|
|
|
November 16, 2010
Remedial Political Science
The libertarians are the difference between winning and losing national elections. The news covers this up by calling them independents. But where do the independents stand? Less government. Government out of the wallet and out of the bedroom. To keep a coalition together you have to allow the tail to wag the dog. Without the tail you lose (nationally). That is not even Political Science 101. It is remedial Political Science. Inspired by a discussion at Red State. Which I was directed to by an E. E. Coe comment at God Party vs Tea Party. Cross Posted at Power and Control posted by Simon on 11.16.10 at 09:47 PM
Comments
flenser, I'm an engineer. I'm never convinced of anything. No matter. Kirk beat Broadway Bank Alex. And that counts for something. And we are one vote closer to control of the Senate - which must count for something even in your book. Unfortunately Alan Keyes didn't win when he had a chance against Obama. A lot of nominal R voters voted against him. Most unfortunate. So Kirk ain't so good. There was a TEA candidate I liked better. But as I told the guy at the T rally. Kirk can get elected in Illinois. And you know what? Kirk got elected in Illinois. M. Simon · November 16, 2010 11:23 PM So Kirk ain't so good.
flenser · November 17, 2010 04:33 PM flenser, Do you have any idea about how to win elections? Clue: you don't win them by tearing your candidate down. You win them by building your candidate up and tearing the other candidate down. Get a some more clues: Do you know why Libertarians generally get numbers well below 10%? And why libertarian Republicans are winning State wide elections? Mark Kirk was the most libertarian candidate in the race who could win the election. The proof is in the pudding. He won the election. Now that he has won I intend to do my best to make him a better libertarian. M. Simon · November 17, 2010 06:48 PM Post a comment
You may use basic HTML for formatting.
|
|
November 2010
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
November 2010
October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 AB 1634 MBAPBSAAGOP Skepticism See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
• Is Sarah Palin Good Or Is She Lucky?
• The American Sphinx • What are those awful bigoted Arizonans smoking? • Remedial Political Science • Who has the fear advantage? • Does freedom to sin violate religious freedom? • Till death panels us do part! • God Party vs Tea Party • Janet Napolitano plays chicken, but who rules the roost? • Official TSA Groping Instructions T-Shirt
Links
Site Credits
|
|
That is not even Political Science 101. It is remedial Political Science.
Sure looks like Wishful Thinking 101 to me. But since you're able to convince yourself that Mark Kirk is a libertarian, maybe you're already graduated to WT 201.