The Tea Party Is Dead. Long Live the Tea Party.

Again,

Was the 2010 mid term election an ass kicking for the Democrats ? Originally Posted by Whirlaway

sure ... why do you need to ask? everyone knows how obvious that was.


do you need to be reminded the republicans lost seats in the senate AND the house last month, trending DOWN?

It's AssWipe. He doesn't know his own head from his ass. He doesn't know Liston from Frazier, he doesn't know a spoof on the news from the real news !

AssWipe is clueless.

Your right; the 2010 election was an ass kicking. It caused a tremendous shift in the power structure in state and federal government. The 2012 Obama win was NOT an ass kicking. The power arrangement in Washington was unchanged by Obama's re-election.

sure ... why do you need to ask? everyone knows how obvious that was.


do you need to be reminded the republicans lost seats in the senate AND the house last month, trending DOWN? Originally Posted by CJ7

Your right; the 2010 election was an ass kicking. It caused a tremendous shift in the power structure in state and federal government. The 2012 Obama win was NOT an ass kicking. The power arrangement in Washington was unchanged by Obama's re-election. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

ass kicking or not matters not ... as they say in Tennessee.

since the power structure/arrangment in Washington was unchanged (from the republicans standpoint) what are you whining about

I am NOT whining; just pointing out that when nitwits like MarxNoSmarts claim November 2012 was an ass kicking, he is wrong.

Don't make life so difficult for your self CJ....accept that you are always one or two steps behind us.

2012 was an asskicking on the presidential level. It's a fact.

What the republican party was offering on the national level was rejected. Now you can accept that or not. Doesn't change the facts.

The public had an option to change from Obama and didn't. Period.

I am NOT whining; just pointing out that when nitwits like MarxNoSmarts claim November 2012 was an ass kicking, he is wrong.

Don't make life so difficult for your self CJ....accept that you are always one or two steps behind us. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

as soon as you admit you are one trick pony

No it wasn't. Historically it wasn't even close to be an blowout.

In 1992 and 1996, Bill Clinton won with 370 electoral college votes and 379 electoral college votes, respectively. But those were relatively close electoral college stats compared to George H.W Bush's 426 electoral votes in 1988, and Ronald Reagan's 525 in 1984. In that election, Reagan narrowly beat out his 489 electoral votes in 1980. Dwight Eisenhower cruised with 442 and 457 electoral votes in 1952 and 1956.

The Obama 332 to 206 electoral college vote doesn't measure up to being a blow out. And his 51% to 47% popular vote was a squeaker of a win.

2012 was an asskicking on the presidential level. It's a fact.

What the republican party was offering on the national level was rejected. Now you can accept that or not. Doesn't change the facts.

The public had an option to change from Obama and didn't. Period. Originally Posted by markroxny

One of the great Democrats of our era was Tip O'Neill. The famous phrase he coined is why the Tea Party is not dead.

"All Politics are Local"

That is why the Republicans, ie Conservatives, will maintain controle over The House, and probably gain some Senate Seats in the 2014 mid terms.

The very voters that returned President Obama to the Whitehouse don't even realize that the true power, ie, the power to controle the purse strings, resides in The House. That is where nthe Tea Party will spend it's capitol, and that is where they will win.

No it wasn't. Historically it wasn't even close to be an blowout.

In 1992 and 1996, Bill Clinton won with 370 electoral college votes and 379 electoral college votes, respectively. But those were relatively close electoral college stats compared to George H.W Bush's 426 electoral votes in 1988, and Ronald Reagan's 525 in 1984. In that election, Reagan narrowly beat out his 489 electoral votes in 1980. Dwight Eisenhower cruised with 442 and 457 electoral votes in 1952 and 1956.

The Obama 332 to 206 electoral college vote doesn't measure up to being a blow out. And his 51% to 47% popular vote was a squeaker of a win. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

and at the end of the day this matters how?

No surprise you think history is useless. Just an illustration of what an electoral college blow out looks like....not the imaginary Obama 2012 "ass kicking."

No surprise you think history is useless. Just an illustration of what an electoral college blow out looks like....not the imaginary Obama 2012 "ass kicking." Originally Posted by Whirlaway

so as usual youre splitting hairs, in this case, between a win and an asskicking ..

dont look now but the republicans are literally getting their ass kicked all over the congressional floor after a SLIGHT win by the dems

You make zero sense.

You make zero sense. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

LOL

then yu better tune in Rush and pay closer attention to Coulter while youre at it

Again, you make zero sense. You bring up Rush and Coulter to prove your clarity of thought ???