Hoffman primed for dominant victory

[PoliticalChic]

Are you serious???? After first endorsing Scozzafava?? And with Hoffman not being a member of the GOP, what does this really say about the GOP itself?

Your tone, as usual is abrasive. Be careful, as you reap what you sow.

I understand how fearful you must be as Obama agenda slips in popularity, and what it will mean to your hopes for a leftist-country, but try to be more adult in your posts.

"..what does this really say about the GOP itself..."
It says that those of you who predicted the dimise of the Republicans after the last election were voicing a hope, but not a reality.

It says that the Republican Party may once again consider the 40% of the electorate that are self-identified as conservative.

Since it has been previously explained to you the reasons why Hoffman ran as an intependent, your post comes off more as a polemic than a reaction.

As with "saveliberty", YOU need to better understand the people of whom you speak, BEFORE you speak. Your assumption of me being a "leftist" is so off the mark, it makes you look like a fool to those who do know me. So, heed your own advice and be careful of what you sow.

If not a leftist, a boor.

If I misspoke as to your political bent, it is because of how frequently those on the left use the kind of inarticulate invective or ad hominem attack to which you are prone, and how easily you slip into that school-yard level of discourse.

In a very few posts today, you have referred to your colleagues as "dumbass," "sparky,' or "asshole."

Try to remember you are in public, not communicating with your family members.

 

[VaYank5150]

Your tone, as usual is abrasive. Be careful, as you reap what you sow.

I understand how fearful you must be as Obama agenda slips in popularity, and what it will mean to your hopes for a leftist-country, but try to be more adult in your posts.

"..what does this really say about the GOP itself..."
It says that those of you who predicted the dimise of the Republicans after the last election were voicing a hope, but not a reality.

It says that the Republican Party may once again consider the 40% of the electorate that are self-identified as conservative.

Since it has been previously explained to you the reasons why Hoffman ran as an intependent, your post comes off more as a polemic than a reaction.

As with "saveliberty", YOU need to better understand the people of whom you speak, BEFORE you speak. Your assumption of me being a "leftist" is so off the mark, it makes you look like a fool to those who do know me. So, heed your own advice and be careful of what you sow.

If not a leftist, a boor.

If I misspoke as to your political bent, it is because of how frequently those on the left use the kind of inarticulate invective or ad hominem attack to which you are prone, and how easily you slip into that school-yard level of discourse.

In a very few posts today, you have referred to your colleagues as "dumbass," "sparky,' or "asshole."

Try to remember you are in public, not communicating with your family members.

You may not agree with, or even appreciate the language in which I use to stress my points, and that is your perogative. However, if you choose to ignore the points I am trying to make, then that is all I need to know about you.

 

[PoliticalChic]

As with "saveliberty", YOU need to better understand the people of whom you speak, BEFORE you speak. Your assumption of me being a "leftist" is so off the mark, it makes you look like a fool to those who do know me. So, heed your own advice and be careful of what you sow.

If not a leftist, a boor.

If I misspoke as to your political bent, it is because of how frequently those on the left use the kind of inarticulate invective or ad hominem attack to which you are prone, and how easily you slip into that school-yard level of discourse.

In a very few posts today, you have referred to your colleagues as "dumbass," "sparky,' or "asshole."

Try to remember you are in public, not communicating with your family members.

You may not agree with, or even appreciate the language in which I use to stress my points, and that is your perogative. However, if you choose to ignore the points I am trying to make, then that is all I need to know about you.

Aside from the poor use of language, it appered to me that you were asking questions, and suggesting that they represented some point of view, re: why didn't the GOP claim Hoffman as one of their own at first, and then do so later.

I believe that I answered that: a local leader selected Scozzafava rather than hold a primary. And Newt and Steele chose local party over leadership.

So?


I appreciate the change in tone.

 

[VaYank5150]

If not a leftist, a boor.

If I misspoke as to your political bent, it is because of how frequently those on the left use the kind of inarticulate invective or ad hominem attack to which you are prone, and how easily you slip into that school-yard level of discourse.

In a very few posts today, you have referred to your colleagues as "dumbass," "sparky,' or "asshole."

Try to remember you are in public, not communicating with your family members.

You may not agree with, or even appreciate the language in which I use to stress my points, and that is your perogative. However, if you choose to ignore the points I am trying to make, then that is all I need to know about you.

Aside from the poor use of language, it appered to me that you were asking questions, and suggesting that they represented some point of view, re: why didn't the GOP claim Hoffman as one of their own at first, and then do so later.

I believe that I answered that: a local leader selected Scozzafava rather than hold a primary. And Newt and Steele chose local party over leadership.

So?


I appreciate the change in tone.

So? For people like me, who voted for Obama because we were abandoned by the GOP, this type of political hackery is not going to get any of us back. Why does the GOP continue to alienate people by playing these political games? Did they learn NOTHING in 2006 or 2008?

 

[PoliticalChic]

You may not agree with, or even appreciate the language in which I use to stress my points, and that is your perogative. However, if you choose to ignore the points I am trying to make, then that is all I need to know about you.

Aside from the poor use of language, it appered to me that you were asking questions, and suggesting that they represented some point of view, re: why didn't the GOP claim Hoffman as one of their own at first, and then do so later.

I believe that I answered that: a local leader selected Scozzafava rather than hold a primary. And Newt and Steele chose local party over leadership.

So?


I appreciate the change in tone.

So? For people like me, who voted for Obama because we were abandoned by the GOP, this type of political hackery is not going to get any of us back. Why does the GOP continue to alienate people by playing these political games? Did they learn NOTHING in 2006 or 2008?

It seems they learn slowly.

As does the electorate.

If the electorate can make the point Tuesday, in your state and in mine, and in Jersey as well- and maybe the Atlanta election, perhaps we will see some reevaluation by the pols.

The problem in this game is that we always seem to have to choose between the lesser of two evils.

 

[VaYank5150]

Aside from the poor use of language, it appered to me that you were asking questions, and suggesting that they represented some point of view, re: why didn't the GOP claim Hoffman as one of their own at first, and then do so later.

I believe that I answered that: a local leader selected Scozzafava rather than hold a primary. And Newt and Steele chose local party over leadership.

So?


I appreciate the change in tone.

So? For people like me, who voted for Obama because we were abandoned by the GOP, this type of political hackery is not going to get any of us back. Why does the GOP continue to alienate people by playing these political games? Did they learn NOTHING in 2006 or 2008?

It seems they learn slowly.

As does the electorate.

If the electorate can make the point Tuesday, in your state and in mine, and in Jersey as well- and maybe the Atlanta election, perhaps we will see some reevaluation by the pols.

The problem in this game is that we always seem to have to choose between the lesser of two evils.

Bob McDonnell SHOULD win comfortably here in Virginia. Not because he has good ideas, but because his Democratic opponent has NO ideas.

 

[ayiakri]

The only way the D's had a chance was to split the vote. The district has been GOP held for 20 years. The only D's to hold the seat were redistricted to other seats. Too bad the GOP didn't totally self destruct, but cest la vie.

I thought I read that it's been a Republican-held seat for close to a century?

For the Dems, this is a wash - it was a "safe" GOP seat before, which is one reason Obama picked the previous occupant for an appointed post, since he assumed it wouldn't change hands.

And so it hasn't - and the Democrats have better than a 60% majority in the house, enough to pretty much ignore most of what the Republicans think or say, which suits me fine for now. I hope the win by Hoffman (assuming he does win - polls are going to be iffy with all the variables in this thing) encourages other parts of the GOP to self-immolate.

Most districts in the country don't have a strong Conservative Party presence, so when they pick far-right social conservatives in their primaries (encouraged by this race), they'll lose more than they would have otherwise.

If the Democrats can keep their losses to less than 25 seats in the House, and 5 seats in the Senate, I'll be content. They (Dems) will still have solid majorities in both houses, a majority of state Governorships, and the Presidency, through 2012 at least.

Time enough to undo some of the incredible damage done by Bush & Cheney to the country.

 

[saveliberty]

I like these comments VaYank5150 and PoliticalGirl much better conversation and points.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Scozzafaza represents everything that is currently wrong with the Republican Party. These people really are absolute frauds in the end. These kinds of people see the Democrats winning all these recent Elections and immediately begin looking for ways to associate themselves with them. Arlen Specter did this same thing. Mere opportunists and cowards in the end. Look for that weasel Lindsey Graham to do something similar in the future. However if the Democrats do begin to lose Elections,i'm sure frauds like Lindsey Graham might reconsider that strategy. Ironically,losing all these recent Elections might actually be the thing that saves the Republican Party in the end. It really is a good way to weed out the phonies and cowards. Lets hope the Republicans begin to make some real changes.

 

[Polk]

So, is Hoffman a Republican or an Independent?

A conservative independent, who will caucus with Republicans and be one of the more conservative members of that caucus. From what I have read, apparently the New York Republican Party mistakenly feared that Obama's popularity would get the Dem candidate elected so they appointed Scozzafava, whose policy positions make her seem more like a moderate to liberal Dem than a Republican, to run for the seat, but Republican voters, denied a primary vote, flocked to Hoffman, 71%, along with 52% of independents and even 21% of Dems, to Scozzafava's 10% of Dems. While most pundits are focusing on what this means to how conservative the Republican Party is going to be, I think the most significant number is the 52% of independents who are choosing a Tea Party supported conservative over a moderate Republican and a liberal Dem.

By itself, this race may mean little, but the latest polls show Christie's lead over Corzine is increasing as the election grows nearer, despite the WH's all out campaign effort on behalf of Corzine and despite Corzine massively outspending Christie with $30 million of his personal fortune on negative advertising in the last few weeks. If conservatives sweep tomorrow's elections, all in areas Obama carried a year ago, it will likely make Congressional Dems, especially those newly elected in 2006 and 2008, wonder if supporting Obama's positions on climate change, health insurance, financial regulation, national security, etc., will help them or hurt them in the 2010 elections, and these concerns could be reflected in how they vote on these issues now.

The idea that Scozzafava is a liberal is something the right-wing blogosphere has drummed up, but it's totally disconnected from reality. During her time in the state legislature, she had one of the most conservative voting records in the chamber and her voting record was more conservative than the average Republican in the body.

 

[toomuchtime_]

So, is Hoffman a Republican or an Independent?

A conservative independent, who will caucus with Republicans and be one of the more conservative members of that caucus. From what I have read, apparently the New York Republican Party mistakenly feared that Obama's popularity would get the Dem candidate elected so they appointed Scozzafava, whose policy positions make her seem more like a moderate to liberal Dem than a Republican, to run for the seat, but Republican voters, denied a primary vote, flocked to Hoffman, 71%, along with 52% of independents and even 21% of Dems, to Scozzafava's 10% of Dems. While most pundits are focusing on what this means to how conservative the Republican Party is going to be, I think the most significant number is the 52% of independents who are choosing a Tea Party supported conservative over a moderate Republican and a liberal Dem.

By itself, this race may mean little, but the latest polls show Christie's lead over Corzine is increasing as the election grows nearer, despite the WH's all out campaign effort on behalf of Corzine and despite Corzine massively outspending Christie with $30 million of his personal fortune on negative advertising in the last few weeks. If conservatives sweep tomorrow's elections, all in areas Obama carried a year ago, it will likely make Congressional Dems, especially those newly elected in 2006 and 2008, wonder if supporting Obama's positions on climate change, health insurance, financial regulation, national security, etc., will help them or hurt them in the 2010 elections, and these concerns could be reflected in how they vote on these issues now.

The idea that Scozzafava is a liberal is something the right-wing blogosphere has drummed up, but it's totally disconnected from reality. During her time in the state legislature, she had one of the most conservative voting records in the chamber and her voting record was more conservative than the average Republican in the body.

From what I can see, with the single exception of her stand on gun laws, Scozzafava is firmly in the moderate to liberal category. She is pro choice, pro gay marriage, with strong ratings from organized labor, 70% to 100% over the last ten years - her husband works for organized labor and has strong relationships with New York Dems - and some "progressive" groups. Is there anything besides her stand on gun laws that leads you to the conclusion she is "more conservative than the average Republican"?

 

[PoliticalChic]

The only way the D's had a chance was to split the vote. The district has been GOP held for 20 years. The only D's to hold the seat were redistricted to other seats. Too bad the GOP didn't totally self destruct, but cest la vie.

I thought I read that it's been a Republican-held seat for close to a century?

For the Dems, this is a wash - it was a "safe" GOP seat before, which is one reason Obama picked the previous occupant for an appointed post, since he assumed it wouldn't change hands.

And so it hasn't - and the Democrats have better than a 60% majority in the house, enough to pretty much ignore most of what the Republicans think or say, which suits me fine for now. I hope the win by Hoffman (assuming he does win - polls are going to be iffy with all the variables in this thing) encourages other parts of the GOP to self-immolate.

Most districts in the country don't have a strong Conservative Party presence, so when they pick far-right social conservatives in their primaries (encouraged by this race), they'll lose more than they would have otherwise.

If the Democrats can keep their losses to less than 25 seats in the House, and 5 seats in the Senate, I'll be content. They (Dems) will still have solid majorities in both houses, a majority of state Governorships, and the Presidency, through 2012 at least.

Time enough to undo some of the incredible damage done by Bush & Cheney to the country.

"...one reason Obama picked the previous occupant for an appointed post, since he assumed it wouldn't change hands."
Since you assume you can read the administration's intentions, let me do some reading.

They tapped the previous Congressman to leave the seat open for a Dem who would sweep into the position based on President Obama's presumed popularity. Should Owens lose, it would appear another misjudgement by the manchild administration.


"Time enough to undo some of the incredible damage done by Bush & Cheney to the country."
I must have missed them.
Would you be good enough to list a bunch of 'em?


"...Democrats have better than a 60% majority in the house, enough to pretty much ignore most of what the Republicans think or say, which suits me fine..."
Since this is the case, why do you suppose that the Democrats keep whining that they want Republican support?
Why the rhetoric that the Republicans are the party of 'no,' standing in the way of 'reform'?
I thought they had enough votes in Congress to pass anything.

Looks like you're battin' .1000.

 

[saveliberty]

So, is Hoffman a Republican or an Independent?

A conservative independent, who will caucus with Republicans and be one of the more conservative members of that caucus. From what I have read, apparently the New York Republican Party mistakenly feared that Obama's popularity would get the Dem candidate elected so they appointed Scozzafava, whose policy positions make her seem more like a moderate to liberal Dem than a Republican, to run for the seat, but Republican voters, denied a primary vote, flocked to Hoffman, 71%, along with 52% of independents and even 21% of Dems, to Scozzafava's 10% of Dems. While most pundits are focusing on what this means to how conservative the Republican Party is going to be, I think the most significant number is the 52% of independents who are choosing a Tea Party supported conservative over a moderate Republican and a liberal Dem.

By itself, this race may mean little, but the latest polls show Christie's lead over Corzine is increasing as the election grows nearer, despite the WH's all out campaign effort on behalf of Corzine and despite Corzine massively outspending Christie with $30 million of his personal fortune on negative advertising in the last few weeks. If conservatives sweep tomorrow's elections, all in areas Obama carried a year ago, it will likely make Congressional Dems, especially those newly elected in 2006 and 2008, wonder if supporting Obama's positions on climate change, health insurance, financial regulation, national security, etc., will help them or hurt them in the 2010 elections, and these concerns could be reflected in how they vote on these issues now.

The idea that Scozzafava is a liberal is something the right-wing blogosphere has drummed up, but it's totally disconnected from reality. During her time in the state legislature, she had one of the most conservative voting records in the chamber and her voting record was more conservative than the average Republican in the body.

CQ Politics | Special Election Candidate Squeezed From Both Sides

"Pence declined to comment on the race, but sources said a small group of conservatives share his belief that her views on abortion and gay marriage make her incompatible with the core principles of the party."

Scozzafava leads poll; plurality undecided | AdirondackDailyEnterprise.com | News, Sports, Jobs, Saranac Lake region — Adirondack Daily Enterprise

"Scozzafava supports gay marriage and is pro-choice, which is one of the reasons Conservative Party figures gave for endorsing Hoffman."

Special Election Candidate Squeezed From Both Sides - Yahoo! News

"They have balked at Scozzafava's moderate stances on social issues, her ties to organized labor -- she has run jointly on the Republican and labor-backed Working Families Party lines while in the Assembly -- and her support, albeit qualified, for the economic stimulus package and the 2008-2009 state budget. In response, the state Conservative Party, which tends to endorse the GOP's slate of candidates, opted to field its own candidate, Hoffman, whom Republicans passed over to tap Scozzafava."

 

[Oldandtired]

So, is Hoffman a Republican or an Independent?

A conservative independent, who will caucus with Republicans and be one of the more conservative members of that caucus. From what I have read, apparently the New York Republican Party mistakenly feared that Obama's popularity would get the Dem candidate elected so they appointed Scozzafava, whose policy positions make her seem more like a moderate to liberal Dem than a Republican, to run for the seat, but Republican voters, denied a primary vote, flocked to Hoffman, 71%, along with 52% of independents and even 21% of Dems, to Scozzafava's 10% of Dems. While most pundits are focusing on what this means to how conservative the Republican Party is going to be, I think the most significant number is the 52% of independents who are choosing a Tea Party supported conservative over a moderate Republican and a liberal Dem.

By itself, this race may mean little, but the latest polls show Christie's lead over Corzine is increasing as the election grows nearer, despite the WH's all out campaign effort on behalf of Corzine and despite Corzine massively outspending Christie with $30 million of his personal fortune on negative advertising in the last few weeks. If conservatives sweep tomorrow's elections, all in areas Obama carried a year ago, it will likely make Congressional Dems, especially those newly elected in 2006 and 2008, wonder if supporting Obama's positions on climate change, health insurance, financial regulation, national security, etc., will help them or hurt them in the 2010 elections, and these concerns could be reflected in how they vote on these issues now.

The idea that Scozzafava is a liberal is something the right-wing blogosphere has drummed up, but it's totally disconnected from reality. During her time in the state legislature, she had one of the most conservative voting records in the chamber and her voting record was more conservative than the average Republican in the body.

Not what I have heard, seen and experienced....please offer me some back up to that cliam.

She has, and has had a very liberal view on most "controversial" topics.....so I would like to see how she has acted otherwise.
Thanks.

 

[Oldandtired]

A conservative independent, who will caucus with Republicans and be one of the more conservative members of that caucus. From what I have read, apparently the New York Republican Party mistakenly feared that Obama's popularity would get the Dem candidate elected so they appointed Scozzafava, whose policy positions make her seem more like a moderate to liberal Dem than a Republican, to run for the seat, but Republican voters, denied a primary vote, flocked to Hoffman, 71%, along with 52% of independents and even 21% of Dems, to Scozzafava's 10% of Dems. While most pundits are focusing on what this means to how conservative the Republican Party is going to be, I think the most significant number is the 52% of independents who are choosing a Tea Party supported conservative over a moderate Republican and a liberal Dem.

By itself, this race may mean little, but the latest polls show Christie's lead over Corzine is increasing as the election grows nearer, despite the WH's all out campaign effort on behalf of Corzine and despite Corzine massively outspending Christie with $30 million of his personal fortune on negative advertising in the last few weeks. If conservatives sweep tomorrow's elections, all in areas Obama carried a year ago, it will likely make Congressional Dems, especially those newly elected in 2006 and 2008, wonder if supporting Obama's positions on climate change, health insurance, financial regulation, national security, etc., will help them or hurt them in the 2010 elections, and these concerns could be reflected in how they vote on these issues now.

The idea that Scozzafava is a liberal is something the right-wing blogosphere has drummed up, but it's totally disconnected from reality. During her time in the state legislature, she had one of the most conservative voting records in the chamber and her voting record was more conservative than the average Republican in the body.

CQ Politics | Special Election Candidate Squeezed From Both Sides

"Pence declined to comment on the race, but sources said a small group of conservatives share his belief that her views on abortion and gay marriage make her incompatible with the core principles of the party."

Scozzafava leads poll; plurality undecided | AdirondackDailyEnterprise.com | News, Sports, Jobs, Saranac Lake region — Adirondack Daily Enterprise

"Scozzafava supports gay marriage and is pro-choice, which is one of the reasons Conservative Party figures gave for endorsing Hoffman."

Special Election Candidate Squeezed From Both Sides - Yahoo! News

"They have balked at Scozzafava's moderate stances on social issues, her ties to organized labor -- she has run jointly on the Republican and labor-backed Working Families Party lines while in the Assembly -- and her support, albeit qualified, for the economic stimulus package and the 2008-2009 state budget. In response, the state Conservative Party, which tends to endorse the GOP's slate of candidates, opted to field its own candidate, Hoffman, whom Republicans passed over to tap Scozzafava."

Oh...so in other words Polk just made that whole thing up so he can once again attack the "right wing"....implying conspiracy and rhetoric.
Thought so.

 

[Polk]

A conservative independent, who will caucus with Republicans and be one of the more conservative members of that caucus. From what I have read, apparently the New York Republican Party mistakenly feared that Obama's popularity would get the Dem candidate elected so they appointed Scozzafava, whose policy positions make her seem more like a moderate to liberal Dem than a Republican, to run for the seat, but Republican voters, denied a primary vote, flocked to Hoffman, 71%, along with 52% of independents and even 21% of Dems, to Scozzafava's 10% of Dems. While most pundits are focusing on what this means to how conservative the Republican Party is going to be, I think the most significant number is the 52% of independents who are choosing a Tea Party supported conservative over a moderate Republican and a liberal Dem.

By itself, this race may mean little, but the latest polls show Christie's lead over Corzine is increasing as the election grows nearer, despite the WH's all out campaign effort on behalf of Corzine and despite Corzine massively outspending Christie with $30 million of his personal fortune on negative advertising in the last few weeks. If conservatives sweep tomorrow's elections, all in areas Obama carried a year ago, it will likely make Congressional Dems, especially those newly elected in 2006 and 2008, wonder if supporting Obama's positions on climate change, health insurance, financial regulation, national security, etc., will help them or hurt them in the 2010 elections, and these concerns could be reflected in how they vote on these issues now.

The idea that Scozzafava is a liberal is something the right-wing blogosphere has drummed up, but it's totally disconnected from reality. During her time in the state legislature, she had one of the most conservative voting records in the chamber and her voting record was more conservative than the average Republican in the body.

From what I can see, with the single exception of her stand on gun laws, Scozzafava is firmly in the moderate to liberal category. She is pro choice, pro gay marriage, with strong ratings from organized labor, 70% to 100% over the last ten years - her husband works for organized labor and has strong relationships with New York Dems - and some "progressive" groups. Is there anything besides her stand on gun laws that leads you to the conclusion she is "more conservative than the average Republican"?

She's a rank-and-file Republican on economic and foreign policy. Outside of gay marriage and abortion, she's a cookie-cutter conservative.

 

[saveliberty]

The idea that Scozzafava is a liberal is something the right-wing blogosphere has drummed up, but it's totally disconnected from reality. During her time in the state legislature, she had one of the most conservative voting records in the chamber and her voting record was more conservative than the average Republican in the body.

From what I can see, with the single exception of her stand on gun laws, Scozzafava is firmly in the moderate to liberal category. She is pro choice, pro gay marriage, with strong ratings from organized labor, 70% to 100% over the last ten years - her husband works for organized labor and has strong relationships with New York Dems - and some "progressive" groups. Is there anything besides her stand on gun laws that leads you to the conclusion she is "more conservative than the average Republican"?

She's a rank-and-file Republican on economic and foreign policy. Outside of gay marriage and abortion, she's a cookie-cutter conservative.

Yet firmly rejected by conservatives. So your theory is flawed. Agreeing with the stimulus package was an economic policy and not "cookie-cutter" conservative. I was unaware the NY assembly spent time on foreign policy issues. They vote on troop levels there often?

 

[toomuchtime_]

The idea that Scozzafava is a liberal is something the right-wing blogosphere has drummed up, but it's totally disconnected from reality. During her time in the state legislature, she had one of the most conservative voting records in the chamber and her voting record was more conservative than the average Republican in the body.

From what I can see, with the single exception of her stand on gun laws, Scozzafava is firmly in the moderate to liberal category. She is pro choice, pro gay marriage, with strong ratings from organized labor, 70% to 100% over the last ten years - her husband works for organized labor and has strong relationships with New York Dems - and some "progressive" groups. Is there anything besides her stand on gun laws that leads you to the conclusion she is "more conservative than the average Republican"?

She's a rank-and-file Republican on economic and foreign policy. Outside of gay marriage and abortion, she's a cookie-cutter conservative.

Republican 23rd CD candidate Dede Scozzafava has been endorsed by New York State United Teachers. They cite her support for school funding and her moderate stance on social issues as among the reasons.

Scozzafava is also a supporter of the proposed federal card-check legislation which would make it easier for companies to unionize — which is one of the reason the national/conservative Club for Growth is supporting her Conservative Party opponent, Doug Hoffman. (Scozzafava’s Assembly votes for gay marriage is also riling up conservatives although that has also doubtlessly drawn a fair amount of normally Democratic voters as well).

NYSUT President Richard C. Iannuzzi said Scozzafava had earned NYSUT’s support for her longstanding advocacy on behalf of public education and the rights of workers. “She is a moderate who has demonstrated, time and again, she understands the issues and is willing to take tough stands on behalf of working America,” Iannuzzi said. “We are confident she will continue to advocate in Congress for education, health care and issues important to working women and men.”

Lubin also noted that Scozzafava has voted in favor of legislation raising the minimum wage and in support of NYSUT bills on social justice issues.

NYSUT endorses Scozzafava - Capitol Confidential - New York Politics - timesunion.com - Albany NY

Which is what all conservative Republicans stand for in your opinion, apparently.

 

[Polk]

From what I can see, with the single exception of her stand on gun laws, Scozzafava is firmly in the moderate to liberal category. She is pro choice, pro gay marriage, with strong ratings from organized labor, 70% to 100% over the last ten years - her husband works for organized labor and has strong relationships with New York Dems - and some "progressive" groups. Is there anything besides her stand on gun laws that leads you to the conclusion she is "more conservative than the average Republican"?

She's a rank-and-file Republican on economic and foreign policy. Outside of gay marriage and abortion, she's a cookie-cutter conservative.

Yet firmly rejected by conservatives. So your theory is flawed. Agreeing with the stimulus package was an economic policy and not "cookie-cutter" conservative. I was unaware the NY assembly spent time on foreign policy issues. They vote on troop levels there often?

That she's rejected by the right doesn't change the facts of her positions. She didn't support the stimulus package. That is more blogosphere crap with no basis in reality.

 

[ayiakri]

The only way the D's had a chance was to split the vote. The district has been GOP held for 20 years. The only D's to hold the seat were redistricted to other seats. Too bad the GOP didn't totally self destruct, but cest la vie.

I thought I read that it's been a Republican-held seat for close to a century?

For the Dems, this is a wash - it was a "safe" GOP seat before, which is one reason Obama picked the previous occupant for an appointed post, since he assumed it wouldn't change hands.

And so it hasn't - and the Democrats have better than a 60% majority in the house, enough to pretty much ignore most of what the Republicans think or say, which suits me fine for now. I hope the win by Hoffman (assuming he does win - polls are going to be iffy with all the variables in this thing) encourages other parts of the GOP to self-immolate.

Most districts in the country don't have a strong Conservative Party presence, so when they pick far-right social conservatives in their primaries (encouraged by this race), they'll lose more than they would have otherwise.

If the Democrats can keep their losses to less than 25 seats in the House, and 5 seats in the Senate, I'll be content. They (Dems) will still have solid majorities in both houses, a majority of state Governorships, and the Presidency, through 2012 at least.

Time enough to undo some of the incredible damage done by Bush & Cheney to the country.

...

They tapped the previous Congressman to leave the seat open for a Dem who would sweep into the position based on President Obama's presumed popularity. Should Owens lose, it would appear another misjudgement by the manchild administration.

Sure - because that makes sense in a district that's been solidly Republican for about a century.

It appears you see no reason to apply a logic-filter to your idle speculation. Back when McHugh was appointed Secretary of the Army, there was absolutely no anticipation by Democrats that this was a likely "pick-up" for them - I'll assume you know how to use Google News in order to check that for yourself.

"Time enough to undo some of the incredible damage done by Bush & Cheney to the country."
I must have missed them.
Would you be good enough to list a bunch of 'em?

If you're insufficiently intelligent and observant to know of, or uderstand the damage done, I doubt providing a list here would do anything more than encourage you to indulge yourself in more attempts to reframe the discussion.

Obviously, more than half of voters last year decided that the Republican party had done enough damage to warrant entrusting the government to the hands of the opposition, despite Obama's lack of experience - either that, or maybe McCain just wasn't "conservative enough", lol

"...Democrats have better than a 60% majority in the house, enough to pretty much ignore most of what the Republicans think or say, which suits me fine..."
Since this is the case, why do you suppose that the Democrats keep whining that they want Republican support?
Why the rhetoric that the Republicans are the party of 'no,' standing in the way of 'reform'?
I thought they had enough votes in Congress to pass anything.

Looks like you're battin' .1000.

Well, if by your score I'm batting .1000 and by my score you're batting a flat zero, then I suppose I'll take that as a win ;-)

Again - it seems interesting, at least, that you're unable to answer your own questions, when the answers are pretty obvious. I'll help you out this once, though, since I'm feeling generous.

The Democrats, as a party, are more tolerant of diverse political views than the Republicans (currently) are. Hence, Lincoln Chaffee and Chuck Hagel being turfed out of their seats, and the exodus of the alleged "RINOs" from the party. Being the bigger tent means that their chances of winning a majority - in this case, very large majorities - is better than the chances of a smaller, narrower party winning control.

The downside, of course, is that Democrats are forced to engage in constant battles just to keep their own members in line - there are "blue dog" democrats, anti-abortion democrats, far-left liberal democrats, and formerly Republican Democrats, like Arlan Specter and Jim Webb. It's tough for them to get a consensus from their own party, and especially tough when some newly elected members are from districts that are nominally "conservative" - and those members want to have a few Republican votes on issues to cover their own asses in the mid-terms.

Plus, historically, large changes to the government (like the health-care reform bill now being pushed through) have lasted longer and done better when they passed with bipartisan support, even if it was only token. So, I think President Obama is hoping that a few Republican votes will both (a) ensure that the legislation isn't simply repealed when the Republicans eventually sort out their party, and win back control of congress in 2014 or 2016, and (b) having a few GOP votes gives him and "blue dog" Democrats some political cover in next year's mid-terms, and in the 2012 election.

It will be harder for Republicans to attack the President in 2012 on heath-care, if he can point to a couple of Republicans who also voted to support it.

Surely you aren't oblivious to all the political machinations at work in what our elected officials are doing? Although I think you clearly give President Obama waaaay too much credit for prescience - he could never have foreseen that the New York district's GOP party bosses would pick a "moderate" Republican, opening the way for a Conservative Party candidate, unless he truly is "the one", lol. And if you believe that, I've got a bridge I'd like to see you.