Arpaio won't run

[CARLHAYDEN]

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/05/03/arpaio-wont-run-for-governor-in-arizona/

You must be logged in to read this quote.

First, I told azmagic several weeks ago that Joe would not run for Governor.

Second, its really funny to see candidates for public office trying to claim that they are endorsed by Sheriff Joe.  Bitter-Smith is a case in  point.

Third, Arpaio likes being Sheriff, especially being billed as America's toughest Sheriff.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Why is he sitting on millions of dollars in campaign cash if he doesn't want higher office??!

Again, can anyone help me with this?  The guy has like a million and a half dollars he's sitting on...for what?  A sheriff's race?

When I saw that kind of money, I presumed he had a strong interest in governor.  I don't know about Arizona, but those types of contributions can typically be difficult to transfer from a state account to a federal one.

Look, he can transfer much of it to contributions to candidates for state legislature.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Remember that Arizona has a bit of a tradition of electing crazies as governor.

We apologize for Napolitano.  She only got initially elected due to a three way general election in which she did NOT win a majority of the vote (just a narrow plurality) over a Republican candidate liked to Qwest (in that year slightly more toxic than being linked to AIG is today).

[CARLHAYDEN]

Remember that Arizona has a bit of a tradition of electing crazies as governor.

We apologize for Napolitano.  She only got initially elected due to a three way general election in which she did NOT win a majority of the vote (just a narrow plurality) over a Republican candidate liked to Qwest (in that year slightly more toxic than being linked to AIG is today).

And what's your excuse for her landslide win four years later?

In any case, you deftly overlooked Bacon King's tacit reference to Evan Mecham, and I may as well throw Fife "crafts of unknown origin" Symington into the mix too.  As you well know, both nutcases ended their terms early in disgrace.

First, 2006 was a Democrat year.

Second, the Republican party was in the initial stages of a civil war at that time, which has been substantially resolved today.

Third, the Republican nominee in 2006, while a nice man, was inept politically.

Fourth, Symington did make mistakes in his life, including saving the life of a scumbag, when he (Symington) was a lifeguard.

[CARLHAYDEN]

The Democrats gained a couple of Congressional seats in Arizona in 2006, as well as other offices.

Don't know why you decided to insert "Thailand," into this thread.  Was it just a matter of trying to change the subject?

[CARLHAYDEN]

Well, I guess you're making as much sense as you usually do (zero equals zero).

[CARLHAYDEN]

From the Seattle Times:

By Kyung M. Song

Seattle Times Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON — For the second time in three months, an unexpected event has opened up a plum job for U.S. Rep. Norm Dicks.

But this time, the Bremerton Democrat

-----

Hmm.

I suppose a certain poster at this forum would have us believe that the writer is referring to a party in Thailand.

Another poster would have us believe that anyone who disagrees is "dense."

Now, drop the stupidity or I'll post other examples!

[CARLHAYDEN]

A member of the Democratic Party is a Democrat....nobody is disputing this. Do you really not see what this is about? Really?

Yes.

You're being 'dense.'

[CARLHAYDEN]

A member of the Democratic Party is a Democrat....nobody is disputing this. Do you really not see what this is about? Really?

Yes.

You're being 'dense.'

1) Let's try this: Carl, are you a citizen of the State of "Arizonian"? "Democrat" is a personal adjective; "Democratic" is a noun.

2) 2006 being a good year for Democrats is a pretty flimsy excuse for Napolitano winning reelection by almost a 2-1 margin and sweeping every county in the state by double-digits. Sorry Carl, but she must've done something right.

Regarding others' comments about Arpaio being electorally invulnerable, I wouldn't be so sure. In 08 he won reelection with only 55% of the vote. Not great for a 16 year incumbent in a Republican County while McCain was simultaneously carrying Maricopa by over 10 points. It might be county residents realize Sheriff Joe isn't so much uniquely "tough" as a "media whore".

First, from Merriam-Webster Onlince Dictionary:

Main Entry: dem·o·crat
Pronunciation: \ˈde-mə-ˌkrat\
Function: noun

Second, guess you are in to making things up.  Where did you get "arizonian"? 

Third, if you bothered to read my post you would see that not only did I point out that 1986 was a bad year for Republicans, and a good year for Democrats, biut, that in addition the Republican candidate for Governor was unusually weak candidate (a nice guy, but weak).

[CARLHAYDEN]

Nobody disputes Democrat is a noun, just your missuse of it as an adjective dawg.

But, Badget posted that "'Democrat' is a personal adjective."

Or, didn't you read his post?

[CARLHAYDEN]

Badger seems to have got it mixed up, but the rest of us have hopefully helped to educate you.

Perhaps you might want to "educate" the gentleman (a 'progressive Democrat') who runs Pollster (used to be Mystery Pollster), who in his reported polls on the generic ballot uses the term "Democrat" as a party identifier.

I can cite many others if you want.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Badger seems to have got it mixed up, but the rest of us have hopefully helped to educate you.

Perhaps you might want to "educate" the gentleman (a 'progressive Democrat') who runs Pollster (used to be Mystery Pollster), who in his reported polls on the generic ballot uses the term "Democrat" as a party identifier.

I can cite many others if you want.

Being a noun in that context, it is therefore a correct usage.

Next example?

Either you failed to understand my most recent post, or you are now agreeing with me.

Given your record of being disagreeable, I will presume the former.

The truth is that both terms 'Democrat party' and 'Democratic party' are used interchangeably.

The difference is merely in connotation.

It is very similiar to referring to the 'Obama regime' or the 'Obama administration.'

[CARLHAYDEN]

The truth is that both terms 'Democrat party' and 'Democratic party' are used interchangeably.

Sure, but only among illiterate right-wingers.  The actual truth is that the term 'Democrat party' is not grammatically correct when describing the U.S. Democratic Party.  You can use it to describe the aforementioned Thai party, however.  A party in Romania as well, I believe.

I'm glad to have helped educate you!  It's always a pleasure to point out your errors, and it's lucky for me that the opportunity arises so often. 

First, I'll have to tell Mark at Pollster that he's being called an 'illiterate right=winger' for referring to the Democrat party.  He'll get a laugh out of that.

Second, the truth is that both terms are used interchangeably, as I previously pointed out. 

Third, your knowledge of 'grammar' is excretable.

Fourth, you believe a lot of things, which does not make your beliefs correct.

Oh, and I am not the one in error.



personal attack removed

[CARLHAYDEN]

Second, the truth is that both terms are used interchangeably, as I previously pointed out.

As I also previously pointed out, this is only the case among illiterate right-wingers.  To use the term "Democrat party" in the context of the U.S. Democratic Party is incorrect, quite simply.

"Mark at Pollster" used the noun correctly.

Again, I'm glad to be of help to you! 

You continue to be wrong.

Mark used the term in exactly the same way a I have.



personal attack removed

[CARLHAYDEN]

Badger,

First, let me admit that I meant to type 2006 instead of 1986, but was dealing with another matter at the time and made an error.

Second, let me give you the primary definition from Merriam-Webster for "democratic":

Main Entry: dem·o·crat·ic
Pronunciation: \ˌde-mə-ˈkra-tik\
Function: adjective
Date: 1602
1 : of, relating to, or favoring democracy

So you see, its an adjective.

Third, I realize that like Joe, you believe in explaining your position whereas I have cited sources to support my contention.

Fourth, you really shouldn't comment on matters where you knowledge is incredibly inadequate.  There are a couple of small (population wise) counties in Arizona that are heavily Democrat.  Further, the war within the Republican party which has seen the routs of Senators in Pennsylvania, Utah and the Governor of Florida began in 2006 in Arizona.  So, 2006 was a weak year for Republicans in Arizona.

[CARLHAYDEN]

You are still incorrect.

Merely repeating your opinions is valueless.

[CARLHAYDEN]

But I've merely pointed out your recurring mistake for you.  You even made my case for me by providing two quotes from Merriam-Webster that showed you the difference between the variants of the word!  Firstly in Reply #39 of this thread, proving that 'democrat' is a noun, and again in Reply #60 proving that 'democratic' is an adjective.  So now you certainly have no excuse for misusing the word again.

I'm not asking for you to thank me, or apologize, but you should at least accept that you were wrong. 

Joe,

I cited that Democrat was a noun, correcting Badger (I cited authority on this matter).

I then corrected yoou in asserting that democratic is an adjective, again citing authority.




personal attacks removed