Mikkel
Pragmatist
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2005
- Messages
- 489
- Reaction score
- 0
- Location
- Cleveland, OH
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Mikkel said:If it's any indication of the democratic swing of my home state, yesterday the voters of D-2 in ohio narrowly elected a republican over Democrat, Paul Hackett, an Iraq War Veteran with a 52% to 48% margin. For those of you who don't know, that is a highly Republican district (it's essentially cincinnati and the surrounding area) and a race this close is incredible to see. With Governor Bob Taft's approval rating the lowest of any Governor in the country, I'm beginning to see a trend after the dissapointing 2004 election.
*********************
CINCINNATI - A Republican former state lawmaker claimed a seat in Congress on Tuesday by narrowly defeating an Iraq war veteran who drew national attention to the race with his military service and a series of harsh attacks on President Bush.
With all precincts reporting, Jean Schmidt had 52 percent, or 57,974 votes, compared with Democrat Paul Hackett’s 48 percent, or 54,401 votes. Schmidt’s margin of victory amounted to about 3,500 votes out of more than 112,000 cast.....
Read the rest of the story here:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8802959/
galenrox said:Any reason you believe that, or any reason we should believe you?
galenrox said:yeah, and republicans like outsourcing, something that the people in Ohio don't like either!
galenrox said:there's also quite a few indicators that the public is turning against the republican party, the low approval ratings for Bush, the war, and especially the republican controlled congress.
Whether with equates with votes for democrats is yet to be seen.
Deegan said:Maybe it's because he appealed to so many military moms, I think that's more the case for the close race.
galenrox said:the fact that this was in a typically staunchly republican area.
gordontravels said:What Paul Hackett actually said about President Bush was that he was a "chicken hawk", "the biggest threat to America" and "President Bush is a greater threat to U.S. security than Osama bin Laden".
All of these quotes were reported on ABC, CBS, CNN and NBC and probably elsewhere. The war veteran lost by 3,500 votes out of approximately 99,000. The 4% margin is called "miniscule" by Democrats and CNN this morning. I can remember JFK beating Richard Nixon by less than 1%. I think both elections produced the same results. A victory and a defeat.
I believe Paul Hackett could have had a better chance if not for his rehtoric. I may be wrong but comparing our President to Osama bin Laden crosses the line way back there as far as I am concerned. A war veteran should know better whether he agrees with the war or not.
So what was this thing about Ohio going blue? :duel
galenrox said:Do you recall how close Ohio was? Oh no, that's irrelevant to you, since you won in a state that was SO CLOSE that they couldn't call the result on the night of the election, and the democrats had such a shitty candidate, I mean, OBVIOUSLY there's no chance that they're taking a democratic shift!
I've got no problem with outsourcing personally, because I know economics. But Bush offers tax breaks for those who outsource, which is just proposterous.
And Bush just passed CAFTA. That can't help outside the economist crowd, who already hates him mostly.
More facts from you I see? Ooops...I meant more FICTION from you.Navy Pride said:Its been 30 years since Ohio when democrat and it will be another 30 before they do it again.......Maybe longer.........
galenrox said:exactly what media do you speak of?
26 X World Champs said:More facts from you I see? Ooops...I meant more FICTION from you.
Clinton WON Ohio in 1992 & 1996. Did you mean dog years or fantasea years or what, exactly?
The last Deomcratic governor in Ohio was Richard F. Celeste who left office in January 1991.
John Glenn, what party was he?
Creditability is defined as:
Worthy of belief: a creditable story.
I find your posts have no creditability at all, sorry, IMHO.
gordontravels said:Maybe he is ignorant and if you don't provide the links going back 6 years for all your statements he will remain ignorant. NO. I don't think he is ignorant. Do I have proof? Well, he got you here. Blows me away that he used facts too.
26 X World Champs said:Why is it that everyone here knows the outcome of the investigation?
Some of you have written that you know for sure that Rove is innocent, some have said you know he's guilty.
The TRUTH is that none of us know! We don't know what the CIA has said about her status. We don't know what Novak testified. We don't know squat which is why there's a special prosecutor.
Thinking something is logical, either way, depending on what one believes. But to write that you know something is fact is pure BS.
I will wait to see what happens before I will claim that "I know."
26 X World Champs said:LOL! If this had happened during Clinton's presidency there would have been either a call for his impeachment or there would have been accusations of murder!
That transcript showed everything that is wrong with Bush and his fellow hypocrites. When it was politically safe for them to comment they do, when they are backed against the wall in the face of positive proof that Rove lied and the White House lied about outing our CIA agents they hide behind the bullshit.
It's so revealing to see some of you hide with the Bushies. Usually you're all so smug, so confident, and now that the shi* has hit the fan you refuse to admit the truth.
Rove is an evil GENIUS. Too bad for him that he was outed when he outed Valerie Plame. Recall that Bush said that The White House promised if anyone was involved in the Valerie Plame affair, they would no longer be in this administration.
Rove is INVOLVED up to his serpent like tongue. You guys love to call Dems traitors. What do you call a man who reveals the identity of one of our spies, and does so to punish her husband? I call him a monster.
I believe there are rules about calling each other names? Is there a reason that you find it necessary to be so damn nasty? Can't control yourself? Unable to stop acting like an asshole long enough to debate? This thread was about Ohio and it's voting record, not about me. I posted a clearly factual post.cnredd said:Do you need proof he's ignorant?
26 X World Champs said:I believe there are rules about calling each other names? Is there a reason that you find it necessary to be so damn nasty? Can't control yourself? Unable to stop acting like an asshole long enough to debate? This thread was about Ohio and it's voting record, not about me. I posted a clearly factual post.
cnredd said:Here is the reason why you are undebatable....
Explaining the rules to me and then breaking the same rule two sentence later?
Sounds like someone who tells everybody to provide sources for their claims, then doesn't do it themselves? I've already proven that, too.
So that's why I don't debate you...you & Billo Really...two people that act so righteous in their deabting skills, puts other people down when they don't debate to your standards, and then get caught doing the same things they accuse other people of.
You have been caught lying...you have been caught not providing sources when you have told NO LESS than four people in the last five days to do so.
So excuse me for pointing out your inconsistancies to the forum so they better understand that they are dealing with a proven hypocrite....
Yes, life would be so much easier for you to play the "Emperor of Debate"
without me around to notice you have no clothes.
debate_junkie said:How about it Champs? The preaching falls on deaf ears, when the preacher fails to practice the very things he preaches.
26 X World Champs said:When someone is making a factual claim rather than expressing an opinion it is common courtesy on this site to post a link to substantiate one's claim.
26 X World Champs said:Have you ever considered posting a link to prove of what you claim?
26 X World Champs said:You're right Simon, his comment was bullshit. The mere fact that he cannot produce any evidence whatsoever is proof enough.
26 X World Champs said:Is there some reason that you're unable to provide any facts when you make claims in your posts? Too lazy? Unable to prove your claims so you simply make them anyway?
You called me ignorant. I said you were ACTING like an asshole, not that you are an asshole. That is not violating any rules, unlike your posts.cnredd said:Here is the reason why you are undebatable....
Explaining the rules to me and then breaking the same rule two sentence later?
Lying? Really? Don't you mean making a mistake and/or forgetting? When I make a mistake I apologize. Show me, please, again, my lies, and show me also how what you call a lie is not a lapse in memory or a mistake, and then show me how I didn't apologize if I made a mistake?cnredd said:You have been caught lying...
You're one to talk! You hadly ever (I can't remember ever actually, but I don't want to "lie" again) provide any sources. I, on the other hand almost always do, and if there are a slim minority of posts where I have not, c'est la vie. My "modus operandi" unlike yours is TO PROVIDE links and sources to my claims. It is the RARE EXCEPTION when I do not. You're so damn committed to being nasty to me that if I do omit what you consider to be a needed source you write post after post demanding them. You even carry your demands to other threads trying to discredit me.cnredd said:you have been caught not providing sources when you have told NO LESS than four people in the last five days to do so.
Perfect example of your rabble rousing and attacking me in multiple threads.cnredd said:Yo DJ(and others)...
Gotta read "Bias in the Media - AirAmerica"...Post #84...07-30-2005
I asked HIM for sources on a claim HE made....He's been to this site multiple times since, but hasn't posted on that thread...He doesn't do what he yells at other people to do....
26 X World Champs said:Perfect example of your rabble rousing and attacking me in multiple threads.
You're acting like an asshole again. Is it possible for you to stop acting like an asshole? I'm not saying you're an asshole, just that IMHO you're acting like one.
This post of yours is the perfect example of your modus operandi. Thank you, thank you, thank you for providing me with a source for my last post...this post of yours is my source for my last post.....Thanks again!
cnredd said:Do you need proof he's ignorant?
This is from 7-26-05....in "Today's News - Karl Rove Leaks CIA Agent"...Post #335
Sounds very objective on his part....He wrote this a couple of weeks earlier on the same thread...Post #57
Real objective, huh?....
Pacridge said:You look at that and decide he's lying.
I've already proven him a lying, not that I'm calling him an assh*ole, person. Once you are caught lying and it's proven, your words kinda lose merit. Monkey Fiasco. Read it. He's done.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?