Will the National GOP learn from Virginia?

[whitehall]

The Tea Party is a powerful pressure group in Republican politics and democrats will use any dirty trick in the book including recruiting and funding fake political candidates to syphon votes in a close race.

Sarvis pulled more from McAuliffe than he did from Cuccinelli, but hey, let's not let facts get in the way of your anti-democratic propaganda.

First off, it ignores data that the Libertarian pulled more votes from the Democratic candidate than he did from the Republican one—an exit poll of Sarvis voters showed that they would have voted for McAuliffe by a two-to-one margin over Cucinelli. Second, and far more important, it presumes that all potential votes somehow really “belong” to either Democrats or Republicans. That’s simply wrong and it does a real disservice to American politics.

Don't Blame Sarvis for the Cuccinelli Loss/McAuliffe Win in Virginia - Hit & Run : Reason.com

Where have you been, in a coma? The political process has always been conscious of the effect of 3rd party candidates. The fact that democrat candidates never count on votes from "libertarians" is not a "disservice" to the political process. It's a fact of life and both parties are well aware of it. Obviously the libertarian candidate syphoned votes only from the republican party. The question is whether the DNC secretly financed the libertarian campaign. The mainstream media isn't curious enough to investigate and republicans do not have the assistance of gigantic investigative (tax exempt) propaganda sources like Media Matters and it's clones. The second point is that the Tea Party is a powerful pressure group within the republican party and it is not likely to quit just because of the barrage of hate speech coming from the left.

 

[Pheonixops]

ROFL you are truly an idiot. Chris Christie got 20% of the black vote, not 80%.

When is the last time a republican received 20% of the "Black vote"? Christie has a "crossover" appeal in my opinion, why do you think he received that high of a percentage of the "black vote"?

20% of the black vote would be worthless in a national election. The risk is not worth the reward as far as outreach with blacks goes for Republicans.

Then why do so many republicans and conservatives complain about over "90% of "the Blacks voting democrat" in Presidential elections?

 

[Iceman]

When is the last time a republican received 20% of the "Black vote"? Christie has a "crossover" appeal in my opinion, why do you think he received that high of a percentage of the "black vote"?

20% of the black vote would be worthless in a national election. The risk is not worth the reward as far as outreach with blacks goes for Republicans.

Then why do so many republicans and conservatives complain about over "90% of "the Blacks voting democrat" in Presidential elections?

I think they complain about the entitlement culture in the black community. It isn't that blacks swing an election one way or another.

 

[thanatos144]

Black people who vote democrats are house *******

 

[RKMBrown]

20% of the black vote would be worthless in a national election. The risk is not worth the reward as far as outreach with blacks goes for Republicans.

Then why do so many republicans and conservatives complain about over "90% of "the Blacks voting democrat" in Presidential elections?

I think they complain about the entitlement culture in the black community. It isn't that blacks swing an election one way or another.

^ this... I could care less who they vote for, it's the theft of my income through re-distribution policies that anger me. What makes it worse is doing it in a way that has been proven through the centuries to fail. Hand-outs didn't work in the time or Rome and they still don't work.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The far right reactionaries, a small minority now in America, believe in a 1950s white entitlement culture.

 

[Redfish]

The far right reactionaries, a small minority now in America, believe in a 1950s white entitlement culture.

Nothing you post is true. Including this ^^^^^^.

What happened to you to fill you with so much hate? I really feel sorry for you because you seem like you have above average intelligence. But you destroy what credibility you might have when you post lies like the previous post.

If you want to be taken seriously, stop posting like a partisan hater.

 

[RKMBrown]

The far right reactionaries, a small minority now in America, believe in a 1950s white entitlement culture.

Nothing you post is true. Including this ^^^^^^.

What happened to you to fill you with so much hate? I really feel sorry for you because you seem like you have above average intelligence. But you destroy what credibility you might have when you post lies like the previous post.

If you want to be taken seriously, stop posting like a partisan hater.

He a POS Troll. I don't think I've seen him post anything but...

 

[Pheonixops]

20% of the black vote would be worthless in a national election. The risk is not worth the reward as far as outreach with blacks goes for Republicans.

Then why do so many republicans and conservatives complain about over "90% of "the Blacks voting democrat" in Presidential elections?

I think they complain about the entitlement culture in the black community. It isn't that blacks swing an election one way or another.

I think it would be better and more accurately stated as; " the entitlement culture that exists in a minority of the so-called black community.". That "entitlement culture" exists in a minority of the AMERICAN COMMUNITY.

 

[Pheonixops]

Black people who vote democrats are house *******

I don't know where you are going with that crap above. I'm sure you represent a minority of the conservative republican mindset, right?

 

[JakeStarkey]

The far right reactionaries, a small minority now in America, believe in a 1950s white entitlement culture.

Nothing you post is true. Including this ^^^^^^.

What happened to you to fill you with so much hate? I really feel sorry for you because you seem like you have above average intelligence. But you destroy what credibility you might have when you post lies like the previous post.

If you want to be taken seriously, stop posting like a partisan hater.

He a POS Troll. I don't think I've seen him post anything but...

The pos white reactionary entitlement TeaPoCraps are not mainstream.

They are extremists who will not serve our country in the American way

 

[Contumacious]

Nothing you post is true. Including this ^^^^^^.

What happened to you to fill you with so much hate? I really feel sorry for you because you seem like you have above average intelligence. But you destroy what credibility you might have when you post lies like the previous post.

If you want to be taken seriously, stop posting like a partisan hater.

He a POS Troll. I don't think I've seen him post anything but...

The pos white reactionary entitlement TeaPoCraps are not mainstream.

They are extremists who will not serve our country in the American way

in the American way......in the American way........hummmmmmm

Is that where half the population feeds and insures the other?


.

 

[thanatos144]

Black people who vote democrats are house *******

I don't know where you are going with that crap above. I'm sure you represent a minority of the conservative republican mindset, right?

They are the slave masters and klu Klux Klan wizards.

 

[JoeB131]

No. They will continue to pursue supply side economics when the problem is consumer demand (which they wrongly believes trickles down by making the rich richer)

The government boosted consumer demand for 30 years, during which we had our greatest economic growth. Then, we took everything government did for the middle class and replaced it with credit (debt). This worked for a little while, but now the consumer is too indebted to consume . . . game over.

How gullible are you?

How about refuting his point?

We had our greatest prosperity when we had a vibrant, unionized middle class, and the wealthy paid their fair share.

 

[thanatos144]

No. They will continue to pursue supply side economics when the problem is consumer demand (which they wrongly believes trickles down by making the rich richer)

The government boosted consumer demand for 30 years, during which we had our greatest economic growth. Then, we took everything government did for the middle class and replaced it with credit (debt). This worked for a little while, but now the consumer is too indebted to consume . . . game over.

How gullible are you?

How about refuting his point?

We had our greatest prosperity when we had a vibrant, unionized middle class, and the wealthy paid their fair share.

Except we didn't . All our economic prosperity happens in the brief periods of when we don't use socialism

tapatalk post

 

[JoeB131]

How gullible are you?

How about refuting his point?

We had our greatest prosperity when we had a vibrant, unionized middle class, and the wealthy paid their fair share.

Except we didn't . All our economic prosperity happens in the brief periods of when we don't use socialism

tapatalk post

Guy, put down the Obamaphone and get to a computer where you can actually do some research.

Or better yet, read a book.

Greatest period of American Prosperity- 1945-1975.

Full employment
Burgeoning middle class.
High Taxes on the Rich.
33% of the work force unionized.
Moms could stay home if they wanted.
Built hiways and put men in space and even fought a pointless war or two.

 

[Pheonixops]

Interesting article that points out the utter BULLSHIT some republican conservatives were and are spewing about Sarvis.

"Am I an Obama puppet or am I a GOP puppet? I tend to think neither," he told U.S. News on Wednesday. "The GOP had a concerted effort to misrepresent my policy positions [and] this was one last-ditch effort to do so." (I agree)


"Among the negative press Sarvis received was an Election Day article in The Blaze that reported the Libertarian Booster PAC – which gave in-kind donations totalling $11,454 to Sarvis, mostly for ballot petitioning – received $150,000 in January from Joe Liemandt, a wealthy Democratic donor who also gives to Libertarians." (That shed's more light on the bullshit some "conservatives" and republicans were crying about, but there's more.....)

"The donor in question didn't donate to my campaign," Sarvis counters. "He donated to a Libertarian PAC well before I got into the race."

"[Ron Paul] was basically spoon-fed the GOP misinformation campaign," Sarvis said, speculating he was also "investing in the GOP infrastructure for the benefit of his son," Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who is considering a 2016 presidential campaign." (I agree on BOTH points)

"It's easy for people outside Virginia, like Ron Paul, to not realize how illiberal and unlibertarian Cuccinelli is," Sarvis said. "They only know about some big-ticket things like fighting Obamacare," and not how the Republican "wants the government in your bedroom."

"Sarvis' campaign featured support for legalizing marijuana, permitting same-sex marriage and embracing new immigrants. He also supported gun rights, school choice and undoing federal health care regulations."





Sarvis Says He Wasn't 'Obama Puppet' Bowling for Cuccinelli - US News and World Report

 

[ScienceRocks]

Twice as many of SAVIS voters were liberal.

 

[Pheonixops]

Twice as many of SAVIS voters were liberal.

I'm one of them. I agree with most of his positions, he's more Second Amendment than many of the "Second Amendment types" here, he for more personal LIBerties than many who claim to be such here, if you look at his positions "On the Issues", one can see that he has many good ideas that attracted LIBerals and LIBertarians alike. Check out his tax plan, etc.:
Robert Sarvis' Issue Positions (Political Courage Test) - Project Vote Smart

 

[Pheonixops]

Twice as many of SAVIS voters were liberal.

That fact also makes the claim by some GOP folks that Sarvis cost Cuccinelli the election pretty laughable.