Eric Cantor set to lose primary: Update - Lost

[thraashman]

It's going to be fascinating when the Tea Party learns the definition of pyrrhic victory as this guy will not win the general election. Is it not obvious to them that Democrats intentionally voted in the open primary to force an easily defeatable, far right nutball to be the Republican candidate?

 

[BoberFett]

It's going to be fascinating when the Tea Party learns the definition of pyrrhic victory as this guy will not win the general election. Is it not obvious to them that Democrats intentionally voted in the open primary to force an easily defeatable, far right nutball to be the Republican candidate?

Way for Democrats to embrace the spirit of Democracy. That's just good citizenship.

 

[Engineer]

I wonder what the turnout was. I know the teahadist luv,m some low voter turnout.

The turnout was twice what it was 2 years ago. The Cantor campaign is blaming Democrats for coming out and supporting the challenger. VA is an open primary state, apparently. Why would you have an open primary? Really?

When losing, even within your own party, blame the other side! :biggrin:

 

[fskimospy]

Way for Democrats to embrace the spirit of Democracy. That's just good citizenship.

Yeah, because primaries are really great examples of the spirit of democracy.

 

[thraashman]

Way for Democrats to embrace the spirit of Democracy. That's just good citizenship.

It's a childish, cheap, and bs practice. Doesn't make it illegal. I also feel gerrymandering is wrong. And then there's the disenfranchisement that the GOP is trying to force with voter ids. Compared to that, what was done here was downright noble (that is to say it's still shitty but in comparison to the bullshit the GOP is doing this is that much less bad. Kinda like how the GOP has gone so far right that the stuff they supported in the 80's and 90's they now call communist).

 

[dawp]

Way for Democrats to embrace the spirit of Democracy. That's just good citizenship.

republicans have done the same thing in the past.

 

[QuantumPion]

It's going to be fascinating when the Tea Party learns the definition of pyrrhic victory as this guy will not win the general election. Is it not obvious to them that Democrats intentionally voted in the open primary to force an easily defeatable, far right nutball to be the Republican candidate?

Highly unlikely. It's a very red district, the democrat only got on the ballot at the last minute after seeing that Cantor might lose. It is possible though, if the GOP spites Bratt like they did Cucienelli and the Democrat party/Soros/Bloomberg/big money interest pour tens of millions into the total unknown contender.

Even if that happens, so what? The dems get one house seat back, for one term. We still win for outing an entrenched washington establishment RINO.

 

[fskimospy]

So don't make it out as though single-issue or dogmatic voters are a Republican-only institution.

I didn't, and you shouldn't try to make false equivalencies between the parties. Surely you aren't trying to argue that ideological orthodoxy isn't more prized by Republicans than Democrats. There's a reason why Republicans face primary challengers at such a higher rate.

 

[werepossum]

You anti-immigrant folks really need to get out and let other Americans know where you stand on this issue! Raise hell! Keep pointing out how the lazy, dirty immigrants are destroying the beautiful glistening white America that you love! Get out there and protest! Primary the immigrant-loving Republican politicians and replace them with people with your views. Your POV is exactly what the Republican party needs...

to finally destroy itself. Keep up the good work!

If the Pubbies are merely going to be "prog lite" as boomerang says, what good are they? It's just like having two primaries in a one party state. If we're going to be Venezuela, let us at least be Venezuela honestly and openly.

Hell yes it's a good thing. There are two ways for conservatives to lose and lose big. One way is to keep electing "prog lite" candidates. There is an abundance of them right now and it's why nothing gets fixed in D.C. Everybody postures one way but willingly jumps on board the status quo train as it chugs slowly around going nowhere and changing nothing. The other way is to lose to prog candidates. Either way, conservatives lose.

The only way to win is to offer up candidates that think differently and that are willing to hold to their principles. The country needs two options. One with the leftist point of view and the other with a conservative point of view. If the conservative viewpoint cannot obtain a majority that has enough influence to make changes, it is not a loss, it's just a continuance of the current system where we all lose.

A member of the status quo lost. For conservatives, that's a win. I don't live in Virginia and I most certainly did not follow the race but pushing for amnesty while tens of thousands of children are streaming over our borders is a guaranteed loss for a Republican candidate.

The current border situation should have a thread of its own and I'm really surprised it doesn't.

Agreed, on both counts.

 

[fskimospy]

If the Pubbies are merely going to be "prog lite" as boomerang says, what good are they? It's just like having two primaries in a one party state. If we're going to be Venezuela, let us at least be Venezuela honestly and openly.


Agreed, on both counts.

Can you explain how being worries about being "progressive lite" is an issue for a party where it's median member is not only vastly to the right of where they were in 1970, but also vastly to the right of what republicans themselves considered to be hard core conservatives only 10-20 years ago?

It is difficult to square this fact with demands for increasing ideological rigidity due to fear of being too liberal.

 

[hal2kilo]

Oo

It's a childish, cheap, and bs practice. Doesn't make it illegal. I also feel gerrymandering is wrong. And then there's the disenfranchisement that the GOP is trying to force with voter ids. Compared to that, what was done here was downright noble (that is to say it's still shitty but in comparison to the bullshit the GOP is doing this is that much less bad. Kinda like how the GOP has gone so far right that the stuff they supported in the 80's and 90's they now call communist).

So is it known for a fact that it was dems that crossed over to put another Angle in the spot in the hpoes that he would be so extreme that the dem would win in the district?

If the goal was to dump Cantor, it worked and I have no problem with that. On the other hand, that district is probably too red to elect a dem.

 

[QuantumPion]

Can you explain how being worries about being "progressive lite" is an issue for a party where it's median member is not only vastly to the right of where they were in 1970, but also vastly to the right of what republicans themselves considered to be hard core conservatives only 10-20 years ago?

It is difficult to square this fact with demands for increasing ideological rigidity due to fear of being too liberal.

You do realize that you are so so far off to the left that everything that isn't you appears to be extreme right wing? John F. Kennedy, a democrat, was more right wing than most of the GOP is today.

And for the record Barry Goldwater ran in 1964, he would have been the penultimate tea party candidate but had the misfortune of having to run against the VP of the highly popular and tragically assassinated-by-a-commie JFK.

Keep in mind that after the Goldwater election blowout, and the 50 year stranglehold the at-the-time moderate democrats had in congress, the GOP attitude was simply to be the slightly less liberal democrats which "got along to get along". They were not the conservative freight train you seem to think they were. Remember, Reagan defeating Bush was a huge upset in 1979.

 

[CitizenKain]

Even if that happens, so what? The dems get one house seat back, for one term. We still win for outing an entrenched washington establishment RINO.

You think Cantor is a RINO?

However good job on getting rid of an experienced person in an important position to elect someone who can only repeat talking points, good plan there.

 

[BoberFett]

Yeah, because primaries are really great examples of the spirit of democracy.

So you think intentionally putting forward bad candidates in the primaries, who end up in the general election, is a good thing? You really will defend any scummy practice your team practices, won't you?

republicans have done the same thing in the past.

But mom, they did it first!

It's a childish, cheap, and bs practice. Doesn't make it illegal. I also feel gerrymandering is wrong. And then there's the disenfranchisement that the GOP is trying to force with voter ids. Compared to that, what was done here was downright noble (that is to say it's still shitty but in comparison to the bullshit the GOP is doing this is that much less bad. Kinda like how the GOP has gone so far right that the stuff they supported in the 80's and 90's they now call communist).

We get exactly the government we deserve.

 

[QuantumPion]

You think Cantor is a RINO?

However good job on getting rid of an experienced person in an important position to elect someone who can only repeat talking points, good plan there.

He talked big conservative principles when it came to making speeches and running for office, but when it came to voting, he voted which ever way would ensure he and his top party buddies remained influential and in power and in the MSM's good graces.

Actually you're right. Cantor was a republican through and through. And that's why he just got his ass handed to him in the most humiliating electoral defeat in recent memory.

 

[manimal]

You do realize that you are so so far off to the left that everything that isn't you appears to be extreme right wing? John F. Kennedy, a democrat, was more right wing than most of the GOP is today.

And for the record Barry Goldwater ran in 1964, he would have been the penultimate tea party candidate but had the misfortune of having to run against the VP of the highly popular and tragically assassinated-by-a-commie JFK.

Keep in mind that after the Goldwater election blowout, and the 50 year stranglehold the at-the-time moderate democrats had in congress, the GOP attitude was simply to be the slightly less liberal democrats which "got along to get along". They were not the conservative freight train you seem to think they were. Remember, Reagan defeating Bush was a huge upset in 1979.

Your both right in the sense that a sea change did happen. For a long time both parties had balance with the blue dogs on the left and the compassionate conservatives that really made up a large swath of the republican base. What started happening in the 80s was the rise of extremism in both parties. The funny thing is the democrats essentially moved to a a center right position with the sucess of Clinton and the republicans chose to become an opposition party which alienated those members who essentially created balance.

I find the example that is oft used of the supreme court justice appointed by a republican over a 50 year period became known as a leftist by his old party.

People like William F Buckley were fierce and sometimes brutal but they saw the need for balance and saw the importance of ruling via coalition. William F Buckley spoke vehemently against the anti flouride kooks and the religious zealots who now have no opposing voices.

If any of you read the national review before the 90s know what I am talking about. Its a different publication as is the party we used to know.

 

[dank69]

... We still win for outing an entrenched washington establishment RINO.

 

[manimal]

So you think intentionally putting forward bad candidates in the primaries, who end up in the general election, is a good thing? You really will defend any scummy practice your team practices, won't you?




But mom, they did it first!



We get exactly the government we deserve.

Your doing exactly the same thing.

Your last comment is especially important. What happened to American exceptionalism? I also find it telling that the people heralding the demise of the American dream are doing the most to destroy it.


If people were truly like you describe do you think Ireland and England would have chosen peace over more blood? It was as hard as f@ck and still takes work but it was worth it.


Are you for or against the current primary systems and which side do you think has the disproportionate amount of lunacy?

Democrats though flawed at least know its best not to eat your own and the local party essentially went full retard in having Cantor fall on his sword. In a few years lets have a discussion on the effectiveness of this strategy so I can have some laughs.

 

[nageov3t]

Cantor is stepping down as Majority leader next month, so that pretty much officializes the fact that he's not going to try and mount a campaign as a third party/write-in candidate.

 

[manimal]

coffee spit hit my monitor

 

[soundforbjt]

You think Cantor is a RINO?

However good job on getting rid of an experienced person in an important position to elect someone who can only repeat talking points, good plan there.

Of course he's a RINO, his voting score on conservative issues was "only" 95%, don't you get the memos from Faux news? He's a RINO now that he got beaten, never mind he was the mouthpiece for the Tea Party before, He got beat by someone more Tea Party than him.

 

[NFS4]

Cantor to step down as House majority leader at end of July, after primary loss

Eric Cantor plans to step down as House majority leader at the end of July after suffering a shocking primary defeat to a Tea Party-backed challenger, Fox News has learned.

Cantor, following his loss to primary rival Dave Brat, plans to tell colleagues about his plans at a House Republican Conference meeting set for 4 p.m. ET.

Several House members already are jockeying for position, making phone calls and lining up for a potential leadership race.

"Members are freaking out right now," one senior House GOP source told Fox News, noting that nothing "rattles" lawmakers more than phone calls about who might support whom.

Republicans sources, though, told Fox News that Cantor will likely throw his support behind Republican Whip Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., to succeed him.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...er-primary-loss-leadership-scramble-underway/

 

[JEDIYoda]

why are people crying over this Yahoo losing????

 

[nageov3t]

why are people crying over this Yahoo losing????

in the short term, because it means there's virtually no chance of anything being done on immigration reform in the next 2-3 years.

 

[TerryMathews]

I didn't, and you shouldn't try to make false equivalencies between the parties. Surely you aren't trying to argue that ideological orthodoxy isn't more prized by Republicans than Democrats. There's a reason why Republicans face primary challengers at such a higher rate.

So are you saying Democrats are less rigid on abortion than Republicans are on immigration reform/amnesty? Really?