Tag: election

Democrats running in 2021 on fear, Trump, fake racism, and more Trump

One year after Joe Biden won the presidency by dodging interviews, debates, and proposing as little policy as possible to instead divert all attention on Trump being bad and Biden being not-Trump, the former Democrat Governor of Virginia Terry McAuliffe is running for the position again (Virginia has a law that you can’t run for Governor in two back to back terms) is running on a very similar strategy and still all about Trump. Which would be strange if Democrats cared about issues in their state and not a perpetual orange-man-bad offensive strategy, but since that’s still their top concern – that’s the candidates top concern.

https://twitter.com/TrumpJew2/status/1455165877993803782

Earlier this month, McAuliffe mentioned Trump 18 times in a 12 minute CNN interview.

A few days ago in a single speech for McCauliffe, Biden mentioned Trump 24 times.

In virtually every appearance, candidate McCauliffe and surrogate Democrats supporting him not only keep bringing up Donald Trump, but use the majority of their time to focus exclusively on the former President instead of the candidate they’re running against. The problem is that while the Democrat party remains obsessed with Trump, it hasn’t been working as a focus to convince voters to support McCauliffe, so one day before election day – McCauliffe attempted to reverse course on the messaging…

CNN was even snarkier about the messaging flip on the air:

This somewhat offhand comment is being blown out of proportion by the press to suggest that McAuliffe’s tossing his entire campaign strategy out the window in the final hours. He isn’t. He’s still laser-focused on Trump, knowing that scaring Democrats about Glenn Youngkin may be the only way he can get them off the couch and to the polls.

What’s interesting to me is that it was CNN that dinged him for it, not Fox News. The media is liberal but they can smell the panic from McAuliffe’s campaign lately and can’t resist a storyline that communicates his desperation.

Youngkin’s campaign responded with a revamped edition of the video above, now with more examples in a minute long cut of what is still just a small selection of the times McAuliffe tried to make the campaign about Trump now that he’s trying to say it isn’t only after he started to lose in the polls:

Candidates pivot as needed with their campaigns focus of course, but this ridiculous insult to Virginia voters intelligence was ripe for ridicule, which was why even CNN couldn’t help but note it above. The especially slimy part of this gaslighting isn’t just the ‘on second thought, forget what I’ve made my entire candidacy about please’ nature of the backpeddle, but the pure projection of it all. Specifically: Youngkin had never embraced Trump or Trumpism or the MAGA agenda or any of the big Trump talking points or campaign issues and by all accounts is much more of a Mitt Romney style Republican, so McAuliffe’s fearmongering that Youngkin is a dangerous Trumpie Virginia should be afraid of was always a dishonest smear, but also one that he is legitimately guilty of himself in regards to the Democrats “Trump”, Hillary Clinton. While Youngkin and Trump were never allies or connected in any way yet Democrats tried to make them appear synonymous with each each other – McAuliffe and the Clintons have always been very close, but due to Clintons unpopularity, McAuliffe has ran away from that association in exactly the way he falsely accused Younkin of doing with Trump…

In fact, McAuliffe literally has more ties to Donald Trump than his opponent he’s trying to frame as Trumps best friend…

McAuliffe’s lying projection aside – this Trump-scare tactic is just part of a larger ‘scare Democrat-leaning voters so they give you power to protect them’ strategy. McAuliffe doesn’t just deserve to lose for lying about this specifically, but also for avoiding issues the state he is trying to be the governor of again faces by distracting focus to fake issues at large.

McAuliffe wants Virginians to be scared of Covid, so he lies about it:

McAuliffe wants Virginians to be scared of racist Republicans, so he creates a hoax where Democrat operatives pretended to be racist Republicans so McAuliffe and his allies could pretend to be shocked and denounce it (most, but not all, later deleted the fake-outrage tweets after the alleged Republican racists were revealed to be anti-Republican Democrats perpetrating a hoax):

And in perfect line with the trend: the actual things in Virginia that require concern are – surprise! – the things that Terry McAuliffe says (but doesn’t actually believe) are in great condition. eg: the terrible school system that McAuliffe kept his own children out of but claims is “great” for everyone else…

Election day is tomorrow. For the record, the same scam is being pulled by Democrats in New Jersey for their Governor’s election as well:

Jersey is surely going to go Democrat as they only vote for Republican Governors when their Democrat Governors go to jail or have to resign over corruption riddled scandal (which has been nearly every Democrat Governor in the past 20+ years, so this will be the first Democrat Gov in awhile to win reelection).

But will the fearmongering work in Virginia which is only “mostly Democrat” and not solidly blue for the past 20 years? They’re already making excuses for when it doesn’t and you guessed it – it’s gonna bet those phantom rrrrrracists to blame:

Developing…

The senators from Georgia are TERRIBLE. And should win. (but won’t)

In the 2020 election, both of the state of Georgia’s senate seats in Washington were on the ballot and Republicans kept the Senate by winning both of those state seats. But not so fast… Georgia law says you can’t just win, you have to SUPER-win – meaning, it’s not enough to just get the most votes – if the winning candidates don’t get over 50%, then they have to run again in a run-off election in January. And that’s what’s happened. and now (at the time of this writing) it is January. and both candidates are poised to win but probably won’t but she should, even though they’re terrible…

I can explain…

The 2 Democrats running against them are worse. They offer no improvement over their Republican challengers in any way that isn’t strictly ideological, and they are both woke talking-point peddling liars. That’s not to say that the existing Republicans “deserve” to win though – just that they should because they are politically better as they are more likely to vote against Biden administration agenda items like tax increases, more regulations that control our behavior in the name of some “its for the children!” type of emotional appeal (though, with the infantilization of minorities, the “for the children” part has been typically replaced with a patronizing “for these poor racial groups that don’t know any better”), and of course – the real reason the deep state ensured a Biden victory: BOMBS. Absolutely gotta bomb some third world countries (which I predict will start within Biden’s first month in office).

That’s obvious though. Most people know that. What most people don’t know is how bad these Republican candidates are so that’s much more interesting to me.

Here are some briefings on why they’re so terrible:

Kelly Loeffler

I’m not a mind reader, so I don’t know why Kelly Loeffler wants to be a United States senator, but that’s also the problem is that – I would have to be a mind reader to know why Kelly Loeffler wants to be a United States senator…

She isn’t an economics-issue’s Republican, anti-war Republican, culture-war Republican, or “stick it to the Dems” antagonistic Republican (which are the main factions of the outgoing Trump administration). She’s just… a Republican. The vibe I get from her is that of a housewife that wants to “be involved” and would normally put this energy into a local Parent Teachers Association or Home Owners Association but since she’s wealthy, decided to go into the senate instead.

Glenn Greenwald captures some of these qualities perfectly in these tweets:

Loeffler was appointed to her senate seat by the Republican Governor of the state even though President Trump and grassroots conservatives wanted congressman Doug Jones instead. In her brief 1 year in the senate after this appointment, her biggest headline making moment was to be investigated for insider trading after suspicious stock investment moves that appeared to be influenced by knowledge she obtained from her position as a senator before the public knew the same information.

We don’t know if that’s valid or just looked suspicious but who cares because of all her other not-good qualities for the position.

David Perdue

What a shmuck this guy is. He’s all the emptiness of Loeffler except he’s been in there longer, doing nothing useful longer, plus he still has the same exact negative regarding the insider trading accusation. lolWTF?

While Perdue’s Democrat opponent Jon Ossoff keeps lying on the campaign trail and would be (will be?) a terrible senator that won’t represent the people of Georgia accurately at all – Perdue is a coward, a phony, and evidently – a crook. Not evident by the accusation of such as that happens to everyone – but by his lack of defense. Ossoff called him a crook to his face at the debate – a bold move for a crook and a liar to make – but came out looking like a hero because Perdue was just like “oh wut-everrr” (that’s a synopsis – not an actual quote). Perdue didn’t like being called out so bluntly in that debate that he didn’t show up to the next one, which gave Ossoff the chance to just rattle off every talking point in his Notes app completely unchallenged. lol. Great. What possible excuse could there be for this? I can think of none, but I shouldn’t have to think of any because Perdue should have made it known. He didn’t make a valid excuse known because he didn’t have one. Coward.

I hope he doesn’t lose because senators are just vote-bots and he would vote for better policies than Ossoff, but if/when he does lose – he will have earned the defeat. Loser.

Tinkering with the Electoral College to…help Republicans?

Pennsylvania Republicans are working on a plan that’s as mischievous as it is completely legitimate: apportioning its electoral votes by congressional district instead of the current winner-take-all system. Under the new system, a presidential candidate would receive an electoral vote for each congressional district he or she (but let’s be honest — this year, it’s going to once again be a he) wins, plus two more if he wins the statewide vote count. For example, since John McCain won ten out of Pennsylvania’s 19 districts in 2008, he would receive 10 electoral votes, instead of the zero he took home under the state’s current system. Obama would have received 11 electoral votes — 9 for the congressional district he won, plus two for winning the state — instead of the 21 he was awarded.

Pennsylvania, like every other state, is free to dole out its electoral votes however it wants. Republicans control both chambers of the state legislature as well as the governorship, so if the GOP wants to switch over to a congressional-district apportionment system, all the Democrats can really do is whine.

Interesting push that I didn’t totally understand at first, and still don’t unless this is a conspiracy, which I will get to in a moment. The part that doesn’t make sense is that even though PA has been won by the Democrats in the past 5 elections, the Republicans have campaigned there every time with legitimate hopes to capture it. In theory it is a “swing state” because the margin of victory is thin enough to change over, it just never happens that way. So if the Republicans think they could actually swing the state to their direction, why would they want to change the winner-take-all rule RIGHT when it could benefit them? Further: the extra few electoral votes under this system wouldn’t have changed the outcome of any of the recent elections, so whats to be gained by Republicans by doing this?

That’s when the conspiracy comes in: What if other states that have gone Democrat in presidential elections for the past few rounds but are now controlled by Republican Governors and Republican state congresses did the same thing? Such states are Michigan and Wisconsin, which dont have many Republican voting districts but if the trend continues – who knows?

Below is the electoral map based on Congressional-district apportionment (Red = Republican. Blue = Democrat).

As for Democrats retaliating by doing the same in traditionally Republican voting states? Not so much…

The only states that John McCain won where Dems control both houses of the state legislature are Arkansas, Mississippi, and West Virginia. West Virginia is too small for splitting the electoral votes to have much effect, and Mississippi has a Republican governor. That leaves Arkansas, another small state — and one where McCain won every district handily in 2008.

No matter how you slice it, splitting up according to districts helps Republicans since Democrat districts are more solid-democrat than Republican districts are solid-republican. I know this from living and traveling across the country: there are far more areas where you can bet large amounts of money on picking a person at random at knowing for certain they will lean Democrat and hardly anywhere in the country where the same is true for Republicans. Even the most conservative areas of a fiery red state still has plenty of democrat influence. As Michael Barone of the conservative American Enterprise Institute wrote last year:

[I]n 2004 John Kerry won 80% or more of the vote in 19 congressional districts, while the number of congressional districts in which George W. Bush won 80% or more was zero. Similarly and even more starkly, in 2008 Barack Obama won 80% or more of the vote in 28 congressional districts, while the number of congressional districts in which John McCain won 80% or more was zero.

Normally I am not one for conspiracies but this one just might be hatching… Stay tuned…

Tomorrows Election Results, Today

Here is my prediction for tomorrows election results (Red means Republican win, Blue is a Democrat win, Gray marks the states where there is no election):


Image created using ABC News’ iPad “what if” app, so it’s their fault that they don’t let you view the whole map at once (you have to scroll down even while zoomed out), so it’s their fault that Alaska is half cropped :p


Straight 50/50 split. In such cases, the Vice President takes on his role as President of the Senate and serves as tie breaker, and since he is a Democrat, that means the Republicans will fall 1 person short of winning the majority and taking back control of the Senate. Way to go Tea Partiers: you had that 51st vote in the bag in Delaware with a candidate (Mike Castle) who would have won by 11 points. Instead, you decided that he wasn’t fiscally pure enough for your standards and nominated Chistine “I’m not a witch” JesusCamp O’Donnell and now she will lose by 11 points. Had the GOP nominated Castle instead of O’Donnell, Republicans would have won both President Obama’s AND Vice President Bidens senate seats.
You missed a huge headline there, douchebagels.

The 2 states that could change are West Virginia and Washington. If Republican Dino Rossi wins in Washington, it will only be by a point or two so that means it’s also entirely possible for him to lose by a point or two – or worse – win by a narrow margin and get raped by a recount (something he has already experienced as the previous winner of the Governors race that was then yanked away from him during a recount). In West Virginia, popular Democratic Governor Joe Manchin is running for senate and is a few points ahead of Republican businessman John Raese. The most amusing part about this race is that Raese’s name is pronounced “Race-E” and it’s…a race, and Joe Manchin doesn’t have a very strong jawline. lolz. I guess it’s also kinda funny that the two dudes are trying to out-conservative each other. Watch this ad below and remember that this is the DEMOCRAT appearing here:

If the Republican wins in WV and loses in WA then nothing changes, obviously, but if they both win then the Republicans gain Senate control.

Whats certain is that the country is about to look like a Hawaiian Punch commercial as it’s washed in a Red wave of right-of-center candidates. This is good for everyone, so no one should really freak out over it. Republicans will like it – cuz duh. Moderates and Independents like me will think it’s alright because we’re okay with a little balance (the Democrats have held control of the House and Senate for 4 years and had the Presidency for 2 years so balancing Obama with a Republican congress isn’t exactly the end of the hope and changey world for the left). Also – these Tea Party candidates poised to win are not as looney tunes as initially thought. Rand Paul (R-KT) for example made me facepalm at first but now I’m alright with him and Marco Rubio (R-FL) has earned a lot of respect and street cred, including an endorsement by the left-of-center Miami Herald when he too was initially considered a dangerously right-wing nutjob. Also there are a lot of moderates getting elected tomorrow too, don’t forget. Mark Kirk (R-IL) is just barely a Republican and in the event that other longshot Republican wins were to happen (like Linda McMahon in CT or Carly Fiorina in CA – both self made business women) they would just be additions to the “oppose my party when it’s wrong” side and not the Tea Party kooks.

I voted for the least amount of Democrats I ever have this year in my mail-in ballot, so I’m somewhat reflecting the nationwide shift. I am hoping that a Republican congress with a Democrat president will work as good as it did under Clinton (quick history recap: Clintons first two years were as ambitious and as unpopular as Obama’s, but in 1994 during his midterm there was a Republican wave and Clinton became more centrist and more awesome).

Even Sharon Angle, the Republican running against Democrat Harry Reid for Senate in Nevada has proved to be not as bat-shit crazy as she initially came off as. I was dead set against this creepy freakshow right up until I watched the debate between the two and I felt shnookered. Reid, whom I previously thought was a loveable grandfatherly old bloke came off as slow, awkward and batty. Angle presented herself well and didn’t say anything that made me cringe. Actually, she impressed me by answering the questions asked of her – especially the yes or no ones, which she answered with yes and no. Reid on the other hand said 2- 4 sentences within his responses for each and dodged them. Example: “Should English be the Official National Language?”. Angle said Yes. Reid said “it already is the national language”. Well, that’s not a yes or no and it’s not even true. There was actually a vote to state it as such and Reid voted against it. Weaselly. I agree with Dennis Miller in that such a dim bulb shouldn’t be representing the state where Las Vegas is located. His son Rory is also on the ballot, running for Governor and is going to lose along with his dad. His commercials all just say “Rory” as he tries to hide his Reid-ness from voters (or maybe its just because “Rory Reid” is impossibly awkward to say).

And wtf is with the reruns? The former senator from Indiana, (R) the former Governor of Iowa (R) and the former Governor of California (D) are running for their old jobs again this year and all 3 of them are going to win. All of them held those jobs over 12 years ago – and in Jerry Browns case over 25 years ago! (god dayum). Couldn’t either party get some fresh blood in these races?

The rest of the map is all goofy too. Check out this weird pattern I noticed with Governors vs Senators in the following states:

Arkansas is going to elect a Democrat Governor by a decisive margin, but going to kick out their Democrat Senator (Blanche Lincoln) on the same ballot. Why? Lincoln isn’t a radical. She’s a Bill Clinton squish who will do what the polls say to do. Are you really THAT mad at her for her vote on Obamacare (rhetorical since the answer appears to be yes, but I still don’t get it). Course, I may get it with time. I’m late to the anti-Obamacare game since I initially supported it before finding out it’s gory power grab deficit steroiding details.

Ohio is going to elect their next Republican senator with a victory of 15 or more points ahead of the Democrat opponent, however they are only going to trade their Democrat Governor for Republican John Kasich by 2-4 points. That one is less interesting since it lacks the party divide, so that’s all I’ll say about it. The next one is the most wtf-er:

Connecticut is more interesting because it is going to elect a Republican Governor by a point or two yet it is going to reject the Republican candidate for senate by double digit margin (Update: The senate race went as I predicted but the Republican Tom Foley lost by 1% to Democrat Dan Malloy: 48%.9% to the Democrats 49.5% – or about 7,000 votes). It’s insane because Connecticut is a dark blue Democrat state and the Republican Governor they’re about to elect seems more conservative than the Republican Senate candidate they’re going to reject. The Gov seems totally blah, while Linda McMahon for senate is an outstanding candidate running against the totally lackluster Democrat Sidney Blumethal. McMahon is a millionaire self funding her campaign and has vowed to work for god-damn free in the US senate, not take any special benefits in addition to not taking a salary and will only serve 2 terms if elected so she never becomes a corrupt career politician. The dude running against her lied about serving in Vietnam and will not only take his full salary and benefits but thinks the answers to solving our broken economy is more government spending, more government regulation and more taxes. Wtf Connecticut.

and WTF California? We have the former CEO of eBay running for Governor of our bankrupt state and we’re supposed to be scared of her for some reason. People are bashing her because she’s a billionaire, but not me. Cuz you know who else is a billionaire? Um, Tony Stark… also known as IRON MAN. And a young gentleman named Bruce Wayne aka BATMAN. So a billionaire using their millions to self fund a campaign they are trying to win with a platform of reducing the size of government (ie: give themselves LESS power for the benefit of the citizens)… and that’s…bad. According to…dumb people, I guess. Makes no sense.

My dumb state is also set to re-elect Barbara Boxer for a third term as Senator despite her being a useless waste and kindov a total bitch.

Californians are stupid.

See more on Fiorina, Whitman and McMahon as well as what could have been in New York here in the Missed Opportunities of the 2010 Midterms.

UPDATE: Colorado and Washington both went Democrat by slim margins and Harry Reid pulled out a 5 point win in Nevada, making my prediction map close, but still off by 3. Washington and CO I knew were gonna be tough bets but I am shocked by Nevada.

Harry Reids weirdo Factor

I admit that I want polished and personable politicians. I also admit that that is a childish and counterproductive desire – especially with Senators, whose only important job is to vote on things. Still, I get creeped out by weird politicians and in Nevada, both Senate candidates creep me the hell out. Incumbent Senator Harry Reid (D) is a slow spoken dim bulb spread on a slice of blah-milquetoast while his challenger Sharon Angle is a tightly wound awkward jittery goof that gives the impression of no one really being “there” on the inside. I’m not a Republican and I don’t live in Nevada, so I have no say in this whatsoever, but I would have preferred either of Angles 2 main challengers: Danny Tarkanian – son of some famous coach of some sport or something and Sue Lowden – a former beauty pageant winner (with other accomplishments that I dont care about). But Angle was the “Tea Party” favorite and she won the Republican nomination, which gives Nevadans an icky choice to make. I started leaning towards Angle after a pitch for her made by Dennis Miller, which makes sense, but then Reid came at me with this very personable 4 minute silly interview. First, here’s Millers take on Angle:

Miller had a previous high profile rant against Reid in 2007 that was of similar thesis.

The clip of Reid is from RighNetwork, a new conservative Cable “On Demand” channel that has these little segments where they ask silly questions to some political figure. So far Reid is the only left-of-center person in the series and i’m not sure why he’s included at all. There are no gotcha questions or any tips that this is an opposition media source that is sitting down with him. The tone is jovial and light and Reid comes off excellently.

UPDATE: So dazzled by Reids show of genuine humanity was I that I failed to notice how badly he fumbled the question of “Can you think of a greatest living American?” by naming 2 famous, but pretty unremarkable (for anything good anyway) senators who are, eh, no longer living:

It may be even more remarkable that Reid apparently can’t comprehend a softball question. What do these two have in common? They’re both dead, not living. What else do they have in common? Their supposed greatness came from winning elections in safe seats for almost half a century or more. Byrd’s example is especially notable, as Byrd was a Klan recruiter who used that safe seat to filibuster the Civil Rights Act in the Senate. Kennedy used his connections and his political power to duck responsibility for a vehicular homicide, and then lived a dissolute life on the grandest of American stages.

Most people would look outside the clubby Senate for a greatest living American anyway, but even if they didn’t, they would be looking for an American that still registers above room temperature.

Beck bags on Brown

This is so weird that I don’t even have a guess on how to explain it. Is Beck a closet liberal? Is he lying with this commentary because he knows that if he comes out against him then it will actually help Brown? Has he been lying about his ideology all this time and couldn’t hold back any more in this instance? None of these make any sense.

wtf? this is just creepy. It reeks of projection in a big bad way. I thought I was being cute by saying yesterday that he “pimped out his daughters” but Beck is being serious, which makes it retarded. Um, the dude wasn’t like “check out how fucking hot my daughters are! lol u guyz. who wants to tap this?? seriously. you can do it. i’ll let you. lol. can I watch tho?? lol, nah, jk. maybe! lol!!1”. Mark Levin, a conservative radio host who has criticize Beck before, kinda nails it here:

You know, the really ignorant thing about criticizing Brown is that in kidding around with his girls, it actually shows he is a good family man. Ask any guy who is a father of girls: doing something deliberately to provoke the “oh daddy!” squirm of embarrassment from the teenage daughters is something only a father with a good, comfortable relationship does (and he never misses a chance to do so).

If smearing Brown was a joke, I don’t think it was very funny. It’s very weird.

UPDATE: it gets even weirder… Beck responded to this with 4 minutes of saying “it was just a joke, you need to learn to take a joke, joke joke JOKE JOKE JUST A JOKE…. joke”. wtf? This is… not honest. Beck was making jokes… in service to the smearing of this Brown guy. No one was crying about making fun of a politician, as Glenn is responding to (he’s on some show where the host is named Jay, not that you’d know that from the uploaders logo being the only thing visible on this clip). The reason Becks rants about Brown being creepy and a person of poor judgment who can’t be trusted were weird and smears were not because Beck used colorful language like “this could end with a dead intern”, it was because Beck was serious about the criticisms behind the jokes and that is weird.

Even more on the “just a joke” brigade from Glenns own show (which reveals that this happened before the above clip and the show he was on was a local Boston radio show):

Mass Backwards: M-cheusettes elects Republican

Tonights special election can be summed up in the following picture:

But if you want to hear the winners version, then here that is too:

“I go to Washington as the representative of no faction or interest, answering only to my conscience and to the people. I’ve got a lot to learn in the Senate, but I know who I am and I know who I serve.

“I’m Scott Brown,

“I’m from Wrentham,

“I drive a truck, and I am nobody’s senator but yours.”

The victory speech took place during MSNBC’s Countdown, where host Keith Olberman had just smeared Scott Brown as a bigot (based on nothing, of course) and all around baddie. Tears.

The clip is worth watching and skipping to the end (around the 8 minute mark) where the Senator elect pimps out his daughters on national tv. Yes, I’m serious, and yes it’s awesome. not only cuz it’s the ultimate “daaaad, ur embarrassing meeee” moment, but because they’re both doable. Announcing their availability was a pretty humorous move.

How the hell could a Republican win the seat held by Ted Kennedy, one of the most liberal Democrats ever over the span of 30 years? Well… See its not that the democrats are playing checkers and the republicans are playing chess. Its that the Republicans are playing chess and the democrats are in the nurses office because, once again, they’ve glued their balls to their thighs’

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c
Mass Backwards
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show
Full Episodes		 Political Humor Health Care Crisis

If Sean Hannity runs for president…

In 2005, veteran Whitehouse reporter Helen Thomas was quoted as saying to The Hill magazine that if Dick Cheney runs for president, she’d kill herself. Now in 2009, I am compelled to make a similar announcement as the thought of President Hannity is floated by one of his radio colleagues guesting on his show.hannity2012

WND reports that Hannity said he would consider becoming a candidate for President of the United States…. if God directs him.*groan*

“I’ve never made a decision in my life without – whatever destiny God has you’ve got to fulfill it,” he is said to have said, adding “I’m not sure that’s my destiny.”

WND also editorializes that “Hannity would make a formidable candidate, with the likability of Reagan, good looks and strong convictions”. I’ll ignore whether he’s good looking or not but the “likability of Reagan?” Don’t make me puke. Can you think of one Democrat that would cross-over to vote for a Hannity ticket? Strong convictions? How is “whatever the republican party says is awesome” a “strong conviction”? oy u guyz…

Later in the program, a member of the audience asked what the host thought of a Hannity-Palin ticket with the following response:

The studio audience erupted in applause.

Hannity asked: “Would any of you really want me to run?”

Loud applause followed.

Hannity then asked, “How about I just stay on the radio?”

No applause.