Posts Tagged ‘Lisa Murkowski
Can someone please tell me what is going on in our nations capitol? There is a movement to have bipartisan seating at the State of the Union address. This movement is being spearheaded by….wait for it…..Lisa Murkowski. I suppose this is somehow a measure to help us “all get along” and it is clearly related to the shooting of Congresswoman Gabby Giffords this past Saturday. Wait a minute….didn’t we all decide that the shooting had nothing to do with politics (at least the sane people decided this)? I suspect this is another Obama initiative that falls in line with his “Together We Thrive” campaign. It reminds me of a “boy, girl, boy, girl” seating chart that I hated in elementary school. Picture what it will look like when the “paritsan” standing and clapping begins. When Obama makes a good liberal point, every other person will stand up and cheer. How silly. At least I find it silly…what do you guys think?
Here’s a great read about this from Michelle Malkins site:
(My favorite line is….Craftsman doesn’t churn out as many tools as Congress.)
**Written by Doug Powers
If they’re not careful, the “We are the World” people are going to sue for copyright infringement:
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaksa) has joined Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) in spearheading Udall’s effort to have bipartisan seating at the State of the Union, Murkowski’s office announced Friday.
In a letter to members of Congress today Murkowski and Udall propose Republicans and Democrats sit together during the State of the Union address. Currently, the tradition is for Democrats and Republicans to sit only with members of their party during the presidential address. The proposal comes after an earlier one by Udall where the Democrat and Republican leadership would sit together during the presidential address.
This could be the first State of the Union to end with a loud reminder from the Sergeant at Arms: “Everybody’s invited to a pajama party at Olympia Snowe’s place!”
In addition to the bipartisan seating idea, other proposals on the table include all of Congress recording an eHarmony.com commercial together and Lisa Murkowski leading a recitation of the Pledge of Kum Ba Yah. However, sources tell me that John Boehner has soured the bipartisan mood by turning down an invitation to spend the duration of the State of the Union speech sitting on Joe Biden’s lap.
Here are those who have signed on, by way of Sister Toldjah:
Senate signers are as follows: Sen. Begich (D-Alaska), Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif), Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Sen. Kristen Gilibrand (D-N.Y.), Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), and Udall for the Democrats and Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.), Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alska, and Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Alaska) for the Republicans. In the House, all nine signers are Democrats.
Craftsman doesn’t churn out as many tools as Congress.
In a Washington Post op-ed, John McCain wrote this:
The president appropriately disputed the injurious suggestion that some participants in our political debates were responsible for a depraved man’s inhumanity.
This is precisely the kind of thing that demonstrates why John McCain fared so poorly in the election and why I plugged my nose when I voted for him. McCain said political rhetoric wasn’t responsible for the Tucson murders. Then, he signed on to this ridiculous “bipartisan seating” idea which is a stunt to imply partisan politics had everything to do with Jared Loughner’s unhinged killing spree.
So far, no Republican in the House has signed on, so kudos to them for not snapping up the bait.
In the meantime, plans for a bipartisan SOTU are ongoing, and the Democrats have commissioned an artist to draw up exactly how they want the evening to look:
QUESTION: Is there ANYTHING that regular people can do to rein in reckless Democrat spending and Cocktail Party Republican establishment pork projects?
Is there anything at all that regular Americans can do to rein in the reckless spending of Democrats and the wasteful pork projects the Cocktail Party GOP establishment revels in?
The new spending bill has $575 million dollars spent per page.
Most Americans are what you could call “thousandaires”…not “millionaires” or “billionaires”.
So, putting this in perspective, can you imagine reading a household budget for you or your friends that summed to $575 per page? In the Obamaconomy, when everyone is just getting by on financial fumes…if they are lucky?
Would YOU create a budget that spends more than you take in, and spends that money on wasteful junk that benefits only the unions and your corrupt acquaintances?
Of course not.
One of the great, unsolved political mysteries is how to get normal, average, responsible Americans up in arms over the wasteful spending of BOTH parties…the Democrats and the Cocktail Party GOP establishment that aides and abets them.
The United States just does not have the money to pay for all the waste Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and Obama have jammed into the massive spending omnibus these reckless fools are ramming through Congress before Christmas.
How do we get Republicans, in particular, to stick to their principles and cut this waste and pork?
Remember: Lisa Murkowski’s win in Alaska proves just how addicted to pork and welfare even “conservatives” are. Alaska is a “conservative” state, supposedly, and yet Murkowski promised to keep wasteful pork flowing while Joe Miller campaigned to end it once and for all. And the welfare queens of our northernmost state turned out in droves to write “Lisa Murkowski” on their ballots so that the government could keep writing checks to Alaska.
It means that in our most brutal and supposedly independent state, the pioneer, take care of yourself spirit has eroded to the point where Alaskans aren’t any better than the welfare queens in Chicago expecting payments from the government just for existing.
Is there any hope of ending this entitlement culture and reining spending in?
Be honest and creative because it’s going to take something way outside the box to ever get through to people on this one.
This is part of a much bigger problem, but eight Republicans refused to ban ridiculous, money wasting, pork projects.
Even though they knew the measure would fail because Democrats would vote against it.
They just didn’t want to be on record against pork because they live for the stuff.
Worse, Lisa Murkowski proves people in Alaska love it too…her write in campaign was all about keeping pork flowing.
How do we change this culture?
I have never seen a candidate stoop as low as was seen last night in Alaska’s senatorial debate.
Alaska’s Joe Miller is facing a tough three-way race for U.S. Senate. Though Joe decisively defeated the incumbent Senator in the primary, and though she conceded the race to him, she reneged on her primary vow to not contest the will of the people. She is now running a write-in campaign bankrolled by Beltway special interests.
I’ve seen some pretty ugly campaigning, and what they’re throwing at Joe right now is nasty. Joe’s opponents can’t run on the issues because they’re wrong on them – whether it’s repealing and de-funding Obamacare, fighting against cap-and-tax, protecting our borders, or pushing hard for responsible resource development. They can’t win in a fair fight on the issues, so they sling mud.
We saw all of this play out in the Alaska senatorial debate yesterday. (Watch the video of the debate here.) Joe took a bold stance for Alaska’s future. He called out the sitting Senator’s involvement in racking up the massive debt burden on our children and grandchildren, as well as her plan to barter over the destructive job-killing cap-and-tax legislation. As Joe said, we should focus on trading “earmarks for ANWR, not cap and trade for ANWR.”
The sitting Senator also came out against Arizona’s right to protect its borders. She called for us to “enforce the laws that are currently on the books,” but didn’t seem to understand that that is precisely what Arizona is trying to do to protect itself because the federal government refuses to enforce our laws. Perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised by her lackadaisical attitude to border security when we consider that she has repeatedly voted against funding a border fence and voted in favor of amnesty.
But perhaps the most shocking part of all in this debate was when the incumbent Senator used Joe Miller’s distinguished military service as a means to attack him. Joe Miller graduated from West Point, fought in Desert Storm, and was awarded the Bronze Star for his service to our country. I find it astonishing that a sitting U.S. Senator from Alaska would challenge the honor of a decorated combat veteran. Is it any wonder the audience later booed her when she again challenged Joe Miller’s honor? Please watch the video of this exchange here.
We need to send a message that we’re not going to stand for this arrogant sense of entitlement and business-as-usual Beltway corruption. Joe needs our help to fight back against the influx of special interest money. Please join me in donating any amount you can spare to Joe’s campaign by clicking here. He can lead once he gets to D.C., but he’ll need our help to get to there.
- Sarah Palin
CLARIFICATION: Does LeNa JaBrowski's name have to be spelled korrectlee on the Akaskan ballots to kount?
Can someone with a good understanding of Alaska’s election laws please chime on on this thread to clarify whether or not LeNa JaBrowski’s name has to be spelled correctly for it to count in the Senate race there?
As we understand it, her name as to be spelled legally correct for it to be an actual write-in vote for her.
She’s been emphasizing this ever since she started her bizarre write-in campaign.
Even getting one letter wrong should disqualify that ballot.
I had a personal, bizarre experience with something similar to this once — and I think the election law should be as strict as what was applied to me in one instance.
I produced an event where someone sent me a package, and the person who signed for the package was a lawyer I’ll call “Art Goldwater”. The package had materials I needed for the event, and I kept waiting and waiting for the package to arrive, but it never did. I contacted the sender and she said it was dispatched to me, via FedEx, at the address here in Chicago I gave her. She tracked it through FedEx and it was marked “Received” and the name attached was “A. Goldwater”.
I directly went up to Art and asked him if he had this package for me, and he said “No, no package for you came”.
Art’s a lawyer, and a partner in his firm, and I never before thought he had some sort of learning disability or autistic tendencies or anything…and I didn’t think he’d just lie and say the package never came, because he wanted the event to be as successful as I did.
Well, since the package never got there (it had custom tee shirts for the event, handmade with cool patches and retro stitching by an artist in California) I had to rush down to the Tee Shirt Deli and have them make new shirts, at great cost, that were just generic American Apparel with iron-on lettering. Still cost me over $150 bucks, but I needed them for the event.
About three months later, which was the next time I saw Art in person, at another function here in Chicago, he said to me — and I will never forget this as long as I live — “Hey, I think I might have a package for you, but it was addressed to someone else”.
“Really?”, I asked him. ”Did you open it? What’s in it?”.
“Oh, all these tee shirts. And they’re really nice, too. And there’s a note from some lady named Sandy inside.”
“Art, those were the tee shirts we needed in May. The ones I asked you about. THAT was the package I was looking for.”
“No, this wasn’t addressed to you”.
“Who was it addressed to then?”
“Some guy named Kevin DuGan”.
The sender got one letter wrong in my last name — changing the “J” to a “G” — but my first name was right and I believe any idiot could have realized the odds are astronomically stacked against two people having ALMOST THE SAME NAME getting a packaged delivered when I was the one asking about said package.
I went around and around with Art on this, since I couldn’t believe he didn’t realize that was for me.
He just kept insisting: ”Nope. Your last name is DuJan. This was DuGan. That’s not you. Every letter has to be correct”.
Art might be a lawyer. He might make a lot of money. But he is an absolute and complete moron. Literally, he was always the guy in the shiny gray suit, his fly open, white button down shirt poking out, standing there, arms on his hips, laughing like a mule at events. A nice man, but without a clue in Hell.
There are a lot of people who are lawyers who went to really bad law schools…where evidently someone taught them to be like this. A reasonable person should have been able to see that was my package, but Art insisted “reasonable” was not the standard he uses when receiving packages.
I never understood all those “toss the lawyers into the bottom of the sea” jokes in the 80s…until I met Art.
So, when I think about LeNa JaBrowski’s write-in campaign for the Senate in Alaska, I wonder if the standard for deciding what name is written in is “reasonable” or if it’s a lawyerly “Art Goldwater standard”.
Does the name have to be spelled “Lisa Murkowski”, exactly, or would “Lisa Mukowski”, no “r” be accepted?
Would Leisa Murkowski be counted?
What about Leesa Murcowskee?
There’s an infinite number of variations possible with this name…even before you get into LeNa JaBrowski parody territory.
What lines are drawn with this, and by whom?
Who is the decider on what counts and what doesn’t?
What about illegible writing?
Didn’t the Supreme Court in Gore vs. Bush talk about not being able to discern voter intent on ballots, and that not being the role of the Board of Elections?
Does Joe Miller have teams in place ready to challenge every single one of LeNa JaBrowski’s write-in ballots on election night — for spelling, legibility, and other issues?
Can anyone answer some of these questions?
Hi Folks, apologies for my relative infrequency of posts. Life/work has been so busy these last several weeks, but K. asked me to look in to something and post my analysis here.
A few waves were made recently when a CNN/Time poll found that Miller only had a 2-point lead over write-in candidate Murkowski in Alaska.
Considering Murkowski is running a write-in campaign it would seem highly improbable that she could be polling so well. A closer look at the numbers may explain why.
I am not an expert on polls, nor am I a statistical analyst. In fact, I mostly slept or skipped my way to a near-four-point in the only college statistics course I took. However, I don’t think you have to be either a pollster or a statistician to notice the obvious.
The one absolutely glaring issue with this poll is that the breakout by age shows “N/A” for the 18-34 age group.
If you examine the trends among the age groups it is clear that Miller does better the younger the voter while Murkowski does better the older the voter. Somewhere north of 20% of the population of Alaska falls into the missing age group, so their absence is clearly no small issue
Along that same path, it appears there is a possible problem with the age distribution of the sample. Unfortunately the data doesn’t seem to include actual counts of the respondents by age. But we are in luck because “margin of error” is a standard statistical process, and the poll does include margin of error for the age breakdown of voter preferences.
I won’t go into the statistical mumbo-jumbo here, but if you’re curious you can check out Wikipedia’s article on margin of error. All I will say is that you have to almost double your sample size for each additional 1% of sampling error you want to eliminate. Thus, a 5% margin of error means a sample size of about 384, while a 4% margin of error means a sample size of about 600.
Note the margin of error for the 50-64 age group: 5%. Now note the margin of error for the 35-49 age group: 6.5%. Using this information we can make an educated guess that this particular poll includes at least 50% (and possibly upwards of 67%) more participants in the 50-64 age group than it does the 35-49 age group. Yet according to data from the last census, 22-26% of the population of Alaska falls into the 35-49 age group, versus only 14-20% of the population falling into the 50-64 age group.
In other words, the poll seems to have way oversampled the 50-64 age group versus the 35-49 age group. Coincidentally, Murkowski does far better vs. Miller among 50-64 year-olds (+2) than she does among 35-49 year-olds (-6).
Another observation is the relative distribution of the sample among the three major boroughs of Anchorage, Mat-Su Area, and Fairbanks. Again, using the margins of error as a guide, we can deduce that Anchorage – where Murkowski fares best – likely accounts for 50-55% of the sample. Yet Anchorage only accounts for about 42% of the state’s population, so again it appears that the poll is giving improper weight to the more pro-Murkowski demographic.
We cannot infer from this data how the poll would look if the rest of Alaska were proportionally represented in this poll, but if the other two boroughs that were polled are any indication, it would seem that Miller is averaging about a 16 points lead outside of Anchorage.
So what do we conclude from this? Even considering the “likely voter” bias (which is not explained in the publication), it seems highly unlikely that the relative age distribution in this poll is representative of actual voters come election day. Add to that the glaring omission of the 18-34 year-old voter group – which almost certainly breaks for Miller by 6+ points – and the possible bias towards Anchorage residents, it would seem that this poll is not nearly an accurate representation of how anyone is actually faring in Alaska (except maybe for McAdams, who seems to be all but forgotten).
But does that mean CNN is fudging the numbers? Or is it pure coincidence? I can’t say. I doubt that CNN’s pollsters would fudge the numbers after the fact, but it is possible that the polling strategy intentionally set out to achieve a sample that was inherently more likely to be pro-Murkowski.
Or, maybe there is a perfectly good explanation for the missing age group, and maybe it was pure randomness that the age distributions don’t match the actual demographics. Who knows. Like I said, I’m not a pollster or statistician. Just a guy who looked at the data and saw some problems. You’ll have to make the call yourselves.
***** UPDATE *****
An astute reader pointed out that the percentages for “Under 50″ segmentation do not match the percentages for the 35-49 age group. If 18-34 year-olds were not included at all, we could expect these two segments to match, since the only folks under 50 would all be included in the 35-49 age group.
Clearly, that is not the case.
If you look at the 50 and Older segmentation and compare it to the two age groups of 50-64 and 65+, the percentages seem to average out. Once you consider the larger sample size for the 50-64 age group relative to the 65+ group, 39% (Murkowski) is a plausible average between 37% and 43%, and 24% (McAdams) is a plausible average between 25% and 21%.
Note that Miller’s lead among the Under 50 group is actually LARGER than his lead among the 35-49 group. This basically confirms that the 18-34 group must be breaking even more for Miller. Assuming an equal sample size to the 35-49 group, Miller would have to be polling at least 45% to Murkowski’s 33% (+12) among the 18-34 demographic (McAdams would be polling the same: 19%).
But that may not be the end of the story. If you compare the sampling error of the “Under 50″ group to the sampling error of the “35-49″ group, you can see that the Under 50 group has reduced its sampling error from 6.5% to 5.5%. This suggests that the sample size of the entire Under 50 group is at least half again as large as the 35-49 group alone, but probably not fully doubled.
This is relevant because it suggests that the missing 18-34 demographic probably has a smaller sample size than the 34-49 group, which means Miller would have to be doing even better among that group to produce the averages shown in the Under 50 segmentation.
Interesting stuff. Fun to dissect.
The latest from Alaska: write-in candidate LeNa JeBrowski announces sale of lunch boxes to support her campaign
Alaskan Senator LeNa JaBrowski today announced her latest plan to gain traction in her bid as a write-in candidate for this fall’s election.
“Lunch boxes are the key to my victory,” JaBrowski insisted, between munches of curly fries in the Muldoon Avenue Arby’s in Anchorage, Alaska. ”See these curly fries here? Well, just imagine if you wanted to take them somewhere. Like, to school, or your friend’s house, or the psychiatrist’s office. All the places I should go during a day. Well, normally I just put curly fries in my pockets, or under my wig so they stay warm. But, the toaster told me to get a lunch box and then put my face on it and then not only could I have a nice way to carry my curly fries, but I can also publicize my already very popular write-in campaign so that everyone will know to vote for me. And, the toilet told me that for once in its life the toaster was right, and that I should SELL the lunch boxes down by the freeway overpass so that I could use the money to then buy MORE lunch boxes and then I can sell them too, so that if I should lose this election I will have something I can do with my life. I’ll be a lunch box tycoon!”
In New York City, a chagrined HRH Princess Caroline of Kennedy chased her much put-upon maid Helga throughout her penthouse, demanding to know why no one thought of lunch boxes as the salvation for her own doomed 2008 bid for the Senate. ”Lunch boxes? Lunch boxes could have made me, like you know, a Senator? What are lunch boxes? Do they sell these at Bergdorf’s? Did Faberge make any lunch boxes? If LeNa JaBrowski’s dad made her a Senator, and her dad wasn’t even a Kennedy, like my dad, then why aren’t I, like, you know, a Senator too? Why don’t I have a lunch box? HELLLLLLLLLLGAAAA!!! Bring me a lunch box!”.
The magical, reality-altering power of lunch boxes.
This is — seriously — the best hope either LeNa JaBrowski or HRH Princess Caroline of Kennedy really have of ever being elected Senator.
BREAKING: HRH Princess Caroline of Kennedy telephones Lisa Murkowski to let her know, "You know, it kinda sucks to lose, and stuff, 'specially when your family should have that seat, and stuff, you know"
We’ve just received word from sources in New York that HRH Princess Caroline of Kennedy has telephoned Senator Lisa Murkowski in Alaska.
Well, technically, it was Princess’ much put-upon Slavic maid, Helga, who did the telephoning, while Princess was lounging in a pile of Hermes scarves sprawled out on the marble floor of New York City’s Bergdorf-Goodman’s, holding the silk up to the light, trying in vain to determine which ones she “only had a dozen or so of”. When Helga reached Murkowski, and handed the phone to Princess, the “last remaining earthly link to Camelot” said:
“Okay, so, I’ll have another banker’s dozen of those faberge eggs I love so much, even though I don’t know, you know, why bankers get a special dozen, and I’m richer than them all, and I don’t have a special dozen too, like whatever, but if I did, there’d be eleventy in it. And then I also want some more shiny things to play with, you know, and more jewelry. Michelle Obama, my best friend, tells me never to buy earrings that are less than $600, and I listen to her because she is so fashionable and is now proud of America for the first time, you know, in her life and stuff. Are you getting all this down, Nordstrom’s, or am I talking too fast again?”, Princess asked, her attention drifting to some new Chanel tweeds her highly-evolved shopping senses had detected in the distance.
“No, mine Princess, this is not Nordstrom’s, it’s that Murkowski woman in Alaska, the one you wanted to talk to,” Helga said. The sweat on her brow clear evidence of how afraid she was of interrupting Princess Caroline while she was shopping, like taking a baby seal away from a great white shark off the Farallons. Whole limbs were at risk when these apex predators were deep in the hunt.
“Oh, yah, like, right and stuff. Yah, okay, give me the phone. Hello? Is this that lady I wanted to call? You know, like, I just wanted to say that it’s not right that you don’t, you know, like, keep your family’s seat in the Senate and stuff. Because this TOTALLY happened to us, and we’re the, you know, Kennedys and whatever. That was our seat, and that guy who was in Playgirl or whatever got it, and that’s probably why Barney Frank wasn’t more upset about what happened, even though I was like totally pissed off and stuff until I got back to Bergdorf’s to play with the crystal, you know. Well, anyway, and stuff, I just wanted to tell you that you should be really mad about this and that it’s not right that you don’t get to keep being Senator, like my uncle was Senator for like forever and a day, and like I was almost Senator but then I didn’t want it anymore, so I said that everyone was just stupid-heads and then I went shopping some more, which is where I still am. So, anyway, connect me to Nordstrom’s, will you, because their holiday catalog just came out and I demand one of everything, you know. And stuff. My dad was, like, the president”.
Somewhere in Alaska, soon to be former-Senator Murkowski didn’t much know what happened, in the election, or on that bizarre phone call with “American royalty”…and didn’t realize just how spoiled and insipid Princess Caroline really and truly is…but she shared the “last remaining earthly link to Camelot’s” frustration and peeve at having her “family’s seat” taken away from her.
Like a repossessed toilet from Hyannis Port.
Those voters: no respect for dynastic power these days.
We’re sitting here in Buzzquarters, looking out at a gorgeous, sunny, blue-sky of a day, smiling ear to ear knowing Governor Sarah Palin is out there, somewhere, terrorizing the GOP establishment as much as she scares the Left and State Media.
Thank God for her.
No matter what insane scheme the current administration launches against America each day, we never lose faith that in the end America will win, because we have women like Governor Palin on the front lines, holding our flag, and beckoning others to follow her and join the Resistance.
The go-along-to-get-along gang that’s ruled the Republican Party as cucumber-and-mayonnaise Romney Republicans for so long, always caving, forever siding with the Left against the best interests of this country, is exemplified in people like Lisa Murkowski.
She, Lindsey Graham, the Weird Sisters of Maine, Mark Kirk, Charlie Crist, and other terrible people who can and should never be trusted, wrapped themselves up as Republicans but are in fact Democrats at heart…with more Leftism in them than conservatism…and an overriding urge to aggrandize and enrich themselves instead of working as servants of the people, which is in fact what they are.
For whatever reason, the RNC decides to throw its weight behind these sorts of people, and attack actual conservatives who are running for office. That should show Republican voters there is something seriously wrong with the RNC, and a major house cleaning is needed of the establishment.
It might not be as big a deal as Scott Brown winning back “The Kennedy Seat” for the people of Massachusetts earlier this year, but if Joe Miller pulls off the upset and takes away “The Murkowski Seat” from the GOP establishment in Alaska, we think this is more proof that America really does have a fighting chance.
We’ve got a two-front battle on our hands, folks:
(1) Defeating the Left in its attempts to tank this country so it can create it’s theoretic “socialist utopia”
(2) Defeating the GOP establishment and ending the cucumber-and-mayonnaise, soggy sandwich, overindulged cocktail party Romney Republican mindset of “go-along-to-get-along”
This is a center-right nation currently governed by far-Leftists because Republicans have been convinced by State Media that they need to be quiet, timid, mousy, and as invisible as possible…lest they be called all sorts of names by the Left, and branded “the party of No”.
We say take immense pride in being the PARTY OF HELL NO.
Punch the Left in the face each and every day, Palin-style.
Punch the GOP establishment in the face too, Palin-style.
We’re telling you, as people who have always liked her, that Governor Palin has not even fully come into her own yet. We’ve only seen a small taste of what this woman has, in terms of potential, because we believe fully that she wakes up each day and operates with a servant’s heart. She is not in this for the money, the cocktail parties, the soggy sandwiches, or the plastic hair that drew people like Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty into politics.
Governor Palin is the real deal, and she is 100% in sync with not only what’s best for this country, but with where we think the mood of the electorate is heading. She’s going to surf this wave all the way to Washington, and we hope she gets to bring as many like-minded, America-loving, Left-fighting grizzlies with her.
Mamma, Pappa, you name it.
So, as the election results from Alaska continue to filter in, and the painstaking and slow task of counting absentee ballots proceeds, we wonder what you think of Joe Miller’s chances of pulling off an upset and defeating Dynastic Princess Lisa Murkowski, and thus removing another go-along-to-get-along Romney Republican from the Senate?
Specifically, we’d like answer to the following questions, from those who follow Alaska:
* What’s the likelihood of absentee voters desperately wanting to vote for Murkowski? IE, what chance is there that of the 7,000 unreturned absentee ballots that Murkowski would have a higher rate of return for her supporters than Miller would have for his?
* How many of the absentee ballots out there do you think are Democrat ballots? IE, if 7,000 ballots are outstanding, and 4,000 of them end up being Democrat (where Democrats CANNOT vote for a Republican candidate, and must only vote for the Democrat running), then it’s just 3,000 left for the Republican side. Since Miller is now leading by over 2,000 ballots, that would mean Murkowski would have to win upwards of 70% of those votes to take the nomination. We can’t imagine she has that sort of overwhelming support in absentees if that sort of support didn’t manifest in the in-person vote.
* How corrupt is the voting process in Alaska? We ask because in Illinois, if there is a close race, absentee ballots can be mysteriously found in cemetaries, abandoned tunnels, under Navy Pier, you name it, to stack the deck for whomever the machine wants to win. Does that happen in Alaska, and if so, does the Alaskan machine WANT Murkowski to continue being a dynastic princess?
* What do you think will ultimately happen? Will Joe Miller get the win, or will Murkowski somehow slither into a lead?
* Regardless of what happens, with Joe Miller coming this close to the nomination, what message do you think this sends for November, for the establishment at large?
In our opinion, Romney Republicans EVERYWHERE, coast to coast, need to be sweating, because the nation is sending a very loud message that it’s no longer in the mood for cucumber-and-mayonnaise soggy sandwiches.
America’s loving what Governor Palin’s dishing up instead, and they are voting for it with relish.