It's on like Donkey Con in NY23

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2009/11/scozzafava_endorsing_dem.php?ref=fpblg
Scozzafava Endorsing Dem?
Josh Marshall | November 1, 2009, 10:47AM
In its endorsement of Democrat Bill Owens today, the Watertown Daily Times said that over the course of yesterday Dede Scozzafava, the regular GOP nominee who bowed out yesterday, "began to quietly and thoughtfully encourage her supporters to vote for Democrat William L. Owens."

The Times itself didn't leave much room for doubt about its views. The strongest line: "It is frightening that Mr. Hoffman is so beholden to right-wing ideologues who dismiss Northern New Yorkers as parochial when people here simply want to know how Mr. Hoffman will protect their interests in Washington."

This is a reference to an incident we noted a few weeks ago when Hoffman showed up to a meeting with the paper's editorial board with former House Majority Leader Dick Armey and then got defensive and abrupt when he wasn't able to answer questions about the district or the issues that faced it. Armey stepped in and chastised the editors for focusing on "parochial" issues.

Another TPM NY 23 story with Owens and hoffmans statements. Link below:
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/10/owens-hoffman-seeks-scozzafavas-moderate-gop-voters-in-new-statements.php?ref=fpblg

Also Frank Rich made some great points in his NYT column about NY23 and the state of the gop and how it will help dems.
Link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/01/opinion/01rich.html?ref=opinion

Frank Rich wrote," 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.

The more rightists who win G.O.P. primaries, the greater the Democrats’ prospects next year. But the electoral math is less interesting than the pathology of this movement. Its antecedent can be found in the early 1960s, when radical-right hysteria carried some of the same traits we’re seeing now: seething rage, fear of minorities, maniacal contempt for government, and a Freudian tendency to mimic the excesses of political foes. Writing in 1964 of that era’s equivalent to today’s tea party cells, the historian Richard Hofstadter observed that the John Birch Society’s “ruthless prosecution” of its own ideological war often mimicked the tactics of its Communist enemies. "



One thing you can say positive about the repubs, they know how to put on a hellava show. You can't make this shit up! Ladies and gentleman get your popcorn out and watch the train wreck of the party that was formerly know as the GOP. It ain't so grand right now.

"...over the course of yesterday Dede Scozzafava, the regular GOP nominee who bowed out yesterday, "began to quietly and thoughtfully encourage her supporters to vote for Democrat William L. Owens."

This has been a long time coming.

that's why it is even more important for us to be unified.
Paraphasing Krugman, "we have to decide what side of history we are going to be on."

The teabaggers scare me. Not only because they're stupid and hateful and violently hate Obama. They scare me more because they are NOT going away. They seem to be growing in number while we sit on the sidelines laughing at them.

I live in red state hell and have been watching them since last spring. I am continually amazed by the crowds they are attracting.

This is a dangerous revolt and might not end in our favor.

I view the teabaggers as the people who were not with us anyway and would NEVER be with Obama. What has changed is that miss palin has given these people the green light to spread their hatred and ignorance.
When you boil it all down, the teabaggers hate Obama and it pisses them off that Michelle is up in the White House. Of course they try to pretty up their rhetoric and say its about the economy, jobs, taxes, and the direction the country is headed.
If they feel so STRONGLY about those issues, why were they not teabagging last year when their people controlled EVERYTHING? Why all of a sudden within 90 days of Obama getting in office they decide to march and whine? After eight years of no jobs, no health care, and high deficits they finally found their voice with a gun strapped to their hip?
Give me a break. Don't fall for that fake carville,greenberg poll. The biggest problem the teabaggers and the wingnuts have is Obama and they JUSt happen to not like his policies.

I'm in North Carolina, and the teabaggers don't seem to be as prominant. We do have some ignorant people, but they tend to show up in the local blogosphere which is predominantly rightwing.

That's it. There is nothing to fear. If they decide to get violent, we will crush them.

They think he was too liberal.

join forces and elect Bill Owen!

"The first ones out of the gate: United Auto Workers CAP Region 9… endorsing Democrat Bill Owens."

“We would like to commend Dede Scozzafava for a hard-fought campaign and she will always be a friend of the UAW. Like Bill Owens, she has been a fighter for working families and a dedicated public servant. Doug Hoffman’s commitment to privatizing Social Security, opposing efforts to reform healthcare, and supporting tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans is directly at odds with the best interests of working families in Upstate New York, and right now we can’t afford to send a voice for those kinds of priorities to Congress.”

<more>
http://blog.timesunion.com/capitol/archives/19532/first-scozzafava-supporter-goes-to-owens/

I do feel very badly for the actual sane residents.
My rep is a Tom DeLay lapdog, so I have empathy for them.

For the rest of us, it's like a circus freakshow :popcorn:

of winning this seat.Come Wednesday morning this might be proven correct.
But I find it interesting that Owens isn't running from Obama and has stated that NY23 need to have a representative that WILL WORK with President Obama.

There is something going on below the surface when you have a dino, who is/was allegedly more conservative than the 1st gop candidate, run toward Obama and his policies to get elected. Evidently the gop isn't picking it and let's hope it stays that way.

then.

How so?

Yes, the nut fringe may win local elections, but extrapolate that nationally and they don't stand a chance against Democrats.
Especially in this economic climate.

The social issue crazies only look good when everyone is prosperous enough to vote on philosophical issues.
When the economic realities are dire, the voting public trusts the Democratic Party w/it's best interests.

And splitting factions w/in the GOP always helps us.

All of this is said remembering that the actual residents of the district will be hurt, no doubt, they pay the price.
The GOP woman that dropped out (& obviously the Dem) would be a far better choice for them personally.
I'm still holding out hope they get good representation.

I don't see them as social issue crazies. They are financially conservative frootloops who happen to be pro-life and against gay marriage. But their #1 message is NOT a social issues, it is economics. And unless the economy improves and quickly, that message will win them votes.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/10/ny-23-special-election-splitting-the-right.php

"Hoffman has been endorsed by the Club For Growth, Family Research Council Action PAC, Fred Thompson and other conservatives, who refuse to back Scozzafava over her various socially liberal stances."

and

"Ryan cited Scozzafava's positions on gay marriage, abortion -- "it's not that she's just pro abortion but she's very, very pro-abortion" "


Michelle Malkin called her a "radical leftist" , a "Margaret Sanger Award Winning Radical" - a reference to Planned Parenthood.

Their # 1 message is ALWAYS social control. Taxes come in second. It wasn't taxes that took this woman down.

The way our two-party system is set up, enormous power and financial resources are available to the major parties, no matter who's running them -- and there are almost insurmountable blockages against attempting to work from outside.

I don't want to see the teabaggers get their hands on those resources.

I shudder at the idea of a teabagger presidential candidate having the right to debate Barack Obama in 2012.

Attempts to *not* treat these people seriously are already being blasted as a grave insult to all conservatives and Republicans. But if you *do* treat them seriously, you implicitly endorse their marginal belief systems and aberrant policies.

It might be premature at this point to suggest we form a tactical alliance with Newt Gingrich to insure that control of the GOP remains in the hands of the same old operatives and party hacks -- but it may yet come to that.

newt is that you?

And how he got bounced out on his ass.

He also started out as far right fringe, don't forget.

Seriously, the crazy people you see on TV don't have nearly as much influence as our sensationalist media likes to give them credit for.
They like the crazy people stories!
Just like sensationalizing crime, it makes it seem more pervasive than it is in reality.

I'm not saying discount the nutjobs, just keep perspective.
They are getting louder because they are in a death spiral politically.
They'll grab anything to look relevant.
There are absolutely no credible statistics that show them in ascendancy.

The GOP is currently up for sale to the highest bidder at fire-sale rates. But who'd want to buy it? The major corporations stopped funding it heavily by the 2006 election cycle -- which is one reason the Democrats won then and in 2008. The Neocons are off on their own little cloud somewhere with Dick Cheney. The party operatives -- people like Charlie Black or Vin Weber -- are trying to hold onto it, but they're uninspired hacks. And the national party has close to zero candidates with any sort of general appeal.

The teabaggers may be at most 20% of the population, but they have passion and determination -- as well as ties with old-line movement conservatives like those in the Heritage Foundation and their deep-pocketed right-wing foundation backers. They could very well capture the GOP, simply because there's a power vacuum there just waiting to be filled.

But if they do manage to take over a major party, they're suddenly at a 50-50 parity with the Democrats as far as attention and the illusion of credibility are concerned. They get their representatives on TV, they get to participate in campaign debates, they get funding for presidential campaigns. Even if they're still only 20% of the population, in a lot of the ways that count they'd loom as large as the other 80%.

Our two-party system was set up on the assumption that both parties would command roughly equal shares of support from the population at large. It was set up on the assumption that both parties would be run by relatively sane people with a sense of responsibility towards the Constitution and our democratic institutions. And for one party to be taken over by a wingnut minority with no real belief in democracy, in national unity, or in the Bill of Rights could strain the system to the breaking point.

Paradoxically, the smaller the GOP gets -- the more normal people who bail out of it -- the more susceptible it gets to total domination by a small, fanatical cult. And that *does* scare me, and I think for good reason.

First off our "system" was not set up to be two party it evolved into it. Secondly just because crazy is the only other option doesnt mean a majority will chose it anywhere.

The idea that if crazy becomes the only other option more people will choose crazy is silly.

And no they dont reach 50-50 parity simply because they take over the GOP hell the GOP already doesnt have 50-50 parity and theres arguably a few sane GOP left.

Yea they are scary but only in an OMG look at that insane person they look like they might do something completely wacko sort of way.

I can't stand Newt but I'd rather see him in charge of the GOP than the teabaggers.

Newt is just pretending to be moderate. The same with so called Conservatives and Republicons all are one in the same.

Seriously? Why in the world would that strike fear into your heart. It would be like palin debating Obama. There would be no contest.

And because knowing they couldn't meet Obama on the issues, they would use the opportunity to demand to see his Kenyan birth certificate or his communist college thesis.

It would be a freak show, a circus, and would trash any concept of democratic elections.

The louder and more emboldened these nutcases get- the greater the opportunity for Democrats; provided that the perennially hapless and complicit "leadership" reigns in its Republican wannabes and actually draws a contrast between the parties with progressive policies that demonstrably help ordinary Americans.

Otherwise- all bets are off.

I wouldn't put anything past that clown.

appreciate it.

There are neo-cons, theo-cons, traditional cons, fiscal cons, social cons--why not donkey cons? It may be argued that "donkey con" is redundant, though, because conservatives are by necessity asses.

thanks.

appreciate it.

between the crazy and the moderate, the crazies will win every time. The crazies feel that they have little to lose and will simply turn up the volume at every turn. The crazies have no problem with "destroying the village to save it" logic. Moderates will flee the bloodbath as they simply aren't in it for this kind of fight, if they were, they would just add to the total crazy.

One of two things will now happen: the Republican Party will turn into Teabaghistan and primary all but the hard of the hardcore RW out, or a new Conservative/Teabaghistan party will form and split the RW vote in critical (very red) districts (where they might score a win). Donations will be lost to the Dems or split between the two parties.

As a result either way, more Democratic Party candidates will be successful.

Obama won the NY 23 district 53% - 47%. Democrats have controlled the seat more than Republicans since WW II.