My honest opinion–yes, Mississippi is really in play if McDaniel is the GOP nominee. Childers scored two upsets earlier this decade, when he ran for the House in a special election, and then again in the regular election. He flipped that seat for the first time in a very long time, and he might be able to do it again.
Or maybe it means the Tea Party has won, by forcing establishment Pubs such as Cochran to toe their policy-line.
Personally, I think the Tea Party exists solely because of visceral hatred of Barack Obama. Perhaps they can transfer that hatred to Hillary Clinton, I’m inclined to think that they can. They’ll continue to push the right wing social issues but I see their influence as slowly waning. Their high water mark was 2010, when they took about a year and a half of uninterrupted condemnation of the ACA and translated that into some House and Senate seats. By 2016 or 2018 at the latest, they will be more or less completely reabsorbed into the Republican Party.
Actually, I think the RW community had reached the point where the TP or something like it would have been their reaction to any Dem taking office as POTUS in 2009. Also, the point where they would have felt the same or nearly the same visceral hatred for any Dem POTUS, even one white and male.
But a high percentage of the corruption. Earmarks tend to go to campaign contributors.
You’re probably right, but, cite?
OpenSecrets not only gives us percentages, but names names:
And I see that Childers gives more than a third of his earmarks to campaign contributors. Cochran only gave 4.6% to contributors. Hmmmm…
I find it baffling that the same people who talk about states’ rights, and go on about how the undemocratic Senate is necessary to look out for the interests of the states… go on to complain whenever senators look out for the interests of their state.
The problem is abuse of the process. Most earmarks aren’t even voted on, they are inserted after the fact. Plus the whole campaign contributors thing.
Complaining about the abuse of the earmarking process is just as valid as complaining about the Patriot Act. The Patriot Act was democracy in action, open and transparent, but it was still a stupid result. LIkewise, while earmarks may be part of the process, Congress can and should make changes to stop the abuse that’s been going on for a long time.
Of course, one way to “look out for your state” is to have the feds stop poaching state revenue sources. The federal government gets to tax people at much higher rates than the states do. It should be the other way around. So what happens is that the states, limited to no more than 10% or so while the feds can jack rates to almost 40%, so the states have to go hat in hand to the feds.
Not only did the Tea Party candidate win in Iowa, she’s now leading Braley in the first two polls taken since she won the nomination:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2014/senate/ia/iowa_senate_ernst_vs_braley-3990.html
Come on, man. Rasmussen and some unknown college have that, while the majority of the polls in your own cite say otherwise.
The fact that you don’t bother to read links, even your own, doesn’t mean nobody else does.
the fact that you don’t bother to read what I wrote means you’re usually wrong.
I said that the two polls taken since Ernst won the nomination say she’s ahead. The other polls, before her nomination bounce, say she was behind.
Back to grade school with you!
You’re leaving out the required Rasmussen Correction Factor, something someone with your intimate knowledge of poll-skewing should be well aware of, although dismissing a Rasmussen poll entirely is also a valid and common reaction. You can also admit you never even heard of the Loras College Poll or Loras College itself, for that matter.
But, go ahead believing what you want to believe, and being stunned into silence on Election Night, amid the steady derision of everyone who tried to tell you, once again, if you really enjoy that sort of thing.
Or, we’ll wait for PPP or Quinnipiac, and you can be shocked and made fun of.
Obviously, there’s another thread about it, but damn, the Tea Party claimed their biggest scalp ever today. Even if they don’t win another race, they had a successful primary season.
I thought so too but doing a little reading I discovered that the democratic nominee was selected by a Democratic Committee (they couldn’t find anyone to run so they appointed someone - hence no democratic primary race.) Add to this that Virginia has open primaries, anyone can vote for anyone. So if you’re a Dem and no one is running for your party, why not throw some sand in the gears, which appears to be what happened.
Which is stupid, because Brat is probably going to win. This is like voting Nancy Pelosi out to get Cindy Sheehan. What you end up with is Congresswoman Sheehan.
Looking at the numbers, there’s no way Democrats alone swung the primary away from Cantor. Republicans must have also been quite dissatisfied with him.
Brat will still probably win, but this changed from a rock-solid red seat to just a strong red seat. If Trammell turns out to be a really good candidate (or, more likely, Brat says something really stupid), the Democrats might have a chance.
They are college professors. Saying stupid things is unlikely, since they do public speaking nearly every day.
What is more likely is that oppo research has only just begun into both of their academic writings. That’s where the interesting stuff is going to be found.
If Cantor does not run as a write-in, splitting the GOP vote between the fairly-crazies and the really-crazies.