Skip to comments.
NYT Editorial: Negativity Wins the Senate
NYT Editorial ^
| 11-5-2014
| THE EDITORIAL BOARD
Posted on 11/05/2014 5:39:55 AM PST by Sir Napsalot
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-52 next last
Dem took control of Congress was not due to negativity. Oh no. Because the country embraced progressive agenda. Now that they were soundly rejected, it is all because of negativity. Got it.
Ridiculous as this sounds, Obama one up it on the ridiculous scale: Obama: It's the Map's Fault
Can you believe this %$^&#? Sadly I can.
To: Sir Napsalot
Negativity Wins the Senate No, it didn't.
2
posted on
11/05/2014 5:41:25 AM PST
by
kevkrom
(I'm not an unreasonable man... well, actually, I am. But hear me out anyway.)
To: Sir Napsalot
after 8 years of democrat positivity
LOL!
3
posted on
11/05/2014 5:41:42 AM PST
by
silverleaf
(Age takes a toll: Please have exact change)
To: Sir Napsalot
Yes. The negativity of NOPE.
4
posted on
11/05/2014 5:42:41 AM PST
by
Paine in the Neck
(Socialism consumes EVERYTHING)
To: Sir Napsalot
Waaaaaah. Whine, cry. LOSERS,
5
posted on
11/05/2014 5:43:01 AM PST
by
LS
('Castles made of sand, fall in the sea . . . eventually.' Hendrix)
To: Sir Napsalot
As usual, the old grey whore is attempting to spin events like a top.
What cratered the dems this time around as much as anything was their own dear leader, Obama, when he stated how "he may not be on the ballot, but his policies are".
This foolish hubris hung itself around the dem's necks like a millstone.
6
posted on
11/05/2014 5:43:26 AM PST
by
Joe Brower
(The "American People" are no longer capable of self-governance.)
To: Sir Napsalot
Black crepe for the NYT’s newsroom.
To: Sir Napsalot
I hate to be crude, but...
FUNYT
8
posted on
11/05/2014 5:44:20 AM PST
by
chrisser
(When do we get to tell the Middle East to stop clinging to their guns and religion?)
To: Sir Napsalot
When an abused spouse finally ends the marriage, that’s negative?
9
posted on
11/05/2014 5:48:03 AM PST
by
Raycpa
To: Sir Napsalot
10
posted on
11/05/2014 5:51:42 AM PST
by
jimbo123
To: Sir Napsalot
NYT does have a point. We all know Republicans running for Senate never articulated a clear “positive” agenda for what they will do. Part of this is usual problem of the media failing to report the “positive” measures that Reid had killed in the Senate.
However, when a president is actively overstepping his powers and also trying to implement policies that are destroying the country, the Congress’ job is to OPPOSE. Let’s hope they fulfill this promise.
To: Sir Napsalot
Brace yourselves boys and girls for an onslaught of articles and commentaries designed to tell us that last night’s results didn’t mean what they meant.
12
posted on
11/05/2014 5:52:49 AM PST
by
gov_bean_ counter
(Romans 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools)
To: Sir Napsalot
From the people who wanted to cancel silly things like “elections”...
13
posted on
11/05/2014 5:54:44 AM PST
by
Caipirabob
(Communists... Socialists... Democrats...Traitors... Who can tell the difference?)
To: Sir Napsalot
The NYT editorial board staff inhabit a rather special world in which nobody votes Republican and nobody knows anybody who has ever voted Republican.
No wonder they get it wrong, this time & always.
The atmosphere in Starbucks parlors across the nation is especially gloomy today. Defiant baristas are wearing their best Che Guevara T-shirts.
14
posted on
11/05/2014 5:55:27 AM PST
by
elcid1970
("I am a radicalized infidel.")
To: Sir Napsalot
People being fed up with liberal rule won the Senate. Nothing was more negative than democratic elected officials inciting and trying to reenact 60s style race riots. Hey NY Times, it doesn’t get any lower or more negative than that.
15
posted on
11/05/2014 5:55:47 AM PST
by
jersey117
(sams.)
To: Sir Napsalot
Once again, the NYT illustrates that with liberals its always someone else’s fault. They never accept any responsibility for their own failures. This response is 100% predictable.
This election was all about rejection and repudiation. People simply don’t want what Obama and the Democrats are selling. They experienced it for six years and concluded it doesn’t work.
To: jersey117
Sounds like a bunch of sour grapes to me from NYT.
17
posted on
11/05/2014 5:57:33 AM PST
by
Free America52
(The White guys are getting pissed off. We beat Hitler Hirohito and Krushchev. Obama will be easy.)
To: gov_bean_ counter
and how this “paves the way” for Hillary to cruise to the WH
18
posted on
11/05/2014 5:57:45 AM PST
by
silverleaf
(Age takes a toll: Please have exact change)
To: jimbo123
*snickering!*
19
posted on
11/05/2014 5:58:24 AM PST
by
skinkinthegrass
("Obama STINKS and his best friends are flies." d8^)
To: Sir Napsalot
Speaking of negativity . . .
20
posted on
11/05/2014 5:58:27 AM PST
by
Hoodat
(Article 4, Section 4)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-52 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson