Comments on: The Election Wasn’t About Obama

By: hkyplayer

hkyplayer — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 05:16:27 +0000

Some of you are way to rough on Rachel…She is one of the few good looking Liberals.

If you take all the political correctness out. The Pres election would have been given to McCain if the Minority votes were not included in the election numbers…
99% of all Black vote was for Obama that is 12% of the votes.

But with the State Governor elections it did not pull very many Minorities out to vote.
69% whites voted for the Republican party in this election. Black people and minorities dont care or vote on an election like this.

By: Chuck Varrick

Chuck Varrick — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 14:04:54 +0000

Gotta laugh at Rachel…she’s another one of those leftist zombies void of anything upstairs. She allows her background to dictate her thoughts. She’s probably never had an original idea in her Vulcan mind. One thing I’d like to see more of is unionized shops moving south to right to work states to dilute the strength of places like Michigan, Illinois and Ohio. I read somewhere I think that Boeing is moving 1 plant to SC. I’d love to see Ford move down there and some other companies like this. That’s how you beat liberal zombies at their own game. Maybe this past election in both Virginia and NJ weren’t about obama, but after his sweeping victories in 08 in those states, his momentum has ceased to be. Say what you want about obama, he’s not qualified to be the President of the U.S. Bill Clinton was as was George W. Bush. Like them or not both had valuable experience running their respective States. obama never really was responsible for anything notable first as a State Senator and later a U.S. Senator.

By: jimmymaher

jimmymaher — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 07:49:59 +0000

Obama wasn’t on the ballot, but his insane spending binge and economy-damaging policies were. Yes, Bush sucked too, but this no longer a defense for Obama — he owns the economy now.Hopefully, this will help Obama and Congress steer towards the center. If they don’t, mid-term elections will be ugly for them as will Obama’s Jimmy Carter-dom. The Democrats hanging their hopes on Republicans self-destructing with candidates that are too socially conservative would be a serious strategic error.
Korean Ginseng

By: Joe Callan

Joe Callan — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 21:43:09 +0000

Jersey has a thing about ousting their Guvs in a bad economy, don’t they? With that said, there really weren’t enough races to say anything meaningful about the Pres. or Congress (which has had an abysmal rating since before Obama took office).

However–depending on exit polls, whether you’re Rachel or Newt, doesn’t really prove anything. I don’t know about anyone else, but when I’m at the polls, I don’t pay attention to the people bugging me outside. I do the deed and get the hell out of there.

By: kimtaylor

kimtaylor — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 07:35:36 +0000

Suuuurrrreee…… Obama’s not watching. He only campaigned for the Democrat candidates — but now the races aren’t important

I’m sure Obama will give a full analysis on Games 6 & 7 of the World Series though

ps3 spiele

By: SFPhoto

SFPhoto — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 06:35:36 +0000

Jelperman. I really think my astute comments won the day, and calling Rachel Sklar a “girl” either puts your IQ at 30 or your masculinity index into the 20′s.

By: MartiniShark

MartiniShark — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 00:08:43 +0000

Well it was not about Obama entirely . . . except–

The President did in fact inject himself notably in those major elections. He campaigned for Deeds in VA, then began backing away when the poll numbers started to slide. The Administration influenced Scazzafava to back the Dem. when she stepped down. (Not to mention Hoffman running as a 3rd party candidate for only a few weeks finished surprisingly close.) And not only did he stump for Corzine repeatedly but the campaign posters actually read OBAMA/CORZINE.

You have to at least consider if it was not a pure repudiation of Obama then he certainly did little to sway voters.

By: Jelperman

Jelperman — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 21:43:10 +0000

Ha ha, SFPhoto got whooped by a girl!

Again!

By: Keeva

Keeva — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 19:35:44 +0000

New Jersey was about an unpopular governor, runaway state taxes and corruption to the max. Virginia has always swapped back and forth between parties.

I find it intriguing that the 2 governor’s races were referendums on the administration, but the congressional election in NY23 was not.

I have been voting for decades and I never, ever vote based on anything but the actual candidates and their records.

By: Magister

Magister — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 15:19:18 +0000

I’ve been voting for more than a quarter century and hav never based a vote for state office on the President or the Congress. If I’m voting for Governor, my vote is for or against one of the candidates.

Oh, and when Virginia and New Jersey elected Democrats Mark Warner and Jim McGreevey Governor in 2001, how did it reflect on President Bush and did it cost him re-election or control of the Congress? How did it affect his agenda?

By: Sunnyr

Sunnyr — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 07:14:31 +0000

It might not have been about Obama, but it was certainly about his nutball agenda! And his approval rating is down to 45% today. People are just now realizing they voted for an inexperienced Community Organizer who is way over his head and totally frickin’ CLUELESS!

By: SFPhoto

SFPhoto — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 05:33:36 +0000

It took only nine months and now (finally) we are hearing the “roar of distant thunder at a picnic.” (F.S. Fitzgerald)
All the parrot liberals are scurrying about whistling their arias of sunshine and daffodils… Pelosi will bring her “bill” up for a vote… And soon the Obama establishment will crash and burn.

By: Rachel Sklar

Rachel Sklar — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 05:22:36 +0000

And you, sir, prove it amply in this space.

By: SFPhoto

SFPhoto — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 05:15:02 +0000

Rachel, thanks for admitting you’re a parrot, and not very good at picking sources: Newsweek and Fineman and Phil Bump… As I said, I knew you were a jerk when you wrote for the Huffington Post.

By: Rachel Sklar

Rachel Sklar — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 05:08:05 +0000

Sorry, I’m actually a Newsweek parrot/Mike Allen parrot/Howard Fineman parrot/Phil Bump parrot/CBS News parrot/exit poll data parrot.

By: StewartIII

StewartIII — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 05:02:36 +0000

Hot Air — WaPo: Elections not a referendum on Obama, but …
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/11/04/wapo-elections-not-a-referendum-on-obama-but/

Kirsten Powers: A warning to Democrats
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/warning_to_democrats_OveXgbUR9kiS8RYEkmW6nJ

By: SFPhoto

SFPhoto — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 05:01:06 +0000

Again, Rachel Sklar is clueless. How anybody in their right mind could not sense “Obama” unease with massive government spending, massive government growth, the now massive power of the unions, and a healthcare bill that no one has read is beyond all belief. Ford Motors cuts costs and manages a billion dollar profit, GM is now owned by our government and does nothing. The election was ALL about Obama and his Czars in the White House. Rachel has become a White House parrot: “The White House says that Republican wins in two governors’ races were not referendums on the president. White House press secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters Wednesday that voters went to the polls in Virginia and New Jersey to work through “very local issues that didn’t involve the president.” President Barack Obama’s spokesman said voters were primarily concerned about the economy.”