Discussion for article #229435
TPM this sounds like a headline from Fox or some other right wing NOT media entity. As far as I know, the ONLY CON woman who has any chance at all, is the pig castrating, gun toting, Bachmann cray cray sister Ernst, so even if she did win, how is that considered the year of Republican women in the Senate???
5 Likes
Alternate headlines:
Ten Republican Women You May Not Have Heard Of
Republican Women Get Ahead Using This One Weird Trick
What YOU Need To Know About Republican Women
Twelve Best Republican Women’s Drunken Wardrobe Malfunctions
3 Likes
It would be nice if the folks who write the headlines here read the articles or at least spoke to the person who wrote them. The number of Republican women in the Senate could, at best, go up by 2, which would do no more than replace Sens. Hutchinson and Snowe, who retired in the last few years. Meanwhile, the number of Democratic women could actually fall (or increase, who knows).
Quite honestly, I will tell TPM what I would tell the 24 hr “news” stations. If there is no news, just shut up. Run features, play nice music, or simply be silent, but don’t invent stories.
6 Likes
Is it me, or is Homer Simpson TPM getting stupider?
Capito in WV seems to be pretty much of a lock:
WV SENATOR '14
1 Shelley Capito +13.0 51.3
2 Natalie Tennant 38.3
Tennant has been coming up lately, but she’s not likely to close a 13 point gap by election day. However, as far as I know the last poll was on 1 Oct.
In either case, a woman is going to win this race.
To answer your “question”:
Christ, I hope not!
1 Like
I totally agree. This is why the only three people I trust in the media anymore, to just report the news and have these things called FACTS to back them up, are Chris Hayes, Rachael, and Lawrence. All the rest of them are just as bad as Fox anymore. MSNBC is unwatchable during the day, because all they do is take the outrageous BS that Fox puts out, like all of their faux scandals, and runs with it hour after hour.
1 Like
I’m not crazy about Maddow-she often makes much ado about very little. I’m in bed by the time O’Donnell is on, so I can’t comment. TV news is a fairly poor return on time invested, since if they ever say anything interesting it will appear on line anyway.
And for sites like TPM, as David Byrne once sang, “Nothing to say, my lips are sealed. Say something once, why say it again?”
The fact that you have to talk about it being the Year of GOP Woman probably means it isn’t so. Women get their Year only when it becomes unremarkable. In Finland, for example, so many men died in WWII that women had to assume all kinds of professional, academic and political roles outside the home. That meant women geologists, mathematicians, doctors, lawyers, police, truck drivers, electrical engineers and even pilots. Finland had a woman president, women supreme court justices, a woman central bank governor, and at times fairly even balances in the parliament. The fact American women, and GOP women in particular, need to have a year is not something to celebrate; it signals how regressive and reactionary US culture remains with respect to gender roles.
1 Like
Why in the world does anyone refer to Susan Collins as a moderate? She votes in lockstep with her party. I don’t care what she says, I care about her actions.
3 Likes
Ask Terry Lynn Land.
I suppose because of the watered-down stimulus from the spring of 2009, she is now the reincarnation of Nelson Rockefeller.
No. Next question.
I kept waiting for the Lindsey Graham punch line.
1 Like
The new headline “Breakthrough year for women” is just as debatable as the previous one. OK, West Virginia will get a female senator. If we believe the polls, Iowa and Georgia may gain one and Louisiana may lose one (or not). Net gain of 2 does NOT equal a breakthrough. And what if one or both women lose in NH and NC? Sure, if every woman running against a man won, there would be a fairly significant increase, but the odds of that are not too good.
Heck, even in that case I think it would be hard to call it a “Breakthrough” for women given it would rest on Republicans winning a couple of close elections that could flip control of the Senate, which is more practically damaging to the state of women in this country than increasing the number of women Senators would be symbolically beneficial.
Is that thing with the weird helmet on its head in the lead photo really a woman?