Barney the Bully

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by SamSpade

(On a side note - "raises" the question)

Because the GOP is nearly non-existent in Massachusetts. Every incumbent was re-elected last fall. In 2008, 6 of 10 races went completely unopposed. For Frank, two of his last four elections he went unopposed.

I don't know how you combat the sense in Massachusetts that you always vote Democrat, but that's how it is. I used to live there. Even fairly conservative people vote Democrat. That's just the way it is.

I am sure there are GOP areas that have the exact same story to tell. All politics are local.

[SamSpade]

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

I am sure there are GOP areas that have the exact same story to tell. All politics are local.

I've checked it out. Not as many as you'd think. The Democrats always have more of them. In 2008, as I count, 22 Democrats sailed into office with no opposition whatsoever - 5 for Republicans.

In addition - if I've counted correctly - an additional 18 Democratic races had only third party, independent or write-in opponents - and they all won. Republicans had just 8 such races, and most of those were in Texas against Libertarians.

Roughly one out of every six seats held by Democrats faced little to zero opposition. One out of every fourteen for Republicans.

There are clearly bastions of safe regions where people vote one way or another, but it just gnaws at me that someone can just sail into office without any opposition at all, especially if they're an incumbent and face no serious opposition in their primary.

[itsbob (Premo)]

Originally Posted by PsyOps

Which begs the question... how do people like Frank keep getting reelected? He has held this seat since '81. HOW? You have to ask what is it he's doing right that the GOP is doing so wrong? This exemplifies how lost the GOP is.

Not voting for Frank would be like not voting for Obama..

In one case you're a homophobe, in the other a racist..

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by SamSpade

I've checked it out. Not as many as you'd think. The Democrats always have more of them. In 2008, as I count, 22 Democrats sailed into office with no opposition whatsoever - 5 for Republicans.

In addition - if I've counted correctly - an additional 18 Democratic races had only third party, independent or write-in opponents - and they all won. Republicans had just 8 such races, and most of those were in Texas against Libertarians.

Roughly one out of every six seats held by Democrats faced little to zero opposition. One out of every fourteen for Republicans.

There are clearly bastions of safe regions where people vote one way or another, but it just gnaws at me that someone can just sail into office without any opposition at all, especially if they're an incumbent and face no serious opposition in their primary.

It's worse than I thought. Vrail keeps telling me...but, do I listen?

[ImnoMensa]

Originally Posted by PsyOps

Which begs the question... how do people like Frank keep getting reelected? He has held this seat since '81. HOW? You have to ask what is it he's doing right that the GOP is doing so wrong? This exemplifies how lost the GOP is.

Tha same way Steny Hoyer keep his job. He delivers the pork.

[Bann (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Pete

Barney get summarily biatch slapped by Bill O'Reilly for his part in the financial melt down being he had his hand on the tiller of the ship. He whines and cries about being bullied...........Then he bullies and berates a Harvard student who dares ask him the simple question "What responsibility do you have for the economic problems?" after Frank spends several minutes of his speech busting on Reagan and Bush for their part.

His royal highness needs to go.

I saw this & I thought what a POS he is. He's a dispicable human being. He's basically flipping the student off by refusing to answer his questions, not to mention deflecting the attention AWAY from his own culpability in the whole Fannie Mae debacle.

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Bann

I saw this & I thought what a POS he is. He's a dispicable human being. He's basically flipping the student off by refusing to answer his questions, not to mention deflecting the attention AWAY from his own culpability in the whole Fannie Mae debacle.

That's why the kid should have asked him about Fanny, not the generalized question he did ask him. Barney Frank isn't responsible for EVEYTHING any more that Dubbya was. They are, however, responsible for what they actually had much to do with.

[SouthernMdRocks]

Originally Posted by Bann

I saw this & I thought what a POS he is. He's a dispicable human being. He's basically flipping the student off by refusing to answer his questions, not to mention deflecting the attention AWAY from his own culpability in the whole Fannie Mae debacle.

I cannot stand to even watch that man speak!!