Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ben Carson occasionally *speaks* at places where there are Tea Party members (like CPAC) but I don't think anyone could say he 'leads' them.
Besides, they aren't a political party -- or so I've been told countless times -- so do they even need a leader?
It's like saying people who want clean drinking water need a leader, and any politician who states they want clean water too, is automatically the Water Party leader.
In other words, if a nut bag on the abortion issue also says she wants clean water, does this mean everyone who wants clean water is a nut bag on the abortion issue?
You were pointing out a very small minority of races to try and point out an extreme while ignore the many seats the Democrats lost because the country was saying they were too extreme.
Are you seriously this mentally incompetent? I mean damn dude, I've seen some logically disconnected posts in my time here but this is right up there.
I openly pondered if Cantor's loss could be the Democrats ticket to take his seat. Another post said it was basically impossible, and I responded by pointing out that much more conservative districts had ended up going Democratic after similar instances of extremist teabaggers beating out more mainstream Republicans in the primary.
The overall trend of 2010 has NOTHING to do with my point.
So really don't forget -- Tea Party types also voted for Alan Keyes. And the Tea Party also has a hispanic leader -- Ted Cruz -- so you really might not want to try to make it about race.
Don't forget Tim Scott of South Carolina, who just won his Republican primary election with over 90% of the vote.
Once again, with a few day's hindsight Mr. Cantor's loss can be summed up to entirely parochial interests.
Yes, the member's views on immigration didn't sit well with many in his district but that was just the rash things broke out in. Mr. Cantor was in danger even without the added weight of taking positions that weren't totally inline with a majority of his district, but the larger problem seems to have been his constituents felt in decent numbers that Mr. Cantor didn't give a toss about them period. You hear one thing over and over, that the man went all "K-Street" and became aloof. Sadly as one has stated previously that is a dangerous thing for any House member these days.
The fact the man gave up without even a whimper (no talk of being a write in or whatever even though remote) shows IMHO he probably has bigger fish to fry. No doubt Mr. Cantor will slide into a comfortable berth at some lobbying position or some such and earn more than he ever would in government service.
The Jar-Jar Banks comment above is pretty much on the money. You notice Mr. Brat's handlers are keeping him under wraps and muzzled. While the district is or rather has been reliably Republican for years nothing is over until it is over.
It looks like the Republican majority in the House will remain sizable after the election, so surely they can afford to throw a bone to Democrats. Having Bratt in the House is probably going to cause RP more trouble than he or the district is worth. Let them stew in their own juices and a Democrat win. Would serve the TPs right.
Once again, with a few day's hindsight Mr. Cantor's loss can be summed up to entirely parochial interests.
Yes, the member's views on immigration didn't sit well with many in his district but that was just the rash things broke out in. Mr. Cantor was in danger even without the added weight of taking positions that weren't totally inline with a majority of his district, but the larger problem seems to have been his constituents felt in decent numbers that Mr. Cantor didn't give a toss about them period. You hear one thing over and over, that the man went all "K-Street" and became aloof. Sadly as one has stated previously that is a dangerous thing for any House member these days.
The fact the man gave up without even a whimper (no talk of being a write in or whatever even though remote) shows IMHO he probably has bigger fish to fry. No doubt Mr. Cantor will slide into a comfortable berth at some lobbying position or some such and earn more than he ever would in government service.
The Jar-Jar Banks comment above is pretty much on the money. You notice Mr. Brat's handlers are keeping him under wraps and muzzled. While the district is or rather has been reliably Republican for years nothing is over until it is over.
It looks like the Republican majority in the House will remain sizable after the election, so surely they can afford to throw a bone to Democrats. Having Bratt in the House is probably going to cause RP more trouble than he or the district is worth. Let them stew in their own juices and a Democrat win. Would serve the TPs right.
2008 Obama elected in the first week of November. First interview was about 2 weeks later
2012 Obama elected in the first week of November. First interview was about month later.
Guess his handlers were keeping a muzzle on him too right?
Where are the polls showing the democratic is going to win?
2008 Obama elected in the first week of November. First interview was about 2 weeks later
2012 Obama elected in the first week of November. First interview was about month later.
Guess his handlers were keeping a muzzle on him too right?
Where are the polls showing the democratic is going to win?
Did not say "going" to but perhaps should. Again nothing is over until it is over. Just looking at the previous election cycle in VA and the results is proof enough.
As for Obama there isn't anything to debate, rather the same side of a coin. The man was a naïf who rode his "story" and being a "rising star" first to the senate then onto the WH unseating the then party favourite Mrs. Clinton. The man had not much to say then and nothing has really changed. It is either rhetoric or class/race baiting; that or "at least I'm not *that* guy" or the use of "forward".
The whole thing is turning into a circular firing squad scenario, IMO. Cantor was a solid guy and was instrumental in getting a handle on spending. Spending spiked under Obama-Pelosi, and actually went down after R's regained the US House in 2010. Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary
$3517 billion in 2009, $3234 billion in 2013. There was never a decline in spending in either the Gingrich or Hastert era. But there was during the Boehner/Cantor era, and that was by design, not happenstance.
I suppose it is a plus that any talk of amnesty is now roadkill, but in general this is looking like a GOP cluster**** to me. Are conservatives going to once again snatch defeat from the jaws of victory this year?
Are you seriously this mentally incompetent? I mean damn dude, I've seen some logically disconnected posts in my time here but this is right up there.
I openly pondered if Cantor's loss could be the Democrats ticket to take his seat. Another post said it was basically impossible, and I responded by pointing out that much more conservative districts had ended up going Democratic after similar instances of extremist teabaggers beating out more mainstream Republicans in the primary.
The overall trend of 2010 has NOTHING to do with my point.
Try to keep up, ok?
Except they didn't. Point one out. Remember you set the bar. "Much more Conservative".
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
