I think part 2 will make you gag. I found part 1 started well and deteriorated. Your experience when you stand at a BMV/USPS/Immigration Office line - that bit is a blatant appeal to emotion. Would we be better off with privately run immigration services? No one can complain about that annoying gun being pointed at their heads by lousy government employees forcing them to stand in line for hours for their passports.Great piece, hits all the fundamentals of conservatism. The history is spot on. Certainly covers what I believe. I haven't seen the others yet, but they could have stopped with just the first half of this one.
Yes, it is. Historically, this argument almost never works. The general rule is if it's clear who the voter intended, then the vote counts. The only time minor misspellings matter is if you have two write-in candidates with similar names. Almost every state requires even write-in candidates to register as candidates just to clear out the clutter of write-in votes for Mickey Mouse, etc, so the write-in vote only has to be similar enough to one of the "official" write-in candidates to count. The argument that the voter might have intended to vote for someone not registered as a write-in candidate virtually never holds water.Miller's observers are challenging write-in votes in which there might be slight misspellings of Murkowski's name or poor penmanship. Desperation time.
I don't view it as being in poor taste or over the top - just disconnected from reality. He's still talking about re-making the country into his ideal - the election message clearly didn't penetrate his camp.Seems like a standard thank-you video to those that helped the democratic campaigning? A little BS-sentimental stuff at 2:00 but other than that I don't see it as in poor taste or over the top. Do you? And why?
I don't think that was addressed to the entire population; and I didn't get from it that he has some ill-conceived notion of the majority of voters still supporting democrats in the house (in the face of the election).I don't view it as being in poor taste or over the top - just disconnected from reality. He's still talking about re-making the country into his ideal - the election message clearly didn't penetrate his camp.
If you recall, I posted something to the effect of - if you want to gag - watch this...:yuck:I don't think that was addressed to the entire population; and I didn't get from it that he has some ill-conceived notion of the majority of voters still supporting democrats in the house (in the face of the election).
I think it'd be much worse if all of a sudden his message was "We lost quite a few seats in the house this election, so we're going to change our core ideals to better fit the population in the losing districts in effort to gain more votes." Could you imagine the tearing apart he'd receive? Both from the right (recall "flip flopper"), and from the left seeing him as abandoning what they stand for in effort to gain some seats. A sell-out.
I think it was exactly what needed to be said to his core supporters, no more, no less.