Doug Hoffman lost but it's not a total loss.

[immto]

I think it is astounding in today's Politics for an unknown guy who is rather geeky on all fronts, only had 30 days and he almost won. Not to mention he didn't have the bucks either. Those facts alone would give any opposing party pause.

Awww Shucks! Hoffman was just a good ole boy

Unknown? Wasn't he front and center with Palin, Limbaugh and Beck every day?

No bucks? He had more money than any other candidate, 90% coming from outside the district.

Hoffman was a carpetbagger being pushed on the people of the 23 district by powerful outsiders. The view of "We know what is best for you more than you do" was soundly defeated by the locals.

His money did come from outside the district but he had far less to spend than either of his oppenants. He was a carpet bagger barely, he just didn't live in that district.

 

[rightwinger]

It’s no secret that national fundraising has buoyed the campaign of Doug Hoffman, the Conservative Party candidate in the NY-23 special election. But the full extent is remarkable. We crunched the FEC contribution numbers this afternoon to discover that 95 percent of Hoffman’s donations came from individuals and PACs based outside of the district. (Hoffman himself doesn’t even live in NY-23.) Only $12,360 of the $265,341 he’s raised came from potential constituents. Hoffman collected money from donors in 35 states. Of the total 146 donors, only 22 were actually from within the district he hopes to represent. The campaign’s biggest backer is the Washington-based Club for Growth, accounting for more than one-third of all fundraising ($83,260).
Hoffman’s been criticized in local NY-23 press for his weak grasp of district issues, which Dick Armey, former House GOP speaker who is campaigning for Hoffman, brushed aside as “parochial.” Hoffman has acknowledged this weak point, even saying that if he were elected, he would reach out to moderate Republican Dede Scozzafava (who has since dropped out of the race) for her “ knowledge and experience,” as a local.

 

[ABikerSailor]

I'm still wondering in what universe is a loss actually considered a win?

Matter of fact, I went down to the tea bagger rally here in Amarillo today, and asked one of 'em when they got off stage, why they said what they said?

Mainly, she was trying to hold Sarah Palin up as a role model for conservative women, and, well.......she quits halfway through anything she does, how is that a role model?

And I'm kinda wondering about this as well.........how the fuck can a loss be considered "winning"?

 

[immto]

If you read my original post I make it very clear. It's a win in the sense the GOP (RNC) gets the message that Doug Hoffman is the kind of candidate real conservatives want and will vote for. If they want to keep putting Liberal Rhino's on the ballot they will continue to loss elections.

I don't know what you have against Sarah Palin but it's a stretch to say she quits EVERYTHING early. She is the kind of person real conservatives want to vote for, if you don't like her don't vote for her, it's really pretty simple.

 

[JakeStarkey]

A loss is not winning, because if it is then Obama won big time Tuesday night.

 

[rightwinger]

If you read my original post I make it very clear. It's a win in the sense the GOP (RNC) gets the message that Doug Hoffman is the kind of candidate real conservatives want and will vote for. If they want to keep putting Liberal Rhino's on the ballot they will continue to loss elections.

I don't know what you have against Sarah Palin but it's a stretch to say she quits EVERYTHING early. She is the kind of person real conservatives want to vote for, if you don't like her don't vote for her, it's really pretty simple.

What the hell are you talking about??

If they want to keep putting Liberal Rhino's on the ballot they will continue to loss elections.

If they left the Liberal RINO on the ballot, they would have won like they always do in that district.

They ran a Conservative and were badly beaten

 

[ABikerSailor]

If you read my original post I make it very clear. It's a win in the sense the GOP (RNC) gets the message that Doug Hoffman is the kind of candidate real conservatives want and will vote for. If they want to keep putting Liberal Rhino's on the ballot they will continue to loss elections.

I don't know what you have against Sarah Palin but it's a stretch to say she quits EVERYTHING early. She is the kind of person real conservatives want to vote for, if you don't like her don't vote for her, it's really pretty simple.

Really ? Clear? Well.......I guess that if you consider a Phyrric victory winning, then, okay.

Still.....ya gotta admit.......it's not a very bright strategy, is it? I mean, that is almost like taking your best poster boy officer, sending him out into the battle field, then telling everyone else still in the trench to shoot to kill anything that moves (which includes the officer unfortunately), in the zone in front of them.

That is what they basically did to that poor sap.

As far as your Wasilla Chihuahua defense? Again......I ask.......how in the fuck can it POSSIBLY be considered something worthy of being like, when your biggest achievement is to QUIT.

A philosopher put it quite eloqently once when they were talking about the very notion of quitting.........the ultimate one.............death.

"Dying is easy, Living is hard."

 

[rightwinger]

If its not a total loss for Hoffman, why don't they run him again in 2010?

The Dems can use the seat

 

[Zoom-boing]

If you read my original post I make it very clear. It's a win in the sense the GOP (RNC) gets the message that Doug Hoffman is the kind of candidate real conservatives want and will vote for. If they want to keep putting Liberal Rhino's on the ballot they will continue to loss elections.

I don't know what you have against Sarah Palin but it's a stretch to say she quits EVERYTHING early. She is the kind of person real conservatives want to vote for, if you don't like her don't vote for her, it's really pretty simple.

Really ? Clear? Well.......I guess that if you consider a Phyrric victory winning, then, okay.

Still.....ya gotta admit.......it's not a very bright strategy, is it? I mean, that is almost like taking your best poster boy officer, sending him out into the battle field, then telling everyone else still in the trench to shoot to kill anything that moves (which includes the officer unfortunately), in the zone in front of them.

That is what they basically did to that poor sap.

As far as your Wasilla Chihuahua defense? Again......I ask.......how in the fuck can it POSSIBLY be considered something worthy of being like, when your biggest achievement is to QUIT.

A philosopher put it quite eloqently once when they were talking about the very notion of quitting.........the ultimate one.............death.

"Dying is easy, Living is hard."

The GOP has been acting more like Dem lite for quite some time. Many, many want the GOP to go back to their roots of conservatism. Why do you all bash them when they run a candidate who is conservative? You want we should all just accept whatever RINO the GOP decides on? No, the people are sick of that shit. Hoffman lost, yes, but a message was sent. The people want the GOP to act like the GOP, no some quasi-Dem-ish party. If the GOP hasn't figured this out yet, Hoffman types will help get the message through to them.

Owens won . . . so what are you all bitching about anyway?

 

[rightwinger]

The GOP has been acting more like Dem lite for quite some time. Many, many want the GOP to go back to their roots of conservatism. Why do you all bash them when they run a candidate who is conservative? You want we should all just accept whatever RINO the GOP decides on? No, the people are sick of that shit. Hoffman lost, yes, but a message was sent. The people want the GOP to act like the GOP, no some quasi-Dem-ish party. If the GOP hasn't figured this out yet, Hoffman types will help get the message through to them.
Owens won . . . so what are you all bitching about anyway?

So if "the people" want the GOP to act like the GOP and not some Dem-ish party..

Why did they soundly defeat your Conservative Hoffman?

They would have elected Scozafarva

 

[ABikerSailor]

I'll tell ya why I'm bitching Zoom...........

It's because instead of stating that they lost and they will try better, they've let the spin masters try to work an angle on this so they could tout it as a win.

 

[immto]

I'll tell ya why I'm bitching Zoom...........

It's because instead of stating that they lost and they will try better, they've let the spin masters try to work an angle on this so they could tout it as a win.

Doug Hoffman lost the race, but if the GOP (RNC) gets the message, it's a win in the long run.

 

[rightwinger]

I'll tell ya why I'm bitching Zoom...........

It's because instead of stating that they lost and they will try better, they've let the spin masters try to work an angle on this so they could tout it as a win.

Doug Hoffman lost the race, but if the GOP (RNC) gets the message, it's a win in the long run.

Yea....if the message is "Don't be stupid enough to run a Conservative again"

 

[JakeStarkey]

In Hoffman's case, it is very clear that less is not more.

The Conservatives lost not only the district but any respect they had with other Americans.

 

[Dr.House]

If its not a total loss for Hoffman, why don't they run him again in 2010?

They probably should... Turnout in 2010 is going to be much higher....

 

[amrchaos]

Pelosi calls the Hoffman loss a "victory" for the dems. She must have forgotten that the real Congressman from that district was made Secretary of the Army. When he wants his seat back, he'll toss the dem out.

Who owns the seat--A dem.

How is he going to vote---along Pelosi's "left wing socialists" agenda.

Who actually won this "political battle"--the Dems.

So why are Republicans trying to take solace in the Hoffman loss. They believe that the people(not counting the aid of political talking heads and conservative press and organizatios bringing Hoffman to the publics attention under the mantra of "A true Conservative" with only their focus on what makes him more of a conservative than Scozzafava and ignore anything that could shine a bad light on this concept) were the ones that allowed Hoffman to get as close as he did.

In truth, I think this "NY23" thing is a long term attempt by the Republicans to regain their disillusioned base trust again. The idea here is to change the political face of the party and rebuild pride in being a Conservaive Republican in the base. By running Hoffman, the Political leaders of the party have accomplished something. They recognize they can run the same propaganda over again and eventually win national elections through a well crafted ideological message.

This is not a win for Conservatism. This is a win for the Republican Party. Think about it--where are the conservatives going to go?

 

[rightwinger]

Pelosi calls the Hoffman loss a "victory" for the dems. She must have forgotten that the real Congressman from that district was made Secretary of the Army. When he wants his seat back, he'll toss the dem out.

Who owns the seat--A dem.

How is he going to vote---along Pelosi's "left wing socialists" agenda.

Who actually won this "political battle"--the Dems.

So why are Republicans trying to take solace in the Hoffman loss. They believe that the people(not counting the aid of political talking heads and conservative press and organizatios bringing Hoffman to the publics attention under the mantra of "A true Conservative" with only their focus on what makes him more of a conservative than Scozzafava and ignore anything that could shine a bad light on this concept) were the ones that allowed Hoffman to get as close as he did.

In truth, I think this "NY23" thing is a long term attempt by the Republicans to regain their disillusioned base trust again. The idea here is to change the political face of the party and rebuild pride in being a Conservaive Republican in the base. By running Hoffman, the Political leaders of the party have accomplished something. They recognize they can run the same propaganda over again and eventually win national elections through a well crafted ideological message.

This is not a win for Conservatism. This is a win for the Republican Party. Think about it--where are the conservatives going to go?

Republicans just don't get it.

They have a quest to identify only true blue republicans and reject anyone who varies from the social or economic agenda.

Maybe its just me, but if I were outnumbered by 60/40 in both houses, I'd be looking to elect ANYONE with an (R) next to their name. Work to get a majority first, then worry about replacing them with right wingers.

 

[amrchaos]

Pelosi calls the Hoffman loss a "victory" for the dems. She must have forgotten that the real Congressman from that district was made Secretary of the Army. When he wants his seat back, he'll toss the dem out.

Who owns the seat--A dem.

How is he going to vote---along Pelosi's "left wing socialists" agenda.

Who actually won this "political battle"--the Dems.

So why are Republicans trying to take solace in the Hoffman loss. They believe that the people(not counting the aid of political talking heads and conservative press and organizatios bringing Hoffman to the publics attention under the mantra of "A true Conservative" with only their focus on what makes him more of a conservative than Scozzafava and ignore anything that could shine a bad light on this concept) were the ones that allowed Hoffman to get as close as he did.

In truth, I think this "NY23" thing is a long term attempt by the Republicans to regain their disillusioned base trust again. The idea here is to change the political face of the party and rebuild pride in being a Conservaive Republican in the base. By running Hoffman, the Political leaders of the party have accomplished something. They recognize they can run the same propaganda over again and eventually win national elections through a well crafted ideological message.

This is not a win for Conservatism. This is a win for the Republican Party. Think about it--where are the conservatives going to go?

Republicans just don't get it.

They have a quest to identify only true blue republicans and reject anyone who varies from the social or economic agenda.

Maybe its just me, but if I were outnumbered by 60/40 in both houses, I'd be looking to elect ANYONE with an (R) next to their name. Work to get a majority first, then worry about replacing them with right wingers.

Actually, they do get it. They are just trying to rewrite the answer to "What it means to be a republican" and erase the Bush legacy.

Personally, I could never become a Republican because that requires giving someone else your vote and not having a say in any issues if it contradicts "conservatism" in some way. I am a moderate. I have trouble seeing things in only Black, White and little bits of grays. I notice Blues, reds, orange, Purple, pink..........

 

[JakeStarkey]

As long as the GOP allows the sawahnistas any say in the Party, the Party will continue to lose.

 

[amrchaos]

As long as the GOP allows the sawahnistas any say in the Party, the Party will continue to lose.

Actually--the NY23 race shows that the party can shift their votes on a dime--well almost.

Thus you have the strange instance of a party that claims to "supportive of liberty and freedom" being able to shift their base towards what ever social issue from the top.

Despite what many think--the R/LWM pretty much follow the dictates of the political leaders of the party. The Leaders of the Republican party just demonstrated an incredeible feat by shifting over 80% of their voters from one candidate to another in 3 weeks through propaganda alone. That is something to be in awe of.