|
| quote: | Originally posted by The17sss
The question is, how are those NOT referendums on Obama if he is the national leader of the Democrats? They were just attributed to "bad candidates"? lol. 61% of voters say Obamacare should be dropped. 70% say that was the number 1 reason for the Massachusetts election---> http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...rop_health_care
|
Rasmussen is always your go-to source for polling, eh? Such a reputable outfit, asking questions such as "Are you in favor of the health care reform plan in front of Congress, which would prohibit people from choosing insurance plans with lower premiums and higher deductibles?"
Or: "Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: It’s always better to cut taxes than to increase government spending because taxpayers, not bureaucrats, are the best judges of how to spend their money."
Taking the fair and balanced right out of the Fox News playbook.
But all that aside - it's laughable to say that every election is a referendum on the national figure - I'm sure if you ask people in Massachusetts - where health care reform has already been enacted - whether this was a referendum on whether they believe Nevada should have the same system, they'd laugh at you too. Or are we to believe that Virginia was somehow a referendum on Rush Limbaugh, the national leader of the Republicans?
| quote: | | If we were talking about Florida or Ohio, which could swing either way, maybe you'd be right. But Virginia and NJ went for Obama in a huge way during the election. |
Lol, what? Virginia is now a solid blue state after voting for a Democrat for the first time since the Civil Rights Act? I'll take that mischaracterization. Corzine was a crook, Creigh Deeds couldn't put his pants on in the morning, and Coakley didn't even know Curt Schilling played for the Boston Red Sox. But yeah, these are all Obama's fault, because he campaigned so hard to get those people elected.
| quote: | | And, well Massachusetts speaks for itself. 3.5 to 1 Democrat. He campaigned for all of them. Convenient to say that since it didn't work, he didn't use his political capital. By the same rationale, if Deeds, Coakley, or Corzine won with Obama's campaign support, would you say that those victories do not prove Obama's popularity or ability to swing races? |
Absolutely not - I would have said the Democrats ran the better campaign. Voter registration doesn't mean anything if they aren't motivated to turn out. Massachusetts was a surprise - but it shows more that Democrats have neglected local issues of importance in Massachusetts and ran a shitty campaign than that the national agenda is somehow now delegitimized.
___________________
|