Where's the birth certificate

Free and Strong America

Tuesday, September 14, 2010

All Eyes on Delaware Today

Will the latest party primary upset of a RINO occur this afternoon in the First State?.....

"A last-minute surge by a Tea Party candidate has threatened to upend Delaware’s GOP Senate primary Tuesday, adding to the concerns of a fractured Republican Party as it seeks to win congressional seats in November.

The latest poll shows Republican establishment candidate Mike Castle, a nine-term House moderate, statistically tied with conservative Christine O’Donnell, who has support and financial backing of the Tea Party movement.

The Public Policy Polling Survey released Monday showed O’Donnell leading Castle 47 to 44 percent, a difference that is within the margin of error. It’s a stunning development; just a week ago, O’Donnell trailed Castle by 8 points in a Rasmussen poll, and she had never been considered a serious threat to win the nomination.

O’Donnell has benefited from a last-minute endorsement from Sarah Palin, whose support helped underdog candidates win Senate primaries in Kentucky, Nevada and Alaska.

“The momentum is definitely in O’Donnell’s direction, so if that keeps going, she could win by an even bigger margin,” said Tom Jensen, the director of Public Policy Polling. “It could go either way, but I wouldn’t be surprised if O’Donnell wins by 10."

Yes! Hallelujah! I'm sick of getting maybe half of whatI want from my own party. If Castle gets in, there will be little to distinguish his record from Biden's and perhaps people are starting to finally get it when it comes to social issues and the role of a federal government that's becoming too bloated and intrusive. Here's the link to O'Donnell's website for those who may want to know more about her.


Froggie said...

The Republicans could have taken control of both houses in November if they had not been fractured by the Tea Party, which now has the effect of a third party in that the Tea Partiers will take votes away from established Republican candidates and throw them to the Democrats.

"I have no doubt if she by some miracle became the nominee she would lose the seat by unprecedented numbers[to Democrat Chris Coons,]" Delaware Republican Party chairman Tom Ross said.

A recent Rasmussen poll showed Castle (R) carrying a double-digit lead over Democrat Chris Coons(R) in the general Senate race, 48 percent to 37 percent, but the poll shows when Coons and O'Donnell are matched up, Coons leads O'Donnell by a 47 percent to 36 percent margin.

The Tea Partiers are basically cannabilizing their own party, especially in this state.

Since the Tea Party is now seen to be run by Beck, Limbaugh, Gingerich and Palin, who are the far right wing, they have comprimised the moderate majority.

Democrats are rooting for O'Connel to win the primary which would guarantee coons the senate seat.

This points out the problem created when the fringe lunatics of a party acquire untecidented backing.

Froggie said...


"...double-digit lead over Democrat Chris Coons(R).."

Should read:
"...double-digit lead over Democrat Chris Coons(D).."

JD Curtis said...

If I lived in DE, I'd be voting for O'Donnell today. Why?

Castle voted for , against the defense of traditional marraige, for cap and trade, to impeach Bush and is pro-abort. I mean it, just goes on and on with this guy. Just because he has an "R" in front of his name doesn't make him a republican.

JD Curtis said...

" O'Donnell's strength lies in Kent and Sussex Counties, the two southernmost. She should be able to establish strong margins in both. She probably needs [to win] 70:30 in Sussex, 55:45 in Kent and lose by 45:55 in New Castle (the northernmost county). Turnout is likely to be variable, [with the] highest turnout in the areas where she's strongest, and that will boost her." Link

GentleSkeptic said...

Predicting she loses the general.

Art of the possible, JD.

GentleSkeptic said...



JD Curtis said...

As it stands right now she's points 16 percentage points behind Coons. Look for that gap to narrow. especially when the "bearded Marxist" innuendo from Coons starts to receive scrutiny. Link

JD Curtis said...

As it stands right now she's points 16 percentage points behind Coons. Look for that gap to narrow. especially when the "bearded Marxist" innuendo from Coons starts to receive scrutiny. Link

JD Curtis said...

I must say, that was an interesting find GS.

Jquip said...

All due respect JD. But party's have nothing to do with legality. Show me a candidate of merit on that regard that can carry gravitas and we're gold. Christie in Jersey ain't there but he's looking in the correct direction.

Ross said...

I'm watching your elections with passing interest, mainly because of the likely implications for the Obama Administration if the Democrats do badly. Having won so spectacularly in 2008, things appear to have soured for him very quickly, just as they did for former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd.


Froggie said...

That the congress would swing toward Republican at the mid-terms is very American.
After Obama got the pendulum swinging his way with majorities, Americans express their desire to see neither political party in complete control.Just as the Republicans lost in their last midterms, 2006, and then even more soundly in the presidential year, 2008, so will happen to BO.
Tjat is the beauty of the Republic. It is like a self-righting boat, she swings back to vertical before she capsizes on either side.

This makes changes deliberate and ultimately many years of push and pull to achieve the will of society, for better or worser. hehe

We are after all, a government by the people. Neither party is in complete control for a relatively long time.

JD Curtis said...

I agree that the "party' is less important than ideology at this point.

Republicans appear to be "taking back" their party, skewing more conservative.

Neither party is in complete control for a relatively long time

The republican congress that lost in '06 was their own worst enemy. They got elected and started acting like democrats. When the democrats were swept into power, they thought it was a mandate for pro-big government programs when it was actually disgust with the former kleptocracy IMO.

GentleSkeptic said...

Thought of you, JD.


Jquip said...

Ideology has always been more important than party. The problem is being given only a choice between the Fascist party and the Communist party when the polls come due. We only get the worst of both to such a degree that both Stalin and Hitler would be a step up from the mess we're under now.

JD Curtis said...

O'Donnell now has raised well over a million dollars in her first 24 hours after winning the nomination.

"Well, Christine O'Donnell's website is now reporting that she has raised over $1 million. Christine O'Donnell of "she can't win" fame has now raised over a million dollars, which means, ladies and gentlemen, Christine O'Donnell is not in debt now, unlike some of our friends with their websites. She is out of debt, a one-day pledge drive that she didn't even orchestrate. She started out yesterday with 50 large. Today she's got over a million. It is amazing. I guarantee you all the political pros were looking at this, "Whoa." There's no question they notice it." Link

People are P.O.'ed in this country. No doubt about it.

Froggie said...

As I said, O'Donnell is unelectable for more reason than are yet known.

" [Her]past indiscretions, misstatements, personal failings. O'Donnell has more than the usual share of these. Many of them are substantial -- her anti-masturbation crusade, her misrepresentations of her college degree, her misrepresentations of her lawsuit against her last full-time employer, her misrepresentations of her personal finances, tax history and foreclosure, the gap between her advocacy of abstinence and chastity and her apparent living situation, her weird belief that 71-year-old Mike Castle hides in her bushes at night, her lack of gainful employment, her unsubstantiated claims of politically motivated burglary at her home. That's quite a list -- and there's more where that came from -- but that's not what I mean when I refer to O'Donnell's extreme behavior. All of that, separately or cumulatively, might be characterized as extreme, but that's not the most extreme aspect of her behavior. So bracket all of that.

The real reason Christine O'Donnell is unelectable is that she allegedly has violated campaign finance laws on a daily basis for years, enriching herself and her boyfriend with political contributions.

O'Donnell's home address -- the one she lists on her voter registration -- is the townhouse pictured above where she lives with her boyfriend (notice it doesn't have bushes). That townhouse is apparently paid for in large measure by campaign contributions, as is her income and that of her boyfriend/aide.

O'Donnell has thus far failed to explain how this apparent arrangement is legal.

The problem, in other words, is not that Christine O'Donnell is too extreme in her policy views or that she has made every effort to alienate the swing voters she would need to be elected. The problem is that she appears to have broken several campaign laws -- that she appears to still be breaking those laws. She is still living in a home allegedly paid for with campaign donations and matching public finances. She is still living on income allegedly drawn from those same funds -- as is her boyfriend."

Typical Tea Party candidate.

Jquip said...

Froggie: Absolutely. Just like Obama is unelectable, by law, because he's allegedly a dual citizen.

Typical Tea Party candidate.

JD Curtis said...

Right. Just like they said Marco Rubio was unelectable. Now he's up by 16 points. Go figure.

GentleSkeptic said...

She would appear to be a professional candidate. Has she held any jobs that we know of? Like, where she actually produced or accomplished things, or helped people?

JD Curtis said...

Can we apply the same criteria to Chairman Zero?