Reason #5629374 why the Democrats are professional LOSERS

I’ve made it clear that I believe the Democratic Party is in deliberate cahoots with the Republican party to keep a “balance of power” between the two parties.

This is all part of the “Kabuki Theatre” of what passes for modern day “electoral” politics in the United States.

The Democrats, if they really cared about anything other than the status quo, would be pissing on the grave of the Republican party right now.   Instead, they are intent on reviving the Republicans.   They are literally going out of their way to revive the Republican Party.  

Here’s one perfect exmple.    Harry Reid in Nevada.   He’s about to get his ass kicked by the Republicans.

More than half of Nevadans are unhappy with Sen. Harry Reid, according to a new poll commissioned by the Las Vegas Review-Journal. It’s the worst “unfavorable” rating he’s received in the newspaper’s surveys for this year’s election, and it comes amid quiet speculation — or perhaps wishful thinking by his opponents — that it’s time for the Nevada Democrat to retire rather than lose re-election.

In response, Reid told the Review-Journal Friday he wouldn’t consider stepping aside as did Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut, whose announcement this week prompted rumors that the Senate majority leader might think about ending his political career now that he’s the most vulnerable incumbent.

“I am absolutely running for re-election,” said Reid, 70, in a statement. “These are difficult times for Nevada and as the majority leader of the Senate I have been able to take action to address those challenges. But I know there is more work to do to turn our state’s economy around and create jobs and I am committed to seeing it through.”

Most independent political analysts firmly discounted the idea that Reid would quit the race, despite poll after poll showing him in a losing battle with potential Republican opponents, who surveys suggest would beat him if the election were held today.

One elephant in the room the article never mentions:

Where is the Democratic challenger?  

If Harry Reid is a loser, which we all know he is, why isn’t there a Democrat primarying him?  

There isn’t one.   Nada.

They are handing that Senate seat to the Republicans.  


Because that’s their job.  To make sure they don’t get too much power.

Becuase if they get too much power, they won’t have any excuses.   If they get too much power, they can no longer come up with all their fake reasons for not working for the American people.

It’s part of their corrupt game.  

And it’s bullshit.   Las Vegas is a huge union town.  All they need is a seriously pro-union candidate from the Dem party to challenge this LOSER.   But will they do it?

Of course not.  


Skip to comment form

    • Inky99 on January 10, 2010 at 18:39

    they’re complicit.  

    • pico on January 11, 2010 at 00:56

    Favorability ratings in Nevada (worth reading.):

    Harry Reid: 38%

    John Ensign: 23%

    John Gibbons (governor): 14%

    Which is not a surprise in a state with the 2nd highest unemployment in the nation.  Bad times are bad for incumbents, and Reid’s actually doing better than the Republicans in office.  As for his challengers, Tarkanian has the benefit of never having held public office – the high point on his resume is that he’s the son of a popular coach, sheesh – and Lowden in having been voted out of office way back in 1996.

    Republican media are doing their best to focus on Reid’s numbers for two reasons: 1. the Republican candidates for Senate represent different ideologies and might just tear themselves apart during the primaries (Lowden’s already been slammed for her flip-flopping on Roe v. Wade, and for being part of the state party machine, etc.) and 2. to distract against the real carnival show, which is the gubernatorial election, where the worst governor in the country is in the middle of a party-wide fracas that’s again showing the Republicans in complete disarray.  

    Against potential Democratic challenger Barbara Buckley, Reid polled 51% to Buckley’s 20%.  I’d guess that’s why she didn’t announce a challenge.

    Also note that all but one of the Republican challengers aren’t coming from within the party: they’re running their campaigns independently.  That seems to be your argument for what the Democrats should do, so I’m not exactly sure who’s “complicit” in your comment above.  Progressive activists, who aren’t putting a candidate forward?  Unions, for not backing a challenger from their own rank?  

Comments have been disabled.