AR-Sen: Lincoln Trails

So sez GOP huckster Ras. Now I certainly do not hope Lincoln loses to a Republican. But I am not one to be an outside interloper.

Let the local blogs handle it. Wake me up when the results come in next year.

Speaking for me only

< Endgame On HCR | Tuesday Late Afternoon Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    heh (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by jes on Tue Sep 29, 2009 at 06:21:08 PM EST
    no nosey fellow you, kitty cat!

    Heh (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Sep 29, 2009 at 06:23:51 PM EST
    Well played.

    Since having a 60 vote majority does not (5.00 / 2) (#8)
    by MO Blue on Tue Sep 29, 2009 at 07:25:57 PM EST
    seem to mean all 60 will vote for cloture, I don't see how Lincoln losing will make much difference.

    Well (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by cawaltz on Tue Sep 29, 2009 at 07:26:07 PM EST
    She won't be getting any support from me. Particularly since she doesn't appear anxious to support her constituency by allowing them an alternative option to private health insurance options.

    Seems I remember a certain blogger (none / 0) (#1)
    by MO Blue on Tue Sep 29, 2009 at 06:13:16 PM EST
    who was more than happy to be an outside interloper in a Senate race in CT. An effort BTW, that I supported wholeheartedly.

    there were a lot of those (none / 0) (#4)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Sep 29, 2009 at 06:25:02 PM EST
    But I also wrote this.

    I find her position (none / 0) (#5)
    by Mike Pridmore on Tue Sep 29, 2009 at 06:31:45 PM EST
    on health care loathesome.  (She voted against the public option in the finance committee today.) But as an Arkansan, I don't believe this poll for a moment.

    Hmm (none / 0) (#6)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 29, 2009 at 06:39:37 PM EST
    send Hillary to campaign for her?

    She may well lose (none / 0) (#7)
    by andgarden on Tue Sep 29, 2009 at 07:06:35 PM EST
    Arkansas lags the rest of the deep south in electing Republicans to Federal office.

    Why (none / 0) (#10)
    by mmc9431 on Tue Sep 29, 2009 at 08:25:20 PM EST
    I wonder if her decision on HCR is helping her or hurting her there? It would be interesting to see if she's losing Democratic support because she's acting like a Republican.

    She will lose..... (none / 0) (#11)
    by mikeel on Tue Sep 29, 2009 at 10:21:07 PM EST
    Not because Arkansas is becoming more Republican, she will lose due to her opposition to the public option.

    My prediction for next year is that Democrats in tough races will be better off supporting the public option.

    When given a choice between a real Republican and someone acting like one, the real Republican will win.

    not sure how this would change things but (none / 0) (#12)
    by Socraticsilence on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 12:08:41 AM EST
    Ras is such a hack its hard to take anything the man says at face value guy had McCain winning Indiana and North Carolina by like 7-10 points, dudes overall track record is sketchy and you can't respect a man who introduces new polling metrics expressly to make a Pol look less popular than he would have looked in your (and every other pollsters) previous metric.

    I'm also guessing (none / 0) (#13)
    by Gisleson on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 01:53:02 PM EST
    You don't have the name of anyone who's willing to run against Lincoln.

    Lincoln deserves a challenger and I hope the folks down in Arkansas find one to rally around.

    If there's one state in the union where the netroots can't do any big footing, it's Arkansas.

    Go get em Giselson (none / 0) (#14)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Oct 01, 2009 at 09:16:17 AM EST
    In your opinion of course (none / 0) (#16)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Oct 01, 2009 at 11:36:33 AM EST
    The problem with your theory is no one actually adheres to it as buttinskeeism is practiced by everyone.

    you seem unaware of that fact.

    I would like to think my comments about Al Franken (none / 0) (#17)
    by Gisleson on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:26:06 AM EST
    being anointed by Act Blue constitutes first hand knowledge of buttinksiism.

    Yes, it happens. But it used to happen quietly, behind the scenes. Unions would use intermediaries to let candidates know there'd be money for them later so burn through everything you got in the primary.

    Letting the netroots spearhead anti-Blue Dog efforts is bad strategy. The netroots could as easily work to build grassroots. Out of state money into one candidate's coffers is a top>down solution.

    Netroots money to build local online news services is bottom>up problem solving. As are ads chipping away at the Blue Dogs, national blogs ripping on Blue Dogs, etc.

    What I object to is the netroots choosing the Blue Dog killers. What is so heinous about letting the locals choose, and the netroots fund?