View Full Version : Pa. Senate race no longer tossup. may not win Senate, citing 'candidate quality’
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/pa-senate-race-no-longer-tossup-as-fetterman-memes-zero-in-on-oz-s-wealth/ar-AA10OSQs
McConnell says Republicans may not win Senate control, citing 'candidate quality'
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2022-election/mcconnell-says-republicans-may-not-win-senate-control-citing-candidate-rcna43777
Coal Dragger
08-19-22, 12:05
Yeah no shit.
Republican voters are pretty much retarded 99% of the time in primaries so we get shit candidates that are not electable in a general election.
Oz needs to just hit the following;
1. Crime is out of control
2. Fentanyl is out of control
3. Fettermen is an out of control Marxist he believes --------------
4. 87,000 IRS is out of control
5. Inflation is out of control.
Instead he does an add that was on Tucker last night of Oz in a grocery store talking about some strange food dish that Joe six pack has never heard of, and that is 100%.
In GA if I were running the GOP campaign I would just run the video of Warnock beating his wife. Then ask do you support this and is this what you want the 87,000 IRS agents to do to your bank account?
ChattanoogaPhil
08-19-22, 12:33
Republican candidate quality?
Oh yeah... unless republicans run a Ronald Reagan against such a high quality democrat like Fetterman or communist like Warnock... well... just no way Republicans can win. sigh...
Defeatism among some Republicans has reached a level of mental disorder.
Republican candidate quality?
Oh yeah... unless republicans run a Ronald Reagan against such a high quality democrat like Fetterman or communist like Warnock... well... just no way Republicans can win. sigh...
Defeatism among some Republicans has reached a level of mental disorder.
It's a simple equation. GOPe RINO's would rather be the permanent minority party, than give up control over the GOP party. :(
Sure, but less impressive individual candidates would do better with a national GOP mission statement, like a contract with America.
I wonder what MAGA leader shot that down? I think his name is Mitch or something…
Who just pushed gun control, in an election year?
I’m not absolving bad Trump loyalist endorsements, but neither will I pretend Mitch would rather be Minority Leader than just a member of a GOP Senate. There is plenty of blame to go around.
And lastly, was there even a “good quality” candidate running in these primaries?
Actually, one more thing.
Polls. Most are intentional propaganda meant to depress the conservative voter.
Diamondback
08-19-22, 13:55
Mitch actively meddling in Primaries like how he singlehandedly saved Murkowski, or withholding NRSC campaign support in the general from anyone who isn't a good little cockremora, doesn't help either...
KY-Sen (MM) is one race where I will actively endorse the D every time until Swamp Turtle either loses, retires or strokes out in office... he is a clear candidate for "Addition By Subtraction." And given my firm belief as a general rule in "NEVER Blue No Matter Who," that's saying a LOT.
Mitch actively meddling in Primaries like how he singlehandedly saved Murkowski, or withholding NRSC campaign support in the general from anyone who isn't a good little cockremora, doesn't help either...
KY-Sen (MM) is one race where I will actively endorse the D every time until Swamp Turtle either loses, retires or strokes out in office... he is a clear candidate for "Addition By Subtraction." And given my firm belief as a general rule in "NEVER Blue No Matter Who," that's saying a LOT.I was shocked that murkowski wasn't put to the curb. She is an obvious RINO that is antigun, she sides with the left way to often.
Why would so many people vote for her?
Diamondback
08-19-22, 15:18
I was shocked that murkowski wasn't put to the curb. She is an obvious RINO that is antigun, she sides with the left way to often.
Why would so many people vote for her?
Two Words: "Crossover Dems." Also, camp-followers of the family and other beneficiaries of Murkowski corruption who owe the dynasty their livelihoods and put Tribe above Party, State or Country.
Two Words: "Crossover Dems." Also, camp-followers of the family and other beneficiaries of Murkowski corruption who owe the dynasty their livelihoods and put Tribe above Party, State or Country.Now that makes sense.
Same with Collins and a handful of other oxygen wasters.
hotbiggun42
08-19-22, 15:50
Mconnel is a POS and is terrified of conservatives being elected.
hotbiggun42
08-19-22, 15:52
Yeah no shit.
Republican voters are pretty much retarded 99% of the time in primaries so we get shit candidates that are not electable in a general election.
I disagree, we have elected a bunch of shit candidates. Mitch being the biggest shit.
I have no particular dislike for “centrists” from purple States as long as that’s how they run.
Don’t run on repealing Obamacare in a red State and then spend your time in office pushing for amnesty and gun control instead.
Diamondback
08-19-22, 16:11
I have no particular dislike for “centrists” from purple States as long as that’s how they run.
Don’t run on repealing Obamacare in a red State and then spend your time in office pushing for amnesty and gun control instead.
So much this. I may bot like or vote for an open Marxist Dem, but at least I'll respect their candor.
I know Oz has US citizenship but has he renounced his Turkish citizenship yet? That would be a non-starter for me had I lived there.
Coal Dragger
08-19-22, 16:49
I disagree, we have elected a bunch of shit candidates. Mitch being the biggest shit.
Kentucky is less and less Republican every election cycle. Do you want a conservative ideologue to run and lose, or do you want a McConnell like Senator? Those are your realistic choices.
And Mitch McConnell is a perfect example of that quality control problem.
Adrenaline_6
08-19-22, 18:08
Yup, Mitch is a POS globalist RINO. He has been playing the part well- and fooling a lot of people, but hopefully that charade has finally come to an end. That was awfully clear when they owned the House and Senate with Trump and did absolutely nothing. That's what they wanted to do...nothing. Time to clean house.
hotbiggun42
08-19-22, 18:37
Yup, Mitch is a POS globalist RINO. He has been playing the part well- and fooling a lot of people, but hopefully that charade has finally come to an end. That was awfully clear when they owned the House and Senate with Trump and did absolutely nothing. That's what they wanted to do...nothing. Time to clean house.
The Republicans had the Presidency, the Congress and Senate until 39 Republicans retired. Since when does the winning party throw the senate and congress? I'd rather have AOC than mitch.
And Mitch McConnell is a perfect example of that quality control problem.
AMEN, and Lindsey Graham is just better at hiding it.
hotbiggun42
08-19-22, 18:39
Kentucky is less and less Republican every election cycle. Do you want a conservative ideologue to run and lose, or do you want a McConnell like Senator? Those are your realistic choices.
I would rather take the loss with a principled man than vote for Mitch.
I have said this here before: Never underestimate the stupidity of the electorate at large.
That's right, my "fellow citizens" are retards for the most part. Sorry [not], but I don't give much if any credence to the intelligence of the average American. It may not be a majority of them, but enough to royally fvck things up over and over again.
Think about it.....AOC, Pelosi, Schumer, The Turtle, Kinsinger, Schiff, et al. They are all elected by 'tards. Yep, I said it and stand by it.
Roughly half this country is the problem. Not sure what the answer is, but I have ZERO faith in the average American voter.
Diamondback
08-19-22, 20:05
I have said this here before: Never underestimate the stupidity of the electorate at large.
That's right, my "fellow citizens" are retards for the most part. Sorry [not], but I don't give much if any credence to the intelligence of the average American. It may not be a majority of them, but enough to royally fvck things up over and over again.
Think about it.....AOC, Pelosi, Schumer, The Turtle, Kinsinger, Schiff, et al. They are all elected by 'tards. Yep, I said it and stand by it.
Roughly half this country is the problem. Not sure what the answer is, but I have ZERO faith in the average American voter.
Part of me wants to say we should require an IQ test before granting the franchise, then I remember that some of the on-paper brightest people I've ever known were also some of the most "screw the rules, I'm SPECIAL!"... Don't even get me started about most MENSA's I've met.
AMEN, and Lindsey Graham is just better at hiding it.
Not really. I guess at least we don't still have to put up with Ryan.
Mitch actively meddling in Primaries like how he singlehandedly saved Murkowski, or withholding NRSC campaign support in the general from anyone who isn't a good little cockremora, doesn't help either...
KY-Sen (MM) is one race where I will actively endorse the D every time until Swamp Turtle either loses, retires or strokes out in office... he is a clear candidate for "Addition By Subtraction." And given my firm belief as a general rule in "NEVER Blue No Matter Who," that's saying a LOT.
I was shocked that murkowski wasn't put to the curb. She is an obvious RINO that is antigun, she sides with the left way to often.
Why would so many people vote for her? Murkowski was really solid on 2A stuff up until this last vote; that was the only good thing I could say about her. I cannot believe her challenger has made zero mention of it in her campaign.
Two Words: "Crossover Dems." Also, camp-followers of the family and other beneficiaries of Murkowski corruption who owe the dynasty their livelihoods and put Tribe above Party, State or Country.
It ain't over yet. Our vote on the 16th was just the primary. We now have a retarded ranked choice voting system. The top four candidates go to the general election regardless of their party. Kelly Tshibaka was only 4% behind. We'll see what 2 1/2 more months of campaigning will do. In all honesty, ranked choice will likely lead to a Murkowski win, though.
Coal Dragger
08-20-22, 01:12
I have said this here before: Never underestimate the stupidity of the electorate at large.
That's right, my "fellow citizens" are retards for the most part. Sorry [not], but I don't give much if any credence to the intelligence of the average American. It may not be a majority of them, but enough to royally fvck things up over and over again.
Think about it.....AOC, Pelosi, Schumer, The Turtle, Kinsinger, Schiff, et al. They are all elected by 'tards. Yep, I said it and stand by it.
Roughly half this country is the problem. Not sure what the answer is, but I have ZERO faith in the average American voter.
Having the right to vote for Congressmen, Senators, and POTUS should require at least one of the following:
1.) Military service. Conscripted or voluntary.
2.) Proof that the individual is a net tax payer.
3.) Property ownership.
That would solve a lot.
Having the right to vote for Congressmen, Senators, and POTUS should require at least one of the following:
1.) Military service. Conscripted or voluntary.
2.) Proof that the individual is a net tax payer.
3.) Property ownership.
That would solve a lot.
No it wouldn't.
Military service would simply become an exclusive club.
Government would simply increase cost of services to offset the amount paid in taxes.
Property ownership would become almost impossible for most people.
If you think those in power have an exclusive club NOW, start creating arbitrary requirements to vote and watch what happens.
I understand the problem, it's frustrating to realize people who aren't even US citizens are voting somehow. But you have to address the problem on that level, not take voting rights away from everyone else. And yes people will vote for FREE SHIT, but you have to address the issue of a government handing out FREE SHIT in the first place, you don't screw around with the right to vote.
I can also tell you who will suddenly become ineligible to vote if you start coming up with requirements, you and I. You think you are a property owner? Well sure you will be until your property taxes make ownership untenable, which is exactly what would happen once property is a requirement to vote.
We certainly haven't put our best candidate forward:
1. Oz is a carpetbagger.
2. He is not 2A friendly.
3. Uncle Festerman is hitting him for the residency thing as well as the number of homes he owns.
4. Oz has not hit back that Festerman is a living example of being a socialist. While mayor of Braddock, grand population of 1,700, he was financially dependent on his parents. Mayor's of twons like that in PA have full time jobs in addition to being mayor.
5. While mayor of Braddock, Festerman's sister gave him the house that he "owns".
6. In PA, Philadelphia and it's surrounding area, Pittsburgh and Allentown (Lehigh and Northampton Counties) have the shear number of dem votes that cancel out all of the other counties.
We certainly haven't put our best candidate forward:
1. Oz is a carpetbagger.
2. He is not 2A friendly.
3. Uncle Festerman is hitting him for the residency thing as well as the number of homes he owns.
4. Oz has not hit back that Festerman is a living example of being a socialist. While mayor of Braddock, grand population of 1,700, he was financially dependent on his parents. Mayor's of twons like that in PA have full time jobs in addition to being mayor.
5. While mayor of Braddock, Festerman's sister gave him the house that he "owns".
6. In PA, Philadelphia and it's surrounding area, Pittsburgh and Allentown (Lehigh and Northampton Counties) have the shear number of dem votes that cancel out all of the other counties.
https://governor.ontheissues.org/Senate/Mehmet_Oz.htm
This guy is polarizing.
Did program on "curing" gays; later blogged it was harmful. (Nov 2021)
Cannabis safer than alcohol & safer than narcotics. (Dec 2021)
Supported "red flag laws" on his television show. (Dec 2021)
We need to expand the role of religious institutions. (Dec 2021)
I saw a few things I liked, but this guy is all over the place and a mess.
We certainly haven't put our best candidate forward:
1. Oz is a carpetbagger.
2. He is not 2A friendly.
3. Uncle Festerman is hitting him for the residency thing as well as the number of homes he owns.
4. Oz has not hit back that Festerman is a living example of being a socialist. While mayor of Braddock, grand population of 1,700, he was financially dependent on his parents. Mayor's of twons like that in PA have full time jobs in addition to being mayor.
5. While mayor of Braddock, Festerman's sister gave him the house that he "owns".
6. In PA, Philadelphia and it's surrounding area, Pittsburgh and Allentown (Lehigh and Northampton Counties) have the shear number of dem votes that cancel out all of the other counties.
So was Hillary Klinton in New York but they voted her in as U.S. Senator didn't they? Not an Oz fan but just pointing out the hypocrisy of the Left.
P2Vaircrewman
08-20-22, 09:39
I have said this here before: Never underestimate the stupidity of the electorate at large.
That's right, my "fellow citizens" are retards for the most part. Sorry [not], but I don't give much if any credence to the intelligence of the average American. It may not be a majority of them, but enough to royally fvck things up over and over again.
Think about it.....AOC, Pelosi, Schumer, The Turtle, Kinsinger, Schiff, et al. They are all elected by 'tards. Yep, I said it and stand by it.
Roughly half this country is the problem. Not sure what the answer is, but I have ZERO faith in the average American voter.
You ain't wrong, the average American doesn't know what he doesn't know and couldn't care less.
Having the right to vote for Congressmen, Senators, and POTUS should require at least one of the following:
1.) Military service. Conscripted or voluntary.
2.) Proof that the individual is a net tax payer.
3.) Property ownership.
That would solve a lot.
1) I get that most gun forums are veteran-centric, but military service should not be the measure of a patriotic citizen. Many people, myself included, desired to serve but couldn't for a variety of reasons. Plenty of us have gone on to contribute to society in a positive way, sometimes in a greater capacity than many vets. It's a pretty tough pill to swallow that my citizenship is less than that of a 4 year enlisted paper pusher that never deployed, or deployed to some safe office overseas.
2) Why? Prove that I am a criminal for not paying taxes, or simply stay the 'F out of my business.
3) Again, why? You could qualify your point #1 and still be serving, but don't own a piece of land. Why force somebody to virtue signal by buying a piece of property?
Honestly, none of your points would do a damn thing to solve anything.
Having the right to vote for Congressmen, Senators, and POTUS should require at least one of the following:
1.) Military service. Conscripted or voluntary.
There was a very high percentage of military service through most of the 20th century that laid down a lot of foundation for where things are at now.
Diamondback
08-20-22, 11:20
If memory serves, the last numbers I saw said that less than 30% of today's populace were both physically and mentally fit to serve.
If memory serves, the last numbers I saw said that less than 30% of today's populace were both physically and mentally fit to serve.
That number is going to get smaller, not just because kids will be in worse physical and mental health , but because our birthrate in this country is plummeting. We're all over here worrying about politics being the end of this country, but the real end will be the economic destruction brought on by the fact our worker and fighting age populace is not getting replaced.
That number is going to get smaller, not just because kids will be in worse physical and mental health , but because our birthrate in this country is plummeting. We're all over here worrying about politics being the end of this country, but the real end will be the economic destruction brought on by the fact our worker and fighting age populace is not getting replaced.
Which is why I understand we need immigration in a big way, but in a legal way.
Diamondback
08-20-22, 19:56
Which is why I understand we need immigration in a big way, but in a legal way.
So much this--we need people who will assimilate and adopt our traditions, values and culture, not the Turd Whirled Shithole ones the Donk-RINO Axis of Viable Organ Wastage want to replace us with.
Coal Dragger
08-21-22, 02:11
No it wouldn't.
Military service would simply become an exclusive club.
Government would simply increase cost of services to offset the amount paid in taxes.
Property ownership would become almost impossible for most people.
If you think those in power have an exclusive club NOW, start creating arbitrary requirements to vote and watch what happens.
I understand the problem, it's frustrating to realize people who aren't even US citizens are voting somehow. But you have to address the problem on that level, not take voting rights away from everyone else. And yes people will vote for FREE SHIT, but you have to address the issue of a government handing out FREE SHIT in the first place, you don't screw around with the right to vote.
I can also tell you who will suddenly become ineligible to vote if you start coming up with requirements, you and I. You think you are a property owner? Well sure you will be until your property taxes make ownership untenable, which is exactly what would happen once property is a requirement to vote.
What makes you think people who meet any of the above requirements would want to raise taxes on themselves, or elect people who are proponents of any of the stuff you pointed out?
I would also add that Senators should be elected by state legislatures again. Direct voting for Senators defeats the purpose of the Senate.
While I’m at it raise the voting age back to 21, not to worry no service members will be disenfranchised. The enlistment age shall also be 21. Company 1stSgt’s everywhere would rejoice at no longer having to deal with 18-20 year olds.
What makes you think people who meet any of the above requirements would want to raise taxes on themselves, or elect people who are proponents of any of the stuff you pointed out?
I think you miss my point. Once requirements are "in place" in a short space of time many qualifying people would discover they no longer qualified. I thought my property owner example would get you there.
And if you think we have no real representation NOW, wait until the powers in place are trying to actively eliminate you from the voting pool.
You seem to think those criteria would solve the problem and bring about better representation, but in the real world the opposite is most likely.
What makes you think people who meet any of the above requirements would want to raise taxes on themselves, or elect people who are proponents of any of the stuff you pointed out?
I would also add that Senators should be elected by state legislatures again. Direct voting for Senators defeats the purpose of the Senate.
While I’m at it raise the voting age back to 21, not to worry no service members will be disenfranchised. The enlistment age shall also be 21. Company 1stSgt’s everywhere would rejoice at no longer having to deal with 18-20 year olds.
You forgot about women.
Averageman
08-21-22, 08:25
If memory serves, the last numbers I saw said that less than 30% of today's populace were both physically and mentally fit to serve.
As a former Recruiter, I think those numbers are very high. I would guess closer to 20%
Coal Dragger
08-21-22, 12:54
I think you miss my point. Once requirements are "in place" in a short space of time many qualifying people would discover they no longer qualified. I thought my property owner example would get you there.
And if you think we have no real representation NOW, wait until the powers in place are trying to actively eliminate you from the voting pool.
You seem to think those criteria would solve the problem and bring about better representation, but in the real world the opposite is most likely.
Any of my ideas would require Constitutional amendment to achieve. Making those changes would be very very difficult, and making further changes would be equally difficult. As for tax code changes eliminate people I think there should be some Constitutional amendments relating to taxation that make it extremely difficult to change any tax codes. Say a 90% majority in favor of a tax code change, federal, state, local, etc… all taxes.
The Dumb Gun Collector
08-21-22, 12:56
Everything is a purity test. "Rino this, Rino that." Everything is being treated like a Reddit forum and the results are normal people are see the republicans running weirdos and halfwits like OZ and Walker. I will vote for Walker because I need the Republicans to get the senate but If I wasn't that political (like a lot of folks) I would see a possibly retarded man running against a man who appears to be a grownup. Until we get out of this "kiss the ring" loop we are going to keep declining.
Diamondback
08-21-22, 13:06
Any of my ideas would require Constitutional amendment to achieve. Making those changes would be very very difficult, and making further changes would be equally difficult. As for tax code changes eliminate people I think there should be some Constitutional amendments relating to taxation that make it extremely difficult to change any tax codes. Say a 90% majority in favor of a tax code change, federal, state, local, etc… all taxes.
We tried requiring voter approval on taxes and fees, and the Commissariat in Olympia has either had their pet blackrobes strike it down or find creative blackrobe-approved endruns every time.
Personally, I'd like to try requiring supermajorities to win office, increasing by incumbency duration--your first time running for an office you can win by simple majority, first reelection you need to win by a 2% margin, increasing by 2% every reelection. So after 20 years of 4-year terms in the State Leg, either you win by a 54/46 margin or the race is re-run. 18 years in Congress (which IMO should be an automatic hard-cap for time in any single elected office), you need an 18-point margin and 59/41 split. Fail to make supermajority, and the re-run is with the runner-up from your primary.
What makes you think people who meet any of the above requirements would want to raise taxes on themselves, or elect people who are proponents of any of the stuff you pointed out?
I would also add that Senators should be elected by state legislatures again. Direct voting for Senators defeats the purpose of the Senate.
While I’m at it raise the voting age back to 21, not to worry no service members will be disenfranchised. The enlistment age shall also be 21. Company 1stSgt’s everywhere would rejoice at no longer having to deal with 18-20 year olds.
Tax rates in the years during and after large scale military enlistment tend to point that way.
https://taxfoundation.org/historical-income-tax-rates-brackets/
To be up front, I don't know a huge number of vets. The ones I know who staunchly say "I support the 2nd Amendment." are very much a minority compared to the vets I know of who say "I support the 2nd Amendment, but <the sky isn't even a limit>"
Diamondback
08-21-22, 18:02
As a former Recruiter, I think those numbers are very high. I would guess closer to 20%
That sounds like what I thought I saw too--couldn't remember if 20 or 30 and decided best to err high.
Everything is a purity test. "Rino this, Rino that." Everything is being treated like a Reddit forum...
What do you want me to call republicans who made it a point to say they didn’t vote for the republican candidate?
Cheney just came out and said she is going to campaign for democrats.
Is it a purity test to ask that a republican be at least a little bit to the right of Bill Clinton?
If I gave you the list of names of GOP Senators who voted for the latest gun bill, do you think it’s more or less likely that they are often called RINOs?
Having the right to vote for Congressmen, Senators, and POTUS should require at least one of the following:
1.) Military service. Conscripted or voluntary.
2.) Proof that the individual is a net tax payer.
3.) Property ownership.
That would solve a lot.
You do realize, the constitution actually states only land owning white males could vote, right?
Do you know WHY they put that in there?
Land owners had an actual stake in the country and were considered to be smart enough to be rational, because they owned land. Men had the vote, because we are a constitutional representative republic not a democracy. The man voted, representing the household. Change that to today, if you pay income taxes and have not received welfare benefits for 6 years, you can vote. If you don’t pay taxes and or receive welfare you don’t get to vote. 90% of our problems would be solved.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.