Author Topic: NRSC rejection of O'Donnell?  (Read 11194 times)

Headless Thompson Gunner

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,517
NRSC rejection of O'Donnell?
« on: September 15, 2010, 01:54:35 PM »
I keep hearing about the NRSC making an announcement last night that they wouldn't support O'Donnell in the general election.  (This morning the NRSC made crystal clear that they do support O'Donnell.)

I'm looking for evidence one way or the other that the NRSC actually did decide not to support her.  Is there any?

My own search has turned up a few passing remarks on TV news reports last night, and a few news and opinion articles referencing those TV reports, but no evidence of an actual announcement or decision issues last night.  This morning lots of people are talking about the announcement/decision, even including O'Donnell this morning on one of the TV shows, but I've not seen anything to solidify the notion that it actually happened as reported.  

I'm curious because such a decision seems both unlikely (the NRSC wouldn't have decided not to support O'Donnell) and impossible (the NRSC people wouldn't have been working after hours last night to formulate any decisions or issue any announcements).  The first opportunity the NRSC had for formally addressing the O'Donnell victory would have occured at open of business this morning, and from that moment onwards the NRSC has clearly, vocally, and fully behind O'Donnell.

I wonder if this wasn't just one more example of the media trying to paint the Tea Party as being at odds with the formal organizations within the Republican Party.  If so, and if I can turn up the evidence, it would make a great black-and-white example of the process at work.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2010, 02:06:18 PM by Headless Thompson Gunner »

makattak

  • Dark Lord of the Cis
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 13,022
Re: NRSC rejection of O'Donnell?
« Reply #1 on: September 15, 2010, 02:15:33 PM »
Although I'm all for a great media conspiracy, that theory doesn't make sense.

The media narrative has been that the Tea Party IS the Republican Party.

To paint it as fighting against the Republican establishment gives the impression that it is an independent force. That would be a Bad Thing for Democrats. Thus, unlikely the main-stream media would push that narrative.

My bet is a bunch of sore losers within the NRSC started leaking that to teach the Tea Partiers a lesson. And then got handed their heads, leading to the very strong statement by Cornyn this morning.
I wish the Ring had never come to me. I wish none of this had happened.

So do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us. There are other forces at work in this world, Frodo, besides the will of evil. Bilbo was meant to find the Ring. In which case, you also were meant to have it. And that is an encouraging thought

makattak

  • Dark Lord of the Cis
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 13,022
Re: NRSC rejection of O'Donnell?
« Reply #2 on: September 15, 2010, 02:17:17 PM »
Further, the fact that so many people believed those reports and began denouncing the NRSC ought to tell you something about people's opinion of the establishment Republicans.

The American people were fooled by Obama. We were fooled prior to that by RINOs and RINO-lovers. We won't be fooled again.
I wish the Ring had never come to me. I wish none of this had happened.

So do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us. There are other forces at work in this world, Frodo, besides the will of evil. Bilbo was meant to find the Ring. In which case, you also were meant to have it. And that is an encouraging thought

cassandra and sara's daddy

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 20,781
Re: NRSC rejection of O'Donnell?
« Reply #3 on: September 15, 2010, 02:26:19 PM »
Further, the fact that so many people believed those reports and began denouncing the NRSC ought to tell you something about people's opinion of the establishment Republicans.

The American people were fooled by Obama. We were fooled prior to that by RINOs and RINO-lovers. We won't be fooled again.

which folks believed? if its just the tea party folks you have no net gain
It is much more powerful to seek Truth for one's self.  Seeing and hearing that others seem to have found it can be a motivation.  With me, I was drawn because of much error and bad judgment on my part. Confronting one's own errors and bad judgment is a very life altering situation.  Confronting the errors and bad judgment of others is usually hypocrisy.


by someone older and wiser than I

makattak

  • Dark Lord of the Cis
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 13,022
Re: NRSC rejection of O'Donnell?
« Reply #4 on: September 15, 2010, 02:29:51 PM »
which folks believed? if its just the tea party folks you have no net gain

Honestly? It's just Tea Party folk because they're the only ones paying attention right now.

"Normal" people don't pay attention till some time next month.
I wish the Ring had never come to me. I wish none of this had happened.

So do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us. There are other forces at work in this world, Frodo, besides the will of evil. Bilbo was meant to find the Ring. In which case, you also were meant to have it. And that is an encouraging thought

cassandra and sara's daddy

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 20,781
Re: NRSC rejection of O'Donnell?
« Reply #5 on: September 15, 2010, 02:36:31 PM »
and thats what needs to change,  i wish i knew how  if i figured a way i'd be famous    no change equals preaching to the choir
It is much more powerful to seek Truth for one's self.  Seeing and hearing that others seem to have found it can be a motivation.  With me, I was drawn because of much error and bad judgment on my part. Confronting one's own errors and bad judgment is a very life altering situation.  Confronting the errors and bad judgment of others is usually hypocrisy.


by someone older and wiser than I

Headless Thompson Gunner

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,517
Re: NRSC rejection of O'Donnell?
« Reply #6 on: September 15, 2010, 02:41:54 PM »
Although I'm all for a great media conspiracy, that theory doesn't make sense.

The media narrative has been that the Tea Party IS the Republican Party.

I don't mean to suggest that it's a conspiracy of any sort.  Probably just a natural result of the preconceived notions, prejudices, and biases of the media.  

The narrative lately is that the Tea Party people are "insurgents" at "war" against the Republican Party (complete with a barely stifled cheerful smirk) and that neither side can succeed due to the conflict.  There has been an ongoing media drumbeat to pound this conflict home in their reports, both to cement the existence of conflict and to amp up the conflict for better affect.

It wouldn't take much for an over-eager journalist, steeped in this conflict narrative and anxious to further it, to elevate a minor, unofficial comment from a sour-grapes underling at the NRSC into a full-blown news report that the NRSC opposed O'Donnell.  In normal times and with honest journalists, such a comment would never make it into the national discussion.

Further, the fact that so many people believed those reports and began denouncing the NRSC ought to tell you something about people's opinion of the establishment Republicans.
Another example of people acting on their own prejudices and preconceived notions.


I want to get past the biases and knee-jerks and get on to the real facts, if there are any.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2010, 06:24:47 PM by Headless Thompson Gunner »

makattak

  • Dark Lord of the Cis
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 13,022
Re: NRSC rejection of O'Donnell?
« Reply #7 on: September 15, 2010, 02:42:41 PM »
and thats what needs to change,  i wish i knew how  if i figured a way i'd be famous    no change equals preaching to the choir

I know how to get "normal" people to pay attention. Unfortunately it would involved a near collapse of this country. People would pay attention then.

Barring that, rational ignorance will still rule. Until the costs of not being informed outweigh the price of being informed, people will remain ignorant.
I wish the Ring had never come to me. I wish none of this had happened.

So do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us. There are other forces at work in this world, Frodo, besides the will of evil. Bilbo was meant to find the Ring. In which case, you also were meant to have it. And that is an encouraging thought

cassandra and sara's daddy

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 20,781
Re: NRSC rejection of O'Donnell?
« Reply #8 on: September 15, 2010, 03:09:57 PM »
i think you overlook a way to bring people around.   though not sure how normal i am.   continue to present both your ideas and yourself in a reasonable way.  folks notice that and lil by lil your ideas gain credibility.  that credibility is inextricably tied togother so the more balanced you seem the better recieved your ideals  you are doing pretty good    keep it up
It is much more powerful to seek Truth for one's self.  Seeing and hearing that others seem to have found it can be a motivation.  With me, I was drawn because of much error and bad judgment on my part. Confronting one's own errors and bad judgment is a very life altering situation.  Confronting the errors and bad judgment of others is usually hypocrisy.


by someone older and wiser than I

roo_ster

  • Kakistocracy--It's What's For Dinner.
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 21,225
  • Hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats
Re: NRSC rejection of O'Donnell?
« Reply #9 on: September 15, 2010, 03:54:20 PM »
I keep hearing about the NRSC making an announcement last night that they wouldn't support O'Donnell in the general election.  (This morning the NRSC made crystal clear that they do support O'Donnell.)

I'm looking for evidence one way or the other that the NRSC actually did decide not to support her.  Is there any?

My own search has turned up a few passing remarks on TV news reports last night, and a few news and opinion articles referencing those TV reports, but no evidence of an actual announcement or decision issues last night.  This morning lots of people are talking about the announcement/decision, even including O'Donnell this morning on one of the TV shows, but I've not seen anything to solidify the notion that it actually happened as reported.  

I'm curious because such a decision seems both unlikely (the NRSC wouldn't have decided not to support O'Donnell) and impossible (the NRSC people wouldn't have been working after hours last night to formulate any decisions or issue any announcements).  The first opportunity the NRSC had for formally addressing the O'Donnell victory would have occured at open of business this morning, and from that moment onwards the NRSC has clearly, vocally, and fully behind O'Donnell.

I wonder if this wasn't just one more example of the media trying to paint the Tea Party as being at odds with the formal organizations within the Republican Party.  If so, and if I can turn up the evidence, it would make a great black-and-white example of the process at work.

http://gretawire.blogs.foxnews.com/looks-like-there-is-dissension-in-the-republican-party-tonight/

FNC's Carl Cameron spoke with some NRSC folk and reported what he heard.

Regards,

roo_ster

“Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.”
----G.K. Chesterton

Headless Thompson Gunner

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,517
Re: NRSC rejection of O'Donnell?
« Reply #10 on: September 15, 2010, 04:03:30 PM »
http://gretawire.blogs.foxnews.com/looks-like-there-is-dissension-in-the-republican-party-tonight/

FNC's Carl Cameron spoke with some NRSC folk and reported what he heard.

Which NRSC folks?  What are their positions at NRSC (are they in a position to make such decisions)?  What, exactly, did they say?

Why were they so dead wrong?
« Last Edit: September 15, 2010, 04:13:05 PM by Headless Thompson Gunner »

roo_ster

  • Kakistocracy--It's What's For Dinner.
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 21,225
  • Hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats
Re: NRSC rejection of O'Donnell?
« Reply #11 on: September 15, 2010, 04:22:11 PM »
Which NRSC folks?  What are their positions at NRSC (are they in a position to make such decisions)?  What, exactly, did they say?

Why were they so dead wrong?

Email Carl Cameron.
Regards,

roo_ster

“Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.”
----G.K. Chesterton

Headless Thompson Gunner

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,517
Re: NRSC rejection of O'Donnell?
« Reply #12 on: September 15, 2010, 04:34:56 PM »
Email Carl Cameron.
You don't know any of the details?

I kinda figured you knew more, given how much you've been pimping the story around.

 =(

roo_ster

  • Kakistocracy--It's What's For Dinner.
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 21,225
  • Hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats
Re: NRSC rejection of O'Donnell?
« Reply #13 on: September 15, 2010, 04:57:50 PM »
You don't know any of the details?

I kinda figured you knew more, given how much you've been pimping the story around.

 =(

I have been linking in all the posts. RTFAs.

Here's another that ought not be too wordy for you:
http://twitter.com/PrestonCNN/status/24529570442

Regards,

roo_ster

“Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.”
----G.K. Chesterton

Headless Thompson Gunner

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,517
Re: NRSC rejection of O'Donnell?
« Reply #14 on: September 15, 2010, 05:23:13 PM »
I have been linking in all the posts. RTFAs.

Here's another that ought not be too wordy for you:
http://twitter.com/PrestonCNN/status/24529570442


I have been reading the articles.  That's why I wonder if there was any substance behind the story.  None of the articles or clips I've seen, including the few you've linked, have been able to cite any evidence that the NRSC had a position on O'Donnell prior to their endorsement this morning.  Hearsay and rumor, yes, but no evidence. 

This story has been on your mind all day, too, if we're to go by your posts here on APS.  Haven't you noticed the lack of substance and wondered about it?  Haven't you given it any thought?

It's a fascinating story, a fascinating process.  Everyone is talking about this story, but nobody can point to anything solid to back it up.  Lots of folks are investing emotion and passion into it, but nobody notices (or cares?) that it's based on unofficial hearsay that turned out to be wrong.  People want it to be true, want to use it to confirm their biases, even though it couldn't possibly have played out the way it was reported.  Even after it's been refuted, people still hold on to it.

roo_ster

  • Kakistocracy--It's What's For Dinner.
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 21,225
  • Hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats
Re: NRSC rejection of O'Donnell?
« Reply #15 on: September 15, 2010, 05:35:00 PM »
HTG:

It is not so fascinating.

It was a leak by NRSC folks to 2+ media critters expressing sour grapes and their heartfelt desire to take their toys and go home.

That's the sort of folks working at NRSC.  It took Cornyn coming in the the AM to see what the kids had done to the place to administer some (message) discipline and then everybody jumped on the band wagon, even "Pancake" Romney.  Good for Cornyn.

The GOP is got the Tea Party tiger by the tail and is more than a little unsettled not to be calling the shots.

I am not a big fan of Podhoretz the Lesser, but I think he hit the nail on the head:
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/jpodhoretz/357216

Regards,

roo_ster

“Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.”
----G.K. Chesterton

roo_ster

  • Kakistocracy--It's What's For Dinner.
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 21,225
  • Hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats
Re: NRSC rejection of O'Donnell?
« Reply #16 on: September 15, 2010, 05:36:47 PM »
As of yesterday, O'Donnell had ~$25K in her war chest and the Democrat had $300K.

Today, O'Donnell has had over $100K $500K+ (as of 1645CDT) in campaign donations.

Also, the distance between her & the Dem has been reduced by ~10 points in 24 hours and she is trailing him by 10-16 points, depending on the poll.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2010, 06:01:20 PM by roo_ster »
Regards,

roo_ster

“Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.”
----G.K. Chesterton

Headless Thompson Gunner

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,517
Re: NRSC rejection of O'Donnell?
« Reply #17 on: September 15, 2010, 06:21:09 PM »

It was a leak by NRSC folks to 2+ media critters expressing sour grapes and their heartfelt desire to take their toys and go home.
Ok, let's go in that direction...

If you believed this all along, that it was leaked info by a few unhappy employees and not representative of the NRSC, why did you repeat so often that it was the NRSC opposing O'Donnell?

The Republican voters in Delaware handed her the nomination.  The NRSC has announced it would not lift a finger to help her in the general election.
The NRSC has announced it would not lift a finger to help her in the general election and Rove was raving after the loss of Castle, his butt-buddy.
If the NRSC made an announcement against O'Donnell as you said, then I'd love to see it.  I don't think there ever was one.  I don't think there could have been one.  And now, based on your current statements, it seems you never thought so either.  Yet you said it anyway.

I'm not trying to single you out for your false statements, so please don't take it that way.  I'm trying to illustrate the power this story has to make people deny sense and reason.  I've seen it here in meatspace today, too.  I've not seen a news story with this sort of power in a long, long time.  At least, not on the right, where reason is supposed to trump emotion.

Everyone knows and understand that after a close primary there's going to be some unhappy folks out there.  Some of them might even work at the NRSC or other official party orgs.  You know it, I know it, Carl Cameron knows it, everyone.  And yet nobody stopped to think that maybe those unofficial accounts from the underlings at NRSC might just be someone blowing off steam, not representative of anything at all except their own personal feelings.  Everyone assumed, (or hoped?) against all reason and sense, that those underlings spoke for the entire organization and that the NRSC would take the unprecedented and unbelievable action of withholding support from O'Donnell.  And people still don't want to give up that assumption/hope.

And since when has the winning camp in a close primary every been so pissed after their victory?  Weird stuff all around.

Yeah, this fascinates me.  Definitely.  It's a microcosm for everything that's going on right now in politics, at least on the right.  It's that same discrepancy between hype and substance that I've been seeing over and over again lately, from people I never expected to see it from.

You may not care.  That's cool.  It's still instructive to me to be able to talk it over with you.  Thanks.  Seriously.  =)
« Last Edit: September 15, 2010, 06:30:31 PM by Headless Thompson Gunner »

Headless Thompson Gunner

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,517
Re: NRSC rejection of O'Donnell?
« Reply #18 on: September 15, 2010, 06:23:41 PM »
To bring this back around to the beginning, is it safe to say that there's no actual evidence that the NRSC had a position on O'Donnell until their announcement this morning?

seeker_two

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12,922
  • In short, most intelligence is false.
Re: NRSC rejection of O'Donnell?
« Reply #19 on: September 15, 2010, 06:27:45 PM »
KLBJ radio in Austin is reporting that Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) has said that the GOP will give their full support to O'Donnell in the general election....
Impressed yet befogged, they grasped at his vivid leading phrases, seeing only their surface meaning, and missing the deeper current of his thought.

Headless Thompson Gunner

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,517
Re: NRSC rejection of O'Donnell?
« Reply #20 on: September 15, 2010, 06:31:59 PM »
Never mind.

drewtam

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,985
Re: NRSC rejection of O'Donnell?
« Reply #21 on: September 15, 2010, 08:05:33 PM »
To bring this back around to the beginning, is it safe to say that there's no actual evidence that the NRSC had a position on O'Donnell until their announcement this morning?

Probably. My understanding from reading the articles is that some 'anonymous' official made off the cuff comments out of frustration. Probably not speaking for the organization.
I’m not saying I invented the turtleneck. But I was the first person to realize its potential as a tactical garment. The tactical turtleneck! The… tactleneck!

tyme

  • expat
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,056
  • Did you know that dolphins are just gay sharks?
    • TFL Library
Re: NRSC rejection of O'Donnell?
« Reply #22 on: September 16, 2010, 03:33:01 AM »
The NRSC has to support O'Donnell or they'll look like they've lost control of their constituents (heaven forbid!).  However, I'll be surprised if O'Donnell doesn't implode before the general election, even with their help.

http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/09/15/5118608-links-for-the-915-trms
(the cspan video containing the issue of women at the Citadel is very long; the segment with O'Donnell starts at 16:45)
Support Range Voting.
End Software Patents

"Four people are dead.  There isn't time to talk to the police."  --Sherlock (BBC)

roo_ster

  • Kakistocracy--It's What's For Dinner.
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 21,225
  • Hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats
Re: NRSC rejection of O'Donnell?
« Reply #23 on: September 16, 2010, 11:10:32 AM »
If you believed this all along, that it was leaked info by a few unhappy employees and not representative of the NRSC, why did you repeat so often that it was the NRSC opposing O'Donnell?

You are making assumptions and putting words in my mouth to fit your preconceived notions, rather than run with the plain meaning of my words and using common sense to figure out why folks would believe such a notion as the NRSC giving O'Donnell a kick in the *expletive deleted*ss.

A little more common sense and a little less lawyerly parsing of text will get to my meaning.



The employees who leaked are likely perfectly happy to work at the NRSC and not alienated from it, as your statement implies (especially since this is an up year for the GOP).  They are unhappy with O'Donnell's victory and have personal animus toward her, as they backed the other guy.  Matter of fact, Castle was the official NRSC preferred candidate in the primary just as Crist was the preferred candidate of the NRSC in Florida.

They may not have been "representatives of the NRSC" in that their name was on a NRSC-approved press release, but they were representatives of the NRSC in that both reporters said they worked there.  IIRC, one mentioned "staffer" and the other mentioned "aide."

Not only that, one has to assume one or both (given two, mutually-reinforcing reports) of the following occurred:
1. Aide/staffer calls journocritter to tell him the NRSC is not going to support O'Donnell
2. Journocritter calls aide/staffer and asks for comment or the inside scoop and is told the NRSC is not going to support O'Donnell

I doubt the reporters ran to the NRSC and shook down the Democrat-registered (or illegal alien) janitor for a comment to get the skinny.

Also, the NRSC opposed O'Donnell in the primary.  Castle was their boy, just as Crist was before Crist went independent.



Why might folks believe the reports that the NRSC would tell O'Donnell to piss off?
1. Castle was the NRSC-endorsed candidate in the primary.
2. Non-Delaware GOP mucky-mucks ("Establishment Republicans") opposed O'Donnell and endorsed Castle.
3. Non-Delaware GOP mucky-mucks ("Establishment Republicans") trashed O'Donnell during the primary campaign with personal attacks as well as citing the conventional wisdom.
4. The Delaware state GOP apparatus opposed O'Donnell and trashed her, up to and including the head of the Delaware GOP organization.
5. Castle is not willing to endorse her candidacy, now that she has won the primary, and a named Castle campaign official was still trashing her while hte votes were being counted and going her way.
6. Carl Rove's (and other Republicans') ravings and trashing of O'Donnell after she won.  I heard Rush commenting that he had never heard Rove talk in those terms about any Democrat.  None of this "Come together and unite behind the O'Donnell candidacy since the people of Delaware have spoken."
7. Two mutually-reinforcing reports, from two different journalists, from two different organizations, citing contacts in the NRSC stating they will not support her Senate run.

Given 1-6, it is not too hard to believe #7 when it popped up.

Matter of fact, I'd bet that the staffers/aides were telling it straight.  The NRSC wasn't going to endorse O'Donnell and only the outrage you decry is what caused Cornyn and cooler heads to try to salvage the NRSC's chestnuts from the fire of their incompetence and arrogance.

It is not about media hype.  The media didn't need to hype bupkis and just had to report the noise coming out of GOP mouths.



The NRSC has to support O'Donnell or they'll look like they've lost control of their constituents (heaven forbid!).  However, I'll be surprised if O'Donnell doesn't implode before the general election, even with their help.

http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/09/15/5118608-links-for-the-915-trms
(the cspan video containing the issue of women at the Citadel is very long; the segment with O'Donnell starts at 16:45)

NRSC is definitely in damage control mode.  This is not the first time they have stepped on their richard this election cycle.  IIRC, they still have given more money to Crist than Rubio in Florida, and Crist isn't even a Republican anymore. 

It is not nicknamed "The Stupid Party" for nothing.

O'Donnell has been active in conservative and R Catholic issue advocacy for more than two decades.  Puh-lenty of tape on her out there, both brilliant and not-so-much.  I am not surprised the left is digging for some of the latter.  Maddow was also pushing the ancient MTV tape where O'Donnell was part of a campus R Catholic group opposed to extra-marital sex of all kinds, to include self-service.  IIRC, that is R Catholic doctrine, so it ought not ab a big surprise that an "O'Donnell" hews to it.

I suspect it will be less effective than they hope, as 2010 smells very much like 1994 in that the election both has a higher ideological content and is more nationalized than the usual election year...and that the pollsters are consistently reporting GOP results 5-6% less than they will turn out in the end, when folks actually go to the polls that count.
Regards,

roo_ster

“Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.”
----G.K. Chesterton

Headless Thompson Gunner

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,517
Re: NRSC rejection of O'Donnell?
« Reply #24 on: September 16, 2010, 12:04:54 PM »

The employees who leaked are likely perfectly happy to work at the NRSC and not alienated from it, as your statement implies (especially since this is an up year for the GOP).  They are unhappy with O'Donnell's victory and have personal animus toward her, as they backed the other guy.  Matter of fact, Castle was the official NRSC preferred candidate in the primary just as Crist was the preferred candidate of the NRSC in Florida.
We know that some of the employees at NRSC are unhappy with the O'Donnell win.  This should be no surprise, it happens in every hot primary.  These employees probably aren't alienated from the NRSC, either.  I never said they were, and it doesn't matter a hill of beans either way.

Yep, the NRSC backed Crist in FL.  And when Rubio beat Crist, the NRSC moved over to backing Rubio.  Just like they're doing with O'Donnell in DE.  This is the way these things work.

They may not have been "representatives of the NRSC" in that their name was on a NRSC-approved press release, but they were representatives of the NRSC in that both reporters said they worked there.  IIRC, one mentioned "staffer" and the other mentioned "aide."
They presented their personal opinions, which everyone should have known had nothing at all to do with the real position of the NRSC.  Yet folks like you keep insisting that it was the NRSC snubbing O'Donnell, and not those few employees.  

Not only that, one has to assume one or both (given two, mutually-reinforcing reports) of the following occurred:
1. Aide/staffer calls journocritter to tell him the NRSC is not going to support O'Donnell
2. Journocritter calls aide/staffer and asks for comment or the inside scoop and is told the NRSC is not going to support O'Donnell

I doubt the reporters ran to the NRSC and shook down the Democrat-registered (or illegal alien) janitor for a comment to get the skinny.
I, too, doubt they asked the janitor for an opinion.  Nonetheless, it's obvious that they didn't go high enough up the food chain to reach someone able to speak for the organization.  They got someone who could only speak for his/her own sour grapes.

This is the crux of the issue, ascribing a position to the entire organization without bothering to get anything solid or official from the organization.

It'd be like callig up fistful to ask what he though about an issue, then saying his position is the official position for APS.  It'd be shoddy journalism and fuzzy thinking.  

Journalists are professionals who should now better.  They know that every organization has legitimate channels they use when issuing statements or announcements.  They know underlings speaking personally off the cuff are not speaking for the organization and should not be reported as speaking for the organization.

You and I know this, too.  One of us "forgot".


Also, the NRSC opposed O'Donnell in the primary.  Castle was their boy, just as Crist was before Crist went independent.

And again, once the NRSC's boy lost in FL, the NRSC went over to the winner.  Just like they doing with O'Donnell in DE.  This is how these things work.



Why might folks believe the reports that the NRSC would tell O'Donnell to piss off?
1. Castle was the NRSC-endorsed candidate in the primary.
2. Non-Delaware GOP mucky-mucks ("Establishment Republicans") opposed O'Donnell and endorsed Castle.
3. Non-Delaware GOP mucky-mucks ("Establishment Republicans") trashed O'Donnell during the primary campaign with personal attacks as well as citing the conventional wisdom.
4. The Delaware state GOP apparatus opposed O'Donnell and trashed her, up to and including the head of the Delaware GOP organization.
5. Castle is not willing to endorse her candidacy, now that she has won the primary, and a named Castle campaign official was still trashing her while hte votes were being counted and going her way.
6. Carl Rove's (and other Republicans') ravings and trashing of O'Donnell after she won.  I heard Rush commenting that he had never heard Rove talk in those terms about any Democrat.  None of this "Come together and unite behind the O'Donnell candidacy since the people of Delaware have spoken."
7. Two mutually-reinforcing reports, from two different journalists, from two different organizations, citing contacts in the NRSC stating they will not support her Senate run.

Given 1-6, it is not too hard to believe #7 when it popped up.
#1 - #6 are foolish reasons, because we know how that's not how these things work.  The NRSC and others at the national level don't turn their backs on primary winners just because their preferred guy lost.  They didn't do it with Rubio.  They didn't do it with O'Donnell.  This just isn't the way these things work.

Even in the minor league of local politics, where anything is possible, it's extremely rare for the official party orgs to oppose the fair winner of a primary.  I can think of a handful instances where an individual candidate lost a primary and then refused to back the winner.  And I can think of one or two instances where a local podunk party organization snubbed a primary winner.  But I can't think of a time when this was done by a national arm of the party like the NRSC.  It just doesn't happen.

Basically, it defies common sense and real-world experience.

And #7 was addressed earlier.  

Careful reading of the news reports should have been enough to register a blip on anyone's "that-don't-make-sense" meter.

Matter of fact, I'd bet that the staffers/aides were telling it straight.  The NRSC wasn't going to endorse O'Donnell and only the outrage you decry is what caused Cornyn and cooler heads to try to salvage the NRSC's chestnuts from the fire of their incompetence and arrogance.
This is wishful thinking on your part, supported by your biases but by fact or reason.


It is not about media hype.  The media didn't need to hype bupkis and just had to report the noise coming out of GOP mouths.

I was referring to internet hype, though there is plenty of media hype out there, too.  The hooples eat it up either way.