Thread: The end of the Reid?

Originally Posted by noahath

Seeing as you like Rasmussen, I've used their latest polling data:
Nevada Senate: Angle (R) 46%, Reid (D) 43%
Election 2010: Nevada Senate - Rasmussen Reports

It is hard for to believe that the Democrats are acting in unison and with coherence. This is very new behavior.

Barack Obama seems to have a sense of timing and it may be carrying over to others. It sure looks to me like the TEA Party peaked about the 4th of July. It looks to me like the Democrats are wanting to peak about the 1st of November.

That seems like a good idea to me.

Originally Posted by Dick Martin

It is hard for to believe that the Democrats are acting in unison and with coherence. This is very new behavior.

Barack Obama seems to have a sense of timing and it may be carrying over to others. It sure looks to me like the TEA Party peaked about the 4th of July. It looks to me like the Democrats are wanting to peak about the 1st of November.

That seems like a good idea to me.

No, Reid is outspending Angle 10-1 right now.

Originally Posted by noahath

Seeing as you like Rasmussen, I've used their latest polling data:
Nevada Senate: Angle (R) 46%, Reid (D) 43%
Election 2010: Nevada Senate - Rasmussen Reports

I do like Rasmussen in that they have the best track record. You will note that the poll I cited was from about 6/10. Polls change all the time and with reid outspending his opponant 10 to 1, I would expect ried to have pulled far ahead. The fact that he still trails bodes well for Angle.

Spending isn't as big a deal as people make it out to be, unless it's a representation of local, grassroots support. If it's mostly local businesses or out of state donations, which is very likely given Reid's power in the Senate, then it doesn't represent real support among voters.

Angle has some out there views, but she's pretty smart. Hopefully she'll be able to make the transition from activist to Senator quickly. Because we know what happens when activists from the other side get in Congress. Sometimes they get crazier.

Originally Posted by adaher

I'm not sure Angle matters much. Reid can't crack 45% in the polls. Angle would have to be pretty scary to get Reid the votes he doesn't have yet, given his name recognition. And although she's certainly far right, she's not nearly scary enough to get Reid re-elected.

I'm sensing the opposite.

Reid is old, bland and uncharismatic and that hurts him. The slow economic turnaround and the natural feelings of opposing parties in power are winds against him. However, he's not a wild lefty, e.g., anti-abortion sentiments, pro-gun and tough on crime for example and that helps him there. Heck, he was a key player in getting Anthony Spilatro (a/k/a 'Nicky Santoro' played by Joe Pesci from the film Casino) banned from the casinos and hunted by the feds before he was a Senator.

Angle, however, is very radically conservative, such as opposing abortion to the extent of cases of rape and incest because it would "interfere With God's 'Plan'" (seriously, WTF), her temperance views on booze, privatising Social Security, the VA, etc. Even the GOP machine is concerned about her far right, Religious Right positions:

Republican senators wary of Sharron Angle's views

By MANU RAJU | 6/16/10 9:49 AM EDT

Much of the focus since Sharron Angle won the GOP Senate nomination in Nevada last week has been on statements that put her to the right of even the most conservative in the Republican establishment.

Sharron Angle may quickly find that some of her more controversial views won’t fly in the Senate GOP Conference if she becomes Nevada’s next senator – even with some of the most conservative Republicans in the upper chamber.

Several Senate Republicans told POLITICO that they don’t favor privatizing Social Security, as Angle has supported. Small government conservatives said it doesn’t make sense to eliminate the Energy and Education departments – as she’s called for in the past. And some recoiled at the thought of pulling the United States out of the United Nations, a position Angle has touted.

. . .

Republican senators wary of Sharron Angle's views - Manu Raju - POLITICO.com

She plays very well to far right and/or Religious Right and/or tea party types, but the GOP already has those votes. NV is a very libertarian state, and her views conflict with that. Her type even motivates the Dem base, socially liberal anti-Religious Right voters fiscal conservative swing voters, moderates, veterans, the elderly, etc. She's also attacked the unemployed and blamed them for their plight rather than appeal to them, which is exactly who the GOP ought to be targeting for acquisition at the polls. Given the Dem base is generally not as motivated right now, that's the last thing the GOP would want to do in a race, and Angle gives every reason to be motivated in that state. She is a great talking point for the Dems and poorly typecasts the GOP.

Right now, she's new and that has its advantages initially, but I sense she'll get cast like Palin or worse by November, a person with an already won segment of GOP voters that wards off enough voters and motivates opposing but unmotivated voters enough to close a deal in an election.

Originally Posted by adaher

Spending isn't as big a deal as people make it out to be, unless it's a representation of local, grassroots support. If it's mostly local businesses or out of state donations, which is very likely given Reid's power in the Senate, then it doesn't represent real support among voters.

Angle has some out there views, but she's pretty smart. Hopefully she'll be able to make the transition from activist to Senator quickly. Because we know what happens when activists from the other side get in Congress. Sometimes they get crazier.

Good grief! Give an example of her being smart! Please! She's no smarter than Mead Pirate's hair.

She has out there views, but if you've seen her interviews she's no Sarah Palin. Which means that when she gets out of that conservative activist bubble, she'll moderate, hopefully.

In any case, all I care about is that she's a sure vote against any new or increased spending and a sure vote for any spending cuts. that's what she'll be hired to do and she'll do it well.

Originally Posted by adaher

She has out there views, but if you've seen her interviews she's no Sarah Palin. Which means that when she gets out of that conservative activist bubble, she'll moderate, hopefully.

In any case, all I care about is that she's a sure vote against any new or increased spending and a sure vote for any spending cuts. that's what she'll be hired to do and she'll do it well.

Then you haven't seen her interview with a real news person I take it? lol

She might vote to cut spending, but she will not be voting to cut the deficit. At least, Republicans haven't voted that way so far.


Lets see... she wants to do away with Social Security, do away with Medicare, do away with the Dept. of Education, do away with the FDA.

She wants to do away with oil industry regulations and inspections, she sees no reason for BP to have to pay for the Gulf mess.

She wants to outlaw abortions for pregnancies resulting from rape (That means that you could very easily end up being required to raise and pay for a child borne of your wife if she happened to be gang raped by the Chinese National Ping Pong Team).

Better check out what it is that she really wants before you shout too loudly in her support.

When it comes down to November, I think that his opponent's radicalism will clinch Reid a victory.

She might vote to cut spending, but she will not be voting to cut the deficit.

You can't cut the deficit without cutting spending. The first step is to get real conservatives in there who will cut spending.

Lets see... she wants to do away with Social Security, do away with Medicare, do away with the Dept. of Education, do away with the FDA.

Actually, she doesnt, except for Education, but that would balance the budget overnight.

Originally Posted by adaher

She might vote to cut spending, but she will not be voting to cut the deficit.

You can't cut the deficit without cutting spending. The first step is to get real conservatives in there who will cut spending.

Lets see... she wants to do away with Social Security, do away with Medicare, do away with the Dept. of Education, do away with the FDA.

Actually, she doesnt, except for Education, but that would balance the budget overnight.

and what do you think will happen if we discontinue public education?


I suggest you watch Idiocracy. While it is a fictional film, if what you suggest comes to pass, its highly possible to come true as well.
Discontinuing public education is retarded. Literally.

and what do you think will happen if we discontinue public education?


Public education precedes the Dept. of Education by 100 years. Education is purely a state issue.

Angle has very specific ideas about education, and they do not involve abolishing public education. As a state legislator, she fought for the rights of parents to homeschool(very successfully), but she did not oppose public education. As a matter of fact, she has ideas to make public education better, although those won't come into play in the Senate.

Originally Posted by Dick Martin

She wants to outlaw abortions for pregnancies resulting from rape (That means that you could very easily end up being required to raise and pay for a child borne of your wife if she happened to be gang raped by the Chinese National Ping Pong Team).

:rolleyes: Don't you think you are being very dishonest when you say that?