Tomorrow's GOP primaries: You can't make this stuff up - Macleans.ca
 

Tomorrow’s GOP primaries: You can’t make this stuff up

“In the olden days our grandparents, they would bring a chicken to the doctor, they would say I’ll paint your house”


 
Tomorrow's GOP primaries: You can't make this stuff up

Harry Reid, Meg Whitman and Mark Sanford (Getty Images)

NEVADA:

Until recently, the re-election chances of Senate Majority leader, Harry Reid, looked poor. A combination of low approval ratings and low charisma, coupled with his lead role in pushing Obama’s expensive policy agenda through the US Senate, made him an easy target for Republicans.

His biggest Republican threat appeared to be a former state legislator and casino owner Sue Lowden—until she waded into the policy debate over subsidized health care.  “Before we all started having health care, in the olden days our grandparents,” mused Lowden, “They would bring a chicken to the doctor, they would say I’ll paint your house.”  Democrats responded with chicken suits, chicken ads, and Chickens for Checkups. Rather than retract her comments, Lowden’s campaign produced a letter from a physician who said she had exchanged medical care for, among other things, “alfalfa hay, yard work, and horse shoeing.”

Now the leading Republican contender is Sharron Angle, a Tea Party favourite, who opposes federal taxes, the Department of Education, wants to phase out Social Security and withdraw from the United Nations.

Harry Reid thinks this is awesome.

CALIFORNIA:

Meg Whitman, the billionaire former CEO of EBay, is the leading GOP contender to replace Arnold Schwarzenegger as governor. She is spending US $80 million on her primary campaign , including $71 million of her own money. That amount is “obscene” according to her GOP rival, a  former high tech entrepreneur, Steve Poizner, who serves as the state’s insurance commissioner. Poizner is spending a paltry $25 million.

The kicker: The big-spenders are battling over who will do a better job cutting spending in the indebted state.

Bonus kicker: The winner will face off against Jerry Yes-He’s-Still-Around Brown, 72, who is touting his experience of already having held the job once – 35 years ago.

Also in California, Carly Fiorina, former CEO of Hewlett Packard, is the leading Republican contender aiming to take on  incumbent Democratic senator Barbara Boxer. Using  footage of Boxer calling climate change a  national security issue, Fiorina launched a television ad in which she says, “Terrorism kills…And Barbara Boxer is worried about the weather.”

SOUTH CAROLINA:

First there was the amorous governor, Mark Sanford, who disappeared from his office for several days last year while his staff scrambled to tell reporters he was hiking the Appalachian Trail, until it emerged that the very married governor had jetted off to Buenos Aires to having a tryst with his Argentinian “soulmate”. Now comes the race to succeed him and restore the state’s reputation and turn the page on the state’s soap opera politics — or not. This time the front-runner, Nikki Haley, an accountant, state politician and daughter of Indian immigrants. She boasts endorsements from Sarah Palin and Jenny Sanford, the two-timing governor’s wife. Inconveniently, though, two men have come forward to say she had affairs with them – including the former governor’s former press secretary. Haley has vehemently denied the accusations and says she would resign her office if any evidence ever came forward.

**

Also:  no one can accuse the GOP of lacking for female candidates.


 
Filed under:

Tomorrow’s GOP primaries: You can’t make this stuff up

  1. Then they wonder why a lot of people don't bother voting.

  2. I'm expecting Gene Gene the Dancing Machine to pop out and interrupt this Gong Show at any moment.

  3. Um, I'm guessing weather probably does kill more people in the US than terrorism…

    • exactly!!! i am not overly fond of boxer but she better run a campaign that ridicules her challenger for being ignorant.

  4. Reading this you'd think the Democrats are poised to pummel the GOP in the upcoming elections, but here in the reality-based community, Democrats are toast; wildly unpopular, so unpopular that they've canceled town hall meetings. It seems a little odd – by which I mean misleading – to give the impression that the GOP is in trouble when it's the Democrats who are.

    • Well, someone has to keep the Parisella legacy (of reporting on American politics as if from a parallel universe where everything is 100% awesome for the left and 100% hopeless for the right) alive around here, I guess?

      • Plus one, sir.

  5. It's a good thing in both countries that we have sane people to prevent conservatives from getting what they wish for.

    (The same is probably true of leftists, but you find a lot more of the extreme right in N. american politics than extreme left).

  6. "…but you find a lot more of the extreme right in N. american politics than extreme left."

    Well, the extreme left are already prettty busy running the media, show business and our universities.

    • take it to small dead animals, buddy.

      • So says the Macleans blog cop?
        How much does this gig pay?

        • I offered a suggestion as to where his level of commentary might play better.

          • Actually, your posting was phrased as an a order. Way to refute my claim of a left-leaning media.

      • oooh, aren't you tough. Most of the commenters and all of the poeple that post there can run logical circles around you.

  7. I like Carly Fiorina and think she'd make a better Senator than Barbara Boxer, but her comment on the weather was just plain stupid.

  8. Well, it's comforting to know that the circus can be avoided by eliminating the per-vote subsidy (: ….

  9. Im glad someone has the decency to at least suggest that the US should withdraw from the UN. The USA gives more money to the UN than all other nations together. Yet what recognition does it get for that?

    • I liked that part too. It's the rest of her nut-bar Tea Party views that have me scratching my head. Well, OK, I didn't scratch my head much. Like I would waste ten seconds trying to figure out the motivations of someone who would eliminate federal taxes and social security. Watching the oldsters starve to death and not having the taxes to save them would not be high on my TO DO list if I became a US Senator.

  10. Keep snickering, by all means; come the Fall it'll all seem a lot less funny.

    • If these clowns get in, I fear you may be right!

      • Mike, do you seriously feel safer with Obama at the helm. The body count in the middle east is just starting. The general view is that the U.S. will has become an unreliable ally for Israel, Israel's enemies have noticed and have become emboldened. War in the Middle East becomes more likely by the day. Thanks Mr. Obama.

        Obama is reponsible for those deaths on those ships. He has abdicated the U.S.'s presence in the Middle East and chaos will ensue. An incompetent leader is what he is. I knew he was an incorrigible ideologue, I didn't know he was so completely unsuited for office as he has shown to be – an incompetent, that's what he is.

        • I tend to agree. I had hoped Obama would be like Bill Clinton, who ran a competent middle of the road administration, but every day Obama is reminding me more and more of Jimmy Carter, the worst US president of my lifetime (I wasn't alive for Coolidge or Harding).

          • Even Clinton had issues with the Netanyahu Government.

          • True, but I don't think there was any doubt that the US would have come to the defense of Israel had the need arisen. I would seriously question whether or not an Obama administration would do so.

          • Why wouldn't they?

          • "Cause it would interfere with Obama's theoritical construct of a peace plan. Intruding realitly doesn't face this guy. He's feckless.

          • Should the Israeli reputation always be defended, no matter what?

          • Their reputation I could care less about. Their existence, which would certainly be in question should their enemies decide to gang up on them again, is well worth defending.

          • You seriously think that if hostilities broke out that threatened Israels existence, Obama would do nothing? He's not that stupid. Even if he wanted to let it happen (which I don't for one second believe), it would wipe out his chance of ever getting re-elected to anything.

          • No, I dont' believe Obama would sit there and do nothing while Israel was obliterated. I do believe, though, is that a Bill Clinton would probably react more quickly and decisively than an Obama would. I could be wrong, but it's my impression.

          • Wait, you mean you seriously fell for the 3am phone call ad?

  11. Its just so amazing that anybody would be against the Democrats, I mean, they have done such a wonderful job.

    The debt is up to 94% of GDP (from 69% in 2008), and the jobless recovery so far (this month's job report looked good, largely because of census hires – hence the market crash) suggests that stimulus money was not particularly effective (the other G-8 countries had a smaller stimulus and quicker recoveries). They have yet to deliver on their promise to close gitmo, and it appears they aren't going to do go through with it. While Iraq was a quagmire (from which the Dems have yet to withdraw), at least it has a history of operating as a cohesive nation-state, and some vital resources. Neither can be said about Afghanistan, where the Democrats are redoubling their efforts. Meanwhile the response to the BP oil spill has made Bush's Katrina performance look good by comparison.

    The real signature accomplishment of this congress is the financial reform bill they just passed, yet the fact that it is only being passed today reflects the misaligned priorities of a broken congress. Instead of passing serious financial reform, the Democrats wasted a year and most of their political capital in order to ram through healthcare reform that leaves most progressives disappointed, and which the public opposed by significant margins. Contrary to the claims that the bill is revolutionary, you need but look at the CBO's projections to find that it is rooted in voodoo accounting, doesn't reduce costs (it just transfers them to the taxpayer), nor does it even make that much headway on the problem of uninsured patients.

    But yes, it is probably more important to focus on alleged sex scandals (I agreed with the Democrats that defended Clinton in the 90s – I just wish they would be consistent in their position), and gaffes by challengers.