Overall not a great election.

[klamath]

They are already hammering that the tea party candidates cost the republicans the senate,
Not that I care that the republicans didn't win with bad candidates but this is going to harm future liberty candidates chances in the primaries.

[Indy Vidual]

Great is in the eye of the beholder:

Re-post from another thread

re: Victory came 2 years later.

Exciting, Yes!



...
We are in uncharted waters and it's pretty exciting.

For now, congratulations, to all of you who have fought for the cause of liberty and freedom and finally get to enjoy a real victory!

Victory came 2 years later.
The new Senate Victory came 50-60 years later.
Taft / Goldwater / LP is born / Rep. Ron Paul / Ed Clark '80 / Ron Paul (L) '88 / Rep. Ron Paul (R) wins again :p / Ron Paul 2008 / Randslide 2010!

^^^
Great day / Great Week / Great Election :D

[Bern]

If the Pubs hadn't supported TARP and the bailouts, there probably wouldn't be any tea party candidates (outside of the Paul family). They have only themselves to blame.

[georgiaboy]

Rewind to 2008:
The libertarians cost the GOP the house and senate, so get rid of the libertarians ==== NOT.

If in the next two years the newly elected legislators do what we're expecting of them, I see momentum continuing in our direction, not reversing.

I say it was a great election.

[yoshimaroka]

They are already hammering that the tea party candidates cost the republicans the senate

I think that was the point of the tea party co-opting.

John C Dvorak on No Agenda called this a couple of months ago: the tea party was hijacked and most of them won primaries against republicans who were shoe-ins for re-election.

[Vessol]

Are you kidding? These are the best possible election results. This is like a "hung parliament" found in Commonwealth nations. Why do I think it's so good? Because neither side will be able to accomplish anything. Both parties want to remove my freedoms and steal my money, the less chance either of them can do that, the better.

Not to mention that this gives more of an incentive for local politics to become more important. Screw the national level! Focus on the local!

And are we suddenly the Republican forums or something? Who do we care if the tea party lost the Republicans the elections? What all would they do to further liberty?

[Stary Hickory]

DIssapointed with Miller/Buck/Angle

It was a GOP landslide brought about because of Obamacare and fiscal insanity. I like that. But not as many liberty folks in as I wanted. Keep pushing states rights, nullify, etc...

[SilentBull]

Is Buck done? I think it's still close over there, no?

[MRoCkEd]

DIssapointed with Miller/Buck/Angle


Same...

But Buck is in a tight race and could pull it off still.

Miller is a likely loss but could win if they threw away a lot of write-ins and he dominated in absentee.. unlikely :(

And Angle lost officially

[low preference guy]

I can't believe people can vote for Harry Reid. Too many people must be more fucked up than we thought.

[MRoCkEd]

Denver Post has called it for Bennett (Buck's opponent)

Shit.

http://www.denverpost.com/commented/ci_16502977?source=commented-

[Jordan]

I can't believe people can vote for Harry Reid. Too many people must be more fucked up than we thought.

It comes down to safety.

People wanted to toss Reid. But, when they got to the polls, or really started considering the race, they knew Angle was a mixed bag. At least with Reid, you knew what you were getting.

This is why, IMO, Conway was able to close well, but far too early. Towards the last few weeks, but not the last week, Conway got within 5 on the idea that he was the safe vote. Rand was against this and that, social security, medicare, etc. Conway wasn't a good vote, but he, too, was safe. Of course, Conway had to take his lies to extremes, losing credibility. It was easier to paint Angle as nuts in Nevada than Rand in Kentucky.

[Southron]

I'm very pleased with the results because my focus was only at the state level.

NC Republicans will finally get to redistrict this state more along the lines of where it should be.

And we have our Ron Paul of the NC House- Glen Bradley.

If most of our money went towards these small state campaigns, I believe we'd see more wins, both in the short and long term.

[LibertyVox]

Daily Kos on the left is not happy. The GOP is not happy. The lame duck Tea Party is slummin it up like an upstart. Ron Paul still remains the moral virtuous yard stick in the republic. The economy sucks. College sux. Fuck the midterms. There's a lot less bacon to go around. Things seem business as usual. Discussions about civic ethics now bore me. And I don't wanna wait for my life to be over..... So I get's it's a win-win.

YouTube - cartman i dont wanna wait (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9s0AJ2mHP4&feature=related)

[DirtMcGirt]

Are you kidding? These are the best possible election results. This is like a "hung parliament" found in Commonwealth nations. Why do I think it's so good? Because neither side will be able to accomplish anything. Both parties want to remove my freedoms and steal my money, the less chance either of them can do that, the better.

Not to mention that this gives more of an incentive for local politics to become more important. Screw the national level! Focus on the local!

And are we suddenly the Republican forums or something? Who do we care if the tea party lost the Republicans the elections? What all would they do to further liberty?

Agreed, In my opinion the Republicans prefer it this way w/ a Dem President. Majority House- Minority Senate... They can hold shit up but not take total blame...

[Vessol]

I own that I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive.
-Thomas Jefferson

[AuH20]

This was a great election. We got a seat at the table. The civil war with the GOP's old bulls is starting. The Tea Party is getting it's sea legs. It's candidates will only get stronger in the future and more proficient in the manner which they articulate their message.

[Meatwasp]

I am disappointed that we didn't win the senate. No chance in changing Obama care now.

[Vessol]

I am disappointed that we didn't win the senate. No chance in changing Obama care now.

The only change would be renaming it to Republicancare

[Stary Hickory]

I am disappointed that we didn't win the senate. No chance in changing Obama care now.

It will not be changed till 2012 anyways. They picked up enough seats to take it in 2012. I was hoping for 49 Rs and 51 Dems this time and a possible fillbuster proof majority for a repeal after 2012.

No matter what Obama a will veto a repeal. What can happen is to defund and obstruct it, while states pick it off one by one, and wait for an unconstituional ruling by the SC.

[klamath]

The best part is Rand. Gridlock we did accomplish but Obama care is secure as it stands.
Buck Angle and Miller are the ones that bother me. Yes a moderate republican could have taken those seats but the democrats with the help of the media was able to paint the more liberty candidates as extreme. They were nowhere as extreme as they could paint RP. They were even able to bring Rands victory down to one of the smallest GOP wins in a solid GOP state. Sorry I am being a fozz here but buck, angle and miller are really bothering me. Even Alaska voted in a Write in to return the liberal republican back.
We have a lot of work cut out and the state of the nation has to get a lot worse before we can make significantly more gains.

[AuH20]

The best part is Rand. Gridlock we did accomplish but Obama care is secure as it stands.
Buck Angle and Miller are the ones that bother me. Yes a moderate republican could have taken those seats but the democrats with the help of the media was able to paint them as extreme. They were nowhere as extreme as they could paint RP. They were even able to bring Rands victory down to one of the smallest GOP wins in a solid GOP state. Sorry I am being a fozz here but buck, angle and miller are really bothering me. Even Alaska voted in a Write in to return the liberal republican back.
We have a lot of work cut out and the state of the nation has to get a lot worse before we can make significantly more gains.

Buck lost because of unneeded self-inflicted wounds late in the campaign, which the democrats spun to their advantage. Nevada and Alaska are tough places to win on libertarian/constitutional principles because they're fueled by patronage. I can't really kill Miller and Angle.

[klamath]

Buck lost because of unneeded self-inflicted wounds late in the campaign, which the democrats spun to their advantage. Nevada and Alaska are tough places to win on libertarian/constitutional principles because they're fueled by patronage. I can't really kill Miller and Angle.
All three of them lost because they were painted as extremists and it worked with the electorate. The moderate republicans deserted Angle such as the mayor of reno.

[rprprs]

The best part is Rand. Gridlock we did accomplish but Obama care is secure as it stands.
Buck Angle and Miller are the ones that bother me. Yes a moderate republican could have taken those seats but the democrats with the help of the media was able to paint the more liberty candidates as extreme. They were nowhere as extreme as they could paint RP. They were even able to bring Rands victory down to one of the smallest GOP wins in a solid GOP state. Sorry I am being a fozz here but buck, angle and miller are really bothering me. Even Alaska voted in a Write in to return the liberal republican back.
We have a lot of work cut out and the state of the nation has to get a lot worse before we can make significantly more gains.

This is pretty much the way I see it. I am thrilled, of course, with Rand's victory but, overall, the results demonstrate that we have a long way to go. Despite the flaws of candidates like Angle, Reid (along with Pelosi) was practically the face of big government. A message needed to be sent, and it wasn't.

[Pericles]

They are already hammering that the tea party candidates cost the republicans the senate,
Not that I care that the republicans didn't win with bad candidates but this is going to harm future liberty candidates chances in the primaries.

Get used to it - I was on the Perot 1992 staff and that has always been the mantra of the R establishment. The party of personal responsibility blames it losses on outsider candidates "spoiling" the chances of the anointed party insider.

Ultimately these guys don't understand the TEA party concept. Personally at this point, I see 4 types of TEA party people (A) ticked off GOPers at the constant compromise of small government principles with the Ds (B) independents who used the demoralized R party as a vehicle to get their point of view across (C) libertarian oriented people tired of losing elections (D) opportunists in the R party feeding off of voter discontent to their advantage.

The decentralized nature of the TEA party, and drawing candidates from the 4 groups mentioned above, means that the quality of TEA party candidates is going to be inconsistent, until the GOP establishment realizes the only way the R party remains viable is by incorporating the TEA party movement into the primary process, or 3 of the 4 groups mentioned above will do the same thing in the D party.

Success will also attract higher quality candidates, who will be more polished in their appearance. It is a long journey, and we have just barely started.

[itshappening]

Miller ran a terrible campaign

I really am shocked about Buck. Bennet is a terrible candidate in comparison. He should have won that seat. There is potential fraud or union involvement i'm sure

Reid has an incredible machine in Nevada and would beat most Republicans I think

These 3 are all incumbents and it is harder to beat incumbents.

We need to focus on open senate seats or find good candidates to take on some in the primaries but realize it HAS to be a select effort.

Many said Rand was our only hope and that proved to be correct. Although I like Miller his campaign was not professional or slick, his ads were lame.

I would suggest Medina in Texas should be a priority and she should hire Rand's staff and ad agency

[silentshout]

Are you kidding? These are the best possible election results. This is like a "hung parliament" found in Commonwealth nations. Why do I think it's so good? Because neither side will be able to accomplish anything. Both parties want to remove my freedoms and steal my money, the less chance either of them can do that, the better.

Not to mention that this gives more of an incentive for local politics to become more important. Screw the national level! Focus on the local!

And are we suddenly the Republican forums or something? Who do we care if the tea party lost the Republicans the elections? What all would they do to further liberty?

^^
i agree. I am hoping for a lot of gridlock.

[justinc.1089]

The best part is Rand. Gridlock we did accomplish but Obama care is secure as it stands.
Buck Angle and Miller are the ones that bother me. Yes a moderate republican could have taken those seats but the democrats with the help of the media was able to paint the more liberty candidates as extreme. They were nowhere as extreme as they could paint RP. They were even able to bring Rands victory down to one of the smallest GOP wins in a solid GOP state. Sorry I am being a fozz here but buck, angle and miller are really bothering me. Even Alaska voted in a Write in to return the liberal republican back.
We have a lot of work cut out and the state of the nation has to get a lot worse before we can make significantly more gains.

Some of that is certain candidates' faults themselves.

For example, you can't run for the house or senate and talk about repealing constitutional amendments no one has talked about repealing for like at least 70 years or something.

Why?

Because to 95% of people out there it sounds wierd, and so the media can easily make it sound crazy.


That was the key to Rand's victory. Rand made himself sound as mainstream as he possibly could without compromising his integrity at the same time. A lot of other Tea Party candidates slipped up and mentioned something in front of the media that was able to be portrayed as crazy.

And yes, the media can and will do that to Ron Paul too because he has TONS of stuff like that from when he ran as a Libertarian, and probably even during his time as a Republican as well.

But Ron Paul may be able to overcome that with his tremendous grassroots support and fundraising abilities that other Tea Party candidates could not come close to having to fight the media with.

[Krugerrand]

Some of that is certain candidates' faults themselves.

For example, you can't run for the house or senate and talk about repealing constitutional amendments no one has talked about repealing for like at least 70 years or something.

Why?

Because to 95% of people out there it sounds wierd, and so the media can easily make it sound crazy.


That was the key to Rand's victory. Rand made himself sound as mainstream as he possibly could without compromising his integrity at the same time. A lot of other Tea Party candidates slipped up and mentioned something in front of the media that was able to be portrayed as crazy.

And yes, the media can and will do that to Ron Paul too because he has TONS of stuff like that from when he ran as a Libertarian, and probably even during his time as a Republican as well.

But Ron Paul may be able to overcome that with his tremendous grassroots support and fundraising abilities that other Tea Party candidates could not come close to having to fight the media with.

Ron Paul has exceptional mental abilities and an uncanny ability to support his positions with case history and logic - all with a political savvy that prevents the message from being twisted or not understood. Debates and interviewers would be hard-pressed to get Ron Paul trapped by his own words.

[Brian4Liberty]

Get used to it - I was on the Perot 1992 staff and that has always been the mantra of the R establishment. The party of personal responsibility blames it losses on outsider candidates "spoiling" the chances of the anointed party insider.


Yep. The establishment and the controlled media did everything in their power to take down the non-anointed candidates. The GOP establishment would rather have a Democrat win than have a GOP candidate win that they haven't vetted and bedded.

[jmdrake]

They are already hammering that the tea party candidates cost the republicans the senate,
Not that I care that the republicans didn't win with bad candidates but this is going to harm future liberty candidates chances in the primaries.

Screw the naysayers. Sharon Angle beat expectations. And she wasn't the best campaigner. The problem wasn't her views but that she wasted precious time at the end complaining about "dirty tricks" from Harry Reid instead of getting out and rallying the troops. Also I don't recall if S.A. ever fully embraced the "liberty movement" as opposed to just the so called "tea party". Did she ever ask Ron Paul to help campaign for her? Speaking only for myself, my support for her never went beyond "Gee, I hope she'll win". Besides, the establishment GOP candidate in Connecticut got trounced (Linda McMahon). Listening to local conservative talk radio last night and today it was all "Thank you tea party" and "this was great". The only blame was on certain candidates not doing a better job on the campaign trail (like Angle) but none of this "This is proof that the message didn't resonate" stuff.