Well it does border Indiana....
Posted on 05/21/2014 8:29:24 AM PDT by centurion316
Among the themes of second-guessing and deep regret that are emerging of rubble of last night's election is the thought that the Senate could be under the control of Republicans right now if weren't for their habit of running supremely unlikable candidates. It was bad enough that Mitt Romney was soundly defeated for the White House, but what hurts even more right now is that Republicans, who at one point had hoped for a sweep of both houses of Congress, actually lost ground in the upper chamber. Depending on your definition of a poachable, that makes as many seven races over the last two election cycles that could have been theirs for the taking.
(Excerpt) Read more at thewire.com ...
Rather pull the band aid off slowly, huh?
Easier to vote for their enablers, eh?
Well it does border Indiana....
He has a pen and a phone, he doesn't need legislation.
We are about to witness powers, not unlike the monarch we came here to avoid, being layed on us.
The same solution I proposed for Boehner, Cantor and Ryan a few months back, the seats in the House are not nearly as important as one seat in the Senate.
Mitt Romney for President! Woo! Woo!
Then you don't get out enough. Tokyo Rove, did all he could to help Dingy Harry by attacking his opponent, and that is not the only one, he might have even practiced a little Witch Craft.
You have voted for plenty of them, they just don't tell you they are democrats.
Remember when Ollie North ran for Senate? They even dragged Nancy Reagan out to cripple him.
They were winning the Senate prior to the convention. After the convention, McConnell went AWOL and Romney never extended coattails to campaign on a national message of sending a team to Congress to work with him as President.
Each state, each candidate, was left the themselves to win their seats.
Republicans went from being ahead in 7 races before the convention to losing 2 seats after the convention.
It was not because of flawed candidates. It was because of a failure by the party to create a national message that everyone ran on.
-PJ
I was trying to remember North, I remembered the situation, but couldn’t remember the people involved.
North would have been a great asset in the Senate.
There are other examples of it also.
I disagree. Their candidates stunk the place up. Case in point, Todd Akin. No hypothetical nationalized race would have changed that outcome.
Agree with your post.
One other point...there really only about 10 or so competitive Senate races each 2 yr cycle...it really allows the MSM to focus/concentrate resources on shredding Republicans.
Much different than House elections where the MSM would have to attack maybe a hundred candidates every time.
The truth is that he was abandoned by the GOP after his gaffe, and if he had been supported by them before the gaffe, the gaffe might not have even happened.
I tracked the 2012 campaing very closely for FR, posting weekly poll predictions and probability charts. Republicans were riding high before the convention, but completely dropped the ball after the convention. That didn't happen because the candidates suddenly "stunk," it happened because the leadership is unqualified to lead.
-PJ
Ouch. The burn is strong in this one.
He was batting against minor league pitching. He couldn't handle the heat and breaking balls when he got to the bigs.
Tommy Thompson?
Scott Brown?
Connie Mack?
Linda McMahon?
Pete Hoekstra?
Linda Lingle?
Denny Rehberg?
George Allen?
All stinkers?
Here is my last 2012 election report before the election.
-PJ
I don’t think that you understood what I was trying to say. The range that I quoted was the projection for 2016. You named the culprits for previous debacles. One that count, you are correct. Muldoons, Morons, Moe, Curly, Larry.
I said that the leadership has nobody to blame but themselves, not stinky candidates.
If we don't change the leadership, then there is no reason to expect 2014 to be any different than 2012.
Now maybe, just maybe, 2014 will be another wave year that sweeps in Republicans despite themselves, but then I won't expect them to perform any better in the majority than they do in the minority.
You'd still think that Nancy Pelosi is running the House, and we'll think that Harry Reid is still running the Senate.
-PJ
Wouldn’t it be smarter, cuban leaf, to leave the Senate race blank in the general election: have that contest have a noticeable low turnout?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.