Comments on: Republicans struggle to agree on candidates who can win

By: besser tot als rot

besser tot als rot — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 01:17:50 +0000

It’s generally agreed that Republicans booted sure Senate wins in 2010 in Nevada and Delaware and perhaps Colorado.

Sure?! Dude. Lay down the crack pipe and slowly walk away from the keyboard.

By: BabyGrace

BabyGrace — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 00:32:52 +0000

… but they never struggle to agree on candidates who can lose.

By: steebo77

steebo77 — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 00:02:24 +0000

Rove has had a good record of doing this over the years. He really was the Republican establishment in 2002 when he picked winning candidates in key races.

Of course, it helped that he had the backing of a Republican president with 60 percent-plus job approval.

Plus it was just a year after 9/11. Plus the Democrats’ Wellstone funereal political rally.

By: Punchenko

Punchenko — Wed, 20 Feb 2013 23:42:05 +0000

It’s not just the candidate, it’s the whole approach to politics and the ground game on the part of the right.

Republicans can no longer rely on unpaid volunteers and 5th grade-level mailers when you’re competing against paid political activists, think tanks, the MSM, and a sophisticated social media and voter identifying organization.

It’s time for the GOP to get with the times.

By: RoadRunner

RoadRunner — Wed, 20 Feb 2013 23:39:30 +0000

The people who keep spouting “Xxx is most electable” have been wrong every time so far. Reagan wasn’t “electable” when he started his campaign.

You keep using this word “electable.” I do not think it means what you think.

/HT: Inigo Montoya

By: fogw

fogw — Wed, 20 Feb 2013 23:34:37 +0000

I remember when Barone described how Romney could gather enough electoral votes to beat Obama.

Think I’ll go with Magic Eight-ball from now on. More Reliable.