Shelley Moore Capito to run against Jay Rockefeller

November 28, 2012
By

For his West Virginia Senate seat. I hope this convinces the 75-year-old Rockefeller to retire instead.

This wasn’t even on my list of most vulnerable Democrat seats in 2014.

23 Responses to Shelley Moore Capito to run against Jay Rockefeller

  1. artist on November 28, 2012 at 7:32 am

    I hope he falls ill for all the damage he’s done to this nation.

  2. Gerry Owen on November 28, 2012 at 8:57 am

    If Rockefeller retires, this will be a very likely pickup. Capito is pro choice, though- shouldn’t matter, that issue was lost for the next generation this last election.

  3. Eric W. on November 28, 2012 at 9:09 am

    I heard Akin is moving to West virginia to help the Dems keep the seat.

    • Gerry Owen on November 28, 2012 at 9:14 am

      LOL…..
      Between him and Muordock, they may have cost the election. Gave legs to the stupid nonsensical “War on Women” with their stupid nonsensical statements.

      Pathetic- lose the country to socialism because two idiots spouting stupidities over an issue they really have next to no say or influence in how it is handled.

      • Setnaffa on November 28, 2012 at 10:09 am

        Gerry, I think the folks who say stuff likr Akin do so because they don’t believe abortion is wrong, just saying stuff they think the audience wants to hear…

        • Gerry Owen on November 28, 2012 at 10:41 am

          True-
          But seriously, where was the pro-life vote going to go, anyway?
          Simply say “I’m pro-life, that you think Roe v Wade was a terrible decision, but unfortunately, it is the law of the land, and I oppose using federal tax dollars to support entities that perform these procedures.”

          This ridiculous approach of trying to out pro-life everyone else is pointless.

          Unfortunately, this issue is lost, unless our judges hold out.

      • rightwingyahoo on November 28, 2012 at 6:21 pm

        Doesn’t say much for the intelligence of voters if they fall for it.

        And the ones who did are likely hopelessly deceived anyway, and not apt to remedial logic.

        The segments of our population that elected Ogabe are simply moving too far away from us to ever come back.

        All future elections come down to whoever there are more of, them, or us.

        We raise families while they immigrate illegals and birth out of wedlock.

        Right now, there are more of them than us. That will change over time, if we stop this amnesty talk, get some enforcement rolling, and get control of schools back.

        If we don’t do EACH of these, (2 out of 3 wont cut it) then we either bend to the left’s will, or secede.

      • artist on November 28, 2012 at 8:23 pm

        The country was lost LONG before they opened their mouths.

    • rightwingyahoo on November 28, 2012 at 6:17 pm

      LOL, probably true.

  4. Jay in Perú on November 28, 2012 at 11:32 am

    Now, let´s see. Rockefeller goes down, then Lowsiana Landrieu & Hagan along with Pryor.
    Wait ! There is Begich, just asking for it and we´re only one away of giving Reid a heart attack. If only the libertarians stay out of handing seats to the donkeycrats ,we should able to pick up something additional: South Dakota, Montana maybe?

    • Haverwilde on November 28, 2012 at 1:07 pm

      Jay,
      When you drive a wedge between two groups of the GOP, you Lose!
      So when religion and scocial conservative values become the primary issues, then you lose the more libertarian members of the right wing.
      Nominate someone that the libertarian conservatives can vote for and you might have a chance.

      • Gerry Owen on November 28, 2012 at 1:18 pm

        Sooo…
        You are saying libertarians will suffer national bankruptcy, failing economy, loss of freedoms, high unemployment,and weakened position in the world in order to make sure someone who believes in traditional marriage and doesn’t want to fund Planned Parenthood stays out of office?

        Thats just stupid.

        • Haverwilde on November 28, 2012 at 1:42 pm

          No I am not saying that, Gerry, don’t be an ass!
          If you focus on national bankruptcy, failing economy, loss of freedoms, high unemployment,and the weakened position in the world order–you will have what it takes to gain my votes.
          Focus all your efforts on your belief in traditional marriage and them condemn alternate unions, or focus your efforts outlawing abortions, and call pregnancy due to rape “God’s Will.” Plan to lose!
          Acorn, Planned Parenthood, cash for food stamps, and all the rest of the Democrats process of buying votes–all need to be changed.
          Focus on increasing our liberties not denying more of them.

          • Gerry Owen on November 28, 2012 at 2:17 pm

            That is what Romney focused on- and pretty much every other Senatorial and Representative candidate the Republicans put forward, including Akin and particularly Mourdock.

            But by your estimation, the Libertarian leaning voters didn’t care, preferring to focus on the inane statements relating to an issue the have next to no control over.

            Even more troubling, the Pro-lifers are all up in arms, claiming that Romney WASN’T strong enough on this same issue(which really can only be slightly affected by judicial choices), and there were apparently a few on the finge that thought they were voting for a church leader or something.

            Point is, it sounds like a lot of squabbling over secondary issues instead of everyone focusing on the big picture. Romney (and, sadly, the verbal diarrhea twins Akin & Mourdock) was for reducing the regulatory beast, has always been pretty vocal about States’ Rights, and realized there was a financial disaster in the offing.

            But now you are telling me the Libertarians didn’t care about that in the Senate Races, and according to Santorum and a few others on this blog, the Pro-Lifers didn’t care because of their pet issue.

            Sounds like we lost the farm because we were too busy arguing over what commemorative stamp to put on the envelope containing the mortgage check.
            Pathetic.

          • Gerry Owen on November 28, 2012 at 2:28 pm

            Also, the so called Libertarian Paulbots have been practically trumpeting their indifference to Romney going down in defeat-
            I know a lot of the Paul supporters here are actually pretty solid Libertarian, but you must recognize most of Paul’s supporters are decidely not.

          • Haverwilde on November 28, 2012 at 6:06 pm

            I have a lot of respect for Romney the man, the religious person, the business executive etc. In fact it was his religion that was the final point in his favor as I looked at his history in government.
            Since Reagan every GOP Nominee has been one of the anointed ones. They have been Big Government folks, every one. And I voted for them.
            This year, the GOP nominated Romney, as governor he signed into law, gun control, government health care etc. Not your small government kind of person. I still voted for him, but was not surprised when he lost, because others like me, just stayed home. Many of us chose the ‘crap sandwich’ of Obama-lite over the pure Obama crap; but it is still not a pleasant choice.
            The rising Federal budget has grown under both parties. Both parties have taken on an agenda of reduced freedoms and more governmental control—Statism.
            There is a lot of lip service to the huge debt, and the huge problems facing the country, and no one has a coherent plan to address it.
            The ‘so called Libertarian Paulbots’ have reason to feel indifference toward Romney—they were not exactly treated fairly in the GOP convention. Most of us understood the trade-off alienate the ‘Paulbots’ but keep a well orchestrated convention without the potential disruption. But that was a conscious decision. And the loss to the GOP was minimal because they would either vote Libertarian or split between the GOP/Democrats.

      • rightwingyahoo on November 28, 2012 at 6:23 pm

        Suggest such a one while we suppress our lolz…..

      • jay in Peru on November 29, 2012 at 4:06 am

        I agree with you 100%.Libertarian party candidates running against Republicans cost us 8 house seats, a senate seat and one governor.

        • Haverwilde on November 29, 2012 at 2:38 pm

          “Libertarian party candidates running against Republicans cost us 8 house seats, a senate seat and one governor.”

          Bovine Scat!
          First, most third party voters are voting against both major candidates.
          Second, Without that third party candidate the voters would split: some would go to the GOP, some would go to the democrats, but more would either vote for another third party candidate or write in Donald Duck or leave it blank.
          If it you need to feel better, and so you blame Libertarians, you would get more effect by just settling down with some Johnny Walker, or Makers’ Mark.

          • Gerry Owen on November 29, 2012 at 8:58 pm

            A so called Libertarian who would vote for the socialist Democrats, is NOT a Libertarian.
            Period.

            You can argue with Conservatives about keeping God’s role in politics at a minimum, but you cannot argue the same with Democrats-because their god is big government.

  5. artist on November 28, 2012 at 8:27 pm

    Yawn.

    There is no political solution to our national ills.

    The GOP will fix next to nothing.

    • Knighthawk on November 29, 2012 at 3:59 am

      Indeed, it’s just one big joke.

      • jay in Peru on November 29, 2012 at 2:37 pm

        Yeah, but the joke`s on us and that ain`t funny !

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *