Ben Quayle for Congress question (Scottsdale: safe, rated, money)

[Ponderosa]

Originally Posted by azriverfan.

Gotta love this state. You can be unqualified, lie and embarrass yourself publicly and still win

In their defense, more voted against Quayle than for him, too. When you get 10 candidates, stuff like that happens. About 30% of Republican voters in the state are rabid birthers, racists, and religious bigots. For them, "Obama is the worst president in history" is all they need to hear. And that is all he needed to get a plurality. Kudos to Quayle's handlers for knowing how to work them. Anyhow who is to say any of the others are any better. All of them are out in right field somewhere. They just did not have the bucks to get their message out like Quayle did. Since he was raised right by his Daddy, he is probably more moderate than most of them would have been.

Welcome to Arizona, Ben. I think you and your (someday) family will like it here.

[Rick Lee]

Originally Posted by azriverfan.

Gotta love this state. You can be unqualified, lie and embarrass yourself publicly and still win

That goes for just about every state in the union.

[_Charles_]

Originally Posted by azriverfan.

Quayle is not even considered to be in second place now. He is barely trailing another guy so I don't think he has any real chance of winning.

The model I presented is accurate.
I don't know what your sources where but if I were you I would drop them in the future.
I voted for Moak but Quayle won the GOP Primary for District 3 (http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/dpp/news/elections/ben-quayle-wins-3rd-congressional-district-nomination-08252010 - broken link) and it was Quayle that raised the most money (and not from his father).
If you want to know what candidate is likely to win a given election - find out who has raised the most money.

[Rick Lee]

It certainly never hurts to be the top fundraiser, but it doesn't decide elections. If it did, Ross Perot and Steve Forbes would be former presidents now. Michael Huffington would have Diane Feinstein's Senate seat and Al Cecchi would have been gov. of CA. I voted for Waring, so I didn't follow Quayle's fundraising or endorsements. But I doubt he'll be any worse than what we're used to and might even be a lot better. I have no use for ambitious career politicians, but since this is his first elected office job, he may just try real hard and do a good job.

[Ritchie_az]

About 30% of Republican voters in the state are rabid birthers, racists, and religious bigots.

Nonsense! That's like saying "30% of Democrats are communist, KKK, and athiests."

more voted against Quayle than for him, too. When you get 10 candidates, stuff like that happens.

Exactly. There were too many people (many of whom were likely not much different than the next), all running.

[azriverfan.]

Originally Posted by _Charles_

The model I presented is accurate.
I don't know what your sources where but if I were you I would drop them in the future.
I voted for Moak but Quayle won the GOP Primary for District 3 (http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/dpp/news/elections/ben-quayle-wins-3rd-congressional-district-nomination-08252010 - broken link) and it was Quayle that raised the most money (and not from his father).
If you want to know what candidate is likely to win a given election - find out who has raised the most money.

You were right but what source do you have that says Quayle raised the most money that wasn't based in some part to his father's connections? Do you have an article that specifies that because according to articles on AZRepublic, he received fundraising from the Bushes, and other politicians connected to Dan Quayle.

Nonetheless his winning speaks ill of the people of District 3. You guys should be embarrassed.

[Ponderosa]

Originally Posted by Ritchie_az

Nonsense! That's like saying "30% of Democrats are communist, KKK, and athiests."

Don't agree about KKK (that's for Republicans), but Commies and atheists, yes, that might be right. About 1/3 of partisans are at the fringes on both ends. Maybe more these days when the moderates of each party have registered independent.

[azriverfan.]

Ponderosa

The only silver lining to Quayle winning is you know he is likely a libertarian. He is clearly not a social conservative. Look at his background. He was raised on the East Coast., attended a socially liberal school like Duke (Duke might be in the South but its students are from the East Coast) and lived in NYC and SF. At least he is a moderate however undeserving he was to win the office. And the guy worked for Dirty Scottsdale so I doubt he is a puritan.

[Ponderosa]

Originally Posted by azriverfan.

You were right but what source do you have that says Quayle raised the most money that wasn't based in some part to his father's connections? Do you have an article that specifies that because according to articles on AZRepublic, he received fundraising from the Bushes, and other politicians connected to Dan Quayle.

Nonetheless his winning speaks ill of the people of District 3. You guys should be embarrassed.

I'll second that sentiment.

[azriverfan.]

Originally Posted by Rick Lee

That goes for just about every state in the union.

Not true! The reason Obama won the Senate in Illinois is the front runner he was running against was forced to bow out because his divorced proceedings were leaked to the public in which is ex-wife Jerri Ryan accused him of forcing her to attend strip clubs with him and get kinky. In Arizona, that guy (Ryan) would have probably won!