Rough week for Democrats

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

How has it already done that? Not a single vote has been cast.

Tell that to the panicking Democrats in Massachusettes.

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Scozzafava, Rubio, Patrick Hughes (to beat Kirk), Mike Lee to beat Bennett, etc.

Of those four, I can think of two with "passion", to use your word: Scozzafava and Crist/Rubio, but neither fits your characterization. Scozzafava isn't a moderate, wasn't selected in a primary, and didn't win the general (or "special", if you prefer). Rubio trounces Meek in Rasmussen's December poll, 49-35% ... better than Crist, 42-36%. So he's certainly just as electable.

I'm not aware of any polling data for either Hughes or Lee vs their competition, so if there's some huge groundswell behind them that you've mystically identified, feel free to prove it.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Archaea

So that's a scientific, peer-reviewed article establishing a causative link between California's economic demise the plebiscite laws of California?

Yes, people complain about the initiative formula of California but I truly doubt it's the main factor in California's economic demise. However, spending too much sure sounds much more plausible. And for that, it doesn't take a regression analysis. If you spend more than you take in over a long enough time, when it's time to pay it back, you won't have enough. Seems simple enough.

Go ahead, fish for boogey-men elsewhere.

Sorry- did you present a scientific peer reviewed article supporting your argument it is all the Dems fault, or were you just "fishing for boogey-men?"

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Sorry- did you present a scientific peer reviewed article supporting your argument it is all the Dems fault, or were you just "fishing for boogey-men?"

I don't have to.

Democrats have controlled the Legislature in California for as long as can be remembered. If Republicans have no control, how could one blame anybody but those in control?

The public fisc is running huge deficits.

It doesn't take a study to link the two.

Democrats have not controlled spending in California.

For you to dissuade me from the obvious, a loose argument is insufficient. But, Mike is correct, Obama will give California a multi trillion dollar bailout, arguing we can't afford for California to go more bankrupt without California fixing its fiscal problems.

Yes public spending is a blessing not a curse. Go ahead stick to the sinking ship of California.

[MikeWaters]

Californians have 1) elected liberals, 2) have huge spending on immigrants, many of them illegal, 3) vote for every government program that sounds half-helpful, usually unfunded.

At the same time, largely though voter initiatives, have limited the amount they have to pay in tax.

Huge spending + inability to have huge taxes = fiscal irresponsibility. And unlike the federal govt. they can't print money, and their credit sucks.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Californians have 1) elected liberals, 2) have huge spending on immigrants, many of them illegal, 3) vote for every government program that sounds half-helpful, usually unfunded.

At the same time, largely though voter initiatives, have limited the amount they have to pay in tax.

Huge spending + inability to have huge taxes = fiscal irresponsibility. And unlike the federal govt. they can't print money, and their credit sucks.

Cali's predictable response is, the initiatives limit the amount of money which can be raised through taxes, and therefore, it's not the spending which is the problem but the silly citizens who don't want increased taxes.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Archaea

I don't have to.

Democrats have controlled the Legislature in California for as long as can be remembered. If Republicans have no control, how could one blame anybody but those in control?

The public fisc is running huge deficits.

It doesn't take a study to link the two.

Democrats have not controlled spending in California.

For you to dissuade me from the obvious, a loose argument is insufficient. But, Mike is correct, Obama will give California a multi trillion dollar bailout, arguing we can't afford for California to go more bankrupt without California fixing its fiscal problems.

Yes public spending is a blessing not a curse. Go ahead stick to the sinking ship of California.

Silly me, I thought the legislature needed the approval of the Republican executive in California. Is that not the case anymore?

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

Tell that to the panicking Democrats in Massachusettes.



Of those four, I can think of two with "energy", to use your word: Scozzafava and Crist/Rubio, but neither fits your characterization. Scozzafava isn't a moderate, wasn't selected in a primary, and didn't win the general (or "special", if you prefer). Rubio trounces Meek in Rasmussen's December poll, 49-35% ... better than Crist, 42-36%. So he's certainly just as electable.

I'm not aware of any polling data for either Hughes or Lee vs their competition, so if there's some huge groundswell behind them that you've mystically identified, feel free to prove it.

I didn't use the word "energy."

Scozzafava is absolutely a moderate (honestly surprised you would argue to the contrary). That's what Republicans hated most about her (and why they picked Hoffman, who was far from moderate). Conservatives pushed the ultra-conservative Hoffman in opposition to Scozzafava and wound up handing the seat to Democrats.

As for Rubio, Rasmussen is the only major poll showing Rubio beating Meek, whereas every poll shows Crist beating Meek. Take your chances with Rubio, please.

As for the others, the point isn't that the incumbent will lose (although perhaps he/she will), but that the tea partiers are doing everything in their power to promote candidates who are less electable in the general than the current party candidate. I say, more power to them. Even if they don't beat the incumbent, they fracture the party.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Silly me, I thought the legislature needed the approval of the Republican executive in California. Is that not the case anymore?

Arnold is not a Republican and in many instances he became a rubber stamp for the California legislature. There is virtually no influence of limited government or Republican principles outside of Orange County or San Diego County.

It is a Democratically dominated and controlled Legislature which dictates to the Governor. There really is no balance in California, so no, you can't punt that way.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

I didn't use the word "energy."

I realized that after the fact, and changed it to "passion." Doesn't affect that content of the post, but point taken.

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Scozzafava is absolutely a moderate (honestly surprised you would argue to the contrary). That's what Republicans hated most about her (and why they picked Hoffman, who was far from moderate). Conservatives pushed the ultra-conservative Hoffman in opposition to Scozzafava and wound up handing the seat to Democrats.

Republicans did not pick Hoffman. They picked Scozzafava, and not in a primary, as you said. Had an actual primary been held and Hoffman been selected, he would've won that race. This example is a total contrast to what you said.

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

As for Rubio, Rasmussen is the only major poll showing Rubio beating Meek, whereas every poll shows Crist beating Meek. Take your chances with Rubio, please.

Cites, please. And try to keep them recent, if you can find them.

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

As for the others, the point isn't that the incumbent will lose (although perhaps he/she will), but that the tea partiers are doing everything in their power to promote candidates who are less electable in the general than the current party candidate. I say, more power to them. Even if they don't beat the incumbent, they fracture the party.

Cite some evidence that conservatives are doing "everything in their power" to oust Bennett and Kirk.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Tex

I realized that after the fact, and changed it to "passion." Doesn't affect that content of the post, but point taken.



Republicans did not pick Hoffman. They picked Scozzafava, and not in a primary, as you said. Had an actual primary been held and Hoffman been selected, he would've won that race. This example is a total contrast to what you said.



Cites, please. And try to keep them recent, if you can find them.



Cite some evidence that conservatives are doing "everything in their power" to oust Bennett and Kirk.

Tex, what is the solution to get the damn whackos out of Lincoln's party?

Why do our whacko brethren keep trying to undo the party?