CNN poll: Coons 55, O’Donnell 39

posted at 6:41 pm on September 22, 2010 by Allahpundit

That’s among likely voters. Among registered voters, it’s … Coons 59, O’Donnell 34.

But the survey indicates that if Castle had won the primary, he would be leading Coon’s 55 to 37 percent in the general election matchup.

“Castle would have had a significant ideological and geographical advantage over O’Donnell,” says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. “Castle would have had a 24-point lead among independents, but O’Donnell appears to have a seven-point deficit among them. Castle would have also had a 19-point edge in New Castle County, the most populous part of the state, but O’Donnell is losing that key region by 18 points.”

According to the survey, a small but significant chunk of Republican voters may be helping to put Coons over the top. “CNN has conducted polls in nine other Senate races this fall, and the Democratic candidate has never gotten double-digit support among Republicans in any of them. But 15 percent of Delaware Republicans are choosing Coons. That may not sound like much, but in today’s polarized political environment, it’s a big advantage that any Democrat would like to have,” Holland said.

Full crosstabs are here. Men split almost evenly between the two but women are breaking for Coons 61/32. (They break 56/37 for Castle in a hypothetical match-up with Coons.) The real killer:

Liberals and Democrats lean heavily towards Coons but 15 percent of Republicans and fully 26 percent of conservatives(!) back him too. Normally I’d attribute that to Castle supporters being sore losers, but if even the right is defecting in large numbers, it’s probably more a function of questions about her qualifications. They’re going to debate on October 13, so obviously that’ll be make or break for her in winning back some of the wayward base supporters and indies. The bad news here, apart from the obvious: I’m surprised she didn’t get a bounce after upsetting Castle. She was the story of the week, and virtually every bit of coverage came with some sort of praise (grudging or not) for tea-party power. Being a grassroots heroine would, I thought, count for something and excite Delawareans. The good news: Geraghty’s right that some voters (especially those wayward conservatives) might be reluctant to tell pollsters that they’re supporting her after all the witchcraft nonsense from last week. If so, then the race is closer than the polls indicate. And look, barring any major gaffes and assuming a decent debate performance, the margin’s bound to close somewhat. She’s sitting on a pile of money and, as the big red wave crashes in, can count on some sort lift from national Republican fee-vah. Look for the race be within single digits in a couple of weeks. I think?

Incidentally, now that she’s got a cool two million bucks and counting in the campaign treasury, is it okay to recommend to grassroots righties that they henceforth direct their contributions instead to Joe Miller and Sharron Angle and Marco Rubio, all of whom are better positioned to win? I’m going to bring that up with Rove and Krauthammer and Frum and Ace and the rest of the vast RINO conspiracy at our next Beltway cocktail party.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

It gladdens my heart to know you’re not part of the Tea Party movement.
You’re gonna have a rough November. Chin up!
donh525

Glad to know you support the over reach of government into the private lives and homes of american citizens (by denying gay marriage) by support the Tea Party establishment and the bigoted (because only the gays spread AIDS, so sayeth O’donnell) elites that now support it!

Zaggs on September 22, 2010 at 9:16 PM

Zaggs on September 22, 2010 at 9:16 PM

You still didn’t answer the question concerning the Bush articles of impeachment.

ddrintn on September 22, 2010 at 9:19 PM

Again Allah, give her 3-4 few weeks to spend some of that 2-mill, then if she’s still down significantly in the polls you can do your happy dance.

Jim-Rose on September 22, 2010 at 9:19 PM

Peter King being one of them. Did he strike you as the impeach bush type? What about Kevin Brady? Or what about the 166 republicans who voted IN FAVOR of opening debate in impeachment?
Here is what was written at the time by the Boston Globe “By a 251-166 vote, the House sent the 35-count articles of impeachment to the Judiciary Committee, which is expected to let it die without further action.”
Boston Globe.

Zaggs on September 22, 2010 at 9:14 PM

And without the YES votes from our side it would have gone straight to an up/down vote right? I see, Castle saved my commander in chief.

hawkdriver on September 22, 2010 at 9:20 PM

^ Oh, I see you did. But why did only 24 Republicans vote to send it on to the Judiciary Committee? I don’t care if Peter King was among them or not. Ron Paul was among them as well.

ddrintn on September 22, 2010 at 9:21 PM

Glad to know you support the over reach of government into the private lives and homes of american citizens (by denying gay marriage) by support the Tea Party establishment and the bigoted (because only the gays spread AIDS, so sayeth O’donnell) elites that now support it!

Zaggs on September 22, 2010 at 9:16 PM

Oh, now I get it. Guys, you’ve voting for the wrong party I think. You’re not Republicans, you’re not Conservatives. Hell you’re not even good Libertarians. Just vote for some Blue Dog Democrats if the only thing you like about Republicans is an old (maybe lost) quality of being fiscally Conservative. Your social issues are lock step with the other side.

Whatever, let the seat burn and we’ll start from scratch.

hawkdriver on September 22, 2010 at 9:27 PM

If O’Donnell can’t beat a property tax raising Bearded Marxist in The First State, the people of Delaware are going to need to seriously examine their priorities.

Or medulla oblongatas.

profitsbeard on September 22, 2010 at 9:28 PM

Whatever, let the seat burn and we’ll start from scratch.

hawkdriver

Seriously, you’re supporting a women who said anyone who had AIDS deserved it because they were gay. So yes I am in lock step with the other side, the side called humanity.

Zaggs on September 22, 2010 at 9:29 PM

ddrintn on September 22, 2010 at 9:21 PM

Exactly. Not one Castle supporter can explain this. Why? There…is…no…explaination.

It would have died in comittee after the Judiciary without a single Republican vote. It could have gone straight down party lines and it wouldn’t have mattered.

Mike helped to twist the knife in the Commander in Chiefs back and strengthen the 2008 case for Democrats by having impeachment articles before the Judiciary during the election season.

Thanks for the help Mike. We’ll just work it out ourselves next time, Buddy! No, really! We got it!

Blue Falcon. (Oh wait)

hawkdriver on September 22, 2010 at 9:33 PM

Zaggs on September 22, 2010 at 9:16 PM

You still didn’t answer the question concerning the Bush articles of impeachment.

ddrintn

Here is the question you asked

So maybe you could take this opportunity to explain why only 24 Republicans signed on to send it to the Judiciary Committee. Since it was such a wonderful thing to do and all

Reading is fundamental, you should try at my 9:14 post. I even have a link to an article explaining it in nice small words so you can follow along.

Zaggs on September 22, 2010 at 9:33 PM

Seriously, you’re supporting a women who said anyone who had AIDS deserved it because they were gay. So yes I am in lock step with the other side, the side called humanity.

Zaggs on September 22, 2010 at 9:29 PM

Seriously, can you not answer my question?

hawkdriver on September 22, 2010 at 9:34 PM

I’m going to bring that up with Rove and Krauthammer and Frum and Ace and the rest of the vast RINO conspiracy at our next Beltway cocktail party.

heh… someone has a boo boo.

Hog Wild on September 22, 2010 at 9:35 PM

I’m not down yet because there’s still a lot of positive here. First of all, it’s only been a week since the election. Castle’s voters are still crying the blues. There’s still a lot of time for this to change. Now, if she’s this far back, or further, a month from now, she’s got a big problem.

Scott Brown was behind this far with this much time left and things started changing. I believe they changed when the Democrats started talking about the Kennedy Seat and he started talking about the people’s seat.

It’s not going to take much to turn this around, no one wants to elect the Democrats into power. No matter what you say about any Democrat, they all have one thing in common, they’ll support Obama’s failed policies and they’ll vote to keep the same leadership in the House and Senate.

bflat879 on September 22, 2010 at 9:37 PM

Zaggs on September 22, 2010 at 9:33 PM

Well, explain to we Neanderthals what Parliamentary magic Castle thus produced by voting YES. If he voted no, would it have not still died in committee and how? Did the 24 drawn straws because it needed to be done?

Don’t bother. The Weekly Standard story is bull. Not one Republican needed to vote for it.

hawkdriver on September 22, 2010 at 9:37 PM

MSM and the Dems will roll out dirts on O’Donnell and then by extension try to taint other Tea Party candidates.

bayview on September 22, 2010 at 8:06 PM

Really? I’m shocked I tell ya…like they haven’t on any other republican candidate. Except with this one, they had an assist from Rove and Krauthammer…not that I’m mentioning any names, mind you…

lovingmyUSA on September 22, 2010 at 9:42 PM

Seriously, you’re supporting a women who said anyone who had AIDS deserved it because they were gay.

Zaggs on September 22, 2010 at 9:29 PM

BS. Prove it.

alwaysfiredup on September 22, 2010 at 9:46 PM

Reading is fundamental, you should try at my 9:14 post. I even have a link to an article explaining it in nice small words so you can follow along.

Zaggs on September 22, 2010 at 9:33 PM

It is, so maybe you can answer the question as to why only 24 Republicans signed onto it IF it was guaranteed to kill the whole measure. Care to elucidate?

ddrintn on September 22, 2010 at 9:46 PM

Zaggs on September 22, 2010 at 9:33 PM

How about you use your own small words and explain it to us nitwits.

Or, since none of you will, (for a week now) let me try in Mike’s own words.

(Castle On)

Well ya see Hawk, it was a very shrewd legislative maneuver whereby 24 of us, yep we voted YRS, lockstep with every single Donk in the House to forward 35 articles of impeachment to the Judiciary, making it look like we wanted to support it by agreeing with Dennis Kucinich that our Commander in Chief was everything from a war criminal to having purposely put our first alert professionals at risk by falling down on national security and totally ignoring Hurricane Katrina Relief support efforts, but we were actually, by fiat, causing it to die in committee by voting for it, you see because if we hadn’t voted Yes for it the year after Nancy Peoplsi….said it was dead…

I mean…. when she said impeachment during the Vice Presidents impeachment movement…. said it was off the table…

Er, don’t you see it would have immediately gone to the floor for a vote without even going to the Judiciary IF I VOTED NO???

God Hawk are you stupid, I was glad no Democrat ruined the process by voting NO with the Republicans, er, I mean, my party. Yeah, that’s it, “my” party.

(Castle Off)

Let the seat burn!

hawkdriver on September 22, 2010 at 9:56 PM

BS. Prove it.

alwaysfiredup

Drag Queen ball “celebrates the type of lifestyle which leads to the disease,”But AIDS, your behavior is DIRECTLY connected to whether or not you get AIDS”, “money goes to things we know will not prevent AIDS but indeed will continue to spread the disease when alot of our money goes to distribute condoms”, “condoms don’t work.”
All from the mouth of the rube.
So a drag queen ball celebrates a lifestyle of disease (obvious we’re not talking about straight people). That behavior is the only way you’ll get aids (remember, drag queen ball, not about straight people). And condoms dont work. So she’s not talking about straight sex, since its about a drag queen ball, and condoms don’t work. So if you’re gay and have safe sex, you’re still getting AIDS according to O’donnell. So its just gay sex that will ensure you get AIDS.
That and all the gay baiting she did of Castle.

Zaggs on September 22, 2010 at 10:05 PM

It is, so maybe you can answer the question as to why only 24 Republicans signed onto it IF it was guaranteed to kill the whole measure. Care to elucidate?

ddrintn

As to not give overwhelming support to it. If every republican voted against it, Nancy just gets to squawk that she can’t bring it up because republicans are defending their tyrant king, easy out for her. If 20 or so vote for it, that argument goes away.
If some republicans cant play parliamentary procedure with her are you then denouncing the other 166 republicans who voted to even open debate on the measure? This is only the second time I’ve asked, so your turn to answer the question.

Zaggs on September 22, 2010 at 10:10 PM

Okay… ouch. Hopefully, $2 mil buys some witty comercials.

bitsy on September 22, 2010 at 10:15 PM

Well, everyone. It looks like another “Castle actually saved Bush by voting to impeach him” argument has been put away.

No one can seem to explain, (other than linking to a web story that has no bearing on my one simple question of “If he had voted NO, would it have then not died in comittee) Well that and calling me stupid. No one seems to be able to explain how this House magic works. Must be a bunch of Wiccans.

So, I am done with it. Better the seat be lost than to go to the back-stabbing Castle.

hawkdriver on September 22, 2010 at 10:18 PM

Zaggs on September 22, 2010 at 10:05 PM

lol, did they draw straws? If it went down party lines, would it have not died in comittee?

Admit you’re talking over your head man.

hawkdriver on September 22, 2010 at 10:19 PM

As to not give overwhelming support to it. If every republican voted against it, Nancy just gets to squawk that she can’t bring it up because republicans are defending their tyrant king, easy out for her. If 20 or so vote for it, that argument goes away.

Zaggs, it would be hard for Pelosi to say that after this Times article.

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi promised Wednesday that when her party takes over, the new majority will not attempt to remove President Bush from office, despite earlier pledges to the contrary from others in the caucus.

“I have said it before and I will say it again: Impeachment is off the table,” Pelosi, D-Calif., said during a news conference.

What’s your next angle Zaggs?

hawkdriver on September 22, 2010 at 10:28 PM

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi promised Wednesday that when her party takes over, the new majority will not attempt to remove President Bush from office, despite earlier pledges to the contrary from others in the caucus.

“I have said it before and I will say it again: Impeachment is off the table,” Pelosi, D-Calif., said during a news conference.
What’s your next angle Zaggs?

hawkdriver on September 22, 2010 at 10:28 PM

Oh, I’m sorry. I meant to add that article is from 2006, two years before Castle voted to send 35 articles of impeachment for my commander in chief to the Judiciary when I was engaged in a war. Why should I love Mike Castle?

hawkdriver on September 22, 2010 at 10:31 PM

As to not give overwhelming support to it. If every republican voted against it, Nancy just gets to squawk that she can’t bring it up because republicans are defending their tyrant king, easy out for her. If 20 or so vote for it, that argument goes away.

Zaggs on September 22, 2010 at 10:10 PM

Too cute by half. Let’s let some firebrand GOPer in the House propose impeaching Obama and let’s see how many wily Democrats vote for it on exactly that same basis. OK?

ddrintn on September 22, 2010 at 10:34 PM

Zaggs, are you throwing in the towel buddy? Did you see that Nancy Pelosi couldn’t use the vote by what she said in The Times two years before? Do you understand if that was your only proof and only argument that Castle wasn’t a traitor to his president and his party; that your contention is just crap?

Zaggs?

Forget it.

Is there anyone else who can explain this shrewd House move by 24 swing-vote Republicans and namely, Mike Castle?

hawkdriver on September 22, 2010 at 10:39 PM

ddrintn on September 22, 2010 at 10:34 PM

Dude, he bolted. Too embarrassing I guess. Exellect points by you my friend. But then, isn’t debate easy when you’re dealing with simple truths.

hawkdriver on September 22, 2010 at 10:42 PM

Unreal, is that the best they could do?

You Castle supporters suck at debate.

Come on, make up some stuff and quote commenters from AfterDowningStreet like Naturoboy. He at least thinks he’s winning the argument.

Dammit, Castle was so loyal and so helpful to President Bush, why can’t you guys explain it?

hawkdriver on September 22, 2010 at 11:25 PM

Zaggs on September 22, 2010 at 10:05 PM

So you are saying that O’Donnell was wrong? I guess you are not very scholarly about the subject. A simple Google search will turn up dozens of articles and studies that all agree. homosexual men have much higher health risks because of their sexual practices. This is NOT disputable, there is a mountain of medical and scientific evidence to prove it…

http://factsaboutyouth.com/posts/male-homosexual-behavior/

http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/abstract/161/2/278

http://ajph.aphapublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/88/1/57

http://ajph.aphapublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/77/5/578

There are literally hundreds of these studies and articles. The results are fairly consistent that homosexuality, especially among men, is not a healthy practice when compared to heterosexual activity.

Hawthorne on September 23, 2010 at 12:06 AM

You guys know there was no vote to impeach Bush, but to refer impeachment to the Judiciary committee where everyone knew it would die, right? Kucinich was behind most of it and no one thought it would happen, AS NEWS REPORTS OF THE TIME SAID.

All of you make me sad to be a Republican.

Rob Taylor on September 23, 2010 at 1:08 AM

Since when did Conservative Americans become the cut-and-runners?

We all know how well these pollsters do at predicting elections [/SARC!] so I guess it is time to call it, “Game over, man!” … NOT!

I guess it is time for me to send O’Donnell some more cash. That is fine by me!

DannoJyd on September 23, 2010 at 1:27 AM

You guys know there was no vote to impeach Bush, but to refer impeachment to the Judiciary committee where everyone knew it would die, right? Kucinich was behind most of it and no one thought it would happen, AS NEWS REPORTS OF THE TIME SAID.

All of you make me sad to be a Republican.

Rob Taylor on September 23, 2010 at 1:08 AM

Guess I missed the part on here where someone said that Castle voted to impeach Bush.

spinach.chin on September 23, 2010 at 1:34 AM

Drag Queen ball “celebrates the type of lifestyle which leads to the disease,”But AIDS, your behavior is DIRECTLY connected to whether or not you get AIDS”, “money goes to things we know will not prevent AIDS but indeed will continue to spread the disease when alot of our money goes to distribute condoms”, “condoms don’t work.”

What part of that quote implies that she thinks gays deserve AIDS (as you stated above)?

The quote clearly says she believes AIDS is a “behavior/lifestyle” related disease… WHICH IT IS.

The same can be said of lung cancer, BTW, but stating that fact doesn’t mean that I think all smokers deserve lung cancer.

Absurd.

spinach.chin on September 23, 2010 at 1:43 AM

No use for Castle. None for Coons. They are both liberals. O`Donnell is the one we want.

Even if you think she is the lesser of three evils, she is still the lesser.

Sherman1864 on September 23, 2010 at 1:57 AM

Don’t believe the polls, people.
Christine is going to kick ass in November!

Mark7788 on September 23, 2010 at 2:07 AM

Since when did Conservative Americans become the cut-and-runners?

We all know how well these pollsters do at predicting elections [/SARC!] so I guess it is time to call it, “Game over, man!” … NOT!

I guess it is time for me to send O’Donnell some more cash. That is fine by me!

DannoJyd on September 23, 2010 at 1:27 AM

The Castle crooners aren’t conservatives. They just want to make you think they are. The moment they stick their tail between their legs and walk away you know they are not conservatives. That is just not the way a conservative acts. It is how the RINOs have consistently acted.

One of the problems with the Internet medium is that people can claim anything. So you get all kinds of people that aren’t what they claim. You get men that pretend they are women, children that pretend they are adults, and certainly we get a LOT of liberals that try to portray themselves as conservatives in order to create havoc in the conservative cause.

The liberals have been doing this for a long time. They put RINOs in the party and convince us to vote for them. Once the RINOs gain control of the party mechanism they tell you that you can’t win without them. But all the while, the lies are put forth that the nation is not as conservative as it used to be.

The real truth is that the nation is every bit as conservative as it was when Reagan was elected, if not more. But the liberals play their games to deny a voice to the conservative cause. By doing they they try to convince us that we are small and outnumbered. It has worked for a couple decades now.

Only with the anger and creation of the Tea Party have we once again found a conservative voice. Slowly we have looked around and realized it was all a lie. There are more of us than there are of them. But the liberals will still play every dirty trick they can in order to derail us.

We will be slandered and libeled. We will be led astray by phonies that pose as conservatives. We will be assailed by the media and the Democrats. We will be pushed down by the liberals in the Republican Party that want to keep the reins of power.

But we always must understand the the truth has been revealed, there are more of us than there are of them. It is time to find our voices and challenge the liberals. They can call themselves moderates, but we know better. Because you have to be on the side of the majority to be moderate. They are nothing more than extremists that have manipulated the public and the party for too long.

But now we know, there are more of us than there are of them.

Hawthorne on September 23, 2010 at 2:28 AM

As long as Castle refuses to endorse, his long time supporters aren’t going with O’Donnell. Now I would like to see him man up and do the right thing and end his political career with dignity and style. But it doesn’t seem like he is leaning towards this, at least not soon enough, as soon as we need him to.
`
`
O’Donnell should tell the NRSC and RNC: “Forget your token donations, I’m doing fine on the interwebs. What I need you to do is set up a sit-down for me with Castle, with McConnell, Cornyn, and Boehner there, and maybe Peter King, and help me convince him to do the right thing and support me as the party’s nominee as he would have wanted me to support him if the roles were reversed. I need you to do this for me, and I need it done NOW – in terms of hours, not days. Fail, and I will turn you all into newts. You’ll be fat, gray, and annoying for the rest of your miserable mortal lives BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!”
`
`
That’s where Boehner blushes and admits, “You had me at Abracadabra . . .”

Adjoran on September 23, 2010 at 3:04 AM

Rob Taylor on September 23, 2010 at 1:08 AM

Sending it to the Judiciary was the exact point of every one of my posts. What? Dd you skim, see “impeachment” and then think, “Oh, there was a Boston Globe and Weekly Standard article that supplied my opinion on Castle voting YES that convinced me the YES vote was necessary to ultimately kill it. Did those articles make you think everyone who even talked about it was thought it was a real impeachment vote. I don’t think we’re as slow as the folks that article was directed to.

Well though, I guess you ought to be the one that completely understands the political tactic of voting YES for it by Castle. You ought to be the one to lay out the argument of how without his vote it would have gone to the floor for an up/down vote.

Dude, I’m not just sad to be a Republican these days, I’m sad at some of the folks who aren’t a dimes difference from some of the most liberal Donks I know calling themselves Republicans.

At any rate, your comment proves nothing just by saying, there was an article that guarenteed it was going to die in comittee. Why was Castle one of the guys who voted YES? Why did any Republican have to vote YES a full two years after Nancy Pelosi said impeachment was not going to happen?

hawkdriver on September 23, 2010 at 5:31 AM

As a Christine supporter, I’m cool with these poll numbers.

Let the Demotards believe they have a comfortable lead. That way, they’ll stay home on election day.

UltimateBob on September 23, 2010 at 10:51 AM

Glad to know you support the over reach of government into the private lives and homes of american citizens (by denying gay marriage) by support the Tea Party establishment and the bigoted (because only the gays spread AIDS, so sayeth O’donnell) elites that now support it!

Zaggs on September 22, 2010 at 9:16 PM

Same-sex marriage does not and never has existed in this country. The only way it will exist is if the government mandates that it exist.

So who exactly is calling for government action? Who exactly is pushing the government to reach into the lives of private citizens and force them to accept same-sex marriage?

And yet you want to claim that those who don’t support same-sex marriage are the ones who are intruding government power where it doesn’t belong?

You’re dishonest.

tom on September 23, 2010 at 1:14 PM

Drag Queen ball “celebrates the type of lifestyle which leads to the disease,”But AIDS, your behavior is DIRECTLY connected to whether or not you get AIDS”, “money goes to things we know will not prevent AIDS but indeed will continue to spread the disease when alot of our money goes to distribute condoms”, “condoms don’t work.”
All from the mouth of the rube.
So a drag queen ball celebrates a lifestyle of disease (obvious we’re not talking about straight people). That behavior is the only way you’ll get aids (remember, drag queen ball, not about straight people). And condoms dont work. So she’s not talking about straight sex, since its about a drag queen ball, and condoms don’t work. So if you’re gay and have safe sex, you’re still getting AIDS according to O’donnell. So its just gay sex that will ensure you get AIDS.
That and all the gay baiting she did of Castle.

Zaggs on September 22, 2010 at 10:05 PM

That’s pretty harsh. But all true. Saying what’s true but not popular is what’s called being “politically incorrect.” Seems to me there was a show by that name once…..

tom on September 23, 2010 at 1:21 PM

So, over a month to go and the smug, I told you so’s, have already started.

Classy bunch.

donh525 on September 22, 2010 at 7:24 PM

Yeah, I don’t get the smugness either. No one was denying that Castle was more a of favorite to win the election, but the question asked at the primary was whether or not it was worth keeping him around just because of that. Is Castle enough of a reliable voice of DE conservatives, or should they take their chances with someone else?

O’Donnell supporters said no to Castle; and seemed to feel this was a battle worth fighting for to kick the RINO to the curb. Apparently, the voters in DE primary seemed to agree, and showed up in unexpected droves to say so.

I don’t understand what this “told ya’ so” is all about. I don’t think anyone picked O’Donnell simply for her electability (it was pretty clear Castle was winning in that regard, and it’s becoming increasingly clear that she’s got some issues all her own), so gloating over the fact that Castle stood a better chance than O’Donnell in the general election isn’t introducing any new information or refuting anyone else’s positon.

One might question the wisdom of choosing the path of ideological purity over electability in cases like this — and honest debates can be had on that — but to gloat that the pragmatic approach was, indeed, a more pragmatic approach seems inane. No one was denying that.

BlueCollarAstronaut on September 23, 2010 at 2:40 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3