Herschel For Senate

Generally speaking, I think Rs will clean up next year

CNN doesn't like it

Personally, I am fine with it. I guess CNN is worried all those white supremacists will vote for Herschel?

(08-26-2021 11:04 AM)BSWBRice Wrote:  Generally speaking, I think Rs will clean up next year

Unless they screw the pooch, the way they seem always able to do.

(08-26-2021 11:34 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-26-2021 11:04 AM)BSWBRice Wrote:  Generally speaking, I think Rs will clean up next year

Unless they screw the pooch, the way they seem always able to do.

Herschel seems to have so significant personal problems which have the potential to derail his candidacy. I read an article that talked about this idea that his running for office in Georgia may not be an especially good thing for Rs.

Quote: Harris County, Texas, Elections Administrator Isabel Longoria (D) resigned on Tuesday after multiple mishaps marred this month’s primary elections.

“Ultimately, the buck stops with me,” Longoria said, the Houston Chronicle reported. “Now, we have a real opportunity to have a hard but necessary conversation in order to solve the problems for future elections and further bolster elections administration.”

She will officially step down on July 1 after she was asked to resign by Republicans and Democratic County Judge Lina Hidalgo.

Issues with the March 1 primary included a lack of support form the elections office, malfunctioning machines and lack of supplies, according to the Chronicle.

The county also found 10,000 uncounted ballots the week after the election was over. Officials said the votes contained around 6,000 Democratic ballots and 4,000 Republican ballots.

Houston Elections Clerk, Isabel Longoria, resigns after disaster of an election last week. AOC-lite, Lina Hidalgo, appointed an Elections Administrator (rather than a duly elected Elections Clerk), Isabel Longoria, who, through incompetency and (more likely) deliberate sabotage, has created chaos in Harris County primaries.


Isabel Longoria, a 32-year-old lesbian and Montrose (Houston) native who was appointed by the Commissioners Court and sworn in by Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo on Thursday, November 18, 2021 to be the very first elections administrator for Harris County. This is what happens when identity politics and quotas are more important than competence or experience to do the actual job. She holds a Bachelor’s Degree of Sociology from Trinity University (San Antonio) and a Master’s Degree in Public Affairs from the University of Texas LBJ School of Public Affairs (Austin). Doesn't look like those elite degress are worth much as far as teaching competence.

A white male Trump supporter ousted a woke Democrat white female: after just a single term as Norman’s mayor, Leftist Brea Clark was defeated in Tuesday’s runoff election, by a vote of 53.4% to 46.6%.


Norman mayor-elect Larry Heikkila

Quote:"For far too long, the citizens of Norman have been victimized by the overreaching of the extremist council,” said Heikkila, who carried the backing of Norman’s Fraternal Order of Police and campaigned on increasing funding for the Norman Police Department.

Clark was the youngest woman to hold the mayor’s office when first elected in 2019. Her tenure saw an unsuccessful recall attempt and death threats over coronavirus restrictions and the city council’s decision to divert more than $865,000 from a proposed police department’s budget increase to pay for social services to help the city’s homeless, mentally ill and other vulnerable populations. Norman was the first city in the state to implement a mask mandate."

Oklahoma is O K

FWIW, R’s held onto this seat 54/46 in the blue wave year of 2018. It was 59/41 for the R in 2020:

Quote:Josh Kraushaar
@HotlineJosh
Long Island sound: "With about 7,100 votes counted, Republican Ari Brown holds a huge 66-34 lead over Democrat David Lobl in a Long Island [NY leg] seat Trump took 52-47 in 2020. Uncounted mail-in votes may shift the margin, but Brown has declared victory in this GOP-held seat."
2:31 PM · Apr 11, 2022

Did you guys see that Herschel Walker declined to participate in the Republican debate in Georgia? Good move? Only downside for him? Do you respect the decision?

Jake Blumencranz, Rice '18, running for NY State Assembly on Long Island as a R.

Nice guy. Whoever gets through the primary has the leg up in the general as it's a pretty safe R seat.

JakeforNY.com

(04-13-2022 12:53 PM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  Jake Blumencranz, Rice '18, running for NY State Assembly on Long Island as a R.

Nice guy. Whoever gets through the primary has the leg up in the general as it's a pretty safe R seat.

JakeforNY.com

Is it weird that his website has basically zero hint of policy beyond the fact that he is a Republican? Or maybe I missed a hotlink?

(04-13-2022 12:58 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(04-13-2022 12:53 PM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  Jake Blumencranz, Rice '18, running for NY State Assembly on Long Island as a R.

Nice guy. Whoever gets through the primary has the leg up in the general as it's a pretty safe R seat.

JakeforNY.com

Is it weird that his website has basically zero hint of policy beyond the fact that he is a Republican? Or maybe I missed a hotlink?

I don't peruse websites (R or D) often, but my impression is they mainly try to avoid controversy, so, IMO, not weird.

However, it is early yet.

Democrats are handing republicans a golden opportunity between the incompetence of Biden and the incompetence plus unlikeability of Kamala the ****. But so far, republicans are too stupid to have a plan to take maximum advantage. If they blow this, then I see no reason for hope about the future.

How hard would it have been to do what Newt did in 1994? Develop a set of issue positions, reality check them with polls and focus groups to determine which ones are the big winners, put the winners into a Contract, and make all republicans stick to the Contract. When you are asked about something in the Contract, promote it. When you are asked about something not in the Contract, find a way to shift the discussion to something that is in the Contract. And when you get elected, be sure to do exactly what you said you were going to do.

Democrats need an issue to rally the faithful. Look for one to be manufactured soon.

I agree the GOP is not taking maximum advantage if the situation, but they still, even without a concentrated campaign, should sweep the Congress, because the left is trying their best to give it back.

My curiosity goes to 2024, and wondering who the nominees and their running mates will be. On the left, will they nominate the octogenarian Biden for a second term? If not not, will they turn to Harris, who has been disappointing even for an identity hire? If not, who will they turn to?

On the right, I hope Trump does not run. He could win the nomination again with a series of plurality wins in winner-take-all states. I have several people I would prefer to see.

But it comes down to Trump vs. Harris, I would vote Trump, based on his record in office - and hers. Same for Trump v. Biden.

(04-14-2022 09:17 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Democrats are handing republicans a golden opportunity between the incompetence of Biden and the incompetence plus unlikeability of Kamala the ****. But so far, republicans are too stupid to have a plan to take maximum advantage. If they blow this, then I see no reason for hope about the future.

How hard would it have been to do what Newt did in 1994? Develop a set of issue positions, reality check them with polls and focus groups to determine which ones are the big winners, put the winners into a Contract, and make all republicans stick to the Contract. When you are asked about something in the Contract, promote it. When you are asked about something not in the Contract, find a way to shift the discussion to something that is in the Contract. And when you get elected, be sure to do exactly what you said you were going to do.

Rick Scott did just that. It just turns out that some of those policy positions are really unpopular.

Right now, it seems like it's a double down on culture war issues - abortion, gay marriage, and transgender issues are what are dominating the Republican talking points. They'll benefit from being the party out of power, per usual, but it's not clear how well they'll capitalize on that like you allude to.

(04-14-2022 10:51 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(04-14-2022 09:17 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Democrats are handing republicans a golden opportunity between the incompetence of Biden and the incompetence plus unlikeability of Kamala the ****. But so far, republicans are too stupid to have a plan to take maximum advantage. If they blow this, then I see no reason for hope about the future.

How hard would it have been to do what Newt did in 1994? Develop a set of issue positions, reality check them with polls and focus groups to determine which ones are the big winners, put the winners into a Contract, and make all republicans stick to the Contract. When you are asked about something in the Contract, promote it. When you are asked about something not in the Contract, find a way to shift the discussion to something that is in the Contract. And when you get elected, be sure to do exactly what you said you were going to do.

Rick Scott did just that. It just turns out that some of those policy positions are really unpopular.

Right now, it seems like it's a double down on culture war issues - abortion, gay marriage, and transgender issues are what are dominating the Republican talking points. They'll benefit from being the party out of power, per usual, but it's not clear how well they'll capitalize on that like you allude to.

Gay marriage? How old is this thread? I thought that was settled years ago. FTR, I have always favored gay marriage.

As for abortion and transgender issues, it takes two sides to make an issue.

I see the issues being:

A. Economic. Can the Republicans hang the inflation on the Democrats? Can the Democrats hang it on Putin?
B. Foreign Policy. Are we doing enough for Ukraine? Are we too slow? Are we being snookered by Iran?
C. Immigration policies. The difference between legal and illegal.
D. Educational policies. Do first graders need lessons on gender assignment or racial history? How about ninth graders?


For the democrats, I expect they will try and find a way to make race an issue. Always do.

(04-14-2022 10:51 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(04-14-2022 09:17 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  reality check them with polls and focus groups to determine which ones are the big winners, put the winners into a Contract, and make all republicans stick to the Contract.

Rick Scott did just that. It just turns out that some of those policy positions are really unpopular.

Right now, it seems like it's a double down on culture war issues - abortion, gay marriage, and transgender issues are what are dominating the Republican talking points. They'll benefit from being the party out of power, per usual, but it's not clear how well they'll capitalize on that like you allude to.

1) Rick Scott isn't Speaker of the House as Newt was. He's a first-term Senator and has no power in the party. I had to look him up just to know who he was. I have no idea if he's a moderate or an extremist... so I don't know if you mean this out of respect or contempt for his actions

2) If those policies are really unpopular then they didn't reality check them and put the winners in a contract....

Bottom line, he DIDN'T do 'just that', and he wouldn't have had the power nor position to do so, even if he had tried. He may have proposed it, but he lacks the power to do anything.

That said, there is a massive lie being spread among the left that the right is driving all of this. First of all, Gay marriage is a done deal. Nobody is doing anything to stop it. They still may not like it, but I haven't seen one story about legislation regarding it. Abortion, I agree... The right is pushing forward on this aggressively, but so too is the left. These laws that make abortion illegal but don't criminalize the ones seeking abortion are directly in line with California becoming an 'abortion sanctuary' state, including 'not criminalizing' POST birth abortions... by statute, arguably a month after birth. Oh, and the argument isn't pre or post birth... it is one week or one month post birth. If they'd wanted to mean pre-birth, they would use different language. I Fully admit that Republicans are pushing back on RvW, but by the same token, so too are Democrats pushing forward. Two way street and all. WHat I've said for decades that keeps being ignored is that RvW CODIFIED the states interest in protecting an unborn child.... and all that is being done now is debate over the conflicting interests. If its okay for the left to push forward on 'quickening' to 'post birth', then its okay for the right to do the same. Trust me, legal abortions of a 2 week old baby aren't 'winners' for the left, either.

As for Trans issues, that's not being pushed by the right at all. It's being pushed by the left.... because they want to allow genetic men to compete as women.... because they want to allow genetic men to use women's bathrooms. They then respond to COMPLETELY REASONABLE concerns (not that all of them are, but many are) with venom... accusing people concerned that perverts (or simply opportunists) will take advantage of these desires to bad ends... as claiming that all those against them are calling Trans persons 'perverts', when only a small fraction of those against them are doing that...

I believe you yourself argued that it was Republicans who were pushing on this... trying to pass laws to somehow restrict Trans persons, when the reality is that the laws passed by both Republicans AND democrats already did that. No 'additional' restrictions are being placed on trans persons. At worst, what we have all (including until recently, trans persons) accepted is simply being more clearly codified, in response to calls to CHANGE these accepted definitions. Yes, this is culture war, but especially in this situation it is one being waged by the left, not the right. The left seems to want to end any reference to gender whatsoever, which to my mind isn't a bad idea... but I'm a male and have many genetic and societal advantages over women. To remove gender as a descriptor in a vacuum sounds fine, but to do it in the real world means to end a WHOLE lot of programs designed to encourage women/gender equity. Is this REALLY a 'winning' idea by the left? I mean, while one can look at a single situation and say... okay, this is unfair and needs to be fixed for this person... are we REALLY going to end all these calls for equal pay, encouraging women in STEM, end title IX, reporting 'gender' in school enrollment to qualify for federal loans, etc etc etc?

I don't have a solution to the trans issue... and saying 'let the governing body decide' isn't an answer because things like Title IX weren't written by the NCAA. I think the NCAA would be perfectly happy to have men compete as women as it might increase viewership of women's sports... but is that really the purpose of women's athletics?? Title IX would have to be amended. What is the proposal there?

(04-14-2022 10:51 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Right now, it seems like it's a double down on culture war issues - abortion, gay marriage, and transgender issues are what are dominating the Republican talking points. They'll benefit from being the party out of power, per usual, but it's not clear how well they'll capitalize on that like you allude to.

And I think that is idiotic. They need to find things that will appeal to independents and moderates on both sides of the aisle, not just keep feeding red meat to their base. I don't care how fervently 35% of the electorate favors you, that's still only 35%. What's worse is that democrats are handing them issues right and left, but republicans seem unable to respond.

You can't accomplish anything without winning elections. And right now democrats care deeply about winning elections, while republicans seem not to care at all about it. And I don't like the future with those odds.

(04-14-2022 10:51 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Right now, it seems like it's a double down on culture war issues - abortion, gay marriage, and transgender issues are what are dominating the Republican talking points.

I will make one other point. If the differences between the parties are about abortion, gay rights, and transgender issues, then it's not the republicans who are the party who have lurched to the extreme since 1960. The republican positions on those three issues are probably the same--or if anything more liberal--than they were 60 years ago. The democrat positions on those three issues have clearly swung far left. Can you imagine JFK running on a platform of current democrat positions on those issues.

What worries me is that those are about the only issues where republicans have held the line at all. On most of the rest, it has just been acquiesce to what democrats want, just don't spend as much on it, which ends up making them look stingy. I would like to see republicans come to the table with new and different--and conservative--solutions to the issues of the day.

(04-14-2022 01:22 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(04-14-2022 10:51 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Right now, it seems like it's a double down on culture war issues - abortion, gay marriage, and transgender issues are what are dominating the Republican talking points.

I will make one other point. If the differences between the parties are about abortion, gay rights, and transgender issues, then it's not the republicans who are the party who have lurched to the extreme since 1960. The republican positions on those three issues are probably the same--or if anything more liberal--than they were 60 years ago. The democrat positions on those three issues have clearly swung far left. Can you imagine JFK running on a platform of current democrat positions on those issues.

What worries me is that those are about the only issues where republicans have held the line at all. On most of the rest, it has just been acquiesce to what democrats want, just don't spend as much on it, which ends up making them look stingy. I would like to see republicans come to the table with new and different--and conservative--solutions to the issues of the day.

I agree that Republicans are not the party who have moved as much on these issues, but I don't think Democrats have "lurched to the extreme" in these examples.

I don't see legalizing gay marriage as extreme. I don't see legalizing abortion as extreme. And I don't even know what the Democrat policy position is on transgender issues outside of a rather laissez faire approach that keeps government out of the conversation of who exactly does what based on their sex/gender (despite what Ham contends, Republicans that are advocating for legal requirements that make government intervene more regularly).

I'm sure the stance on interracial marriage being legalized was once considered extreme. I'm wondering who today still feels that is the case.

I'd like to see Republicans offer up different solutions as well - it would give me a reason to pause and consider voting for them. But to me, they've become the party of no solutions outside of less taxes and less government, no matter what.