Showing posts with label christine o'donnell. Show all posts

Barry The Insult President: Obama's Trip To Delaware


Erick Erickson had a great piece this morning about Christine O'Donnell, who has evolved into an all-purpose spear catcher for all of the other Tea Party candidates who are running to overturn the established order. Even if she loses, many others will win because so much Democratic resources and media eyeballs were directed at the First State:

The odds are stacked against Christine O’Donnell. Thanks to the industriousness of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, the Senate GOP Leadership, the Delaware GOP Leadership, and the assorted pundits, journalists, and other talking heads on TV and in print, Christine O’Donnell is really taking one for the team and will likely not make it past the tigers.

But because of Christine O’Donnell’s willing sacrifice, the tigers are distracted. With only about twenty-two days left, the tigers are just now trying to refocus on Sharron Angle, Ken Buck, Mike Lee, Joe Miller, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Pat Toomey, and Ron Johnson. Meanwhile, for the past five weeks or so, these candidates have built up leads or drawn even with their opponents.

While the tigers have been taking out Christine O’Donnell, these candidates have surrounded the tigers and are preparing to slay the beasts.

As if to underscore this, the White House announced that President Obama will travel to Delaware to campaign with The Bearded Marxist. This is an odd use of the President's time, given that Coons supposedly has a double-digit lead in the polls. (Rush was all over this story this morning). Oh, no, Obama's not going to Delaware to support Coons. (and bringing Biden, besides). He's going there to rip on Christine O'Donnell. Ah:

Campaigning for Coons - and, more important, against O'Donnell - gives Obama a chance to remind voters nationwide about the Republican nominee, whom Democrats have gleefully embraced as an example of an extreme conservative. In political parlance, this is known as "elevating" your opponent, something Obama has also done with House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio).

White House officials believe candidates such as O'Donnell, especially O'Donnell, have mobilized their previously disaffected liberal base a few weeks before the midterms, giving them a greater chance of keeping control of the House and Senate. Democratic strategists said the Delaware race is having a spillover effect into neighboring Pennsylvania, which has an overlapping media market, appearing to help Democratic Senate candidate Joe Sestak.

Remember how we used to hear about Obama's first class temperament? At this point, I have to ask whether he even has a steerage class temperament. I mean, the President of the United States is going to Delaware to make fun of Christine O'Donnell. That's the best the post-racial healer can do? As if Saturday Night Live isn't already on the case? O'Donnell may have plenty of flaws, but she obviously appeals to the voting block of hard-working, church going straight arrows. When Obama insults her, he is insulting them as well. Nice.

Carl Paladino had to spend the day apologizing to gays, a typical endgame for a Republican who said the wrong thing about the wrong protected group (never mind how infinitesimally small a percentage of the population they are). When was the last time a liberal had to apologize for insulting people on the Right?



The Day After The Primaries


The GOP Senate primary in Delaware got all of the attention last night, but there were some other remarkable primary results across the nation.

The "unelectable" "extremist" Christine O'Donnell went on Good Morning America and, in the space of a few minutes, declared the scandals against her to be "unfactual," called Karl Rove the "so-called political guru," dubbed Mike Castle an "Obama Republican," and said she thinks she can win without the GOP establishment. Intimidated she is not. And for all the talk of her being an extremist (for being pro-abstinence and anti-porn???) her actual presentation is charming and winning. O'Donnell may lack the star quality of Sarah Palin, but she's got something. Think of her as being Jan & Dean to Palin's Beach Boys.

Some guy named Carl Paladino won the GOP primary for New York governor, defeating moderate Rick Lazio, who was last seen losing to Hillary Clinton in 2000. Palodino is quite a character; a wealthy upstater who has promised to "clean up Albany with a baseball bat" and has gotten in trouble for some off-color emails. Lazio was destined to lose to Prince Andrew, but Paladino is a real wild card. These guys will have to debate, of course, which should be entertaining. Since we're supposed to be so concerned about O'Donnell's tuition bills and Paladino's emails, do you supposed someone could ask Andrew Cuomo about his work on "affordable housing" at HUD?

Charlie Rangel also won his primary. He may be facing an ethics trial, and has clearly been scamming NY's rent control laws, and the IRS, but who cares, right? But, watch out! Christine O'Donnell had to short sell her house!

DC mayor Adrian Fenty lost the Democratic primary, which is the only election that matters in DC. His opponent Vincent Gray explicitly ran against School Chancellor Michelle Rhee's reforms, which I guess means the kids in DC's public schools will be trapped for another 20 years. "Compassion" at work.

Kelly Ayoette narrowly won the GOP Senate primary in New Hampshire. This is being spun as a victory for the Establishment, which is funny as she was endorsed by Sarah Palin, who has been travelling the country upending the Establishment.

Even John Dingell is in trouble!


Amazing! O'Donnell Beats Castle!


Unreal. "Longshot" Christine O'Donnell just defeated Delaware GOP heavyweight (and the national GOP Establishment) for the right to seek Joe Biden's former Senate seat. It wasn't even that close.

Marketing consultant Christine O'Donnell upset Rep. Mike Castle in the Delaware Republican Senate primary tonight, handing the tea party movement a major victory and giving Democrats an unexpected chance to hold the First State seat.

O'Donnell, who is making her third run for the Senate in as many elections, relied heavily on national surrogates -- from the Tea Party Express to former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin -- to fuel a shoestring campaign against the iconic Castle who had held elected office in the state for more than four decades.

"The people of Delaware have spoken," said O'Donnell in her victory speech. "No more politics as usual."

The O'Donnell victory, which was considered a political impossibility as recently as a month ago, is a major boost for Democratic hopes of holding the seat once held by Vice President Joe Biden. New Castle County Executive Chris Coons was unchallenged for the Democratic Senate nomination.

There's been a lot of talk within GOP political circles about how O'Donnell is virtually unelectable. National Democrats, and her Democrat opponent Chris Coons are already rolling out the "too extreme for Delaware" talking point. This is typical

"Delaware Republicans chose an ultra-right wing extremist who is out of step with Delaware values. Christine O'Donnell cares more about imposing an extreme social doctrine than addressing the challenges facing working people," said DSCC chairman Robert Menendez in a statement. "Even the Delaware Republican Party Chairman has said O'Donnell is 'not a viable candidate for any office in the state of Delaware', and 'could not be elected dog catcher.'"

This somehow ignores the fact that Coons is on record has having been a "bearded Marxist" at one point in his life. From what I can tell, O'Donnell is an "extremist" only in the sense that she is a Reagan conservative who interprets the Constitution more strictly than has been the fashion the last few decades. Also, she is pro-abstinence and anti-porn (no joke, these are part of the "O'Donnell = Extremist" argument). This is extreme? As compared to a "bearded Marxist?" Seems like both candidates could be described as being at the far end of their respective political spectrums.

Here for your viewing pleasure is quick interview O'Donnell did with Robert Costa earlier tonight. Watch this and then ask yourself whether this is the new face of American Extremism:



Why you see civil rights being rolled back as she speaks! And here she is standing up to some unexpectedly hard questioning from Neil Cavuto:



Unhinged! Extreme! Not ready for prime time! Run away!

The truth is, O'Donnell's charming and has a quiet charisma that is much more appealing than that of the elderly, liberal Castle, or the glib former occupant of the seat she seeks. And the O'Donnell "scandals" are pathetic. She apparently had to do a short sale to save her house from foreclosure. Her 2008 campaign - run on a shoe string against Joe Biden - had about $20,000 in debt that hadn't yet been retired. Funny, I don't recall hearing anyone complain about Hilliary Clinton's millions in 2008 debt for which she and Bill are still holding fund raisers to retire. Then there's the matter of O'Donnell's graduation from college. She apparently walked across the stage in cap and gown back in 1993, but didn't get the actual diploma until she finished paying her tuition. As she points out, unlike a lot of people, she had to pay her own way. These aren't scandals. They are real life problems faced by middle class people whom liberals and "moderate" Republicans (but, I repeat myself) claim to be so concerned about. The only reason they are disqualifiers for higher office is because O'Donnell put herself in a position to deny Castle what he obviously believes is rightfully his.

There've been too many Castles elected to the GOP caucus (not to mention too many Coons entering the Democrats'). After the last couple years worth of destructive legislating, beginning with the Castle-supported TARP vote, it's clear that a significant percentage of the electorate (at least 30%, some fringe) wants to clean house. I don't know if O'Donnell will be "better," but she certainly can't do any worse.

UPDATE: I have to apologize for the screwy fonts in this post. Blogger isn't letting me change them for some reason.


A Tea Party in Delaware: Castle and O'Donnell Tied in Latest PPP Poll


Looks like there might be some tea served in Delaware this Tuesday, as Mike Castle and Christine O'Donnell are virtually tied, with O'Donnell even maintaining a slim lead that is within the margin of error.

It looks like there’s a real possibility of a major upset in the Delaware Senate primary on Tuesday night, with insurgent conservative Christine O’Donnell leading longtime Congressman and Governor Mike Castle 47-44. That 3 point lead is well within the poll’s margin of error.

If Castle is indeed defeated Tuesday night it will be yet another sign that conservatives have a strangle hold on the Republican Party and moderates may or may not be welcome anymore. Castle has an overwhelming 69-21 lead with moderate voters but they only make up 33% of the likely primary electorate. O’Donnell has a 62-31 lead with conservatives that’s more than enough to propel her to the overall lead.

It’s clear that Castle’s popularity has taken a sharp turn in the wrong direction over the last month. An August PPP poll found his favorability with Delaware Republicans at a 60/25 spread. Now his favorables within the party are negative at 43/47. That’s largely a product of 55% of voters in his party saying they think he’s too liberal compared to 37% who think he’s about right.

After a week in which Castle and a number of conservative media figures have absolutely trashed O'Donnell, that's a pretty remarkable result. But, maybe it shouldn't be a surprise. We've seen these sorts of media frenzies a lot in the last couple years: a conservative woman gains some prominence and immediately comes under sustained assault from people who hadn't heard about her the week before, but are now convinced that She Must Be Stopped. The media assured us that Sarah Palin was stupid, that Nikki Haley was a whore, that Sharon Angle is crazy, and that Jan Brewer was a redneck. None of that was remotely true. Why should it be true for O'Donnell?

For his part, Castle has hardly fought this election with any sort of honor or courage. He has refused to debate O'Donnell, for one thing. While O'Donnell has made media appearances that could be described as Palinesque, she has at least made an effort. Castle doesn't appear to have done any media, whether favorable or unfavorable. He was dumb enough to join in an FEC complaint against O'Donnell and the Tea Party Express. And, while everyone else has been throwing themselves on their fainting couches over O'Donnell's finances and dopey lawsuits, Castle has spent his many decades in Congress quietly proposing bills at the behest of his money men. Is Castle willing to stand still long enough to discuss that?

Mostly, though, Castle's the sort of person who has enabled the creeping growth of government over the last 30 years. He may not have voted for Obamacare, but his support for repeal is tepid at best. Like many of this year's troubled GOP moderates, he voted for TARP. His has been a career tacking and trimming with the political winds, all with the goal, it seems, of running for Senate at the ripe old age of 71. Is this the sort of person who would have the stones for the sort of political fighting that lies ahead as the GOP and the Tea Party seek to roll back the entitlement state? Doubtful.

Castle is a careerist and all of his acts in public life have been made with career in mind. This is best summed up in this Jeffrey Lord piece:
It must be said here that the reason Ms. O'Donnell is a "two-time loser" is that she had the guts to take on up-hill Senate races in the first place. Where was Mike Castle when it was time to challenge Democrat incumbent Senator Tom Carper in 2006? Where was Castle when it was time to challenge Biden in 2008 -- when Biden was playing the Ruling Class game and had a ballot spot for both re-election to the Senate and on Obama's ticket as vice president? Answer? Not running. Why? Because the man who so much wants to be a United States Senator from Delaware didn't want to mar his reputation with a loss -- thus enabling some Ruling Class writer to describe Castle as a "two-time statewide loser." Such things are important in Ruling Class circles, and the fact that O'Donnell paid no heed and took on Delaware's political goliaths Carper and Biden anyway is a sign of Country Class guts.
O'Donnell may lack Castle's political savvy. She may try too hard and say the "wrong" thing when she's speaking off the cuff. Her finances may be in disarray. It may well be that she is too conservative to win in Delaware. But, you know what? She didn't vote for TARP and she hasn't acted like a Delaware Senate seat is something she should be handed because she's "next." A vote for Castle is a vote for careerism. A vote for O'Donnell is at least a vote for ideas.


The Opinionator: Free Will Quick Hits


The GOP primary for Joe Biden's Senate seat has raised the question that has often bedeviled "conviction" voters: do we vote for the person who matches us politically, or for the one who is the "most conservative who can win?" In this case, neither candidate is especially inspiring. Christine O'Donnell has youth and ideas, but she also comes off as amateurish. Mike Castle, on the other hand is a political lifer who will be 77 years old should he choose to run for re-election in 2016. Plus, he's nowhere near the most conservative who can win. At least for this election season, when voters are looking to replace the House and Senate's Old Guard wholesale, I think it's worth a roll of the dice to vote for O'Donnell.

Lisa Murkowski's trial balloon for a write-in third party candidacy should make every moderate in the GOP caucus blanch. How many times have we been told we have to support this or that "moderate" over a better, more conservative candidate. And how many times have those "moderates" turned on the GOP as soon as their hold on power was loosened. Conservatives have shown more loyalty to the GOP than Arlen Spector, Lincoln Chaffee, and now Lisa Murkowski ever have.

Good riddance to Mayor Daley. I'm always hearing about how sophisticated Chicago is, but why its voters prefer to be governed by mayor-for-life acting as potentates dispensing favors like a Tammany Hall ward heeler is beyond me. If it is their destiny to be lorded over by Rahm Emanuel, they deserve every bit of it.

If I put out an invitation to my Facebook friends announcing that I was going to burn a Bible in my backyard, would anyone care? Doubt it. But, call CNN and say you're going to burn a Koran at some podunk "church" and suddenly it's "alert the media" time.

Michael Gross' anti-Palin hit piece in Vanity Fair was apparently self-debunking. What's funny, though, is how easy it was to get through the week without having to read Gross' article. A few years ago, such an article would have been must-see reading. Now, you wonder, "do people still read Vanity Fair?" I used to subscribe - I read it as a satire of upper-crust life - but around 2006 it published one too many "rise of the vulcans" style pieces about the Bush Administration, so I quit.

CNN is apparently replacing Larry King with Piers Morgan, a Brit journalist (he used to be editor of the Daily Mail) turned media personality. He seems like a pleasant, sophisticated guy with a plummy accent, but he's also a firm believer in the BBC brand of leftism, reflected in the fact that he lost his editorship after publishing fake photos of US atrocities in Iraq. You have to wonder why CNN thinks this is the guy to increase its appeal in middle America.

Just watched The Outlaw Josie Wales. It's good, but about 20 minutes too long, plus it has a goofy scene where Clint Eastwood parleys with some Navajo, using the sort of "men good/government bad" rhetoric that probably sounded very profound back in 1976. Worth seeing for the excellent supporting cast, which looks like it just stepped out of a Civil War-era tintype. You have to wonder whether a movie starring an ex-Confederate soldier refusing to surrender would be made today.

Best Retirement Invesments Auto Search