(03-13-2018 11:47 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(03-13-2018 11:31 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(03-13-2018 09:18 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(03-13-2018 09:16 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(03-13-2018 09:12 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Great night for the Dems!

Great win for dems that are republicans. Lol

Saccone was Donald Trump before Donald Trump... at least that’s what he said.

And what about Lamb do you leftists support?

His Marine service? His 2nd amendment support? Former prosecutor? His utter dismissal of Fransicko Nan? Pro-life? Pro Trump tariff?

This proves a couple things- The candidate is more important than the party, Trump proved that convincingly in the spectacular flameout of the '16 dim "lock". As in 98.7% lock.

Sanccone was a rather weak, uninspiring candidate, and Lamb may well be out of there in what? 8 months? Bout a million bucks a month?!? lol.

Money well spent. He might cast 10 real votes in that time.

This guy, with an impressive resume, is closer to the R's than he is a regressive. Fact.

So if a democrat is a republican he can win. lol

We'll see how he votes for the next 8 months, including the 3 1/2 they'll likely be in session. But, as you astutely point out, he's more R/ Conservative than most registered republicans I know.

Wonder how long before he flips?

(03-13-2018 11:47 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(03-13-2018 11:31 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(03-13-2018 09:18 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(03-13-2018 09:16 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(03-13-2018 09:12 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Great night for the Dems!

Great win for dems that are republicans. Lol

Saccone was Donald Trump before Donald Trump... at least that’s what he said.

And what about Lamb do you leftists support?

His Marine service? His 2nd amendment support? Former prosecutor? His utter dismissal of Fransicko Nan? Pro-life? Pro Trump tariff?

This proves a couple things- The candidate is more important than the party, Trump proved that convincingly in the spectacular flameout of the '16 dim "lock". As in 98.7% lock.

Sanccone was a rather weak, uninspiring candidate, and Lamb may well be out of there in what? 8 months? Bout a million bucks a month?!? lol.

Money well spent. He might cast 10 real votes in that time.

This guy, with an impressive resume, is closer to the R's than he is a regressive. Fact.

So if a democrat is a republican he can win. lol

LOL. No way he could ever win a GOP primary in any competitive district in the country. He supports Planned Parenthood funding, and campaigned on opposition to the 20+ week ban on abortion. He supports LGBT rights. The NRA campaigned against him. So he said he won't vote for Nancy Pelosi for speaker. He'll be voting for a DEMOCRAT for speaker. And that speaker is going to be far more liberal than Paul Ryan.

Daily Kos's readers gave him 130 grand. That's NOT a conservative bunch. https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/3/...l-District

A recount and a couple of court cases and he may never vote.

(03-13-2018 11:53 PM)Claw Wrote:  A recount and a couple of court cases and he may never vote.

Its highly doubtful that the PA gerrymander will be put back in place. And its VERY likely he will win in the neighboring Trump +2 district in November (this one was Trump +20), so barring some really crazy eventuality, he'll be voting in January 2019.

A recount (or some truly unforeseen development in the absentees in Washington/Greene Counties) might turn this election against him tonight or tomorrow, but recounts and absentees don't usually don't turn over results like this.

Its possible he has to wait till January.

Doesn’t matter if he never votes. This is going to super charge an already excited base. 119 or whatever it was GOP held seats are bluer. Think about those poor saps that hold a seat in districts that Hillary won. There were 19 I think.

Tom.


What’s the Cook rating on this district? Simply amazing.

Seems like a nice guy.

(03-13-2018 11:51 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(03-13-2018 11:47 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(03-13-2018 11:31 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(03-13-2018 09:18 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(03-13-2018 09:16 PM)shere khan Wrote:  Great win for dems that are republicans. Lol

Saccone was Donald Trump before Donald Trump... at least that’s what he said.

And what about Lamb do you leftists support?

His Marine service? His 2nd amendment support? Former prosecutor? His utter dismissal of Fransicko Nan? Pro-life? Pro Trump tariff?

This proves a couple things- The candidate is more important than the party, Trump proved that convincingly in the spectacular flameout of the '16 dim "lock". As in 98.7% lock.

Sanccone was a rather weak, uninspiring candidate, and Lamb may well be out of there in what? 8 months? Bout a million bucks a month?!? lol.

Money well spent. He might cast 10 real votes in that time.

This guy, with an impressive resume, is closer to the R's than he is a regressive. Fact.

So if a democrat is a republican he can win. lol

We'll see how he votes for the next 8 months, including the 3 1/2 they'll likely be in session. But, as you astutely point out, he's more R/ Conservative than most registered republicans I know.

Wonder how long before he flips?

which makes the donk a centrist like DJT.....

his stance on abortion is what lost it for him (if he indeed ends up losing)

I have no problem this one unless he flips out and turns into a pelosi/shmuckster.....

if he does, he'll be a one term feller.....

the dems are starting to figure out the game.....some of the cons aren't.;....

oh wellzy.....it's just a mattress tag that can be snipped if req'd down the road if he does flip to party vs. policy....

edit: lmao....fox morning goofs just stated the same thingy.....lmao...

Union workers will decide this and most elections and as the jobs come poring back into America the Union numbers will rise. Republicans better learn from this.

(03-14-2018 06:11 AM)Dasville Wrote:  Union workers will decide this and most elections and as the jobs come poring back into America the Union numbers will rise. Republicans better learn from this.

Ironically, it was Lamb's pro union stance that helped him to get elected. But one thing a lot of people forget is that attractiveness plays a role in elections - sadly. IMHO, if swap the candidates physical features then Saccone wins the election outright. This concept is more easily observed during the presidential election years due to higher turnout across the board vs special elections where the voters tend to be higher info types.

(03-14-2018 06:11 AM)Dasville Wrote:  Union workers will decide this and most elections and as the jobs come poring back into America the Union numbers will rise. Republicans better learn from this.

I would've voted for the donk in this particular race.....

the other guy was too much of a right wing con.....

no differently than the uber libs, they need to die off too,....

From one of the local papers about the election - excerpt on Connor Lamb. Definitely a moderate. Also, not surprising given the traditional nature of elections where the party opposed to the president's party picks up congressional seats.

http://triblive.com/local/regional/13418...-uncounted

Quote: Lamb campaigned as a moderate Democrat who supports unions and some of his party's banner social programs, including the Affordable Care Act, but said he would work with Trump on issues important to the district. He distanced himself from the national party when he said he wouldn't support re-electing Nancy Pelosi as House minority leader, despite Republicans' efforts to brand him as a rubber stamp for Pelosi and a range of liberal policies, and shared views on issues such as guns and abortion that sometimes seemed to go against liberal orthodoxy.

He said during the campaign that he wants to expand background checks and improve mental health treatment to try to prevent gun violence but doesn't support specific bans on assault rifles, extended magazines or other devices. He has said he would support women's rights to have abortions despite his personal opposition as a Catholic to the procedure.

(03-14-2018 06:36 AM)miko33 Wrote:  From one of the local papers about the election - excerpt on Connor Lamb. Definitely a moderate. Also, not surprising given the traditional nature of elections where the party opposed to the president's party picks up congressional seats.

http://triblive.com/local/regional/13418...-uncounted

Quote: Lamb campaigned as a moderate Democrat who supports unions and some of his party's banner social programs, including the Affordable Care Act, but said he would work with Trump on issues important to the district. He distanced himself from the national party when he said he wouldn't support re-electing Nancy Pelosi as House minority leader, despite Republicans' efforts to brand him as a rubber stamp for Pelosi and a range of liberal policies, and shared views on issues such as guns and abortion that sometimes seemed to go against liberal orthodoxy.

He said during the campaign that he wants to expand background checks and improve mental health treatment to try to prevent gun violence but doesn't support specific bans on assault rifles, extended magazines or other devices. He has said he would support women's rights to have abortions despite his personal opposition as a Catholic to the procedure.

lmao again.....

die-hard cons have the same disease as die-hard dems....they're both going to die a hard painful one....

apparently some 'phants have not learned the #henceDJT lesson yet.....

#dipshites

Union guys who voted for Trump. He appoints Gorsuch who will dismantle Unions this summer. Such an interesting dynamic.

The country would be a lot healthier if more Democrats like PA 18 dude ran

(03-14-2018 07:03 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Union guys who voted for Trump. He appoints Gorsuch who will dismantle Unions this summer. Such an interesting dynamic.

The unions dismantled themselves by getting so outrageous with their demands that employers moved overseas. The one set of employers whop can't leave--government--are their last bastion. So you have situations like yours where public sector unions negotiate benefits that are unaffordable, and at some point government has to screw you to make the numbers work.

(03-14-2018 07:03 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Union guys who voted for Trump. He appoints Gorsuch who will dismantle Unions this summer. Such an interesting dynamic.

Not letting *THE STATE* compel you to be in a union = "dismantling unions"

Oops.

I really don't think it matters if he won or lost at this point. Does it? It's not going to make a hill of beans until the D's get to 218. Then..... it's on....

(03-14-2018 09:16 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-14-2018 07:03 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Union guys who voted for Trump. He appoints Gorsuch who will dismantle Unions this summer. Such an interesting dynamic.

The unions dismantled themselves by getting so outrageous with their demands that employers moved overseas. The one set of employers whop can't leave--government--are their last bastion. So you have situations like yours where public sector unions negotiate benefits that are unaffordable, and at some point government has to screw you to make the numbers work.

The government paved the way for employers to leave by entering into one-sided trade deals that benefitted the multinationals but destroyed the American middle class. Unions will negotiate for what they can get, just as a corporation will bargain for whats in their best interests. They government, however, allowed companies to bail on American workers w/o repraisal thus decimating American manufacturing. The government is supposed to be the referee, however, its been paid off by corporations for the past 4 decades.