So the tea party is wounded and Chris Christie is the face of (R)

[merl]

As per the news this morning, the loss in VA means the tea party/R hard liners are hurt and the solid win in NJ means Mr Christie is the front runner for 2016.

Thoughts, opinions? I know he is no fan of gun rights be neither was Mr Romney. Anyone else get the feeling that we'd get thrown under the bus in an instant?

[cstone]

A liberal Republican won re-election in a liberal Democrat state. Christie becomes the GOP front runner for 2016. Too early for me to care about that race.

The sub-state of Northern Virginia proves once again how very different it is from the rest of the Commonwealth by electing a Washington insider who outspent his opponent 2 to 1. IMO, Kuccinelli lost the race based on the turn out of women who voted against his stand on abortion. I personally agree with Kuccinelli on the issue, but take the issue of abortion out of that race and he would be the governor elect this morning.

If the bus is being driven by the establishment media, I expect to remain under it. I mostly ignore the establishment media.

[Aloha_Shooter]

Cucinelli lost because McAuliffe learned to lie from the best (the Clintons) and he was hugely outspent. If anything, tea party principles were born out -- no Libertarian candidate and Cucinelli would have won an election he was supposed to lose by double digits.

[Bailey Guns]

I wouldn't start writing the obituary for the Tea Party based on one off-year election. Christie winning in NJ is no surprise...he's a liberal and he got the liberal vote. Christie is on the extreme left fringe of the R party...further left than just about anyone I can think of.

In Colorado we rejected a nearly $1B schools tax backed by unions, kept a conservative board in DougCo schools and elected a conservative board in JeffCo schools. Not to mention 6 of 11 counties voted to explore secession from the state based on fallout from liberal policies and laws enacted in the last few years.

I'm really failing to see how the Tea Party was "wounded" based on the VA governor's race which was much closer than expected. Most reports on the race are saying voters angry with O'care narrowed the double-digit lead McAuliffe had for most of the campaign to just about a 3 point margin of victory.

Some leftists in the media may be calling Christie the "front-runner"...big surprise. I'll make a prediction right now: Christie WILL NOT be the republican nominee in 2014. For a lot of reasons.

[Circuits]

no Libertarian candidate and Cucinelli would have won an election he was supposed to lose by double digits.

Dem machine funded the libertarian candidate quite a bit, too - to successfully split the non-dem vote.

[Circuits]

Some leftists in the media may be calling Christie the "front-runner"...big surprise. I'll make a prediction right now: Christie WILL NOT be the republican nominee in 2014. For a lot of reasons.

What would he be nominated FOR in 2014? You meant 2016, perhaps?

[Great-Kazoo]

Everyone is missing the most important point.
1- D/L's outspent R's Approximately $69-70 MILLION for the Hamburglar. vs. $10 Million on Cuccinilli.

[generalmeow]

Dem machine funded the libertarian candidate quite a bit, too - to successfully split the non-dem vote.

I see a lot of Republicans pissed at Libertarians on other website comment sections, because the Republicans and Libertarians combined for 53% of the votes. The Republicans think those are all their votes. But I think those are all Libertarian votes. The Republicans cost the Libertarian the election.

If the Republicans don't want Libertarians stealing their votes, they need to become Libertarians. As a Libertarian, why would I ever vote for a Republican? They don't represent anything I want. If a Democrat gets elected, so what? It's just going to piss people off more which will in turn help them see things the Libertarian way. The more Democrats win, the more Libertarian conservatives will become. That's a good thing.

[sniper7]

I see a lot of Republicans pissed at Libertarians on other website comment sections, because the Republicans and Libertarians combined for 53% of the votes. The Republicans think those are all their votes. But I think those are all Libertarian votes. The Republicans cost the Libertarian the election.

If the Republicans don't want Libertarians stealing their votes, they need to become Libertarians. As a Libertarian, why would I ever vote for a Republican? They don't represent anything I want. If a Democrat gets elected, so what? It's just going to piss people off more which will in turn help them see things the Libertarian way. The more Democrats win, the more Libertarian conservatives will become. That's a good thing.

Sounds like a wet dream to me.

[avandelay]

I see a lot of Republicans pissed at Libertarians on other website comment sections, because the Republicans and Libertarians combined for 53% of the votes. The Republicans think those are all their votes. But I think those are all Libertarian votes. The Republicans cost the Libertarian the election.

If the Republicans don't want Libertarians stealing their votes, they need to become Libertarians. As a Libertarian, why would I ever vote for a Republican? They don't represent anything I want. If a Democrat gets elected, so what? It's just going to piss people off more which will in turn help them see things the Libertarian way. The more Democrats win, the more Libertarian conservatives will become. That's a good thing.

The issue in VA is that there are good indications that Sarvis (the L candidate) was a shill candidate. He got a lot of campaign funding that can be tracked back to a Dem money bundler and his stance was, in many cases, for more government instead of less. Had the VA Libertarians actually looked at where the candidate stood instead of just looking at his party affiliation then he should have received far fewer votes that, in theory, would have gone to Ken C.