Drake McHugh
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 23, 2013
- Messages
- 628
- Reaction score
- 138
- Location
- Brookfield,Wisconsin
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
From your mouth to God's ear.Paul Ryan may be defeated for reelection.
Nuts doesn't even begin to describe how crazy these people are now.It says something about the continued trend toward irrationality of the Republican Party when Paul Ryan is considered a liberal Democrat.
Paul Ryan may be defeated for reelection. His district is the least Republican of the 5 GOP seats in the state(it went about 52% for Romney,despite him being on the ticket.
In 2012,he only won with 54%,his lowest ever. Now he is front and center on immigration,making his conservative base very unhappy. Very unhappy. Very,very unhappy. Attended his townhall over the weekend in Racine,WI and he sounded indistinguishable from a liberal Democrat. Glad he is not my congressman.
Sorry, but you're wrong on one count. Duffy and Ribble's districts are the least Republican leaning congressional districts in Wisconsin.Paul Ryan may be defeated for reelection. His district is the least Republican of the 5 GOP seats in the state(it went about 52% for Romney,despite him being on the ticket.
In 2012,he only won with 54%,his lowest ever. Now he is front and center on immigration,making his conservative base very unhappy. Very unhappy. Very,very unhappy. Attended his townhall over the weekend in Racine,WI and he sounded indistinguishable from a liberal Democrat. Glad he is not my congressman.
I doubt very much Paul Ryan would lose. His close margin in the general election was probably due to running at the same time on a national ticket, just like Michele Bachmann's closer than expected margin.
Maybe his supporters didn't bother voting, because they feared their vote would be lost if he was the VP?
It says something about the continued trend toward irrationality of the Republican Party when Paul Ryan is considered a liberal Democrat.
Sorry, but you're wrong on one count. Duffy and Ribble's districts are the least Republican leaning congressional districts in Wisconsin.
His opponent Zerban and several liberal advocacy groups were telling 1st district voters both that they couldn't vote for Paul Ryan or that they didn't have to vote for Paul Ryan, because he was on the Presidential ticket. The Wisconsin Republicans had to mount a last minute call campaign to contact voters and tell them that they had to vote for him twice.
So ... if by "54%, his lowest ever" he means, "Wisconsin Progressives are immoral, lying creeps" then he'd be correct.
I doubt very much Paul Ryan would lose. His close margin in the general election was probably due to running at the same time on a national ticket, just like Michele Bachmann's closer than expected margin. Besides, it sounds like you think his trouble would come from the right. His defeat in a primary election would be a national embarrassment. I'm sure the party would throw all the endorsements and money he needs to win that race. Combine that with the fact that immigration is only one issue and he remains conservative on most others, as well as the fact Paul Ryan is at the very least an above average politician, I believe he is very safe for re-election.
It says something about the continued trend toward irrationality of the Republican Party when Paul Ryan is considered a liberal Democrat.
Paul Ryan may be defeated for reelection.
No, you just said he sounded like one. :roll:I didn't say he was a liberal Democrat.
I didn't say that at all. I didn't say anything about his re-election bid. I think you may have me confused with someone else.Why is the fact Paul Ryan may have some difficulty in his reelection bid a harbinger of Republican "irrationality"
No, you just said he sounded like one. :roll:
I didn't say that at all. I didn't say anything about his re-election bid. I think you may have me confused with someone else.
The irrationality is the idea that a guy like Paul Ryan could be considered a liberal by the Republican Party.
Exactly...do you see ANYTHING about his re-election bid there? You don't, right?Yes, your exact quote from post 3 was "It says something about the continued trend toward irrationality of the Republican Party when Paul Ryan is considered a liberal Democrat".
And my point still stands, which is that you very obviously seem to think something is in my post which is not there. I didn't say ANYTHING about Paul Ryan's re-election bid, merely Paul Ryan himself and the nonsense exhibited by any Republican who thinks he's a liberal Democrat.So my question still stands - why would this be considered irrational behaviour on the part of the Republican Party when the Joe Libermann getting primaried out of the Democrat nomination was not irrational behaviour by the Democrat party, thinking he was a conservative Republican?
My point being, it's not irrational, it's just politics, and it happens in each party all the time.
Exactly...do you see ANYTHING about his re-election bid there? You don't, right?
And my point still stands, which is that you very obviously seem to think something is in my post which is not there. I didn't say ANYTHING about Paul Ryan's re-election bid, merely Paul Ryan himself and the nonsense exhibited by any Republican who thinks he's a liberal Democrat.
I honestly have no earthly idea why you think that has anything to do with an election.
No, your mistake was the fact you clearly did not read the opening post, which featured this comment:My thoughts may have had something to do with the fact your comment was the third on a new thread entitled "Paul Ryan May Lose in 2014" and the subject of the OP was Paul Ryan's reelection in 2014. My mistake for thinking you were actually responding to the thread and not just throwing out an irrelevant random thought.
Attended his townhall over the weekend in Racine,WI and he sounded indistinguishable from a liberal Democrat. Glad he is not my congressman.
Nuts doesn't even begin to describe how crazy these people are now.
No, your mistake was the fact you clearly did not read the opening post, which featured this comment:
That is what I responded to (and told you I was responding to). Amusingly enough, Drake knew what I was talking about when he replied to me and he created the thread. So I accept your apology on making the mistake of not reading before you posted. It happens to everyone. But what I said was not at all an irrelevant random thought, it was a thought directly related to the opening poster's comment about Paul Ryan sounding like a liberal Democrat.
So you believe that painting the entire Republican Party as trending to the irrational, simply because one person said Paul Ryan sounded like a liberal Democrat, without even having any idea what Paul Ryan actual said is reasonable?
And you still avoided my question, which is pertinent to your comment. I appreciate you can't justify your comment that the Republican Party is trending to the irrational and I accept that you'll do anything to avoid address it, so I'll leave it at that.
Is that what I said? No. Here's what I said, you even quoted me once:So you believe that painting the entire Republican Party as trending to the irrational, simply because one person said Paul Ryan sounded like a liberal Democrat, without even having any idea what Paul Ryan actual said is reasonable?
The Republican Party was trending toward irrationality before that poster made his comment. I simply said his comment simply highlights the trend. Why you are having so much difficulty understanding what I said?It says something about the continued trend toward irrationality of the Republican Party when Paul Ryan is considered a liberal Democrat.
:lamoAnd you still avoided my question, which is pertinent to your comment. I appreciate you can't justify your comment that the Republican Party is trending to the irrational and I accept that you'll do anything to avoid address it, so I'll leave it at that.
Is that what I said? No. Here's what I said, you even quoted me once:
The Republican Party was trending toward irrationality before that poster made his comment. I simply said his comment simply highlights the trend. Why you are having so much difficulty understanding what I said?
:lamo
I'm sorry, but did you really just accuse me of avoiding a question you asked based on your erroneous understanding of what I said, a question which challenges an idea I never expressed? C'mon now, surely you realize how ridiculous that sounds. I didn't avoid anything, I simply told you your question had absolutely no relevance to what I said.
No, it's irrelevant and ridiculous because the question assumes something I never said. Tell me, why do you think Obama is a pedophile?Of course you consider it irrelevant and ridiculous because it challenges your asinine narrative. That's fine, carry on.
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?