View Single Post
  #35  
Old 11-03-2010, 10:51 AM
Kathy63 Kathy63 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 380
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ayatollahgondola View Post
Pedictably, Chelene did horribly. She didn't even make the 2% level. a few of the counties she pulled a little better when taken individually, but since this was a statewide race, those don't matter when diluted by the greater mass.

I was reading how the press treated O'Donnel after the defeat, and she pretty much mirrors Chelene in history and temperment. Both had no experience, no real education, and both lied about their credentials. Both lost their homes prior to the race, and both had debts owed to supporters and others before their run. The similarities don't end there, but O'donnel probably cost the republicans that possibly pivotal seat, whereas Chelene didn't even come close to mattering.
Seems like someone said that in the beginning. Someone did say that Chelene Nightengale was doing this to have another failure on her resume and because it felt good and felt really important to be a gubanatorial candidate.

Oh yes.

It was me.

Christine O'Donnell did better because she did have a history and served in the state assembly before making her senate run. She didn't enter the race because some ego bump needed massaging.
Reply With Quote