Originally Posted By Darkbeer The GOP candidate has dropped out! <a href="http://www.politico.com/blogs/scorecard/1009/BREAKING_Scozzafava_drops_out_of_NY_23.html" target="_blank">http://www.politico.com/blogs/..._23.html</a> >>Republican Dede Scozzafava has suspended her bid in next Tuesday’s NY 23 special election, a huge development that dramatically shakes up the race. She did not endorse either of her two opponents -- Conservative party candidate Doug Hoffman or Democrat Bill Owens. The decision to suspend her campaign is a boost for Hoffman, who already had the support of 50 percent of GOP voters, according to a newly-released Siena poll, and is now well-positioned to win over the 25 percent of Republicans who had been sticking with Scozzafava.<< Should be an interesting election in New York and a few other states on Tuesday.
Originally Posted By gadzuux I'm not a supporter of either one, but what a strange thing for her to do. The campaign only has three more days to go - stick it out, girl! Instead she pulls a "Palin" and quits at the finish line. This race has received a LOT of national media attention. Each of the three candidates is now a more 'famous' politician because of it, and better off for the result. So for Scozzafava to flame out right before election day ... it seems fishy to me. There's gotta be more to this story that hasn't come out yet.
Originally Posted By gadzuux I'll go further - just blue sky conjecture. She was either bribed or threatened by highly placed republican party operatives. And judging by who quits and who's still standing, it's the arch-conservative "wing-nut" branch of the GOP that did it. Because of the high profile nature of this election, the party didn't want to see a GOP 'split' with the two candidates divvying up the republican support, and thereby vaulting the democrat to victory. So they've done what they always do - they corrupt the process with money and scandal. If Scozzafava had any family skeletons in the closet, she'd be confronted with it. Otherwise, she's been "made whole" for her efforts so far. My crystal ball's coming in loud and clear on this one - mark my words . . .
Originally Posted By DAR This was actually the least trollish post in awhile. Some snippets from the article and a little commentary at the end. I say play on.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "There's gotta be more to this story that hasn't come out yet." <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/01/nyregion/01upstate.html?hp" target="_blank">http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11....html?hp</a> >>Ms. Scozzafava had been under siege from conservative leaders because she supports gay rights and abortion rights and was considered too liberal on various fiscal issues. prominent Republicans expressed concern that Ms. Scozzafava’s decision seemed likely to unsettle the party going into next year’s midterm elections, raising the prospect of more primaries against Republican candidates that they deem too moderate. Party leaders — including Mr. Steele and Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker — had argued that local parties should be permitted to pick candidates that most closely mirror the sentiments of the district, even if those candidates vary from Republican orthodoxy on some issues.<<
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 ecdc's definition of a troll is anyone who has an opinion differing from theirs...
Originally Posted By Dabob2 No, a troll is what DB has proven to be on WE on many occasions. But on this one, not so much. It's an actual news story, as opposed to an opinion piece, that he links to, for starters. I have no idea if anything untoward went on here, though I agree that it's weird and highly unusual for a major-party candidate to drop out 3 days before the election. But whether there's more here than meets the eye or not, I do think it's indicative of the GOP drifting further and further away from the center and closer to the wingnuts. They demand orthodoxy, and soon it may be hard to find a moderate Republican left in the halls of Congress.
Originally Posted By Mr X Smart move by the GOP. If an "unauthorized" wingnut had trounced the official GOP pick, that would have emboldened the wingnuts into doing this in every race of 2010. Having said that, has anyone actually seen any interviews by this Hoffman guy? He sucks! Total lamo.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox <<But whether there's more here than meets the eye or not, I do think it's indicative of the GOP drifting further and further away from the center and closer to the wingnuts. They demand orthodoxy, and soon it may be hard to find a moderate Republican left in the halls of Congress.>> The more the GOP moves to the right, the more irrelevant they will become as a national party, alienating the moderate voters along the way. Contrary to the "collective wisdom" preached on Fox Noise, our nation is no longer politically right of center. Obama's solid victory, coupled with 58 Dems plus Bernie in the Senate and 257 Dems in the House, clearly defines the nation as left of center. And as the GOP continues to align itself more and more with the far right wingnuts while ignoring their moderate base, the fewer elections they will win at the non-local level. The more conservative the GOP becomes, the more the DNC will grow. I wonder if Palin and Gingrich fail to grasp this, or are actually setting out to destroy the GOP as retaliation for abandoning them.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 To be fair, Gingrich was one of the ones who came out in favor of the Republican moderate here, not the far-right conservative. And it tells you how far the GOP has tilted when Newt Gingrich is associated with the more moderate side of the GOP on anything.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox You're right, sorry. I meant Huckabee. I believe the GOP is going the way of the Whigs.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>ecdc's definition of a troll is anyone who has an opinion differing from theirs...<< Yes, that's why I go around calling you and DAR trolls all day long. More insightful, critical thinking from William. What a shock.
Originally Posted By tiggertoo According to fivethirtyeight.com, most Scozzafava supporters have a favorable view of Obama (64% to 31%), and have very negative perceptions of Hoffman (15% favorable to 57% unfavorable) and Owens (19% favorable to 50% unfavorable). I think is very premature to believe one side or the other will win. But don't tell that to the nutwings, it'll mess up their buzz. <a href="http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/10/scozzafavas-supporters-like-obama.html" target="_blank">http://www.fivethirtyeight.com...ama.html</a>
Originally Posted By Mr X Ouch. Now wouldn't THAT be a huge kick in the teeth, if the Democrat won after all!?
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder I heard some news show pundit say already this morning that what this means, if anything, is that there's a "civil war" among Republicans in this race and they're in more disarray here than they've ever been.
Originally Posted By ecdc And now the more moderate GOP candidate has endorsed the Democrat. Frank Rich nailed it in his column today: <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/01/opinion/01rich.html" target="_blank">http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11...ich.html</a> >>The right’s embrace of Hoffman is a double-barreled suicide for the G.O.P. On Saturday, the battered Scozzafava suspended her campaign, further scrambling the race. It’s still conceivable that the Democratic candidate could capture a seat the Republicans should own. But it’s even better for Democrats if Hoffman wins. Punch-drunk with this triumph, the right will redouble its support of primary challengers to 2010 G.O.P. candidates they regard as impure. That’s bad news for even a Republican as conservative as Kay Bailey Hutchison, whose primary opponent in the Texas governor’s race, the incumbent Rick Perry, floated the possibility of secession at a teabagger rally in April and hastily endorsed Hoffman on Thursday.<< And I especially loved this little tidbit: >>These conservatives’ whiny cries of victimization also parrot a tic they once condemned in liberals. After Rush Limbaugh was booted from an ownership group bidding on the St. Louis Rams, he moaned about being done in by the “race card.” What actually did him in, of course, was the free-market American capitalism he claims to champion. Limbaugh didn’t understand that in an increasingly diverse nation, profit-seeking N.F.L. franchises actually want to court black ticket buyers, not drive them away.<< Much more at the link!
Originally Posted By gadzuux I like this part ... >> Who exactly is the third-party maverick arousing such ardor? Hoffman doesn’t even live in the district. When he appeared before the editorial board of The Watertown Daily Times 10 days ago, he “showed no grasp” of local issues, as the subsequent editorial put it. Hoffman complained that he should have received the questions in advance — blissfully unaware that they had been asked by the paper in an editorial on the morning of his visit. Last week it turned out that Hoffman’s prime attribute to the radical right — as a take-no-prisoners fiscal conservative — was bogus. In fact he’s on the finance committee of a hospital that happily helped itself to a $479,000 federal earmark. Then again, without the federal government largess that the tea party crowd so deplores, New York’s 23rd would be a Siberia of joblessness. The biggest local employer is the pork-dependent military base, Fort Drum. << So - in sum - the GOP wingnuts topple their own authorized republican candidate and inserts some guy out of nowhere, who lives elsewhere, with no previous political experience or knowledge of local issues. But he whistles dixie when it comes to hard right doctrinaire - abortion, gay marriage, and fiscal conservativism - (except when it's going into his pocket). This litmus test of abortion and gays is a leftover of the 1990s - the "values voter". But abortion isn't going away, and neither are gays, so these seem like stupid issues to go so far out on a limb for. In the meantime there are important matters at hand that have nothing to do with either abortion or gays. So why don't these people know that? The GOP leadeship that's out there rousing the rabble and pandering to people's base fears must believe that it's in their own best interests to do so, but I can't see how. You'd think that they'd at least try to pursue a two-track course, mollifying the moderates while quietly stirring the pot with the fringe base. But no - there's nothing there for moderates or sensible people - just hysterics and demogoguing. It's amazing that they can be so politically tone deaf - especially at this moment in time when it's crucial for their own survival that they get it right. Oh well - watching their own self-snuff unfold in real time makes for entertaining politics.
Originally Posted By ecdc That's the real key, isn't it? We keep hearing about how "there are crazies on both sides!" Well, the crazies on the right just ousted a moderate candidate in favor of an extremist. Since when have you seen that kind of power among the crazies on the left? Did Michael Moore rally Daily Kos to get rid of Obama in the election and replace him with Dennis Kucinich? Not so much....
