Republican wins Democratic New York House seat

Ikari · Sep 14, 2011

LesGovt said:
LOL! People who did not vote for McCain in the general election helped cause ObamaCare to become a reality. Non-voting is an issue as is those who voted, but did not vote for McCain. I'll say it again. I VOTED IN THE PRIMARY ELECTION. Got it now? You are making a false argument. Please read my most recent posting prior to this one.

But you didn't vote for the right person then. You supported someone who could not capture votes from independents and third party. I am making a false argument because it's YOUR argument. You are trying to blame people who didn't vote for Obama as being responsible for Obama having won. I've turned the table around and said it's your fault for not putting up someone better than McCain to run. It's the same argument, but you're all huffy and puffy because it's being used against you. It's as nonsensical as claiming that someone who didn't vote for Obama is responsible for Obama being elected; but hey it's your argument.

Ikari · Sep 14, 2011

Conservative said:
Let's see, this is a Democrat District that last elected a Republican in 1920 and has a 3-1 or 4-1 advantage over the Republicans in numbers. The incumbent resigned and wasn't on the ballot. The Democrat Candidate ran on supporting the Obama policies and the Republican ran against them. The Republican won for the first time since 1920 with a 54-46%. I posted the issues for Turner so not sure what you are looking forward but it sure looks to me like this is a rejection of Obama policies and go with the 2010 elections, the Nevada Special election which wasn't a surprise however the margin of victory was. so study your statistics and let the world pass you by

I'm looking for more than ONE election result to support your hypothesis that this is rebellion against Obama and his policies. You make a claim, but you don't actually have proof of the claim. You have assumption and supposition at this stage; not the proper data set necessary to declare this an actual rebellion against Obama and his policies.

Conservative · Sep 14, 2011

Ikari said:
I'm looking for more than ONE election result to support your hypothesis that this is rebellion against Obama and his policies. You make a claim, but you don't actually have proof of the claim. You have assumption and supposition at this stage; not the proper data set necessary to declare this an actual rebellion against Obama and his policies.

Republicans won N.J., Virginia, won this House Seat, won overwhelmingly in Nov. 2010 setting state records. Name for me one election that Obama has won since he was elected and started generating the results I posted

pbrauer · Sep 14, 2011

Conservative said:
Republicans won N.J., Virginia, won this House Seat, won overwhelmingly in Nov. 2010 setting state records. Name for me one election that Obama has won since he was elected and started generating the results I posted

NY-26 because of RyanCare

Ikari · Sep 14, 2011

Conservative said:
Republicans won N.J., Virginia, won this House Seat, won overwhelmingly in Nov. 2010 setting state records. Name for me one election that Obama has won since he was elected and started generating the results I posted

Obama only has run the one time and not again since his first victory.

My opinion is that given how far the government has fallen and failed the people that we will see a wholesale switch when voters can vote for politicians.

LesGovt · Sep 14, 2011

Ikari said:
But you didn't vote for the right person then. You supported someone who could not capture votes from independents and third party. I am making a false argument because it's YOUR argument. You are trying to blame people who didn't vote for Obama as being responsible for Obama having won. I've turned the table around and said it's your fault for not putting up someone better than McCain to run. It's the same argument, but you're all huffy and puffy because it's being used against you. It's as nonsensical as claiming that someone who didn't vote for Obama is responsible for Obama being elected; but hey it's your argument.

You have not turned the tables. You have gone from the ridiculous to the sublime.

I am one vote in the primary. I voted for someone that I thought would beat Obama and had he won the primaries, he may or may not have done better than McCain. I was consistent in attempting to defeat Obama. You were not. I voted for McCain in the general election. You did not. McCain had a chance of winning. Your candidate, assuming you voted, had no chance. Again, if people like you didn't vote in the general election or voted 3rd party, all of you share the blame for "ObamaCare." You can deny it. You can make up silly arguments. You can howl at the moon. Facts are facts. It's your choice. Your vote. Your "ObamaCare." Live with it.

Fishstyx · Sep 14, 2011

pbrauer said:
NY-26 because of RyanCare

Yet that strategy, which was heavily used in both the Nevada and New York special election races failed.....abysmally.

Conservative · Sep 14, 2011

pbrauer said:
NY-26 because of RyanCare

Obama didn't win that election but misinformation did. Anyone 55 and older wouldn't experience any change at all but that fact escaped the voters.

VanceMack · Sep 14, 2011

LesGovt said:
Do you always answer questions with questions. I take it you cannot answer the questions I asked about what McCain had said. So, let's look at what you have asked. Illegal immigration. This is a Federal law enforcement issue. Who implements Federal law enforcement issue. One Senator or the President of the United States? I asked you first about McCain's position on debt and you have not answered. I will defer for the moment to your answer... when it comes. As for healthcare, show me where he has even intimated that he would sign such a bill. Did he vote for it? No. You have no leg to stand on with regards to McCain and "ObamaCare."

What is missing from the political process is not more parties, but more responsibility within each. While I am not a member, I appreciate that the Tea Parties are attempting to hold the feet of members of Congress to the fire. We need much more of that rather than 3rd Party members who sit on the sideline and yell "Foul," but then vote in such a manner as to let the worst happen, ala "ObamaCare."

Depends...are the 'questions' being posed hypothetical questions? And isnt the job of a senator a federal position? And isnt illegal immigration a pertinent topic for a senate candidate?

Gill · Sep 14, 2011

Ikari said:
I'm looking for more than ONE election result to support your hypothesis that this is rebellion against Obama and his policies. You make a claim, but you don't actually have proof of the claim. You have assumption and supposition at this stage; not the proper data set necessary to declare this an actual rebellion against Obama and his policies.

Here's the results of a few more elections that Americans are not happy with Obama and his policies. Americans overwhelmingly voted Dem Representatives out of office in 2010.

Conservative · Sep 14, 2011

A little history on NY 9

New York's 9th Congressional District

1980: Geraldine Ferraro wins over Republican opposition by 65% to 35%.
1982: Geraldine Ferraro wins over Republican opposition 79% to 21%.
1984: Thomas Manton wins over Republican opposition 57% to 43%.
1986: Thomas Manton wins over Republican opposition 74% to 26%.
1988: Thomas Manton wins with no Republican opposition, 100% to 0%.
1990: Thomas Manton wins over Republican opposition 72.5% to 27.5%.
1992: Chuck Schumer wins with no Republican opposition, 100% to 0%
1994: Chuck Schumer wins over Republican opposition 75% to 25%.
1996: Chuck Schumer wins over Republican opposition 79% to 21%.
1998: Anthony Weiner wins over Republican opposition 73% to 27%.
2000: Anthony Weiner wins over Republican opposition 70% to 30%.
2002: Anthony Weiner wins over Republican opposition 67% to 33%.
2004: Anthony Weiner wins over Republican opposition 73% to 27%.
2006: Anthony Weiner wins with no Republican opposition, 100% to 0%.
2008: Anthony Weiner wins with no Republican opposition, 100% to 0%.
2010: Anthony Weiner wins over Republican opposition (Bob Turner, btw), 64% to 36%.

From 1980 to 2010, inclusive, the average Democrat received 78% of the vote vs. 22% for the Republican.

LesGovt · Sep 14, 2011

VanceMack said:
Depends...are the 'questions' being posed hypothetical questions? And isnt the job of a senator a federal position? And isnt illegal immigration a pertinent topic for a senate candidate?

If asking questions is how you answer questions, I shall take the same tactic: What has Obama done about immigration? Who has management authority for ICE? The Senate or the President?

You and Ikari are grasping at straws in an attempt to deflect the argument away from your votes that helped to cause "ObamaCare." Sorry, that won't work.

Ikari · Sep 14, 2011

LesGovt said:
You have not turned the tables. You have gone from the ridiculous to the sublime.

I am one vote in the primary. I voted for someone that I thought would beat Obama and had he won the primaries, he may or may not have done better than McCain. I was consistent in attempting to defeat Obama. You were not. I voted for McCain in the general election. You did not. McCain had a chance of winning. Your candidate, assuming you voted, had no chance. Again, if people like you didn't vote in the general election or voted 3rd party, all of you share the blame for "ObamaCare." You can deny it. You can make up silly arguments. You can howl at the moon. Facts are facts. It's your choice. Your vote. Your "ObamaCare." Live with it.

My goal was not to "defeat Obama" as I saw McCain and Obama as essentially the same. We may not have had "Obama Care", but I also don't think that an honest and intellectual debate on nationalized health care is a bad thing. My goal is to not perpetuate the breaking of our government, the polarization of our political field, and ultimate destruction of the Republic. And in those terms, there is no way I can support the standard Republocrat offerings.

As I said, choose a better candidate and I may be able to vote for them. Until then, you work only to alienate the independent and third party voters even more and only serve to have the other side win "easier" or whatever. If my actions can be attributed to Obama winning, then so can yours. If you were really interested in making sure you could defeat Obama (and boy did you overestimate McCain, eh?), then you would be searching for better candidates and candidates who can easily reach outside the boundaries of the GOP to capture the independent and third party voters. Like it or not, we're who you have to pander to. Of the established voters, those who vote party lines are fairly well split. You don't need to pander to those guys, they're like you. Vote for the R or D regardless of class or caliber. Each election comes down to essentially a 50/50 split plus noise, and the noise is what pushes one side over or under. And guess who composes the noise. The independents and third party voters.

Appease me and win my vote, you'll win easier. Don't and you won't.

Ikari · Sep 14, 2011

LesGovt said:
You and Ikari are grasping at straws in an attempt to deflect the argument away from your votes that helped to cause "ObamaCare." Sorry, that won't work.

I guess you should have brought forth a better candidate that could have appeased Vance and me. Then we wouldn't have Obama Care. Guess you ****ed up.

Ikari · Sep 14, 2011

Gill said:
Here's the results of a few more elections that Americans are not happy with Obama and his policies. Americans overwhelmingly voted Dem Representatives out of office in 2010.

Well that statement goes to my point. They voted out the incumbents. What you want to present is not just Democrat incumbents being voted out, but also Republican incumbents keeping their job.

Conservative · Sep 14, 2011

Ikari said:
I guess you should have brought forth a better candidate that could have appeased Vance and me. Then we wouldn't have Obama Care. Guess you ****ed up.[/QUOTEe]

Elections are about choices not the perfect candidate. You didn't run so therefore you didn't have that perfect candidate. You are left with voting for the best alternative. I didn't like McCain but rather than sit on the sidelines and complain about the end result I voted for McCain to keep Obama out of the WH. Problem is I live in TX and my vote didn't matter as he lost the state by over a million votes. Those looking for the perfect candidate were countered by a majority that elected Obama. Thanks for your principles, we are in the mess we are today because of those principles.

Gill · Sep 14, 2011

Ikari said:
Well that statement goes to my point. They voted out the incumbents. What you want to present is not just Democrat incumbents being voted out, but also Republican incumbents keeping their job.

I guess you don't follow election results too closely.

The 2010 United States House of Representatives elections, also known as the 2010 midterm elections, were held on November 2, 2010, at the midpoint of President Barack Obama's first term in office. Voters of the 50 U.S. states chose 435 U.S. Representatives. Voters of the U.S. territories, commonwealths, and the District of Columbia chose their non-voting delegates. [6]

Republicans regained control of the chamber they had lost in the 2006 midterm elections, picking up a net total of 63 seats and erasing the gains Democrats made in 2006 and 2008. Although the sitting U.S. President's party usually loses seats in a midterm election, the 2010 election resulted in the highest loss of a party in a House midterm election since 1938.[7][8] The Republican Party gained control of the most House seats since 1946. [9] Republicans gained the most in New York state where they picked up six seats, defeating five incumbents and winning an open Democratic district. The heavy Democratic Party losses were attributed to anger with President Obama, strong opposition to the new health insurance bill that was commonly called "Obamacare", and the weak economy (unemployment averaged 9.6% for the year.

United States House of Representatives elections, 2010 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

LesGovt · Sep 14, 2011

Ikari said:
My goal was not to "defeat Obama" as I saw McCain and Obama as essentially the same. We may not have had "Obama Care", but I also don't think that an honest and intellectual debate on nationalized health care is a bad thing. My goal is to not perpetuate the breaking of our government, the polarization of our political field, and ultimate destruction of the Republic. And in those terms, there is no way I can support the standard Republocrat offerings.

As I said, choose a better candidate and I may be able to vote for them. Until then, you work only to alienate the independent and third party voters even more and only serve to have the other side win "easier" or whatever. If my actions can be attributed to Obama winning, then so can yours. If you were really interested in making sure you could defeat Obama (and boy did you overestimate McCain, eh?), then you would be searching for better candidates and candidates who can easily reach outside the boundaries of the GOP to capture the independent and third party voters. Like it or not, we're who you have to pander to. Of the established voters, those who vote party lines are fairly well split. You don't need to pander to those guys, they're like you. Vote for the R or D regardless of class or caliber. Each election comes down to essentially a 50/50 split plus noise, and the noise is what pushes one side over or under. And guess who composes the noise. The independents and third party voters.

Appease me and win my vote, you'll win easier. Don't and you won't.

Please let me know when I get to choose the candidate. And, you keep on voting for people who have no chance and we will end up with more statist crap. The Tea Party folks have done far more to work for change than all of your morally superior votes for nobodies. They are the example you should be following. Your choice. Your vote. Your ObamaCare. Live with it.

pbrauer · Sep 14, 2011

Conservative said:
Obama didn't win that election but misinformation did. Anyone 55 and older wouldn't experience any change at all but that fact escaped the voters.

Why would anyone 55 and older wish the younger ones would have to pay more for their health care when tihey retired? As a general rule they didn't, this was a big miscalculation by Ryan an the Republicans. The plan was nothing more than crony capitalism, just like Medicare Parts C & D was.

Ikari · Sep 14, 2011

Conservative said:
Elections are about choices not the perfect candidate. You didn't run so therefore you didn't have that perfect candidate. You are left with voting for the best alternative.

This is not only true, but my entire point. You have to vote for the candidate you feel is best. The one who will best represent you, the one who best echos your political ideologies. That was neither McCain nor Obama last cycle. I voted third party because that's were that candidate lives for me. You may think the Republicans serve your cause better. Fair enough, vote for them. But it's not MY FAULT if Obama gets elected over McCain, I didn't vote for either because neither were the best alternative.

Conservative said:
I didn't like McCain but rather than sit on the sidelines and complain about the end result I voted for McCain to keep Obama out of the WH. Problem is I live in TX and my vote didn't matter as he lost the state by over a million votes. Those looking for the perfect candidate were countered by a majority that elected Obama. Thanks for your principles, we are in the mess we are today because of those principles.

Sorry, I want the system to work properly, not pander to the increasingly polarized political playing field. We aren't in the mess we are today because of my principles. We are in the mess today because the Republocrats cannot field my best alternative were as other parties can. It's all about free market competition to draw a correlary. You must compete for my vote, my vote will go to the best alternative. If you can field that, you'll get my vote. If you can't, you won't. That simple.

Ikari · Sep 14, 2011

LesGovt said:
Please let me know when I get to choose the candidate. And, you keep on voting for people who have no chance and we will end up with more statist crap. The Tea Party folks have done far more to work for change than all of your morally superior votes for nobodies. They are the example you should be following. Your choice. Your vote. Your ObamaCare. Live with it.

Start fielding better candidates and I'll vote for them. Till then, you're stuck with your Obama Care till you end the crap your party seems to like to throw around like monkeys.

Conservative · Sep 14, 2011

pbrauer said:
Why would anyone 55 and older wish the younger ones would have to pay more for their health care when tihey retired? As a general rule they didn't, this was a big miscalculation by Ryan an the Republicans. The plan was nothing more than crony capitalism, just like Medicare Parts C & D was.

Because most younger people understand they can do better than what the govt. offers.

How do you know that the voucher system wouldn't work? Competition creates great deals whenever allowed to be implemented. Please don't talk about crony capitalism with Solyndra and GE in the pocket of Democrats. How much did those two enterprises cost the American taxpayer?

Interesting how free enterprise and competition scares people like you. Shopping for the best deal seems to bother you and the question is why? you don't seem to care about cost to the taxpayers.

LesGovt · Sep 14, 2011

Ikari said:
I guess you should have brought forth a better candidate that could have appeased Vance and me. Then we wouldn't have Obama Care. Guess you ****ed up.

HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!

You can be so funny. Why don't you come over to the GOP and bring forth the best candidate. Oh, you cannot do that. You are only one vote and you don't get to say that this person will be running when he or she doesn't want to run, and you do not get to say that Person A is the one who will win the primary since your one vote is one vote. You need to stop these arguments that go from the ridiculous to the sublime. Your choice. Your vote. Your ObamaCare. Live with it.

Ikari · Sep 14, 2011

Conservative said:
Interesting how free enterprise and competition scares people like you. Shopping for the best deal seems to bother you and the question is why? you don't seem to care about cost to the taxpayers.

Interesting indeed. So you'd be up for more "free market" style political competition? You're not scared, right?

Conservative · Sep 14, 2011

Ikari said:
This is not only true, but my entire point. You have to vote for the candidate you feel is best. The one who will best represent you, the one who best echos your political ideologies. That was neither McCain nor Obama last cycle. I voted third party because that's were that candidate lives for me. You may think the Republicans serve your cause better. Fair enough, vote for them. But it's not MY FAULT if Obama gets elected over McCain, I didn't vote for either because neither were the best alternative.

Sorry, I want the system to work properly, not pander to the increasingly polarized political playing field. We aren't in the mess we are today because of my principles. We are in the mess today because the Republocrats cannot field my best alternative were as other parties can. It's all about free market competition to draw a correlary. You must compete for my vote, my vote will go to the best alternative. If you can field that, you'll get my vote. If you can't, you won't. That simple.

Then you have to accept the consequences of your actions which gave us Barack Obama. Interesting how ideologues are out of touch with reality. Although honorable that is a very naive approach to the election process. You would be better served working from within a party than from the outside. what clout do you have not voting for one of the major candidates?

Republican wins Democratic New York House seat

Less like the tiger...more like the lion.

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency