Rush Limbaughs best comment of the day--LOL

The nuts did not screw it up. The nuts did exactly what they needed to do. The last thing they wanted was a republican in that seat acting as a democrat.
It would have allowed insincere use of the word Bi-partisanship.
She had to go....and it worked like a charm.

So it seems the nuts even fooled sane poeple like you.

It was quite obvious what was happening for weeks.....and I am not surpirsed it was too deep for you to see.

Your spin is only mildly amusing.

That's what happens when it's fact, and not spin.


According to FOX NEWS the only two Presidents that didn't have problems with the 1st year off elections & didn't spend ANY time campaiging to save anothers arse were.

1. FDR
2. GW Bush

Hmm.
 
Last edited:
The nuts did not screw it up. The nuts did exactly what they needed to do. The last thing they wanted was a republican in that seat acting as a democrat.
It would have allowed insincere use of the word Bi-partisanship.
She had to go....and it worked like a charm.

So it seems the nuts even fooled sane poeple like you.

It was quite obvious what was happening for weeks.....and I am not surpirsed it was too deep for you to see.

Your spin is only mildly amusing.

That's what happens when it's fact, and not spin.

Ok, so you're happy the Democrats have another seat in Congress. lol
 
Rush is also now trying to pretend that NY23 was no big deal,

which is even funnier.



:lol::lol::lol: It's kind of like switching quarterbacks in the last 2 minutes when you're 14 points behind & expecting a win---:lol::lol:

On the other hand this administration & congress got their asse's KICKED in regular time--from the bluest of blue states NJ & flat got BLOWN OUT in Virginia.

Now that's something to talk about--:lol::lol:

Just keep on thinking that those tea partiers don't matter--:lol::lol:

$2 million tea-partiers.jpg
 
Last edited:
Rush is also now trying to pretend that NY23 was no big deal,

which is even funnier.


it WAS a big deal.
Despite a republican taking her support and tossing it to the democrat, a third party candidate took the race well into the night.

That, to me, is a big deal.

Yes, and to think that he only entered the race less than a month ago, with no money, he did very well only a 4% spread. Just think what he could have done if he had the backing of the GOP and entered the race at the right time. I do beleive we would have seen an entirely different outcome.

The dems know this, they are just attempting to spin it, got give em something to point at, it was an absolute disastor in Virginia and New Jersey for them. So let em feel good for awhile, because they aren't gonna be feelin too good soon, especially in 2010.:lol:
 
You want the predictive value of this election?

In 2001 both the Virginia and New Jersey governor races were won by DEMOCRATS.

Which of course predicted the huge victory in the House and Senate by Democrats in 2002, and the stunning defeat of GW Bush in 2004.

...right...

Excellent point however using this pattern as an example, republicans will take over in 2016. :)
 
Rush Limbaugh & his staff are trying to count how many votes were saved or created in New Jersey/Virginia by this administration---:lol::lol::lol::lol:

We will never know how many votes were persuaded by Obama

What we do know is that Rush's meddling in the NY 23 converted a seat that was republican for 150 years into a Democratic seat.

That is one less vote in Congress for the republicans

Nice job Rush and Sarah!
 
Rush Limbaugh & his staff are trying to count how many votes were saved or created in New Jersey/Virginia by this administration---:lol::lol::lol::lol:

We will never know how many votes were persuaded by Obama

What we do know is that Rush's meddling in the NY 23 converted a seat that was republican for 150 years into a Democratic seat.

That is one less vote in Congress for the republicans

Nice job Rush and Sarah!

Keep in mind, this disastorous strategy, for conservatives, blossomed after the 2006 election; all you heard from the right is that the Republicans lost because they weren't conservative enough, and they had to move to the right. I told them they were wrong then, and they're still wrong.
 
Conservatives will win seats and caucus with the Republicans. Not that hard to figure out. The result is, Democrats have less power.
 
Conservatives will win seats and caucus with the Republicans. Not that hard to figure out. The result is, Democrats have less power.

Update:

The Conservative AND the Republican lost in NY23. So the Democrat will caucus with the Democrats...

...the Republicans have less power.

You just made the case for the Republicans/conservatives to have stuck with Scozzafava.
 
Conservatives will win seats and caucus with the Republicans. Not that hard to figure out. The result is, Democrats have less power.

Update:

The Conservative AND the Republican lost in NY23. So the Democrat will caucus with the Democrats...

...the Republicans have less power.

You just made the case for the Republicans/conservatives to have stuck with Scozzafava.

I couldn't be happier with your assessment. It is always easier to win with the element of surprise on your side. You just keep thinking that NYcarbineer. I suppose the word WILL threw you in my post. As in, Conservatives will win seats in 2010. If we can get that close in a short couple of weeks, two years should be quite interesting.

As I have said before, Scozzafava was the worst choice of the three. We tried to get our guy in first, but at least ended up with our second choice.
 
Last edited:
Conservatives will win seats and caucus with the Republicans. Not that hard to figure out. The result is, Democrats have less power.

Update:

The Conservative AND the Republican lost in NY23. So the Democrat will caucus with the Democrats...

...the Republicans have less power.

You just made the case for the Republicans/conservatives to have stuck with Scozzafava.

I couldn't be happier with your assessment. It is always easier to win with the element of surprise on your side. You just keep thinking that NYcarbineer. I suppose the word WILL threw you in my post. As in, Conservatives will win seats in 2010. If we can get that close in a short couple of weeks, two years should be quite interesting.

As I have said before, Scozzafava was the worst choice of the three. We tried to get our guy in first, but at least ended up with our second choice.

The Conservatives WILL win seats in 2010....no question

But those seats will come out of the rebublicans hide not the Democrats. The Conservatives/teabaggers will take seats in red state/bible belt areas. The insistence on toeing the line on Conservative social and economic lines will cost them seats in blue states.

You can't force conservative values, escpecially on social issues (gays, abortion, guns) in areas where republicans are moderates. That is a losing strategy and will cost republicans in 2010
 
Update:

The Conservative AND the Republican lost in NY23. So the Democrat will caucus with the Democrats...

...the Republicans have less power.

You just made the case for the Republicans/conservatives to have stuck with Scozzafava.

I couldn't be happier with your assessment. It is always easier to win with the element of surprise on your side. You just keep thinking that NYcarbineer. I suppose the word WILL threw you in my post. As in, Conservatives will win seats in 2010. If we can get that close in a short couple of weeks, two years should be quite interesting.

As I have said before, Scozzafava was the worst choice of the three. We tried to get our guy in first, but at least ended up with our second choice.

The Conservatives WILL win seats in 2010....no question

But those seats will come out of the rebublicans hide not the Democrats. The Conservatives/teabaggers will take seats in red state/bible belt areas. The insistence on toeing the line on Conservative social and economic lines will cost them seats in blue states.

You can't force conservative values, escpecially on social issues (gays, abortion, guns) in areas where republicans are moderates. That is a losing strategy and will cost republicans in 2010


So please explain ...WITHOUT A SPIN.....how it is possible for far left progressives such as Reid and Pelosi get elected.

Sorry...I appreciate your theory....but it is not proven.
 
It has been alluded to here before. It is the economy stupid. To change a phrase.

Regardless of Wall Street and other indicators, unemployment is the 800 pound gorilla in the room. I see productivity increasing and small businesses facing continued financing, tax and other issues. Small business is where job growth happens. This will not be fixed by 2012.

Obama will not give their voice a place. The US Chamber of Commerce is already at odds with him. The industrial and business giants that "can't fail" are the only ones helped. Mom and Pop will recover, but it is a long time coming.

Don't get everyone back to work, Democrats go down. The smoke and mirrors of jobs "saved/created" has no traction on Main Street.
 
Rush Limbaugh & his staff are trying to count how many votes were saved or created in New Jersey/Virginia by this administration---:lol::lol::lol::lol:

We will never know how many votes were persuaded by Obama

What we do know is that Rush's meddling in the NY 23 converted a seat that was republican for 150 years into a Democratic seat.

That is one less vote in Congress for the republicans

Nice job Rush and Sarah!

Keep in mind, this disastorous strategy, for conservatives, blossomed after the 2006 election; all you heard from the right is that the Republicans lost because they weren't conservative enough, and they had to move to the right. I told them they were wrong then, and they're still wrong.

There are way more people in America that consider themselves conservatives than those that consider themselves liberals.

Yet we have many far left liberals voted into congress.

Sorry...wishful thinking on your part perhaps...but by no means logical.
 

Forum List

Back
Top