Monday, November 10, 2014

Sharing the Lyme: Various Musings about the Midterm from the Sage of Tickbite

Ok now that the dust has settled let's have a look at some analyses (and fallout) from both sides of the isle (both sides being Democrat scum and me). What happened and why?

Many liberal talking heads say it was a vote against "gridlock" or an anti-incumbent vote, which I think is not very creative. Jeez if you're gonna bullshit show a little imagination. Now Nancy Pelosi is on the right track, she claims it was voter suppression. “To succeed, we must inspire, educate and remove obstacles to participation. Only by changing our political environment and broadening the universe of the electorate can we build a strong sense of community and an economy that works for everyone". 
See? That's how you BS! But lets define a couple of terms shall we? By "broadening the universe" I assume she means that anybody and everybody who wants free stuff courtesy of the American taxpayer not only may vote in our elections, but are encouraged to to do so be they whatever, whomever or wherever. Just have your ass at the polling station and you're good to go, and if anybody tries to stop you or there's not a ballot available in your native tongue of Ch'orti', then by (The Sun) God you are being suppressed!
Also I just love the new catch phrase being bandied about by the Dems (I noticed Kay Hagan used it a lot), " economy that works for everyone". Man if that's not a soccer mom, metrosexual, limp wrist focus grouped to hell and gone line then I ain't never heard one! An ECONOMY that works for everyone? That's like saying a baseball game that works for the players (Coach I'm hitting .167, this game just ain't working for me!). What does it all mean? I'm sure nobody has a clue but it sounds nice...and that's all that matters.

The Rev. Al has a different take, it was the Clintons fault (I guess he's not quite over that Sista Souljah thing). He goes on to say the Democrats should have embraced President Obama and if they had they would have won.
Ok I can buy half this argument. The Democrats should have embraced Obama, especially after in early October he declared this election to be all about him and his policies. Hell there wasn't a lot of wiggle room at that stage so why not? Plus they couldn't have done any worse and at least Obama might have spurred a little more turnout among the kleptocracy. Couldn't they see that their running from Obama was becoming the story? I'm so glad to see Democrat consultants are just as stupid as Republican consultants.
But as to the Clintons, they did this? Look I agree Hillary and Bill didn't help (Pryor must have been disgusted), but Obama campaigned for quite a few that lost as well. Check CW's adopted home state of Mary-Land.
Al screws up when he attempts logic, demagoguery is his bag. I would expect something just a little more entertaining out of him!

So...what DID happen? Glad you asked. This was a protest vote plain and simple (or as the guy over at the Daily Haymaker says, "a restraining order"). The Republicans didn't run on anything other than stopping Obama. So guess what? That's their mandate, stop Obama's ass...immediately! The voters have spoken loud and clear! Note to Republicans: git er dun!!!

Now if the chump wing of the Republican party loses their nerve and starts to believe all that "let's work together" bullshit, then we are toast. Don't be fooled or intimidated, rule the roost like you been there before and give 'em hell at every turn. Just keep in mind what Obama told us, if you want your way then win an election. We do and we did, thanks for the advise Mr. President.

No comments:

Newer Post Older Post Home