O'Donnell's "I'm you" Ad; Meh

Allahpundit is happy with Christine O’ Donnell’s new campaign ad:

Writes Allah:

Not a syllable is breathed here about policy, party affiliation, or conservatism; it’s a straightforward “everyman versus the establishment” appeal which, thanks to O’Donnell’s poise and the direct, soft-spoken conversational appeal to the camera, ends up being quite arresting.

Well, I like the playful “I’m not a witch.” and the “I’m nothing you’ve heard.” After that, I wanted to hear what she IS, and “I’m you” didn’t tell me that. In fact, forgive me, but when I heard “I’m you,” all I could think of was Linda Tripp’s disastrously-received “I’m you” statement during the Clinton/Lewinsky debacle.

Given her good looks, perhaps others will like “I’m you,” but I also didn’t love the droning, “none of us are perfect, but we all can agree…” No, it’s not working for me.

Allah notes:

The latest old chestnut retrieved by the media is something she said in a debate four years ago about being privy to classified info regarding some sort of Chinese takeover of the U.S. I hope that doesn’t swamp the rollout of the “I’m you” message, but it bodes ill if the kook/everyman arm-wrestling between the campaigns goes on until election day since it means she’s on the defensive until the bitter end.

I happened to hear a newsreader on the radio report on this, this afternoon, her voice dripping with mockery and disdain. Even though it was presented as a straight news story, the reporter did all she could to make the listener understand that O’Donnell = nutcase.

Then again, if Barack Obama had said something about being privvy to secret information like this four years ago, we’d want to know about it, and we’d want him to explain.

The difference is, in that case, the press wouldn’t tell us, and would call us “crazy” for even daring to wonder about it.

Which pretty much sums up why, as long as the mainstream media has control over the national conversation, things won’t change much.

They don’t have the control they had even two years ago, but unfortunately, they still control too much.

Meanwhile, I suspect that there is going to be a steady drip, drip, drip
of “oddball things Christine O’ Donnell has said” with the most damaging saved until two days before the election. It will get the Democrats hooting, and may scare plenty of indies, but tea party folk will close ranks around O’ Donnell feeling protective about her.

I sometimes think O’ Donnell’s fierce supporters are simply Palin fans who are trying to answer the savaging Palin took two years ago by sticking up for O’Donnell, no matter what. But O’ Donnell is not a strong candidate.

She’s a strong tea party candidate. Whether that makes her strong enough, I dunno.

This ad may be her roll-out, let’s-put-the-witch-stuff-behind-us effort, but I never thought the witch stuff mattered all that much. In fact, I believe her admitting to “having dabbled” in occult things made her more, not less, relate-able to the general public.

“I’m you, I used a Ouija board as a kid,” works a whole lot better than, “I’m you; I felt privvy to secret information about China.”

UPDATE: My husband liked the ad. He thought it was fresh and endearing.

UPDATE II: Jim Geraghty likes the ad a great deal:

You all know I’m a Ruling Class RINO who thinks that if Christine O’Donnell will stiff her former employees, she’ll turn her back on anyone, right? So I’m inclined to be very, very skeptical. I still think she’s got to climb Everest and she’s trying to do it without oxygen masks.

But this is a great ad. Intensely personal, perhaps the only approach that could cut through the noise that has surrounded her bid since she stepped into the spotlight. There’s almost a bit of vulnerability or awkwardness, and that almost becomes charming.

Hmmm…”charming” is a word I’ve seen several times in connection with that ad. I’m rather immune to charm offenses, so perhaps that’s what I’m not picking up, and Allah, Jim and my husband may be right while I’m wrong.

UPDATE: Rush Limbaugh isn’t that impressed

About Elizabeth Scalia
  • Piano Girl88

    I heard Christine O’Donnell being interviewed on WBAL (Baltimore, MD) the other day ~ that’s within listening range of much of Delaware. Must say I was quite impressed with what I heard. Perfect? Nope, but far better than many we have in Congress right now. I guess it’s up to the voters in Delaware in four weeks to decide.

    [I think she is a mixed bag, but then so is any pol...at this point, I am not impressed with slick or glib. I just want COMPETENCE. And a few candidates that are media-assassination-proof! -admin :-) ]

  • Steve

    THANK YOU FOR POSTING THIS!!

    Steve
    Common Cents
    link

  • Roland Shirk

    This is an excellent ad…for seventh grade class president.

  • http://blog.beliefnet.com/deaconsbench/ Deacon Greg Kandra

    Well, that’s all well and good, but I wouldn’t vote for me. I’d rather not have a me running the country. I’d prefer someone better than me.

    I’d rather have someone more educated, more competent, more astute, more visionary, more courageous, more knowledgeable, more adept at understanding the nuances and tradeoffs that are part and parcel of politics. Her delivery may have been sincere, but (at least to me) she didn’t exactly inspire confidence in anything — except, perhaps, the certain fact that she doesn’t ride a broom.

  • dry valleys

    She isn’t me. (I suppose if you want brevity you can stop reading now, those three words say enough).

    There are few things that annoy me more than people who put on a man/woman of the people act. Especially from people who are in fact wealthy & priviliged, but who think that folksy mannerisms somehow make them comparable to someone who has to actually go out there & do it.

    I am not interested in culture wars, it means nothing to me if Scott Powell drives a truck or Sarah Palin didn’t have an abortion or Christine O’Donnell used to condemn masturbation, what I am concerned about is their policy stances.

    They can prove they are like me by following the sort of policies I’d like to see enacted, which none of those do. Politics is not some kind of game or a team sport, it is actually a matter of whether millions of people will be able to make a decent living & live dignified lives, or not.

    I certainly share Deacon Greg Kandra’s sentiments as well.

    As for China, that is quite interesting because they have done everything “right” in power policy terms. The extent to which they’ve entrenched themselves across the world is breathtaking. I certainly think they’ve stolen a march on America, as the US government has used military force to little extent while the Chinese regime has simply got on with taking over.

    I oppose protectionism, farm subsidies etc. If we retailiate to them it will make us all worse off. Yet in a world where some states are free traders & others aren’t, the former may find themselves at a disadvantage.

    What will be interesting in tomorrow’s world will be the emergence of regional powers, for good or ill.

    South Africa, for instance, wields more power over the Robert Mugabe regime than anything else I can think of. (But doesn’t use it anything like enough, a recurring theme). You have to ask yourself what hope there would be for North Korea if the Chinese party turned against them, or look at the fact that the Lukaschenko regime in Belarus has faltered now that its Russian patrons have decided it isn’t useful any more.

    Castro’s criticism of the clerical fascists in Iran drew little attention for some reason, but had more influence over the countries Iran pals around with than American threats.

    Now there is little doubt that China is an emerging power, so perhaps O’Donnell isn’t as wrong as she sounds, as much as I wouldn’t back her on precise details of her “information”. This about soft power was not to be scoffed at after all.

  • dry valleys

    I meant Scott Brown, of Massacheussets. No idea why I wrote Scott Powell.

  • Jim Hicks

    I heard about her new ad while driving to work this morning (CBS Radio news). This ad is now a national story, including the Drudge Report. And it is posted on Facebook.

    Watched it just a few minutes ago. I was not impressed or unimpressed. But it is never good to be on the defensive this early in a campaign. That generally starts the last week in October. But the witch issue may be big with the Evangelical church folks in southern Delaware, so it had to be addressed. I think this ad is intended to strengthen her support with her base, not win over undecided voters.

    In the primary, she carried every election district in two-thirds of the state and the turn out nearly doubled the Republican turn out of every Delaware primary since 1972. If the ad succeeds in steighthening her base, she could pull this off.

  • CV

    O’Donnell was a communications director (in higher ed, I think) so yes, she does present herself well and seems to have the ability to think on her feet.

    As with Obama, however, that ability (while valuable and even essential to someone in public life) doesn’t compensate for the fact that she doesn’t have much of a track record and what’s there is sketchy, to say the least. I have to wonder what kind of person spends a good part of her career as a “color commentator” for the likes of Bill Mahrer, for pete’s sake.

    O’Donnell is a lightweight, period. People criticized Krauthammer and Rove for saying out loud that she was a weak candidate and likely to be unelectable but they are right.

    I’m just glad I don’t live in Delaware and have to make a choice between her and her (equally unappealing) Dem opponent.

    All that said, however, I do find it offensive that the MSM and late night comedians are in full attack mode against O’Donnell, ala Palin.

  • Maureen

    You know, there’s absolutely nothing in the Constitution that expects every representative and senator to be super-great, super-wise, super-educated, and so forth. They’re supposed to be people who get sent to represent their district or state, who are above a certain age, and who can take off from their regular business for a certain amount of time if paid by the people. That’s it.

    In Athens, you do realize that representatives were picked randomly from freeborn men of each “clan” district of the city. It was like jury duty; you didn’t get a choice in the matter of serving as a voting rep. In Rome, the Senate was filled entirely randomly by genetic lottery, as indeed was most of the UK’s House of Lords.

    Most of our great statesmen of US history were not “well-educated” by today’s narrow standards of paper certification. Either they were auto-didacts, apprenticed to read law under some country lawyer, or they went to a Bible college for training preachers, like Harvard. Our only well-educated president of the first hundred years by today’s standard was John Quincy Adams, who did his job but wasn’t exactly a Great Man in history’s annals.

    But of course, today’s idea of “well-educated” means that you don’t speak and read Latin, Greek, French, Italian, and Hebrew. You don’t hold thousands of years of words of wisdom from all sorts of cultures in your head, and you haven’t read the great classics or grappled with learning formal logic and the higher mathematics. It means that you have read a lot of fashionable novels with fashionable views, that you have learned to regurgitate whatever shallow comments your professors make, and that you’ve managed to pay for a certain number of credit hours from some school with a fancy name but teaching less good than that at a community college. Woo freakin’ hoo.

    [I agree that we've put way too much emphasis on "elite" educations, and how well someone performs for the camera, or reads from a teleprompter. Glibness does not equal competence, and you'll never catch me saying that someone must have a particular sort of education in order to be elected; a common working man may well be better-suited to some offices than an academic who has never done anything but theorized. But while I'm all for getting away from the over-educated chumps who are spoiling everything they touch, that doesn't mean I am willing to embrace people with ethical issues. Anyone who is halfway intelligent and has common sense can hold political office and do a decent job in it, but they have to be honest, or the hell with them, says I. -admin]

  • dry valleys

    If past statesmen were autodidacts then they were educated, educated by themselves. We are not (or shouldn’t be) so much talking about credentialism, or saying only graduates of such & such a university are acceptable, but that legislators should be intelligent & make efforts to inform themselves. They should be curious, & make the effort to read publications about anything they don’t know about that may be relevant to helping them do their jobs better.

    I see a lot of this man of the people stuff. Is it supposed to impress me that David Camoron claims to drink cans of Guinness? I’d be surprised if he did, & I also wouldn’t care.

    What I would mean by “educated”, above my level, etc. is that they combine natural intelligence with sound judgment, curiosity about the world, a high level of information about pressing matters.

    I had a bit of a dilemma once when someone whose policy stances I supported was an unusually weak candidate as a person. I ended up not supporting him because he wouldn’t have delivered. Yet in most cases their position matters as well.

  • Trish

    . . . the ad is not impressive, and as I heard John McCaslin say this morning, it rather sounds like it came out of Mr. Roger’s Neighborhood. I, too, am glad I’m not in Delaware and feeling as if I’m being asked to choose the lesser of two evils. O’Donnell is, of course, not evil, but she doesn’t measure up to some of the other tea-party candidates who have stepped up to run for office, e.g., Joe Miller in Alaska or Ken Buck in Colorado. Integrity, common sense, and successful experience in the military or the business world are winning ingredients for me.

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention The Anchoress | A First Things Blog -- Topsy.com

  • Lisa

    Why should the people of Delaware vote for the Marxist Chris Coon? Is he better for Delaware, for America? If so, how? Why? What makes him a better choice than O’Donnell?

  • Maureen

    Re: honesty

    Anchoress, I agree! A little blarney is one thing, a pile of horse manure is another.

    Re: David Cameron

    That just means he’s afraid to go to the pub (don’t blame him, with the drunken yahoos today), but not committed enough to get his own barrel. :)

  • c matt

    I can only think that all this focus on O’Donnell, whether positive or negative, is the best thing for her candidacy. How much air-time and name recognition has she gotten without spending hardly a dime? Even her ads are getting plastered all over for free. She must have been one heck of a communications major!

    And until Lisa mentioned whats-his-name, I forgot who was her opponent.

  • Elaine

    I want Obamacare to be repealed and cap and trade to never see the light of day. I want tax cuts for everyone who lives in this country. I want all forms of energy developed including oil and gas and coal. I want to solve problems that we have with over spending, social security, healthcare, etc. and not change our America. I would like to have a candidate who will vote for these things so if it is Christine O”Donnell then so be it.

  • Maureen from Canada

    As a Canadian I do have a dog in this fight since our economies are so closely aligned – if the US goes down then Canada is going to have a hard time as well.

    I think this is a first ad to gain some traction against all of the horrid things that are being dripped out about her.

    As a professional, self employed woman I was very impressed and moved by the ad. It was straight from the heart which is something you can’t fake.

    Of course over the next month, she needs to bring out more substance, but for now it is a very good ad to allows her to connect with voters – something that her critics and the MSM is not allowing to happen.

  • Mark L

    Her best bet would be to talk about how she will use a broom to make a clean sweep of things in DC. Maybe adopt the old Sinatra song “Witchcraft” as her theme with words indicating that she will use her magic to to clean up Washington. Ridiculing the witch charges is better than apologizing or denying them.

  • dry valleys

    To my mind, Maureen, that particular incident is just one episode in the soap opera of politicians patronising us by claiming to share our interests & be like us. I am saying that if they want my support they should explain how their policies will benefit me & be in line with what I support. Is there really a constituency of people that will vote for whoever is down with the kids, they can imagine themselves having a good chat with, regardless of their views? Sadly I suspect there might be.

    Also, you misspelt Camoron :)

  • Jenny

    I find it interesting that David Cameron claims to drink Guinness to prove he is a man of the people while here in America, Guinness is seen as kind of a snob beer. The common man would drink Bud. Never mind the fact that Bud is awful and undrinkable.

  • Barbara

    I’m underwhelmed, too. It’s unusual to every have a “perfect” candidate, and a conservative candidate with no baggage and a ton of experience would have an uphill slog in Delaware (does anyone think Joe Miller would make it in DE? Nah.) But with all due respect to Maureen, the Constitution lays out minimal legal requirements. Alvin Greene meets the minimal legal requirements. And we aren’t a city-state, we’re a huge country.

    Speaking for myself, since, after the last presidential election I can’t speak for most Americans, I look for relevant experience, common sense and a track record that speaks to a certain maturity and sense of responsibility. Sarah Palin and Sharon Angle are outside the elitist mold and their personal integrity is without question. Christine O’Donnell, in many ways, hasn’t left high school.

  • o.d.

    All of you who want to know what she really stands for need to tell us how to state that in a 15 or 30 second ad. I perceive too many snobs responding here to the ad. If that fits you, or possibly might apply, how about spending thirty seconds thinking about how you would fare with your entire life being rooted out by muck rakers. Where the hell were you when Obama was running? Did you vote for him? If so, you need to vote for Christine.

  • davis,br

    I’m with your husband: I thought it was utterly charming. Maybe even to the point of being disarming. What it “dripped with” was, well, sincerity. So whatever she was selling, I bought in (heh). Maybe it’s a guy thing.

    But regardless of her competence (or lack thereof), her experience (or lack thereof), her suitability (or lack thereof) …or her whatever-is-being-used-to-trash-her-now (whether fact based or no) …the one over-riding factor is that she will be a solid vote against a Democrat socialist agenda.

    And her opponent’s bona-fides are rooted in Marxism. “Harry’s pet” indeed!

    Does anyone seriously expect to make the argument that O’Donnell will be “Harry’s pet”? Srsly?

    To dredge up ancient history: the bottom line is, as much as I disliked McCain, I ended up voting for him …because “the other guy” was worse. Much worse.

    …and I was right about that, too.

  • CV

    Maybe it’s a guy thing. She presents herself well, but I don’t find this charming at all. I especially didn’t like the extra little “I’m you” kicker at the end.

    I really don’t want to hear ANYONE tell me “I’m you.” Sounds patronizing and condescending at best.

    And coming from her, my response is, no you’re not “me.” I paid off my student loans, didn’t take money from Bill Mahrer, didn’t sue my former employer for harrassment, you name it.

    I don’t think she deserves the scorn that is being heaped upon her from the left, but I don’t think she deserves the job either. Unfortunately her opponent doesn’t either.

    Like I said, glad I don’t live in Delaware!

  • http://vita-nostra-in-ecclesia.blogspot.com Bender

    O’Donnell is not a strong candidate

    Really, what does this accomplish? What is the point?

    The primary is over. She is the Republican nominee.

    The ONLY question at this point is whether she would be better for Delaware and/or the country than her bearded Marxist, Reid pet opponent would be? Would you really prefer him over her? Do you really think that he is better than her?

    No? Then get up off her back.

    [I'm hardly "on her back," Bender. But I'll be damned if I'll just shut up and fall in line; that mentality drove me from the left, and I won't take it from the right, either. You don't have to like my opinion, but I think if it's all the same to you I'll continue to speak as I find...particularly on my own damn blog. The essence of constitutionalist ideology is that people are allowed to say what they want, last time I checked. -admin]

  • Dustin

    I’m sick and tired of people like Bender telling everyone they are not allowed to express a negative critical opinion of O’Donnell.

    Of course she isn’t a strong candidate. she’s a career politician who has never held office, has many ethical lapses, etc.

    Good grief. ‘Get off her back’ is a terrible attitude to take. Do you want to reform the USA or not? Making an argument is not the same thing as telling the person you disagree with to shut up.

    BTW, Coons is not a marxist. It’s sad that a liar wants a truth teller to shut up, but not surprising. I heard for a month that Coons was no worse than Mike Castle, a very moderate Republican. So I guess Coons can’t be that bad, or the O’Donnell supporters who screeched this have no credibility anyway.

    ————-

    ANYWAY, I think it’s quite clever of O’Donnell to lump all her issues in with witchcraft. Frankly, that’s a tactic that works. Clinton lumped all his ethics scandals in with sex. Some Obama shills have done that with birthers. It’s not 100% effective, but O’Donnell probably picked the most likely avenue for success in highlighting the scandal that is the best soundbite and also the least important.

    Nobody cares about the witchcraft.

  • dry valleys

    Talking about the witchcraft, I remember one particular case of a self-styled follower of the Norse gods entering politics. He is a Republican, which may surprise some, but not me.

    A kindred spirit of O’Donnell isn’t faring well, Sharron Angle. Can you believe what this woman said in the first paragraph?

    [Seems Angle did not say that prayer; a Pentecostal minister did. But it's not my kind of prayer:

    "Lord, we pray for our candidates," said the speaker, kicking off with a call to prayer. "We ask for you to help them, and to hit the Democrats. We ask for you to hit the liberals, to hit the Senate, hit the Congress, and to carry the people of America to the polls. Let them vote for your glory, in Jesus, under his precious name."

    If that's for real, it's not the kind of praying I learned. Honestly, I can't get my head around it. On a very fundamental level, this prayer is offensive to me. The rain falls on the just and the unjust, for God created (and loves) all of them. You don't send God in like a pinch-hitter, and you don't tell him who to "hit." You say "they will be done." This is easily as offensive as that idiot in Washington last weekend referring to the tea party as "evil." Awful. I can't imagine anyone on the right would think this is a good prayer, if it came from the left. But be accurate, DV, Angle did not say that prayer. The writer just would like you to think she did.-admin]

  • Azathoth

    Coons will not vote to repeal Obamacare. Coons will not vote to stop cap and trade, amnesty, or any of the other socialist horrors Obama and the left wish to foist upon our country.

    So why help him get elected?

    I understand that you may not think O’Donnell is a strong candidate, and I have no interest in telling you not to speak. I merely ask you to look at the people your speech gives aid and comfort to.

    Chris Coons is counting on enough Delaware voters hearing comments like yours–disparagement from ‘her’ side. Opinions of the GOP candidate that are in line with the opinions of the left. Why help them?

    [You know, it's amazing to me. The same people who, in 2008, were saying, "well, McCain is so awful that I'm thinking of sitting out the election to teach the right a lesson; my principles mean EVERYTHING to me," are now saying "shut up and fall in line...your principles are not important, only winning is." And too many of them are also sounding a lot like the media and far left in '08: "no one is permitted to criticize the candidate; the candidate is perfect." Really? Those are the lessons you took from 2008? I'll continue to speak as I find. When I think O' Donnell needs defending, I'll defend her, as I have. And when I think she's misstepped, I'll do that, too. Anything else is fakery. -admin]

  • dry valleys

    Aye- I wasn’t suggesting you’d share this woman’s stance, I knew you wouldn’t. I am just talking about the kind of difficulty the O’Donnells & Angles of this world might find themselves in.

  • dry valleys

    Also, by “this woman” I meant Natalie Yafari. It’s just that it was too early in the morning for me to think about any precision of language!

  • Pat

    The ad wasn’t bad, but it certainly wasn’t good. As to whether or not she’s a strong candidate or not– it’s hard for me to say when I’m not in Delaware–but she seems to come off as very competent and likable when I’ve seen her on television (which have only been her values speech and her interview with Sean Hannity).

  • Old Fan

    I agree with your fine offering Anchoress.

    This is a very poor video, but the reality is, there is nothing she really can offer about herself, having no accomplishments or record to be running for the Senate. Sort of like the ‘Obama of the Right’.

    The idea Ms. O’Donnell is “NEW” is absurd of course. To many in Delaware and the East, she isn’t new. Her odd appearances on TV over the years, and a few Statewide election failures in the past are actually quite memorable.

    There were many on the good side, who revealed an ugly offering in this regard. Even a form of self destructive sophistry. A prime example is the juvenile Mr. Riehl’s ugly smear of Mr. Castle, which resembled ugly Democratic Partisan sophistry. Many high profile Conservative Pundits lost credibility over this disaster, Levin, Malkin, Limbaugh, Hannity, etc. Levin’s distortion of Mirengoff was just as pathetic as the Riehl sophistry – reminding one of the Polipundit and LGF disasters of the past.

    We see the foolish product of the mindless Fashion:
    ‘O’Donnell getting trounced in race GOP once led’

    At first I simply did not care about who was battling in the Primaries, just strongly objected at the unethical, disgusting, vitriol focused upon the Republican in the case – as I believed it is poor politics, guaranteed to lead to enabling the worst, building opposition and enemies needlessly.

    But then I studied the Candidate of Ms. O’Donnell the Fashion was trying to empower, slandering the likes of Castle. I was simply shocked at the foolishness, coming from some in the once sound Conservative side – to appease a Fashionable Identity Movement without any substance. O’Donnell is a terrible offering, and was a huge mistake. One can pray for a miracle, and I hope I will be proven wrong in the end.

    Certainly the Conservative movement is on the right side of history, advocating limited Government, but we clearly have a reactionary, emotive, hyperbolic, etc., population which leads to a very self destructive effort. They won’t bother to apologize either, for their destructive efforts either. Ego and insecurity are blinding factors – we will see plenty of it in the race for 2012 as well.

    We most likely, have given the Democrats a Seat in the Senate, one which was occupied by Biden for years, at a time when taking the Majorities in the Senate and House is essential. The Fashion was utterly foolish in this case. Even with Castle voting 50%, with Republicans, he would have won easily – while O’Donnell was a gift to Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Clinton.

    Coons is a disastrous extreme Democrat, who will occupy this Seat for another 6 years. Instead, we could have had a moderate Republican who would have caucused with the Conservative GOP Majority, further empowering McConnell and Company to block Obama.

    Then we could have challenged Castle after the 6 years, if he voted poorly as a Senator. Now we will have to wait to take the Democratic Partisan Seat, whose disastrous offering will be hidden with the potential gridlock coming.

    It would help, if the mistakes are recognized. If Conservatives return to objectivity, honesty, basis, etc., and reject the ugly offering of the reactionaries.

  • Old Fan

    Oh, on that ‘charming’ concept, I think Mr. Beeler (whom I think isn’t the best – but tries), is not impressed either.

    See:
    O’Donnell Ad Spoof – “NOT A WITCH”

    I have joked before, but perhaps if Hannity, Limbaugh, Malkin, Levin, etc., moved to Delaware to cast a vote, would be the ultimate show of sincere conviction. At least it would be amusing, as we know no mention of “golly gee, I was mistaken and I apologize” will never be provided.

  • c matt

    Ridiculing the witch charges is better than apologizing or denying them.

    That would be hilarious – I can see the next ad – with the “Bewitched” theme music playing the background, and O’Donnell does an Elizabeth Montgomery impersonation – as she walks the halls of the Senate, she twitches her nose and – snap! Out goes cap & Trade! Another twitch and snap – healthcare reform gets repealed (or at least fixed). All the old white haired male senators just stare in bewilderment as she gets things done (I would also like to see O’Donell give a little twitch and snap – just as Pelosi is lowering the gavel in the Speaker’s seat, she get’s replaced by O’Donnell – that would be awesome).

  • freelancer

    Perhaps Christine O’Donnell should have said that she was ‘of’ the ‘yous’ rather than that she was “you” but she knew that her DE voters were astute enough to know what she meant. She will represent them for the reasons they selected her. Castle was only half Republican and they want a senator who is with them all of the time. If the democrats win that seat it will not be on O’Donnell’s head. COD was elected in a fair primary and won with a significant margin over rival Castle. Since COD has run in more than one race over the years and is well known in DE I would think that she really is of the people in that state. Seems that whatever COD has or has not got in the way of qualifications for this senate seat is satisfactory for those who chose her and support her. Her ad was probably focused grouped before production and was presented with the concerns of potential voters in mind. I preferred that she drop the high school era witch thing but obviously it remained a serious issue that needed to be addressed. Given the huge varieity of character defects in so many of our elected leaders, COD is a giant brain along side of them. I pray for her to win this seat and am supporting her financially. If the Republicans and Independents see this senate seat as critical for the survival of this Republic, they and Castle will work to see that it is won by the candidate who has been chosen by the voters in DE, Christine O’Donnell.

  • Lucius

    I know O’Donnell; I worked with her 10 years ago on a project. I am not a Delaware voter and I did not support her; I wrote to everyone in politics to advise against supporting her.

    But, she is the nominee now. She is marginally qualified to be a US Senator…but then, what were Joe Biden’s qualifications? What were Al Franken’s qualifications? Compared to those two Dems, Christine is okay.

    The ad is not aimed at people who are strongly opposed to her. It is aimed at people who don’t know much about her except for the hostile comments and media reports they have heard. I think the ad will be effective for that target audience.

  • Julie

    Coons vs. O’Donnell. That’s the choice. It’s up to the voters in Delaware to make that choice but their decision will affect all of us. No candidate is perfect and sometimes it’s the lesser of two (perceived or real) evils. I don’t live in Delaware but I do vote and I don’t vote based on who has the best ad. I don’t routinely analyze an ad to death. But that’s just me. No doubt most campaign ads fall short in one way or another. O’Donnell has some baggage. I guess some folks don’t but they’re not running. Bottom line? How will she vote if she’s elected. Right now that’s the most important issue. IMHO.

  • Dustin

    Coons or O’Donnell isn’t the choice for me. That’ the choice for Delaware. The other choice is to not show up and vote, btw. I think a lot of people will reject both.

    Anyway, the choice for me is to think ahead, look at what was good and bad with O’Donnell, and learn from her campaign’s utter failure (and it truly is a massive and miserable failure, currently 20 points worse than Castle would have been doing, despite having tremendous resources in a tiny state).

    For some reason, O’Donnell is well equipped to make any argument she wants to nearly every voter in her state, and she can’t even convince all the GOP to support her. There’s a reason for that, we all know what it is, and we need to avoid candidates with those problems if we can manage to.

  • Azathoth

    Prior to the nomination of McCain, I supported someone else. I liked Fred. I could not–and can not stand McCain. After the nomination, I still couldn’t stand McCain, but I stood by the process. My primary guy didn’t make it, but the party had picked someone. I said I was voting for McCain, I encouraged people to vote for McCain–people who were saying things like those being said about O’Donnell. People who were shooting his candidacy down in his own party.

    See, there’s a process, you back your guy and hope he wins in the primary, if he does, you expect the other guys endorsement(That’s what we used to call good sportsmanship), and the support of the party whose nomination you just won. The party, and the people who vote for that party unite behind the candidate–better to have your party in power than the other party–even if it’s not your specific guy.

    Now, it’s the fashion to act as if the primary is still going on during the actual election–or, worse, to ignore the primary results and stay in the race as an ‘independant’…and keep the internecine primary rancor going right up until the day the other party gets in because the vote got split.

    In this we see the leftist tropism of ignoring the ‘stupid voters’ when they don’t choose correctly infecting the right.

    The Delaware GOP chose the crazy conservative over the RINO. Why is it so hard for people who call themselves conservatives to accept that and support the candidate that was chosen against the Democrat?

    [My issue is not that. My issue is that we have reached the point where no one is permitted to say a negative thing about Palin or O' Donnell without having the far right rain down on them. That reminds me too much of how no one was permitted to say a negative thing about Obama, on the left. It's not healthy. -admin]

  • dry valleys

    Are there not third parties for people who wish to raise objections to O’Donnell without supporting Coons? I know they don’t count for much in America, but surely someone would seize his chance if a lot of voters feel stranded.

    [The problem, DV, is that if people split off into a third party, the Democrat automatically wins. See Perot, 1992 -admin]

  • c matt

    See, there’s a process

    I don’t recall voting for this process of which you speak. Why should I be bound by it?

  • Pingback: What we’re up against « Olliander


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X