough for you?

Untrue and where was the pressure from?