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.
Hey I thought the Republicans were going to sweep everything?
How come they can't even take a district that went to McCain last election and after they dumped a million bucks into Tim Burns' campaign?
Gosh, do I have to keep repeating myself and debunking the spin from the Left?
A conservative democrat running in a district where the democrats hold a 2-1 advantage in voter registration, where he runs AGAINST obamacare, cap&tax, pro-gun and runs away from any contact with obama, where the seat has been held by a democrat for the last 32 years, where the district is heavily union democrat, where Critz benefited from the hotly contested Senate Dem primary, where 62% of the voters that turned out were democrats, 34% republican...why does the left think a republican should have won?
This is interesting;
Quote:
45,777 people voted in the Republican primary in PA-12, choosing Burns to run again in November. And 82,695 people voted in the Democratic primary, choosing Mark Critz. But in the special, Critz won 71,684 votes and Burns won 59,476 votes. Burns won, and Critz lost, around 17 percent of Democratic votes.
Which paper? The Post-Gazette or the Tribune? The Trib is very conservative (you'd like it since I believe they carry Malkin and Coulter ) and even though I don't remember the Post-Gazette as being liberal, I think it's more liberal than the Trib.
Actually, it's not to surprising that a conservative Dem was picked in Johnstown.... I think that reflects the folks there. Blue collar and yet social conservatives... Unless they've changed a lot over the last 30 years.
I doubt it. (I'm from the Pgh area, too.)
Actually, regarding health care, Critz says he does not support Obamacare, but he was not in favor of repealing it, paraphrasing. I posted a link on some other forum.
House Republicans grumbling over loss in PA special election..
This loss in the battle to take over Murtha's seat was a real punch in the gut to Republicans. They thought they had this seat and where all set to start celebrating and calling it a referendum on Obama's leadership......then reality hit.
Quote:
Two Republican sources at Wednesday’s House GOP Conference meeting tell CNN that there was a lot of grumbling about the party’s loss in a special election Tuesday for the vacant House seat in Pennsylvania’s 12th congressional district. Democratic candidate Mark Critz topped Republican Tim Burns by double digits in the battle to succeed the late Democratic Rep. Jack Murtha. “People should be grumbling – members sure were,” said one of the sources.
This loss in the battle to take over Murtha's seat was a real punch in the gut to Republicans. They thought they had this seat and where all set to start celebrating and calling it a referendum on Obama's leadership......then reality hit.
The thing is, anti-incumbent may not translate into anti (D).
Agree. Now, we have the repubs blaming the loss in Murtha's district on faulty polling. Of course, it's not the fact that the focused on bashing President Obama and Speaker Pelosi instead of the issues like unemployment. The repubs need to lower their expectations. LOL.
Clip:
Rep. Darrell Issa of California said that faulty NRCC polling raised Republicans' expectations in the Pennsylvania race.
"The polling is going to have to be retooled," he said. "This was a district we thought we would lose until the polling told us we might not, and that changed expectations."
Gosh, do I have to keep repeating myself and debunking the spin from the Left?
A conservative democrat running in a district where the democrats hold a 2-1 advantage in voter registration, where he runs AGAINST obamacare, cap&tax, pro-gun and runs away from any contact with obama, where the seat has been held by a democrat for the last 32 years, where the district is heavily union democrat, where Critz benefited from the hotly contested Senate Dem primary, where 62% of the voters that turned out were democrats, 34% republican...why does the left think a republican should have won?
This is interesting;
Quote:
45,777 people voted in the Republican primary in PA-12, choosing Burns to run again in November. And 82,695 people voted in the Democratic primary, choosing Mark Critz. But in the special, Critz won 71,684 votes and Burns won 59,476 votes. Burns won, and Critz lost, around 17 percent of Democratic votes.
Since, basically, the only Moderates running anywhere in this country, are Democrats, I don't think Nov is going to be the "hoped" for doom of Dems in Congress.
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.
) and even though I don't remember the Post-Gazette as being liberal, I think it's more liberal than the Trib.
House Republicans grumbling over loss in PA special election..
