Latest reader comments

  • Reply to: Sunday News: From the Editorial pages   18 hours 46 min ago

    I could go through the rest of my life without hearing from the News and Observer. Every time I do hear about them I’m filled with disappointment, again and again and again.

    You’re doing a good job keeping them off of our site.

  • Reply to: Sunday News: From the Editorial pages   20 hours 24 min ago

    They apparently just assumed Dan McCready ran his campaign the way Republican tv ads portrayed it, instead of actually doing their research. It's just a big, hot mess, frankly. I expect a lot more from the Editorial Board. Most of their arguments are pretty cogent.

  • Reply to: Sunday News: From the Editorial pages   20 hours 36 min ago

    ... merely a collection of talking points from the NC GOP.

  • Reply to: Sunday News: From the Editorial pages   21 hours 4 min ago

    This week's loser is the N&O Editorial Board itself, for making the wrong conclusions in the NC09 race:

    Early this year, when Republican Mark Harris called for a new election in North Carolina’s disputed 9th Congressional District...

    Let me interrupt you right there, because that is a heinous misrepresentation of the facts. Mark Harris fought tooth and nail to keep his fraudulent victory, and only (tearfully) acquiesced to a new election after his own damn son testified against him. Carry on... Republicans wanted little to do with taking his place on the ballot. They cited varying reasons such as work and family, but there also was a clear political reality at play: The Republican nominee would be running against a well-moneyed Democrat who had barely lost in a race that was now tainted by Republican election fraud. Why spend time and political capital on such an uphill climb?

    On Tuesday, Dan Bishop showed why. The Mecklenburg Republican beat McCready in a race that was close — but not as close as the disputed 9th District result last November. Bishop’s win — and McCready’s somewhat disappointing performance — should at least raise the eyebrows of Democrats looking ahead to the 2020 election.

    I'm with you for the most part there, but not for the reasons you think:

    McCready, while not a dynamic candidate, ran a campaign that hewed to the Democratic playbook. He talked a lot about health care and the Republican threat to pre-existing conditions. He didn’t talk a lot about Donald Trump. He campaigned vigorously and didn’t make any blunders. And he lost by more votes, to a more flammable candidate, than 10 months ago.

    He most certainly did not "hew to the Democratic playbook," he swung pretty far right, and also made his campaign slogan "Country Over Party." This was an attempt to peel off a certain percentage of previous Harris voters, and it was a mistake. As a result, some 40,000 Democrats who had voted for him less than a year before, decided to stay home. Yes, the lower turnout affected both candidates. But if my guy had lost, and it was proven his opponent cheated, and I was given a second chance to make things right, my guy would have to really screw up for me to not take advantage of that second chance. And I believe he did:

    In part that’s because Bishop was a smarter campaigner than Harris, investing more energy in conservative districts and counties like Robeson, which McCready won last year but not Tuesday. More important, perhaps, was the message he carried to those conservatives — that he was running against liberals already in Washington who wanted to make structural changes to American government.

    Bishop didn’t say it nearly as politely. He called congressional Democrats “clowns” and socialists, and his party and president followed suit until election day. But the message appeared to resonate with at least some N.C. Republican voters who’ve seen national Democrats veer to the left since November.

    Funny you should mention November, because that's when Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez made a donation to the McCready campaign, and instead of just returning the donation, he chose to criticize her (again, in an effort to attract Republicans). He bemoaned about the "divisiveness" she was causing, and then later accused her of being "anti-Semitic."

    That pissed off the vast majority of Democrats in our state, including those who live in the 9th. But he did it because he just took for granted Democrats would show up at the polls, regardless of what he said, and regardless of how far he swung to the right. That in itself is an insult to our intelligence. And so is this:

    Liberals will argue that Americans voted for big change in 2018, which may be true, and in some cases such change may be a good idea. But pushing for fundamental, systemic transformation comes with a risk of unsettling moderate and conservative fence-sitters who might merely be troubled by the guy in the White House right now. Bishop exploited that discomfort in rural NC counties Tuesday, and that strategy could be fruitful in 2020 swing states like Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania — and North Carolina. Are Democrats listening?

    You're forgetting one important point: McCready didn't run on a radical agenda, or a Socialist agenda, he actually did all the things you're implying Democrats should do in 2020. And he got his ass kicked. So thanks, but no thanks. The system needs to be changed, and Democrats need to be right at the forefront pushing that change.

  • Reply to: Friday News: Conspiracy   2 days 20 hours ago

    So it was a Democratic conspiracy, with the Governor behind it, to override his Veto. That's some master-level stupid right there. Like, falling into an open mine shaft stupid. This is why we can't have nice things...