
http://news.yahoo.com/republican-jolly- ... ction.html










Very interesting.HI54UNI wrote:Some additional background on the race if you're bored
http://www3.blogs.rollcall.com/rothenbl ... d-to-lose/


Right...SuperHornet wrote:Typically, when one candidate outspends the other by that kind of a margin, that candidate wins. Besides, the media portrays nearly every Democrat (save for those with ethics problems, which even then are often swept under the carpet) as infallible, so on that alone, this is a "win" for the Republicans....

SH is right here. It's unusual if the candidate who spent less wins.Chizzang wrote:Right...SuperHornet wrote:Typically, when one candidate outspends the other by that kind of a margin, that candidate wins. Besides, the media portrays nearly every Democrat (save for those with ethics problems, which even then are often swept under the carpet) as infallible, so on that alone, this is a "win" for the Republicans....
and didn't two Koch brothers just spend like $500 Million on Romney
on top of Sheldon Adelson's $100 million flushed down the toilet
This just in "Politics is expensive"
I'm still waiting for the "BREAKING NEWS" part of this whole thing

Registration in that district has been pretty evenly split for many years and the Dems poured boatloads of money into the race.Chizzang wrote:Can you explain how
1) a Republican dies
2) is replaced by a Republican (which happens 80% of the time)
3) and this is seen as a victory..?
I'm all ears


Most campaign analysts and all pre-election polls named Sink the favorite in the race. Sink held statewide office as Florida Chief Financial Officer from 2007-2010. In 2010, one of the bloodiest political years for Democrats ever, Sink came within a hair of winning Florida’s gubernatorial election. Sink had a tremendous name recognition advantage over Jolly
Sink decided to counter anti-Obamacare sentiment by defining Jolly as a scientifically dangerous climate change skeptic.
If there is any congressional district in America where Democrats should theoretically get the most bang for their buck selling global warming alarmism, Florida District 13 should be it. The district is urban and decidedly moderate. The Tea Party barely exists here. Northeastern and Rust Belt snowbirds dominate the demographics. President Obama carried the district in 2008 and 2012.
Plus, they brought in Bill Clinton and Biden.CitadelGrad wrote:Registration in that district has been pretty evenly split for many years and the Dems poured boatloads of money into the race.Chizzang wrote:Can you explain how
1) a Republican dies
2) is replaced by a Republican (which happens 80% of the time)
3) and this is seen as a victory..?
I'm all ears
The results actually weren't very close if you consider the Libertarian (anti-Obama) candidate got nearly 5% of the vote.

The HI54UNI corollary to Godwins Law - how long before the Koch brothers appear in a political thread.Chizzang wrote:Right...SuperHornet wrote:Typically, when one candidate outspends the other by that kind of a margin, that candidate wins. Besides, the media portrays nearly every Democrat (save for those with ethics problems, which even then are often swept under the carpet) as infallible, so on that alone, this is a "win" for the Republicans....
and didn't two Koch brothers just spend like $500 Million on Romney
on top of Sheldon Adelson's $100 million flushed down the toilet
This just in "Politics is expensive"
I'm still waiting for the "BREAKING NEWS" part of this whole thing


Damn you!HI54UNI wrote:The HI54UNI corollary to Godwins Law - how long before the Koch brothers appear in a political thread.Chizzang wrote:
Right...
and didn't two Koch brothers just spend like $500 Million on Romney
on top of Sheldon Adelson's $100 million flushed down the toilet
This just in "Politics is expensive"
I'm still waiting for the "BREAKING NEWS" part of this whole thing

I love the Koch brotherskalm wrote:Damn you!HI54UNI wrote:
The HI54UNI corollary to Godwins Law - how long before the Koch brothers appear in a political thread.![]()
Also Saul Alinsky.

Warren Buffet, George Soros....Chizzang wrote:I love the Koch brotherskalm wrote:
Damn you!![]()
Also Saul Alinsky.I mean who else has a half a billion to just shovel into a furnace

You don't think they get bang for their buck?Chizzang wrote:I love the Koch brotherskalm wrote:
Damn you!![]()
Also Saul Alinsky.I mean who else has a half a billion to just shovel into a furnace
You're an idiot. That seat has been Republican for 30 years.SuperHornet wrote:Typically, when one candidate outspends the other by that kind of a margin, that candidate wins. Besides, the media portrays nearly every Democrat (save for those with ethics problems, which even then are often swept under the carpet) as infallible, so on that alone, this is a "win" for the Republicans....


kalm wrote:You don't think they get bang for their buck?Chizzang wrote:
I love the Koch brothersI mean who else has a half a billion to just shovel into a furnace

I'll give that spin and A for effort!dbackjon wrote:LOL
One - District has been REPUBLICAN for decades, and has majority republican representative
Two - Conk running was aide to highly popular congressman
Three - Said aide ran on platform reminding how much federal pork the previous congressman brought to district, and how much he personally had a hand in it.
Four - Sink is a shitty candidate, who ran away from Obamacare. Sink couldn't beat admitted fraud felon Prick Scott for Gov.
So in reality, the Dem was out-spent - by a guy using our own tax dollars.

ASUMountaineer wrote:I'll give that spin and A for effort!dbackjon wrote:LOL
One - District has been REPUBLICAN for decades, and has majority republican representative
Two - Conk running was aide to highly popular congressman
Three - Said aide ran on platform reminding how much federal pork the previous congressman brought to district, and how much he personally had a hand in it.
Four - Sink is a shitty candidate, who ran away from Obamacare. Sink couldn't beat admitted fraud felon Prick Scott for Gov.
So in reality, the Dem was out-spent - by a guy using our own tax dollars.

Uh, wrong. That district voted for Obama in 08'.Ibanez wrote:You're an idiot. That seat has been Republican for 30 years.SuperHornet wrote:Typically, when one candidate outspends the other by that kind of a margin, that candidate wins. Besides, the media portrays nearly every Democrat (save for those with ethics problems, which even then are often swept under the carpet) as infallible, so on that alone, this is a "win" for the Republicans....That district voted Republican in 2000, 2004 and 2008 for President. In 2012 they were 51% for Obama. The races have usually been close so this isn't an upset.
You should stick to what you know best, shitty TV shows from the 70s and 80s, root beer and kittens.

Despite her spendthrift exercise of political speech rights, Sink was sunk!kalm wrote:SH is right here. It's unusual if the candidate who spent less wins.Chizzang wrote:
Right...
and didn't two Koch brothers just spend like $500 Million on Romney
on top of Sheldon Adelson's $100 million flushed down the toilet
This just in "Politics is expensive"
I'm still waiting for the "BREAKING NEWS" part of this whole thing