Far-right suffers another setback in Virginia

[houghtam]

Originally Posted by W*GS

Didn't you know? It's one unit area, one vote. It says so right in the USC, right after the part about the US being a Christian nation.

Could you be more specific? Where is it in relation to the part where it says taxes are illegal?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by El Guapo

Most of Virginia is very far right and like most of the US the city w the largest population rules the roost. In this case its the Northern Virginia area (DC) which is full of granola eating, Prius driving, turtle neck wearing libs. This part of the city is completely opposite from the rest of the state.

Translation: Not enough toothless hicks to pull this one out for the TeaPublicans.

[barryr]

Funny, the democrat candidate spends a ton more than the republican or libertarian in VA, which means got far more money contributed by the "evil" wealthy. Yeah, I know it's different, they must be the "good" wealthy ones. Maybe people should start figuring out why the democrats are getting more money than anybody else from the wealthy instead of the usual pretend it isn't happening routine. Maybe the wealthy prosper more with democrats since they seem to screw up everything for everybody else besides the rich.

[DenverBrit]

Originally Posted by barryr

Funny, the democrat candidate spends a ton more than the republican or libertarian in VA, which means got far more money contributed by the "evil" wealthy. Yeah, I know it's different, they must be the "good" wealthy ones. Maybe people should start figuring out why the democrats are getting more money than anybody else from the wealthy instead of the usual pretend it isn't happening routine. Maybe the wealthy prosper more with democrats since they seem to screw up everything for everybody else besides the rich.

+

=

[cutthemdown]

Originally Posted by barryr

Funny, the democrat candidate spends a ton more than the republican or libertarian in VA, which means got far more money contributed by the "evil" wealthy. Yeah, I know it's different, they must be the "good" wealthy ones. Maybe people should start figuring out why the democrats are getting more money than anybody else from the wealthy instead of the usual pretend it isn't happening routine. Maybe the wealthy prosper more with democrats since they seem to screw up everything for everybody else besides the rich.

Well they realize without govt pumping up the economy they would have to invest their own money to do the same. Right now though you can go out and get Obama to give 400 million, and then you can just go bankrupt.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by DenverBrit

+

=

[Rigs11]

Originally Posted by barryr

Funny, the democrat candidate spends a ton more than the republican or libertarian in VA, which means got far more money contributed by the "evil" wealthy. Yeah, I know it's different, they must be the "good" wealthy ones. Maybe people should start figuring out why the democrats are getting more money than anybody else from the wealthy instead of the usual pretend it isn't happening routine. Maybe the wealthy prosper more with democrats since they seem to screw up everything for everybody else besides the rich.

you dipshet, the reason he lost was because moderate republicans did not support him.The dems are getting more money because the candidates that the GOP puts out there are bat shet crazy.

[Garcia Bronco]

Originally Posted by Rigs11

you dipshet, the reason he lost was because moderate republicans did not support him.The dems are getting more money because the candidates that the GOP puts out there are bat shet crazy.

And that was true in this case. I don't live there anymore, but most of my moderate friends did not consider him at all. In fact, I can't think of one person I still talk to from there that did.

[Rohirrim]

Is big business turning against the Tea Party radicals?
http://www.nbcnews.com/business/big-...way-2D11577339

[BroncoBeavis]

Funny how hardily these kids will rally around a win by a quintessential K-street lobbyist so long as he wears the right letter behind his name.

They give the standing-o to the big money Wall-street guy eeking out an election with 2-1 spending, yet wail and moan any time money swings things the other direction.

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis

Funny how hardily these kids will rally around a win by a quintessential K-street lobbyist so long as he wears the right letter behind his name.

They give the standing-o to the big money Wall-street guy eeking out an election with 2-1 spending, yet wail and moan any time money swings things the other direction.

What on Earth are you talking about? Do you even know?

[Rigs11]

Sometimes I think Beavis, cutthead, and barry are all the same poster.

[houghtam]

Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis

Funny how hardily these kids will rally around a win by a quintessential K-street lobbyist so long as he wears the right letter behind his name.

They give the standing-o to the big money Wall-street guy eeking out an election with 2-1 spending, yet wail and moan any time money swings things the other direction.

It's already been discussed, and apparently you missed it. It just proves that you can run pretty much anyone against the crazies in your party. Since you never answer direct questions, I'm putting on my best Beavis voice and shoving some words in your mouth for once. Your incorrect assumption here is that a "K-street lobbyist" is somehow less-preferable than the far right lunatics who have co-opted your party. Your feeling is that a guy like Ted Cruz is better for this country because at least he's not more of the same. Sorry, chump. Status quo may not be great, but I'd love to see a mother****ing ticker-tape parade every time people like Palin, Bachmann, Cruz or any of those other people are told to shut up and go back to where they belong, i.e. under a rock.

[BroncoBeavis]

Originally Posted by houghtam

It's already been discussed, and apparently you missed it. It just proves that you can run pretty much anyone against the crazies in your party. Since you never answer direct questions, I'm putting on my best Beavis voice and shoving some words in your mouth for once. Your incorrect assumption here is that a "K-street lobbyist" is somehow less-preferable than the far right lunatics who have co-opted your party. Your feeling is that a guy like Ted Cruz is better for this country because at least he's not more of the same. Sorry, chump. Status quo may not be great, but I'd love to see a mother****ing ticker-tape parade every time people like Palin, Bachmann, Cruz or any of those other people are told to shut up and go back to where they belong, i.e. under a rock.

Don't think I've ever said much of anything about Cruz, Palin, or Bachmann.

But then again, the Populism shtick isn't my thing. Whether it's the pseudo-folksy Tea-Partier, or the Double-dealin D's Preachin it up for the po' folk while knifin' 'em in the back for their bundler buddies.

Compromise is required. And the rhetoric thrown out by either side of that coin pretty much makes that an impossibility.

[houghtam]

Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis

Don't think I've ever said much of anything about Cruz, Palin, or Bachmann.

But then again, the Populism shtick isn't my thing. Whether it's the pseudo-folksy Tea-Partier, or the Double-dealin D's Preachin it up for the po' folk while knifin' 'em in the back for their bundler buddies.

Compromise is required. And the rhetoric thrown out by either side of that coin pretty much makes that an impossibility.

"Compromise."

When you assume that, say, Cuccinelli and McAuliffe are on opposite ends of the spectrum, "compromise" still ends up far to the right of where the real center is. I see you look away every time Roh or Fed or any of the other "lefties" (durrrr) on the board say Obama is a centrist.

We get it, that's your MO and has been for about thirty years or so. Have a lunatic stake out a position so insanely far right that everyone goes WTF, and then you demand "compromise" and ultimately get 90% of what you want. Then, hilariously/horrifically, you make the absurd claim that the United States is getting more conservative as a nation, despite the fact that states are passing gay marriage and marijuana laws left and right! All the while trivializing the efforts of people like Obama to pass anti-discrimination laws and the like, saying he's got more important things to do, like fix the economy that YOU ****ING BROKE IN THE FIRST PLACE!

But we're done with it. We're done. That's it. You're going to continue seeing stuff happen like just did in Virginia, Alabama, and yes even in New Jersey. Why NJ, you say? Because that's what a race should be like. Two centrists. Futurama had a great bit on Jack Johnson vs. John Jackson, but that's the way it should be when it comes to governing the nation. 75% of the nation is made up of people in the middle of the aisle. You're right, **** the radicals. Your understanding of what radical means needs a ton of work, though.

[BroncoBeavis]

Originally Posted by houghtam

"Compromise."

When you assume that, say, Cuccinelli and McAuliffe are on opposite ends of the spectrum, "compromise" still ends up far to the right of where the real center is. I see you look away every time Roh or Fed or any of the other "lefties" (durrrr) on the board say Obama is a centrist.

We get it, that's your MO and has been for about thirty years or so. Have a lunatic stake out a position so insanely far right that everyone goes WTF, and then you demand "compromise" and ultimately get 90% of what you want. Then, hilariously/horrifically, you make the absurd claim that the United States is getting more conservative as a nation, despite the fact that states are passing gay marriage and marijuana laws left and right! All the while trivializing the efforts of people like Obama to pass anti-discrimination laws and the like, saying he's got more important things to do, like fix the economy that YOU ****ING BROKE IN THE FIRST PLACE!

But we're done with it. We're done. That's it. You're going to continue seeing stuff happen like just did in Virginia, Alabama, and yes even in New Jersey. Why NJ, you say? Because that's what a race should be like. Two centrists. Futurama had a great bit on Jack Johnson vs. John Jackson, but that's the way it should be when it comes to governing the nation. 75% of the nation is made up of people in the middle of the aisle. You're right, **** the radicals. Your understanding of what radical means needs a ton of work, though.

Yeah, you kids keep tellin' me how middle-o-the-road President Skyrocket is. But as I've asked before. What would a "Real Liberal" President's (King) first 100 days look like?

[Requiem]

They would look glorious.