Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

?
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/ ... iticalWire+(Political+Wire" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)

"As the attorney general of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, I'm always amused to get a lecture on constitutional law from a self-certified ophthalmologist."

-- Kentucky U.S. Senate candidate Jack Conway (D), quoted by the Cincinnati Enquirer, in a debate with rival Rand Paul (R).

Mike Castle had kinda the same attitude towards Elphaba...

Rob Iola wrote:Mike Castle had kinda the same attitude towards Elphaba...

And Mike Castle was running in the Republican primary. She'd get roasted by him if they went head to head in the general election.

RealClearPolitics still has Paul up 5 points.

Skjellyfetti wrote:

Rob Iola wrote:Mike Castle had kinda the same attitude towards Elphaba...

And Mike Castle was running in the Republican primary. She'd get roasted by him if they went head to head in the general election.

All that the assh0le-idiot Mike Castle had to do was give some attention to his Republican base to win the primary - just treat them like voters. The arrogant prick failed to do so. His primary loss is entrely his own fault.

native wrote:

Skjellyfetti wrote:
And Mike Castle was running in the Republican primary. She'd get roasted by him if they went head to head in the general election.

All that the assh0le-idiot Mike Castle had to do was give some attention to his Republican base to win the primary - just treat them like voters. The arrogant prick failed to do so. His primary loss is entrely his own fault.

I didn't say it wasn't. Just pointing out it doesn't make sense to compare a primary fight to a general election.

Ivytalk wrote:RealClearPolitics still has Paul up 5 points.

with the most recent poll being from October 9. I bet it's tightened.

Skjellyfetti wrote:

Ivytalk wrote:RealClearPolitics still has Paul up 5 points.

with the most recent poll being from October 9. I bet it's tightened.

Thank you, Herr Spindoktor.

native wrote:

Skjellyfetti wrote:
And Mike Castle was running in the Republican primary. She'd get roasted by him if they went head to head in the general election.

All that the assh0le-idiot Mike Castle had to do was give some attention to his Republican base to win the primary - just treat them like voters. The arrogant prick failed to do so. His primary loss is entrely his own fault.

We understand. He was a bit too moderate for you. God forbid we put any candidate up for vote that is willing to compromise from time to time.

I liked Mike Castle a lot. I wish there were more candidates like him on both sides of the aisle instead of the batshit crazies that are increasingly being nominated on both sides.

93henfan wrote:

native wrote:
All that the assh0le-idiot Mike Castle had to do was give some attention to his Republican base to win the primary - just treat them like voters. The arrogant prick failed to do so. His primary loss is entrely his own fault.

We understand. He was a bit too moderate for you. God forbid we put any candidate up for vote that is willing to compromise from time to time.

I liked Mike Castle a lot. I wish there were more candidates like him on both sides of the aisle instead of the batshit crazies that are increasingly being nominated on both sides.

+1

93henfan wrote:

native wrote:
All that the assh0le-idiot Mike Castle had to do was give some attention to his Republican base to win the primary - just treat them like voters. The arrogant prick failed to do so. His primary loss is entrely his own fault.

We understand. He was a bit too moderate for you. God forbid we put any candidate up for vote that is willing to compromise from time to time.

I liked Mike Castle a lot. I wish there were more candidates like him on both sides of the aisle instead of the batshit crazies that are increasingly being nominated on both sides.

No, 93hen, you and blue pants do not understand at all.

Mike Castle's so-called "moderation" is irrelevant to my support. I liked him, too, and respected his long and distinguished public service. I would not support Castle for a seat in Kansas or Wyoming, but I fully supported his candidacy in Delaware. I fully support and admire Susan Collins in Maine, too, and Arnold's first year in California, and Scott Brown's principled moderation in Massachusetts.

The primary election was Mike Castle's to lose, and he lost it. What you fail grasp is that am pissed at Mike Castle not because of his policy stands, but because of his arrogant and complacent attitude which lost the primary, and his subsequent whiny and petty behavior.

native wrote:his arrogant and complacent attitude which lost the primary, and his subsequent whiny and petty behavior.

Examples? Complacent is about the only adjective I can see that might apply.

93henfan wrote:

native wrote:his arrogant and complacent attitude which lost the primary, and his subsequent whiny and petty behavior.

Examples? Complacent is about the only adjective I can see that might apply.

Arrogant is the flipside of complacent, 93hen. Castle was unnecessarily dismissive not only of O'Donnell, but of her issues and her supporters and their issues. That is arrogance.

It would have been much better for Castle to have ignored O'Donnell and stressed his own conservative accomplishments. He could at least have feigned interest in tea party issues during the primary season. He gained nothing from being so disrespectful of the tea party.

Fred Barnes wrote a superb critique of Castle's primary race, in which he lists four failures:

1. Castle failed to run as a conservative even though he had taken several principled conservative stands.
2. Castle stressed his strategic electability in the general election instead of his connectedness to primary voters.
3. Castle was demonstrably disrespectful of his opponent and thus disrespectful of her supporters and their issues.
4. Castle lowered himself to personal attacks in a year when issues are at the fore front.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/why ... astle-lost" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

native wrote:

93henfan wrote:
Examples? Complacent is about the only adjective I can see that might apply.

Arrogant is the flipside of complacent, 93hen. Castle was unnecessarily dismissive not only of O'Donnell, but of her issues and her supporters and their issues. That is arrogance.

It would have been much better for Castle to have ignored O'Donnell and stressed his own conservative accomplishments. He could at least have feigned interest in tea party issues during the primary season. He gained nothing from being so disrespectful of the tea party.

Fred Barnes wrote a superb critique of Castle's primary race, in which he lists four failures:

1. Castle failed to run as a conservative even though he had taken several principled conservative stands.
2. Castle stressed his strategic electability in the general election instead of his connectedness to primary voters.
3. Castle was demonstrably disrespectful of his opponent and thus disrespectful of her supporters and their issues.
4. Castle lowered himself to personal attacks in a year when issues are at the fore front.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/why ... astle-lost" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I don't see the word 'arrogance" mentioned in the article. Regarding personal attacks, I don't believe they started on Castle's side, but he did go tit for tat, especially after O'Donnell's staff stooped to questioning his sexuality. O'Donnell and the teabaggers took the low road from jump. It was an incredibly crude, amateurish campaign with millions of dollars behind it, completely obliterating the Delaware Way of politicking, and unfortunately Castle broke the mold and resorted to similar crudeness in the late stages. Getting smeared can do that to you.

I'm glad he did not endorse her though, or run as a third candidate. Anything that keeps that Jersey wench out of office is a good thing for Delaware.

93henfan wrote:

native wrote:
Arrogant is the flipside of complacent, 93hen. Castle was unnecessarily dismissive not only of O'Donnell, but of her issues and her supporters and their issues. That is arrogance.

It would have been much better for Castle to have ignored O'Donnell and stressed his own conservative accomplishments. He could at least have feigned interest in tea party issues during the primary season. He gained nothing from being so disrespectful of the tea party.

Fred Barnes wrote a superb critique of Castle's primary race, in which he lists four failures:

1. Castle failed to run as a conservative even though he had taken several principled conservative stands.
2. Castle stressed his strategic electability in the general election instead of his connectedness to primary voters.
3. Castle was demonstrably disrespectful of his opponent and thus disrespectful of her supporters and their issues.
4. Castle lowered himself to personal attacks in a year when issues are at the fore front.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/why ... astle-lost" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I don't see the word 'arrogance" mentioned in the article. Regarding personal attacks, I don't believe they started on Castle's side, but he did go tit for tat, especially after O'Donnell's staff stooped to questioning his sexuality. O'Donnell and the teabaggers took the low road from jump.

You were there experiencing the local media reports, so I take your post and observations seriously, 93hen.

But I am sticking by the word "arrogant" to describe Castle. He had enough experience to run a better campaign. In researching my posts, I could not find a single instance in which he attempted to reach out to the tea party or throw them a bone. His dismissiveness of O'Donnel's supporters was vain, foolish, and yes, arrogant.

Moreover, as the senior more experienced politician, I hold him to a higher standard than the newbie. Even if the other side did start the personal attacks (debatable) there was no reason for Castle to respond tit-for-tat, especially since the responses were vacuous. He should have exhibited his statesmanship and focused on the issues.

Castle should also have swallowed his pride and graciously endorsed the winner like a man, instead of making excuses and laying blame.

Thread hijack by post 2?!?

That's quality right there friends....

Rob Iola wrote:Thread hijack by post 2?!?

That's quality right there friends....

native wrote:

Rob Iola wrote:Thread hijack by post 2?!?

That's quality right there friends....

native,
Secretly, I like you. Hell, even publicly. but, you are one know-it-all Conk motherfvcker.

Cap'n Cat wrote:

native wrote:

native,
Secretly, I like you. Hell, even publicly. but, you are one know-it-all Conk motherfvcker.