Tuesday, June 19, 2012

You Sir, Are Doomed

Excuse me while I laugh. . . ROFLMAO(twice). Sorry, but sometimes the news makes me laugh. It doesn’t make the Democrats laugh, but I sure do. Here’s the latest:

Item 1: Enthusiasm Gap

First up, we have Obama’s rural problem. Obama won the Pennsylvania primary as expected. Nothing to see here, right? Well, some worried leftists looked a little deeper and discovered a wee hint of a problem. Let’s call it an enthusiasm gap, shall we?

Obama ran unopposed in Pennsylvania. But when PoliticsPA looked at the voting data, they found that in 27 of the state’s 67 counties, more than 30% of Democratic voters didn’t vote for Obama. That’s right, they left it blank.

Think about that. These people were enthusiastic enough to turn out for a primary, but then chose not to voter for their own Presidential candidate. Fascinating. They couldn’t even be bothered to lift their pens or chad-pokers or whatever they use to vote in Pennsylvania and poke a hole for old Obamy. Wow.

And this isn’t a new problem. In Arkansas, Kentucky, and West Virginia, Obama lost 40% of the primary vote to “not him.” In West Virginia, he actually lost 8 counties to convicted criminal Keith Judd, who is serving time in Texas. In Oklahoma, Obama lost 18% of the vote and 12 counties to an anti-abortion protestor. He lost 12% of Louisiana Democrats to a lawyer from Tennessee. And so on.

Until Pennsylvania, none of these were states Obama was supposed to win, so it didn’t freak too many people out. But Pennsylvania is supposed to be Obama country and it tells us he’s got serious problems. If even 2% of his supporters don’t turn out, he will lose, and this suggests that 30% of Democrats are, to put it lightly, not enthusiastic about voting for him. Moreover, Pennsylvania gives us a strong bit of insight into the key states of Ohio, Wisconsin and Michigan. The man is doomed. Maybe he should buy some overalls?

Item 2: I Am Woman, Hear Me Whine!

A couple of chicks just threw an interesting hissyfit about the mistreatment of poor, noble Elizabeth Warren, as well as other representatives of the double-X chromosome set everywhere. What upset them? Well. . .

According to these brainiacs, when male candidates attack female candidates, they always attack their honesty. Why? Because “female candidates generally have an advantage on honesty and ethics,” i.e. they are more honest. So male candidates must destroy this perception. Hence, when male candidates challenge them about their honesty, it has nothing to do with politics as usual or the actual issue being brought up. Nope. It’s just a strategy meant to undermine the biggest advantage female candidates have. . . and that’s sexist. Whined the chickies, “It’s upsetting not only because it is a cheap shot, but also because it is a tactic that disguises political games as a genuine push for transparency.”

Wrong.

For starters, how in the world can something that is true and goes to a candidate’s honesty, integrity and ethics be considered a cheap shot? The cheap shot is actually the idiot who lied and then tries to hide behind their chromosomes to get immunity. Secondly, how is this a “woman’s issue”? Name a single male candidate who hasn’t had his honesty and ethics challenged?

Also, where are the examples of other women similarly attacked? The other examples they give in the article are Nikki Haley being accused of infidelity and Alex Sink losing the voters when she decided to play with her cell phone during a televised debate. Well, let’s consider these. The accusation of infidelity is nothing new. In fact, I can’t think of a Republican who hasn’t been accused of mystery infidelity by the Democratic machine. How is the attack against Haley anything special?

As for Sink looking at her cell phone, notice first that this is not a smear by her opponent, it is something she did herself to hurt the public’s perception of her seriousness as a candidate. Hence, it doesn’t support the argument the chickies are making. Not to mention, this is no different than Mike Dukakis flaming out because he looked stupid in a helmet, Howard Dean flaming out for a scream, or a dozen-dozen other examples. Again, this isn’t a gender issue.

The fact is Warren is flaming out because she’s a liar and an idiot, and she never learned the first rule of politics, which is to stop shoveling when you find yourself in a hole. She tried to sell herself as something she is not and her attempts to defend her lie blew up in her face repeatedly. The fact that she’s a liar and an idiot means she should not be trusted. This has nothing to do with her gender. . . whatever that may truly be.


P.S. Don't forget, it's Star Trek Tuesday at the film site.


70 comments:

tryanmax said...

Wow! That second one is twisty. Women are inherently more honest, so when they lie, it's still the truth? I think I just had an aneurism.

AndrewPrice said...

tryanmax, Amazing isn't it?

AndrewPrice said...

OT: As a reminder, Without a Hitch is free today, right here: LINK

DUQ said...

That rural gap is going to be a real problem for Obama because it Pennsylvania is a lot like the other states he needs like Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan. He could be in a lot of trouble.

rlaWTX said...

I just love* this tactic of responding to a charge - or even just information - by saying that the very fact that it was even brought up is some form of discriminatory act. Intent is beyond irrelevant to their mindset. TRUTH is so extraneous as to not even be considered.

How true, in context facts can be sexist or racist, or any-other-ist is totally outside my realm of understanding. (Vs. "Could-have-been-true facts" or "the-vague-idea-is true facts")

* love = HATE, am discombobulated by, wish would never happen again

AndrewPrice said...

DUQ, Yeah, it's going to be cause him huge problems if he can't win over these normally reliable Democrats. It will only take a couple percentage points to lose those states.

AndrewPrice said...

rlaWTX, It's a twisted way of thinking and I wonder if it's genuine or if it's just for political purposes? By attacking the person making the charge rather than defending the charge itself, they do theoretically manage to produce a defense for the indefensible.

Of course, they might truly believe this garbage. I wouldn't put that past them at all either. It's illogical, factually wrong, and obviously pure garbage, but when has that ever stopped liberals from believing something?

ellenB said...

Let me second tryanmax's aneurism. How in the world can it be sexist to accuse someone of lying when they have in fact lied? That blows my mind and not in a good way.

AndrewPrice said...

ellen, Yeah, me too. That's why I wrote about it, because it does boggle the mind!


(By the way, the book just hit 67 in the free kindle section and 1 in the free legal section).

ellenB said...

Andrew, Congratulations. So far, so good. I hope lots of people buy the book and you get rich! :D

I agree about this boggling the mind. What are they thinking?

On Obama's enthusiasm gap, good. That's all I have to say!

EricP said...

Watching the New Black Panther Party membership in PA a whole lot closer now.

@tyranmax, I'll let Vincenzo Coccotti offer some wisdom to hopefully help your aneurysm heal: "There are seventeen different things a guy can do when he lies to give himself away. A guys got seventeen pantomimes. A woman's got twenty, but a guy's got seventeen ..."

StanH said...

To paraphrase Reagan: “When the opposition is in the process of self destructing, get out of the way.”

We have democrats approaching meltdown. Pat Caddell, said it reeks of desperation. If you listen real hard, you can hear people pounding on their kitchen tables while demanding, “Get that jerk the hell out of the Whitehouse!” We must fix the mistake of ’08!

Koshcat said...

While watching TV last night (some cable show; doesn't really matter), I saw 2 different Obama ads. Both basically criticize Romney during his time as governor. Basically left his position with the state deeper in debt and near the bottom in job creation. I have a feeling they are playing fast and loose with the truth, but I'm not sure what is. Any place to find out so to better defend against these?

On a related issue, this seems to be a very risky approach as no matter how bad it was, Obama has done exponentially more. $2 Billion in debt for the state? How about $15 trillion, half collected during his reign?

AndrewPrice said...

Ellen, Well said: "good!" :)

AndrewPrice said...

Eric, That's clearly sexist! LOL!

It's going to be interesting if things are close in Pennsylvania to see what kinds of leftist thugs crawl out of the woodwork to try to save the state for their Olord and Omaster.

Right now, my money says he loses Pennsylvania by 5% and that's the beginning of a route on election night.

ellenB said...

Also, Hosni Mubarak is dead. Want to bet they killed him?

AndrewPrice said...

Stan, I agree 100% And right now Obama is definitely in the middle of imploding and the Democrats are about to tear each other apart in the process. So the best thing we can do is stand back and let them rip themselves to shreds.

I'll bet these numbers will cause them to panic.

AndrewPrice said...

Koshcat, I'm not sure where to look right now to verify or refute that claim. I'll look into it. But I doubt very much that's true. It's probably one of these claims where they carefully selected the start/finish dates to make a lie appear true.

I think it's a very risky approach because people don't tend to credit or blame governors for the economy, but they do blame the President and Obama has the worst record since the Great Depression and people know it.

AndrewPrice said...

Ellen, It wouldn't surprise me if they killed him. Both sides would have a motive.

Doc Whoa said...

I'm not surprised about the enthusiasm gap. I wonder how many of those voters voted for him the first time though?

Doc Whoa said...

As for the women in issue two, they're full of it. These are the exact same kinds of attacks that would be made on male candidates. There's no bias here.

Koshcat said...

As for the woman issue, I find it interesting when many use her gender as selling point and then react with feigned offense when it is used against her.

-"Vote for me over my opponent because I raised three children and know what families are going through."
-"Vote against her because she has no experience in how to run a business or other leadership role."
-"That's a sexist statement assuming stay at home moms are not smart enough!"

BevfromNYC said...

Liberal women can actually complain with a straight face about the treatment their female candicates get after the deafeming silence about the way every female Republican candidates get treated??? Shall we list the grievances that were poo-poo'ed by NOW and other feminist groups when this happened to Sarah Palin, Nikki Haley, Sharon Angle, Whitman, Carly Farina and the list goes on and on. And "liar" was the least of it. What hypocrites!

by the way, Tryanmax has a great article today on Cogiteria on a similar subject...whiny feminist/liberals. http://cogiteria.blogspot.com/2012/06/theres-no-such-thing-as-stay-at-home.html

AndrewPrice said...

Doc, That's a good question, but ultimately, it doesn't matter that much because even if it's only 3-5% who don't vote for him, then he's doomed.

AndrewPrice said...

Doc, That's true. This is loony, but there is method in the madness. If enough "experts" claim that women are treated unfairly, then the left will accept it as fact and seek to use that as a basis for further restricting individual rights.

AndrewPrice said...

Koshcat, That's exactly the point to the stunning hypocrisy here. Not only do these two morons have this completely wrong and see sexism where there is none, but they are saying:

1. Women have advantages they should be allowed to use to get elected, BUT
2. It's sexist to do anything which might hurt those advantages.

Total hypocrisy.

AndrewPrice said...

Bev, I think it's stunning. They stand by and say nothing as Republican woman after Republican woman is smeared and attacked in ways that they wouldn't tolerate for a tenth of a second if it was a liberal, but then they turn around and whine about someone pointing out when a liberal woman has lied through her teeth.

The level of hypocrisy is staggering, but they don't seem to care.

Here's the link to tryanmax's joint: LINK. Thanks!

Doc Whoa said...

Loony is right. That anyone could say these things with a straight face is just staggering. But you're right, if they say it enough, people will begin to believe it.

obiwan2009 said...

Andrew, my you guys are quick on the stories, must be that time zone thing! Anyways, I find it wierd that some people have no clue what it means to sit the election out. Just like lunch, There is no such thing as a free vote! Even as a converted conservative, back in the day, I would still consider the right-wing candidate sometimes, especially if he/she was at least reasonable on the issues that resonated with me, especially states' rights and economics. But voting for a "blank" ballot, okay, that has me wierded out!

As for Elizabeth Warren, it sounds like she's subject to the old country justice, if you claim to be great in some way, you will get vetted on that claim pretty quickly, sort of like a person claiming to be a good marksman being asked to prove it shortly thereafter. In this case, Warren was being asked to prove her marksmanship in the sense of how much she really knew about her claimed heritage, sort of like how Lawhawk asked for me to demonstrate that I knew how to speak the Austrian German dialect when I said I had such a heritage. Well, Ms. Warren has failed on that test.

AndrewPrice said...

Doc, My sense is that the left has no shame whatsoever when it comes to hypocrisy.

Individualist said...

OK so Women have an advantage in that they are more honest...

I guess it is sexist to ask why this is so....

My theory is this... I saw a special on men and women and these researchers evaluated people at a speed dating event. They filmed the conversations (both peoiple) and had each person fill out a questionare.

What they showed was that women pretty much knew if a guy liked or did not like her however for the most part all men thought the women liked them whether they did or not.

The researcher attributed this to evolutionary mating styrategies. Men have evolved to be easier to read becuase they want to advertize to every women they like in hopes of attracting the most mates. Women on the other hand evolved to be more difficult to read (i.e. better poker face) because when they are choosing the one mate they want it is better that the potential males don't know how enthusiastic they are.

So let me rephrase this maybe.....

Men are easier to catch at lying than women are so while it appears that men lie more both sexes pretty much lie the same amount. Given this then Elizabeth Warren has an advantage and not a disadvantage.

Still a leftists response to these fact if shown to be true will simply be..

Well... it is a Native American issue then....

AndrewPrice said...

obiwan, I have occasionally left local races un-voted on my ticket because I had no opinion, but I never left a statewide or national race blank. That said, I do know people who do that. I have a friend in California who goes to vote every time and writes "-1" next to Pelosi's name (that's all he votes on). I've warned him that probably counts as a vote, but he doesn't care. He sees it as a protest vote and he doesn't care about the rest.

On Warren, that's exactly what Warren has done. She's like Gary Hart who dared reporters to follow him to prove he wasn't having an affair and then went straight to his love nest. She's like a thousand other resume cheats who get discovered every year.

Warren did herself in on this issue and any criticism Brown makes of that is valid, until and unless the voters decide they don't care. It's not sexism, it's stupidism.

Doc Whoa said...

Obiwan, Apparently 40% of people didn't vote. That sounds like a protest vote and I would bet that if there had been another candidate, he (or she) would have gotten the 40%.

Doc Whoa said...

Indi, Do you think we could convince the left that evolution is sexist? That would put them into a quandry.

AndrewPrice said...

Indi, I have seen little reason to believe that women are considered more truthful in politics. I think what they are counting here is the outsider factor where people overestimate the integrity of someone who hasn't been part of the system. Since most female candidates in the past decade have been outsiders, they rate higher on average than male candidates. I would bet there is no difference if you look only at men and women seeking re-election.

AndrewPrice said...

Doc, It's possible they would have gotten the full 40% in the primary, but it's highly unlikely in the general election. This was a safe form of protest. That won't be true in the general election. Thus, the question is, will 3-5% of these 40% actually stay home? I think they will.

Individualist said...

Doc

There is no quandry for a leftist when they contradict themselves....

There is however the fun of making their heads spin around and around as they try to tell you both contradictory yet leftist beleifs are true.

Doc Whoa said...

Indi, That's a lot of fun. I think it would be hilarious to get them all upset about the theory of evolution being sexist. LOL!

obiwan2009 said...

Andrew, I guess my bad joke flew over this time. I was referring to the common occasion in westerns, and parodied in Back to the Future, Part III, where a person who claims to be a good shot gets asked to prove it right then and there, with a target. This has happened, as I recall, several times in the old Wild Wild West TV Series, and is parodied in Back to the Future where Marty takes a few shots with a revolver at pop-up targets, impressed at his accuracy, the local deputy asks, "where did you learn to shoot that well?"

McFly: "Seven- Eleven"

Deputy : ????

obiwan2009 said...

Ok, Indi, awesome observation, guess that explains why my wife seemed to be so "testing" of me back when we were dating...

ScyFyterry said...

Andrew, Congratulations on the book. It looks like both are moving up the charts.

AndrewPrice said...

Indi, I've never seen the left worry about contradicting themselves. Hypocrisy is only a charge they lob at our side.

AndrewPrice said...

Doc, That would be hilarious if we could get them shooting at each other.

T-Rav said...

I think it would give everyone on both sides less of a headache if the Left would wait to finish calling us all racists before they start calling us sexists. Much less confusion that way.

AndrewPrice said...

obiwan, Whoops. Yeah, I missed the joke. I've got about a dozen things going on today which has kept me from focusing. Arg. I still need to write two article for tomorrow too.

Now that you mention it though, it is funny how the new media has changed the world. In the past, the Democrats could count on a willing media ignoring their lies. Not anymore. Now the conservative new media jumps all over them. That's what Warren ran into. She lied, they blasted her, she didn't know how to respond, she kept digging, the conservatives kept responding.

This is a new experience for the Democrats.

AndrewPrice said...

Thanks Terry, yeah, they're going up. I'm stalled at 61 right now, but we'll see.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, The problem is that the left is uncoordinated. So the left hand doesn't know what the other left hand is doing. Hence, one group calls us racist, another calls us sexist, meanwhile the others are working on gayists, ageists, antisemitic-ists, atheistists, anti-bogeyman... you name it.

Fortunately, conservatives can multitask!

Jen said...

I sum it up this way:

The Left = Moving Target
The Right = Stationary Target

The Left ---> Can't hit the (broad side of a barn) Stationary Target = "You lose"

The Right ---> Hits the Moving Target (almost) every time = "You win"

USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

That's good news about PA! And, as you mentioned, this is not an isolated occurance. Unless Romney is found to be a serial killer I think Obama is toast in Nov..

As to the feminazis: Yeah, this sounds even more hysterical than their usual lies.
If I was a reporter I would ask them if they are now calling all the Indians/Native Americans who are calling Warren out for her lies sexist.

"Now that you mention it though, it is funny how the new media has changed the world. In the past, the Democrats could count on a willing media ignoring their lies. Not anymore. Now the conservative new media jumps all over them. That's what Warren ran into. She lied, they blasted her, she didn't know how to respond, she kept digging, the conservatives kept responding.

This is a new experience for the Democrats."

Aye, but it did take quite a few years for the truth to surface, although I expect with the advent of the Knew Conservative Media we won't wait as long from now on when leftists lie. :^)

In fact, it looks like the left will actually hafta develop some standards from now on, if they want any kind of hope of having credibility or respect (except for leftist stongholds like SF, Detroit, DC, etc.. Leftist voters there will still happily elect representatives that have no standards or ethics. No good ones anyway).

AndrewPrice said...

Jen, That's a great way to describe it. The Democrats simply don't care about consistency or avoiding hypocrisy. To them, it's about saying whatever needs to be said to make the point they want to reach.

Yet, conservatives keep winning because we've got truth, logic and common sense on our side.

AndrewPrice said...

Ben, I agree and Romney's no serial killer. I think the neat thing about Penn is that this should be an Obama state, unlike the rest. This means Obama is in deep trouble in some key states.

You're right that it took a long time for the truth to surface, but the point is that the truth does now surface and it's happening faster as conservative media like Breitbart get more efficient.

It will be interesting to see how the left responds. Will they start to adopt standards and hold their people to them to stop the bleeding or will they just keep on trying to deny reality.

Jen said...

Andrew,

I've been wanting to use that one for about two weeks. I finally got my chance.

Truth, logic, and common sense. Amen to that!

AndrewPrice said...

Jen, It's better than the Superman version! Truth, justice and the American way!

Well, almost. ;)

USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

"...the left hand doesn't know what the other left hand is doing"

LOL! Good one! They are also notorious at canibalizing each other. It's entertaining to watch.

Biden said what?
Clinton said what?
A sphincter says what?

DUQ said...

HotAir and I guess the Washington Post has an article today about fewer women being willing to make themselves candidates for the VP slot because of what happened to Palin. But I guess that doesn't count because they're Republican women.

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/06/19/so-is-the-vp-race-down-to-portman-and-pawlenty/

DUQ said...

They also say Rubio isn't being vetted and everyone is now thinking Portman or Pawlenty.

JJ said...

The problem with the libtards is that they have no control over their hand to eye or brain to mouth functions. It's like they all have Tourettes. You can't even seem to get a logical comment out of your mouth before they yell....RACIST. So the conservatives have normal motor skills. Libtards need to go to Tourettes camp.

AndrewPrice said...

Thanks Ben! It seemed appropriate!

Nice Wayne's World reference!

AndrewPrice said...

DUQ, I'm writing something about the Post right now. I didn't see that article though. Nice find.

Here's the link LINK

AndrewPrice said...

DUQ, I think we won't know for some time yet, but I don't believe anything I hear at the moment. I hope he doesn't pick Portman though, that would be a bad choice nationally.

AndrewPrice said...

JJ, Isn't that the truth. I wonder how many of them will blurt out "that's racist" when they are just sitting around at home looking through the fridge?

"Who drank my 15.9 oz soda? Dang racists!"

JJ said...

Where's my Snapple? Damn racists!

JJ said...

They are making it so much easier to drink out of shot glasses now. Heck with the 15.9 oz soda. It's tequila time. So what now we have to bootleg our sodas?

AndrewPrice said...

JJ, LOL! Yep. Now it's time to bootleg sodas!

Welcome to the site, by the way. We're happy to have you join us! :)

JJ said...

Thanks Andrew, happy to be here. Jen kept telling me so much about the site that I had to put my 2 cents in (well, -1.1 cent after the govt gets their hands on it). By the way, Jen told me about your book. Congratulations. I'm anxious to read it.

AndrewPrice said...

Thanks JJ! I hope you like it. It's kind of exciting to see it out there. :)

Yeah, -1.1 cents is right. How much damage has Team Obama done to our economy and our country?! Talk about a total failure!

USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

"What are you in for?"

"Bootleggin' 16 ounce sodas and salt."

AndrewPrice said...

Ben, That's going to be hard time my friend!

Anthony said...

Politicians and political acitivists usually try to turn opposition into examples of bigotry in order to muddy the waters.

Its not just a Democrat thing (quite a few Republicans claim with a straight face that opposition to them is due to their race or gender). I think its stupid when anyone does it be it Barack Obama or Sarah Palin. Carter and Rush (the two closest analogs I can think of) had/have opposition just as vehement.

There are racists/sexists out there, but the overwhelming majority of Americans put idealogy first and everything else second.

AndrewPrice said...

Anthony, I agree with that. And I totally agree that Palin excelled at playing the victim card. I think it's despicable when anyone does it. And you're right that both Bush and Carter got it just as bad as Obama. I would say Bush got it the worst of them all because the country lost it's sense of decorum by that point, but few Presidents have been treated easily when things go wrong.

Post a Comment