Spencer Bachus: "Sarah Palin Cost Us Control Of The Senate"

[Liability]

And the large strides taken by the GOP are properly credited TO the Tea Party movement. If it hadn't been for the Tea Party movement, the GOP strides in the Senate would likely have been much smaller or even non-existent.

I think you are completely misreading the election. The faltering economy secured the 08 election for Obama and the faltering economy secured the GOP an upset victory in the midterm. The tea party really had very little to do with it.

I think you misread both Elections. The faltering economy in '08 set the stage for the ass-clown nominated by the liberal Democratics. Against that weak-ass candidate, the GOP offered an even weaker candidate. Plus, voting for the black man was like a feel-good catharsis for Americans who are sick and tired of the fucking "race" card getting played so often.

But, now that President Obama has shown who he really is and what he has to "offer," the American Electorate are filled with Voters' Regret. If they could, they would vote to retract the '08 vote.

The Electorate does NOT care for the Socialist Agenda and the reckless irresponsible deficit spending of this Administration and the horrid out-going Congress. Indeed, they detest it.

That is the message. It was trumpeted rather well by the Tea Party movement. That's what motivated the voters to turn-out and vote out the worst of the lot. It resulted in a GOP House and major strides by the GOP in the Senate.

You liberals failed to read the warning signs. You persist in misreading the signals. They aren't exactly hidden, either. Your biases have distorted your ability to see things properly. And this means that you will probably continue to misread the signals. Good! Excellent! You will get thumped again in 2012.

 

[loosecannon]

I am not a librul, and I wasn't thumped last week, redneck inbred.

And it is the economy, stupid.

 

[Liability]

I am not a librul, and I wasn't thumped last week, redneck inbred.

And it is the economy, stupid.

Whether you are or are not a liberal is kind of beside the point.

If you are not a liberal, then you did not get thumped last week.

If you are not a liberal, you should be rejoicing.

And your last phrase might just qualify as a TOS violation, genius.

 

[Sheldon]

44 - GOP Rep. Bachus: 'Sarah Palin cost us control of the Senate'


By Emi Kolawole
Alabama Rep. Spencer Bachus (R) told members of the South Shelby Chamber of Commerce that former Alaska governor and vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin was probably the reason for the GOP's failure to take control in the U.S. Senate in last week's election.

"The Senate would be Republican today except for states (in which Palin endorsed candidates) like Christine O'Donnell in Delaware," Bachus said. "Sarah Palin cost us control of the Senate."

According to the Shelby County Reporter, Bachus made the remarks Nov. 4, at the local chamber's monthly luncheon meeting. But Bachus didn't stop with Palin, he also weighed in on Democrats continued accountability when it came to the power balance in Washington. "If you think Republicans are not in charge in Washington...," Bachus said. "Democrats are in control of the presidency and the Senate. It would take 67 votes to override any veto."
<more>

Parts of the right will start turning on Palin as 2012 approaches. She's not as well-liked as her apologists want to believe.

 

[Samson]

44 - GOP Rep. Bachus: 'Sarah Palin cost us control of the Senate'


By Emi Kolawole
Alabama Rep. Spencer Bachus (R) told members of the South Shelby Chamber of Commerce that former Alaska governor and vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin was probably the reason for the GOP's failure to take control in the U.S. Senate in last week's election.

"The Senate would be Republican today except for states (in which Palin endorsed candidates) like Christine O'Donnell in Delaware," Bachus said. "Sarah Palin cost us control of the Senate."

According to the Shelby County Reporter, Bachus made the remarks Nov. 4, at the local chamber's monthly luncheon meeting. But Bachus didn't stop with Palin, he also weighed in on Democrats continued accountability when it came to the power balance in Washington. "If you think Republicans are not in charge in Washington...," Bachus said. "Democrats are in control of the presidency and the Senate. It would take 67 votes to override any veto."
<more>

well, no question that if she hadn't back nutters in delaware, nevada and alaska, the repubs would have gotten the senate.

but it's not just sawwah's fault... the loons follow her. and, frankly, the normal repubs need to get out and vote during primaries so they don't have insane people representing them.

By "sane" I assume you mean like......

BOOOOOOOOOOooooooooOOOOOOOSH!!!??

 

[shintao]

Wow, talk about whining, pointing fingers, and blaming others for their woes............

Alabama Rep. Spencer Bachus (R) told members of the South Shelby Chamber of Commerce that former Alaska governor and vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin was probably the reason for the GOP's failure to take control in the U.S. Senate in last week's election.

"The Senate would be Republican today except for states (in which Palin endorsed candidates) like Christine O'Donnell in Delaware," Bachus said. "Sarah Palin cost us control of the Senate."

According to the Shelby County Reporter, Bachus made the remarks Nov. 4, at the local chamber's monthly luncheon meeting. But Bachus didn't stop with Palin, he also weighed in on Democrats continued accountability when it came to the power balance in Washington. "If you think Republicans are not in charge in Washington...," Bachus said. "Democrats are in control of the presidency and the Senate. It would take 67 votes to override any veto."

44 - GOP Rep. Bachus: 'Sarah Palin cost us control of the Senate' (Updated)

 

[geauxtohell]

Wow, talk about whining, pointing fingers, and blaming others for their woes............

Alabama Rep. Spencer Bachus (R) told members of the South Shelby Chamber of Commerce that former Alaska governor and vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin was probably the reason for the GOP's failure to take control in the U.S. Senate in last week's election.

"The Senate would be Republican today except for states (in which Palin endorsed candidates) like Christine O'Donnell in Delaware," Bachus said. "Sarah Palin cost us control of the Senate."

According to the Shelby County Reporter, Bachus made the remarks Nov. 4, at the local chamber's monthly luncheon meeting. But Bachus didn't stop with Palin, he also weighed in on Democrats continued accountability when it came to the power balance in Washington. "If you think Republicans are not in charge in Washington...," Bachus said. "Democrats are in control of the presidency and the Senate. It would take 67 votes to override any veto."

44 - GOP Rep. Bachus: 'Sarah Palin cost us control of the Senate' (Updated)

He's right, you know.

The presence of Sarah Palin and the election results is what we refer to as a "confounding effect".

The GOP made gains, because they convinced more of the middle third to vote for them.

The middle third, by all statistics, loathes Palin.

 

[Yeggo]

He's absolutely right, especially when it comes to Delaware. I got some pushback from the guy who runs Conservatives4Palin.com about this, but Christine O'Donnell BY HERSELF cost the GOP two seats - the Senate seat she lost, and the House seat the guy she beat in the primary had to vacate. Really cost them a huuuuuuge night.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Lame, very lame.

You claim the whole GOP whined about not getting the senate, but then only mention one dude.

Lame, come up with something better or at least don't start with a lie.

 

[elvis]

merged

 

[USArmyRetired]

It is this kind of backward thinking that cost Republicans control of the Senate in the first place. Sarah Palin did not cast a single vote in Delaware, Kentucky, Florida, Utah, Colorado or Nevada. Republican voters in those states did. The fact that the candidates “chosen” by the professional Republican class in D.C. failed to impress Republican Party voters enough to win their respective nominations should be a wake-up call for the D.C. Republican know-it-alls, who think they should choose the “right” candidate and the rest of America should just accept their omniscient judgment. The “chosen” candidate in Florida, whom Palin opposed, decided not only to pack up his ball and go home, but to completely abandon the Republican Party and effectively run as a Democrat. Perhaps that is why the voters who knew Charlie Crist best did not trust him, in spite of all the advantages of his governorship, name ID and money. The “chosen” candidate in Delaware lost to Christine O’Donnell, because the Republican base decided that while Mike Castle could get elected, it was a career-topping victory lap for him, and he was just a placeholder for Beau Biden. The voters who knew Mike Castle best decided that they did not want him. This rebellion by the masses against the Republican establishment is borne out by poll after poll showing that Republicans (rinos) are not held in particularly high esteem by the voters, even those who identify themselves as Republicans. Sarah Palin has captured this sentiment, and helped provide voters with choices through her endorsement of alternative candidates. Palin, who has personally felt the barbs and snickers of the Republican establishment, has given hope to Republicans across the nation that they don’t have to settle for Democrat-lite candidates who represent their values in party affiliation only. Unfortunately, those who want to blame Palin are missing the basic fact that if they identified and supported candidates who were strong advocates of the free-enterprise system rather than hollowed-out cores running in Republican suits, their candidates would have won. Our nation owes Sarah Palin and all of those who stepped out to change the status-quo Republican culture a gigantic thank-you. It took radical actions to beat the establishment.

 

[JimH52]

DUH! And she will cost the GOP to lose the WH in 2012. She is a gift that just won't stop giving.

 

[Stephanie]

DUH! And she will cost the GOP to lose the WH in 2012. She is a gift that just won't stop giving.

LOL, keep telling yourself that..

 

[Stephanie]

Bachus is a career Rino Gop and is just the kind of people that NEEDS to go.
as we see they are NOT going to go quietly. And neither is the Tea Party and Sarah Palin.

NO matter, as we went after and won a HISTORIC WIN of Republican seats this election, We are not going away.

Bachus is up for ReElection in 2012 foks...keep that in mind.

 

[mudwhistle]

44 - GOP Rep. Bachus: 'Sarah Palin cost us control of the Senate'


By Emi Kolawole
Alabama Rep. Spencer Bachus (R) told members of the South Shelby Chamber of Commerce that former Alaska governor and vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin was probably the reason for the GOP's failure to take control in the U.S. Senate in last week's election.

"The Senate would be Republican today except for states (in which Palin endorsed candidates) like Christine O'Donnell in Delaware," Bachus said. "Sarah Palin cost us control of the Senate."

According to the Shelby County Reporter, Bachus made the remarks Nov. 4, at the local chamber's monthly luncheon meeting. But Bachus didn't stop with Palin, he also weighed in on Democrats continued accountability when it came to the power balance in Washington. "If you think Republicans are not in charge in Washington...," Bachus said. "Democrats are in control of the presidency and the Senate. It would take 67 votes to override any veto."
<more>

Bachus was talking out of his ass.

The GOP establishment was responsible.....simply because they pulled their get out the vote support for O'Donnell and Angle insuring that we didn't have a majority in the Senate. I suspect it was to prevent Obama from using a GOP controlled congress as a whipping boy.

It's things like this that forces me not to trust ether side.

 

[Revere]

DUH! And she will cost the GOP to lose the WH in 2012. She is a gift that just won't stop giving.

Obama would have let McCain win otherwise?

 

[mudwhistle]

DUH! And she will cost the GOP to lose the WH in 2012. She is a gift that just won't stop giving.

So is Nancy Pelosi....and Harry Reid....and Barrack Obama.

 

[Mad Scientist]

"The Senate would be Republican today except for states (in which Palin endorsed candidates) like Christine O'Donnell in Delaware," Bachus said. "Sarah Palin cost us control of the Senate."

Well, the Presidency would be Republican if a RINO like John McCain hadn't ran.

The election is over, just deal with it. I hate that "what if" shit.

 

[Revere]

Two years ago these pukes were predicting Democrats would build on their majorities in the mid terms.

 

[American Horse]

44 - GOP Rep. Bachus: 'Sarah Palin cost us control of the Senate'


By Emi Kolawole
Alabama Rep. Spencer Bachus (R) told members of the South Shelby Chamber of Commerce that former Alaska governor and vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin was probably the reason for the GOP's failure to take control in the U.S. Senate in last week's election.

"The Senate would be Republican today except for states (in which Palin endorsed candidates) like Christine O'Donnell in Delaware," Bachus said. "Sarah Palin cost us control of the Senate."

According to the Shelby County Reporter, Bachus made the remarks Nov. 4, at the local chamber's monthly luncheon meeting. But Bachus didn't stop with Palin, he also weighed in on Democrats continued accountability when it came to the power balance in Washington. "If you think Republicans are not in charge in Washington...," Bachus said. "Democrats are in control of the presidency and the Senate. It would take 67 votes to override any veto."
<more>

With 23 Democrat senators due of for re-election in 2012, and with a number of those being in strong "red" states, the Republicans may well have, if not functional (i.e., committee chairs and subpoena power), then "ex officio" control of the Senate. The senate is now 51 Ds, 2 Inds, and 47 Rs. It looks like its a better deal for the Rs to have the Ds in control by name in the Senate. Especially by the name of Harry Reid. They, along with the president can be held to taking the blame for denying the house, from which all budget legislation must originate, the power which belongs to their elected representatives.

On the other hand, the senate/Reid, whose function is to "advise and consent", and approve treaties, can be held responsible, along with the president for the lack of advancing any new trade treaties which deny the export of American products, like for instance heaevy machinery, like Caterpillar Inc, a Manufacturer/Exporter/Importer in Peoria Illinois, in the president's home state, and where we now have a new R senator.

On the other hand, Having a bare majority in the senate would be a liability. We now have a foil,(two of them the senate and the president) and we will have greater opportunities for educating the public. And we will have subpoena power in the house to use as a tool to educate; not to bring charges against anyone but to haul these people in who will otherwise administer Obamacare and have them explain themselves, what their roles will be and how it is they think it will work. This amounts to education. There can't be real leadership without education.

Therein the opportunites lie for the Republicans.