December 11, 2007

Ohio’s 5th District Remains Prolife and Anti-Stealth

Filed under: Taxes & Government — Tom @ 9:58 pm

Nix calls it at 9:05 p.m.

AP strolls in about 15 minutes later, based on the post time per Google News.

So the 5th will be represented by:

  • A person who believes in the sanctity of life, unlike the loser, who was “honored” to be backed by a group that wants to bring back partial-birth abortion — but “somehow” forgot to tell us on her web site.
  • A person who at least had the courtesy to tell us where he stands on a number of issues, unlike the loser, who told us virtually nothing — and what little she did tell us wasn’t even consistent.

And there’s a bonus with the new congressman vs. his predecessor: He lives in the district.

All of these are good things.

___________________________________

UPDATE 1: A second bonus: It looks like the loser, as of this moment, will get barely more than the 43.15% of the vote she received in November 2006, and could conceivably wind up with less. Imagine how low she would have gone if all voters had known her true beliefs and issue positions.

UPDATE 1A: Yup, she wound up with less

OH05Final121107

Given the circumstances, this is some serious underachievement.

UPDATE 2: ROTFLMBO (Rolling On The Floor Laughing My Butt Off) — “We’ve Already Won.”

Sorry, folks, that’s a new record for self-delusion. Even with your opponents “in disarray in OH-5, and largely angry at their nominee for a lackluster performance,” and all your supposed energy, your candidate’s performance improvement in “this remarkable special election” was barely zip, if that was worse.

I would think your party is going to have to find another stealth candidate next time, because the loser was, at long last, exposed (and will, of course, be remembered). I would think hope (given the barbarism she clearly supports, that’s the correct word) her party recognizes that subsequent runs by her would likely achieve even worse results.

UPDATE 3: Nix points to a sign (9:50 item) that there may yet be intelligent life at the Ohio Republican Party, as its victory statement takes an opportunistic slap at Ted Strickland, who put a bit of face time into the race. Shouldn’t make too much of it, but if a GOP governor ever campaigned with similar losing results, we’d never hear the end of it from Ohio’s Old Media.

Share

15 Comments

  1. [...] – OK just filed a report at the Machine.  Bizzyblog: So the 5th will be represented [...]

    Pingback by NixGuy.com » Official OH5 Live Thread — UPDATE: Latta Wins! I call it at 9:05PM — December 11, 2007 @ 10:12 pm

  2. 16% COH to defend an R+10 district? I’m no financial expert by any means. Maybe Bizzy can explain to me how that may somehow be sustainable at all. Half a million dollars to win a seat that is in the top ten most R leaning in the country. R+10. Think about it. That should require zero money. None.

    LMFAO! ROTFLMBO? Classic.

    Congrats on having a pro-life tax raiser. Gotta have priorities I guess. ;-)

    PS – Latta’s views on abortion won’t change the national scene one bit. So I guess all we really get are higher taxes? LMBO!

    Comment by Eric — December 12, 2007 @ 12:38 am

  3. #2, my posts were about Weirauch’s unfitness, as you well know, and which is, one would hope, from this point forward, well-established.

    You also know that Latta signed a no new taxes pledge. But you’ve never let facts get in the way of a good narrative, so why start now?

    The rest is irrelevant noise.

    Comment by TBlumer — December 12, 2007 @ 1:00 am

  4. Now now Eric. Half a million dollars is a perfectly fair amount of money to put into a safe (R) district. No biggie.

    And the “dealbreakers”…still hilarious. Intact Dilation & Extraction, btw.

    Comment by Jerid — December 12, 2007 @ 1:08 am

  5. #4 Jerid –

    “I think this is just too close to infanticide. A child has been born and it has exited the uterus. What on Earth is this procedure?”
    – Late Democrat Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan

    Really great thing you’re willing to support there, Jerid. So “compassionate.” Sleep well.

    Comment by TBlumer — December 12, 2007 @ 1:25 am

  6. Here’s your Intact Dilation & Extraction, Jerid. You’re a savage for supporting infanticide.

    Note: Working link added by BizzyBlog at 11 a.m.

    Comment by The Puddle Pirate — December 12, 2007 @ 2:59 am

  7. What are the chances this will make the Club for Growth introspective about their tactics? Slim or none?

    Shall we see them in Ohio ’02 before March?

    Comment by Nasty, Brutish & Short — December 12, 2007 @ 10:07 am

  8. #7, They may not like Schmidt, but they have relatively little to criticize since she’s been in Congress. If they went after her in OH-02 in 2008, it would break an alltime record for bad judgment.

    I don’t see them going after Latta again either. There have to be at least two dozen better and more valid targets in a general election.

    Comment by TBlumer — December 12, 2007 @ 10:23 am

  9. I haven’t said a thing about Intact Dilation and Extraction’s substance. The funny part is that your whining about what to call it. Ya made that a huge part of your “dealbreaker” thing-a-majig because she won’t call it what you want it spun as. That’s about as fair as me yelling that Republicans won’t call the President’s tax cuts the “War on the Middle Class.”

    And as far as sleeping. Yes Tom, I do it quite well.

    Comment by Jerid — December 12, 2007 @ 9:54 pm

  10. #9, Partial-Birth Abortion is the term that has been in common use since the reality of the procedure came to light because it does describe the substance. You know that. That’s what you don’t like about it. It communicates the reality. ID&E avoids it, unless you change the E to stand for Extinction.

    Weirauch’s web site never defined her position on abortion (if she had, she wouldn’t have gotten to 30%, if that), or any other issue with coherence. You know that too.

    Otherwise, what #6 said. The party of “compassion” is the party of hypocrisy until it gets life issues right.

    Comment by TBlumer — December 12, 2007 @ 10:04 pm

  11. I see you tactfully avoided my point altogether. Well done, Tom.

    Comment by Jerid — December 13, 2007 @ 2:08 am

  12. #11, See Bold Italics in #10. I have crayons at the ready if you need further clarity.

    Your tax-cut statement isn’t an analogy. It’s inane.

    Comment by TBlumer — December 13, 2007 @ 9:25 am

  13. Tom, feel free to color the fact that you think “partial birth” is the term everyone should use all over your walls. You and I know you’ve been dishonest in the past, and you’re being dishonest again.

    And I’m sorry you don’t like it when your own methods are held up to the light.

    Good sleepin’.

    Comment by Jerid — December 13, 2007 @ 12:54 pm

  14. #13, Jerid, you’re in worse shape than the Black Knight:

    http://youtube.com/watch?v=kNKSzmM44gE

    Comment by TBlumer — December 13, 2007 @ 1:45 pm

  15. cute.

    Comment by Jerid — December 13, 2007 @ 4:10 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.