Remember when the Dems said the Tea Party would undue the GOP this cycle

Another Dem Governor candidate now must answer some tough questions.

I initially thought that the Dems might gain a Governorship or two this cycle as the GOP would be entirely focused on the Senate and Governorships are harder races to "nationalize" but now with Ohio now probably a "Safe GOP" keep and this new news about Burke plagiarizing her campaign platform that takes two of the possible flips off the table.

Walker was already up by a small margin but had positives to lean on like majorities saying that Wisconsin was on the "right track". These new revelations are going to make beating Walker tougher because it makes Burke look like her policies are not serious.

If both Kasich and Walker win and the GOP loses no governorships it puts Chris Christie back to the forefront of the party. He leads the Republican Governor Assn.

What's funny is remember when the Dems said they were going to ruin the GOP's hopes by crossing party lines to nominate bad candidates or that the Tea Party would do it for them? It appears the strategy is not working.

Right now it looks like the Dems got the short end of the stick for candidates with Braley, Burke, and Fitzgerald. Things could change but it's after Labor Day and time is running out.

No votes yet

It should read undo


Really, Mikey? You can't spell-check what you post?

(not being an ass like a certain radio personality was earlier, oh no.)

I believe I corrected my mistake did I not? So yes, you are being an ass.

Also, I really don't kare about spelling. If I correct a mistake I correct it, if I don't I dont.


Mike you can edit your post. Surly a marine can figure this out.

Statements made are the opinion of the writer who is exercising his first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and are generally permitted.

Never been in the Burj Khalifa. If I do one day I'll send you a picture of the view.

I don't think I need to edit the post. I addressed it because I was in the mood to address it. I made a mistake and admitted it. It's done.


The Liberals make a lot of claims that just aren't true. They are lost in their own rhetoric. That's what happens when you never grow up and face the real world.

heroes of the Tea Party and many other conservative Republicans. To me, this is proof of what my brother, the doctor, used to complain about. He used to opine that his education was so focused upon medicine that it was difficult for him to be well-rounded. BTW -- my brother, the doctor, as a rock-ribbed Republican.
If these citations are accurate, it appears that Dr. Carson needs some other experiences outside of what has become his very insular world. Really: equating same-sex marriage with bestiality? believing that the 2016 election will be cancelled because the U.S. will fall into anarchy? believing that Obamacare is "the worst thing that has happened in this country since slavery?" and that Ray Rice is being unfairly demonized, and that his wife has some culpability in that wanton attack?
GREAT candidate, all right! GREAT leader. JUST what this country needs to unite us!!

Dale, Dr. Carson represents the fringe of even the Tea Party and the Tea Party represents a fraction of the GOP. It is a politicial movement inside of an established party.

Most agree with the Tea Party's fiscal conservative message. This is what unites all of the Tea Party regardless of where they are. A social message is not universal in the Tea Party. It is very much geographically tied. This is why when you search for Tea Party groups there is not one group that comes up. It's a populist movement so in each state you will see a group a little bit different than the group in the next state.

It would behoove you to find a better source of information on the Tea Party than


Let's roll back the clock.

Tea Party WAS a grass-roots populist movement, until the Kochs and other special interests and nutjobs co-opted it into the disgusting mess it is today. The Tea Party isn't any more fiscally conservative than the GOP, they exist to pass tax cuts for the rich while making *some* cuts to spending, particularly in the social safety net, education, etc., all with the idiotic and naive hope that the wealth will trickle down.. which it isn't, thus leaving them with huge deficits in the budget, which the self-same Tea-tards that approved the cuts for the rich blame on the "Liberals" and then work on trying to cut more taxes in order to lower the deficits, "Dig UP, stupid!"

should be supporters of Hillary, since Bill brought us FOUR BALANCED BUDGETS, the last three with significant surpluses!

The truth is, like most ideological movements, the Tea Party is more concerned with ideology than it is with results. They are "true believers" who would rather fight others than compromise to move the nation forward.

And, Mikey, you can say what you want about Ben Carson being on "the fringe of even the Tea Party," but, in fact, he runs near the top of every poll I've seen rating who Republican voters want as their Presidential candidate in 2016. Now, you may not like his views, but a high percentage of other Republican voters sure do! Here's a very recent poll: BTW -- Is this an acceptable source, Mikey? Read the Carson quote at the end of this article...sounds like your kind of candidate, Mikey...maybe you should reconsider.
More support for Dr. Carson! Is this an acceptable source, Mikey?

Bingo, Dale. It's not about "balanced budget" or "fiscal conservatism", it's about the Party Above All, that's why The Powers That Be co-opted the Tea Party and signed up the lunatic fringe of social conservatives, gun nuts, racists, and so forth to join in under the big tent of the GOP... the only difference being they came in the servants' entrance on the side after being told that if only they worked harder and longer and promised all the people coming in the red-carpeted front entrance they'd vote for tax cuts, they too would get to walk the red carpet to the executive suites instead of the nosebleed bleachers.

Dale those polls are not indicative of the party at whole.

One is a straw poll, the other is a poll of "value voters". What these are not is polls of the Republican party as a whole.

Carson winning 20% of a values voters poll doesn't mean he's got 20% of the vote of Republican voters. I would say a large majority of the "value voters" self identify as Tea Party members. So, yes I am still correct, he represents the fringe. He gains 20% of his supposed core demographic in what's known as a jungle poll, meaning lots of people in it.

Yes those are good sources Dale but from them you're misreading the information. It's a subsample of a subsample. Biden might be leading polls with left handed women with clubbed feet, but it doesn't mean he is going to beat out Hilary for the women vote.


And another thing...there is a current race for Judge of Domestic Relations Court in Lucas County. There are no party labels on the ballot for judge in Ohio, but on his signs, Jay Feldstein states that he is the endorsed Democrat. Lisa McGowan, his opponent, has no party mention on her signs. And I checked. She was not endorsed by The Stain before the Primary, but won anyway. She is currently listed on the Republican Party website as an endorsed Republican for that judicial seat.

Now, I am NOT stating that ALL Democrats are thrilled with Obama's performance, and/or his poll numbers. I am just stating that running with a popular POTUS, or NOT with an unpopular POTUS is nothing revolutionary. It's politics as usual. And MANY candidates still want to be identified as Democrats, while many Republicans do NOT want to be associated with that party designation. Politics as usual...nothing more, nothing less.

including Ben Carson. (Most polls do NOT include Carson, making it hard to assess his level of support. The pollsters want to consider only traditional politicians, I guess.) It shows that the margin between Hillary and Carson is about the same as those between Hillary and Christie, and Hillary and Ryan, her closest GOP competitors.
Comparatively speaking, Hillary leads Cruz and Rubio by a statistically significantly larger margin, and Hillary crushes Kasich. The Carson vs. Hillary numbers are from LIKELY VOTERS!!

Apparently, a whole lot of people in the general public believe Ben Carson to be a viable alternative in the Republican battle for the 2016 POTUS nomination. I guess a LOT of voters like his extreme rhetoric.
Embrace the man, Mikey! If he gets the Republican nomination, I bet you vote for him! And I bet you come up with all kinds of reasons to rationalize your support for him should that time arise.

Here's the link:

Ok. Dale, once again you're shifting focus.

A "Hilary vs" is only that... a comparison of Hilary versus another opponent. So a fraction of the people could be throwing their support behind Carson because they like him or they could be doing it because they hate her.

Using your link, all of the GOP candidates get roughly 39-40% with the exception of Kasich and Ryan. Kasich gets lower 35%, Ryan gets more 42%. Now in most discussions Kasich hasn't been a large contender yet to jump into the race, that may change after November. For Ryan, he has higher name recognition among likely voters because he's already run on a National ticket.

So since all candidates get a 39-40% we can assume that's a reasonable baseline number. Carson achieving a baseline number doesn't mean he's a leader of the party. It doesn't mean he's going to get anything. You could probably put "generic Republican" and get 39-40% against her.

Also interesting is when against Carson, Hilary gets her lowest number. Only Christie kept her at 45 and that was back in April. Now do I think Carson siphons support away from Hilary? No. I think Carson is less known and thus we see more undecideds in the hypothetical matchup.

Since Carson has never run for office it remains to be seen if he can even put a campaign together. Normally these type of candidates can't do it without lots of cash, which I don't think Carson has. At this point I am not putting much stock into Carson even topping 10% in any primary, especially when his core demographic is also prone to like Cruz and Paul, who are currently more well known and better funded.


You challenged me to come up with a national poll. I DID!!
Now, you talk about Carson's inadequate ability to put together a national campaign. You refer to a "generic Republican" who, according to you, would get a HIGHER percentage against Hillary than Kasich gets! How does THAT work, Mikey?

Face it, Mikey! Ben Carson -- and his "interesting" perspective on America -- is a player in Republican politics for the 2016 POTUS election! And, you don't deny that, if it's Ben vs. Hillary, you would support Ben. If Ben gets the nomination, I look forward to getting some good laughs at your rationalizations about why you could THEN support Ben.

What I actually challenged was "One is a straw poll, the other is a poll of "value voters". What these are not is polls of the Republican party as a whole." I don't fault you for not being able to find one. Polls are done generally on a whim.

I don't doubt Carson is a player and holds influence over some. I wouldn't characterize him as a leader of the party. He hasn't proved he can do anything for the party. Not money, not votes, not influence.

At the time of the poll of Kasich, he had a lot of negativity surrounding him. At that time the Dems thought they'd win Ohio back. Kasich has since turned it around. I wouldn't be surprised to see him at the 39-40 mark today. After November if he wins over 55% of the vote he'll be talked about as a serious challenger, probably more than Christie, again if he can win by over 55% which looks likely. The same holds true for Walker. If he wins with over 55% he will be a top leader.

Carson doesn't have advantage of an election. He doesn't have the advantages of office. I would be surprised at this point if he were able to finish third in any primary. If you're not in the top 3 in the primaries, you won't win the nomination.


And, as far as Kasich is concerned, you only have him up to the level of what you claim a "generic Republican" would get? And about the same level as Ben Carson?

Mikey, you are so partisan that, if Ben Carson does get the Republican nomination for POTUS in 2016, you'll find a way to rationalize your support for him over ANY democrat who may be nominated.

Dale, if Jesus Christ came back to Earth and joined the Democratic Party, Fox News and talk radio would be in panic mode solid wall-to-wall coverage of how Jesus can't be President because He's "unnaturally born", a foreigner, and has no birth certificate. If Jesus joined the GOP, within one hour every Republican-controlled state legislature would be voting to hold a Constitutional Convention to amend the Constitution to allow Jesus to run while Orange Boehner would be holding repeated votes to amend the Constitution in the House while Turtle-Man McConnell would be demanding the same of Harry Reid.

If, somehow, Jesus was actually allowed to run as a Democrat, or even as an Independent, Mikey and every other Republican-Teabagger-Libertarian S.O.B. would rationalize their support and convince themselves to vote for the Prince of Lies so long as Satan happened to manifest his presence as a pro-unfettered capitalism pro-American pro-gun white guy in a business suit.

Just picture the debate:

MODERATOR: Tell us your plans for health care. Jesus, you go first.
JESUS: If elected, I will personally heal all the sick.
SATAN: My opponent will personally cause millions of Americans in the health care, pharmaceutical, and insurance industries to be unemployed. (as Satan says this, he is handed large bags of cash by the leaders of industry lobby groups LIVE ON AIR).
MikeyA (and millions more like him watching at home): YOU TELL THAT COMMIE SOCIALIST BASTARD, SATAN!

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.