Is O'Donnell really stupid?

Is O'Donnell really stupid?

Attorney · Raleigh, NC · Member since 2008 · 4k+ posts · 1k+ votes

There seems to be a lot of fear of attractive conservative brunettes to the point that they have to attacked as "stupid" by people who never really qualify that statement and when they do qualify it, it turns out they are factually wrong and she is right. I have to admit that I haven't sit down and listened to O'Donnell beyond soundbites. I've only read what she's come out with, so I found an interview she was going to be one where she was basically going to explain who she is and what she's about and sat down for a good 15-20 minutes and listened to her talk (without a teleprompter).

I'm going to skip past the politics of who she is and what she's about and focus on two political strategies she employed. In my opinion, politics are beliefs but where you measure intelligence is in how they are delivered and the strategies you employ.

The first is her response to the smear campaigns against her. Her angle on responding to this is that a vote for her opponent based on these smear campaigns is a vote in support of dirty politics that keeps good people out of office. She came out with this right when she revealed that a recent piece about a supposed one night stand that was written for the Gawker, was written by a person, a former Boy Scout, paid to write that smear piece. She indirectly showed how the Coons campaign has turned Boy Scouts into paid political hit men and then asked if that's the trend you want to set for future generations. That's pretty sharp because that cuts right past politics and to a core dissatisfaction people have been feeling for quite sometime....and it plays the guilt button which, as Obama illustrated, is quite effective.

The second thing she did, which was brilliant, was the same week that Obama announced he was coming into town to campaign for Coons - she had a rally called "Democrats for O'Donnell" and had as her featured speakers LOCAL Democrat leaders who were dissatisfied with what Washington has been up to lately. You talk about turning someone's attempt at "momentum" right against them, Obama is toxic in local constituencies that aren't populated with his sycophants and she capitalized on this by siding herself with names that don't mean anything to us, but mean something to Delaware voters in their local community. Obama flies in, talks for 20 minutes and flies out. These local Democrat leaders are there 24/7, talking to people. I don't care who you are, that is a very smart move.

We will see on Tuesday how it all plays out but it is interesting to see people rely so heavily on the characterization of political candidates as "stupid" or as some Democrats have tried to use lately "b-tch" or "whore", especially when they are factually wrong in how they came about that characterization. I would caution you in your use of it because by now, it's a tired, overused assertion. It reveals nothing more about the person you are attacking while revealing a whole lot more about you.

1Reply
129 views

Most Popular Reply

Investor · Westminster, CO · Member since 2009 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes
15y
Originally posted by Bryan Hancock:
What I do have a problem with is a bunch of blathering morons running for office

At the very top of this list is:
Barack Obama
And right behind him is the group including:
Nancy Pelosi
Joe Biden
Harry Reid
Barney Frank

And right behind them is Michelle Obama. While not running for office, she is the First Lady. She is the one who was NEVER proud of her country till her spouse got elected president. I was always proud of my country, although with him as president, I am quite embarrassed at the lack of intelligence of the electorate. Hopefully, they have worked at getting some education over the past 2 years. We shall find out today.

See this reply in the discussion

117 Replies

Jump to latestLatest
  • Joshua D.Pro Member
    BiggerPockets Founder · HI · Member since 2008 · 16k+ posts · 5k+ votes
    15y

    Thanks Ruben. That said, you can choose to hide all political discussions through your dashboard.

  • J ScottPro Member
    Moderator
    Investor · Sarasota, FL · Member since 2008 · 17k+ posts · 17k+ votes
    15y
    Originally posted by Tim Wieneke:

    These are Senators we're talking about. You think they haven't figured out a way to keep money?

    So, you're saying that O'Donnell has figured out a way to game the system to do something that would otherwise be illegal and based on your post above you clearly think she might be doing it?

    Does that seem like someone we'd really want to vote for?

    Again, I don't know anything about her...I just read your post about how she's keeping campaign money that's not hers (whether she figured out a way to do it legally or not), and it concerned me, as I think someone who would do something that unethical shouldn't be elected to office...

  • Attorney · Raleigh, NC · Member since 2008 · 4k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    15y
    Originally posted by J Scott:
    So, you're saying that O'Donnell has figured out a way to game the system to do something that would otherwise be illegal and based on your post above you clearly think she might be doing it?.

    Yes, I'm saying there's legal ways to do something that if you don't follow the law, become illegal. That works for a lot of things. :lol: :lol: :lol:

  • Attorney · Raleigh, NC · Member since 2008 · 4k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    15y
    Originally posted by Ruben Aguirre:
    you have a lot of very good points that seem to be falling on hardened ears, so why continue? at least that was my thought last night.

    Honestly it's because I find liberals amusing. :lol: It's like skeet shooting. The clays have some minor deviation but they pretty much follow the same path every time and with liberals I find it amusing blasting their arguments out of the sky over and over again when they keep throwing the same thing up over and over again. :lol:

    As to the rest of your post, I respect that you have the stones to man up the way you did. It's going to be a pleasure getting to know you here on BP.

    Tim

  • J ScottPro Member
    Moderator
    Investor · Sarasota, FL · Member since 2008 · 17k+ posts · 17k+ votes
    15y
    Originally posted by Tim Wieneke:

    Yes, I'm saying there's legal ways to do something that if you don't follow the law, become illegal. That works for a lot of things. :lol: :lol: :lol:

    But above, you implied specifically that O'Donnell was doing this (or might be). In fact, you used this insinuation to support the fact that she was smart...

    And my question to you was whether you had evidence that O'Donnell was doing this or if it was just your opinion?

  • Attorney · Raleigh, NC · Member since 2008 · 4k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    15y
    Originally posted by J Scott:
    But above, you implied specifically that O'Donnell was doing this (or might be). In fact, you used this insinuation to support the fact that she was smart...

    And my question to you was whether you had evidence that O'Donnell was doing this or if it was just your opinion?

    You're asking if I have access to her tax returns?

  • J ScottPro Member
    Moderator
    Investor · Sarasota, FL · Member since 2008 · 17k+ posts · 17k+ votes
    15y
    Originally posted by Tim Wieneke:

    You're asking if I have access to her tax returns?

    Look, your post clearly implied that you believed she was using campaign contributions for her personal benefit. I don't know what prompted you to imply it, or what evidence you have, but the fact is that you implied it.

    Generally, when people make an assertion or an implication about the actions of another person, they have a reason to make that assertion/implication (unless they're just fabricating stuff to support their argument).

    So, given that you clearly made an implication, and given that implications generally have some set of facts or beliefs behind them, I'm curious what your set of facts or beliefs is.

    If there are no facts, and you just *believe* she's taking campaign contributions, that's absolutely fine...I'm just curious which it is so I can form a better opinion of her one way or the other...

  • Investor · Westminster, CO · Member since 2009 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    15y

    While I do not have any facts to back this up, it would not surprise me if nearly every person who ran for office and had leftover funds used them for something other than campaigning.

    O'Donnell lost and we will probably never see her again on the national scene. She may get a PTA or City position, but it won't make CNN. But what I liked about her is that she showed that a common person can make a run at an elected office and even make a little noise doing it. That is what the US is all about, dreams, aspirations and the opportunity to explore them.

  • Attorney · Raleigh, NC · Member since 2008 · 4k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    15y
    Originally posted by J Scott:
    Generally, when people make an assertion or an implication about the actions of another person, they have a reason to make that assertion/implication (unless they're just fabricating stuff to support their argument).

    So, given that you clearly made an implication, and given that implications generally have some set of facts or beliefs behind them, I'm curious what your set of facts or beliefs is.

    I see. Well I submit as my fact that she was already accused, but never proven, of living off campaign contributions at a time when she was allegedly not running an "official campaign". The entire complaint hinged upon whether or not she was running an "official campaign" at the time. She's been running back to back campaigns since 2006, while holding no other job but doing pro bono work, so clearly she's been using campaign contributions to keep things going - which is legal if you do it right. Including, as I have read, paying yourself a salary as an employee of your own campaign and there's something I'm not sure about but it deals with being able to convert directly to personal income a certain amount of money as long as it doesn't exceed the balance of what they call unobligated excess funds. This is how politicians are able to do things like this all the time like when Rangel paid for his legal expenses out of campaign contributions. You just have to keep "official campaigns" running and she's been doing it for 4 years. This was her fist big fund raising one, which you can tell by the quality of her 2008 campaign site.

    Call it what you will. Call it part of politics. Call it something you don't like. You'd be hard pressed to call it "stupid".

  • Attorney · Raleigh, NC · Member since 2008 · 4k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    15y
    Originally posted by Mike M:
    O'Donnell lost and we will probably never see her again on the national scene. She may get a PTA or City position, but it won't make CNN.

    I'll bet you 10 bucks the complete opposite. :lol: She's done this twice on a shoestring budget before. Now she has money. Plus she was a drama major and you KNOW she loved the stage. :lol:

  • J ScottPro Member
    Moderator
    Investor · Sarasota, FL · Member since 2008 · 17k+ posts · 17k+ votes
    15y
    Originally posted by Tim Wieneke:
    Well I submit as my fact that she was already accused, but never proven, of living off campaign contributions at a time when she was allegedly not running an "official campaign".

    Got it...I wasn't aware of that...which is why I was asking...

Join the conversationCreate a free account to reply, vote on answers and follow this thread.