Printable View
Figures, please.Quote:
Originally Posted by clocker
Oh, I think not.Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Especially when the anonymous corporate money is considered.
In fact, even throwing out batshit crazy/rich outliers like Meg Whitman, conservatives out spent liberals by over two to one.
I know it's easier to just make shit up Kevin, but really, you can do better.
You first, being the initial claimant and all.
Whoa, I guess I'll have to admit there's been a huge swing in the past few weeks as massively accelerated Republican spending nudged us out in front by a hair:
$1.64 billion
Projected amount spent on Republican candidates and concerns in 2010.*
$1.59 billion
Project amount spent on Democratic candidates and concerns in 2010.*
Looks like the money spent, considering the results, puts the conservative/Tea Party Movement agenda foremost in American minds; that is to say, had George Soros (the owner of the democrat party) opened his purse a bit - or a lot - wider, the result would have been the same.:naughty:
*from The Week
If the Tea Party/conservatives actually had a coherent agenda, it still wouldn't be foremost in my mind.
Stupidity is boring.
Just the same, they pretty much all won, didn't they?Quote:
Originally Posted by clocker
Boring stupidity can be pretty effective, apparently.
No, they didn't pretty much "all" win.
Admittedly, many did but no one should underestimate the stupidity of the American electorate.
Ah, whining.Quote:
Originally Posted by clocker
The "stupids" kicked your butts.
True story.
Not here in Colorado they didn't.
Buck and Tancredo both lost.
So did the three "tax-cutting" propositions, by 2 to 1 margins, in fact.
Ha.
I was hoping Tancredo would win, but it was a long shot.Quote:
Originally Posted by clocker
That's a shame; Colorado is such a lovely state, too.Quote:
Originally Posted by clocker