22 Comments

On NY ballots, parties can list any candidate willing to accept their endorsement. In the "Conservative" column, you'll usually find the GOP nominees listed as candidates. It's a way of keeping our third, fourth, fifth, and sixth parties politically relevant: to the extent that voters vote straight Conservative or Libertarian tickets, the GOP has to pay attention to those parties. (Ditto for the Democrats: if a Dem favors fracking, his name might not be in the Green column next time around.)

Expand full comment

I've always wanted to see one of insHannity's guests tell him, "If I wanted to watch you talk, which I don't, I would just turn on my TV," and then turn off the fucking camera. This was better.

Expand full comment

The Conservative Party USA (who probably don't use the abbreviation CPUSA) <a href=" http:\/\/www.conservativepartyusa.org\/register.html" target="_blank">think you can</a>, in any state. This was discussed a while back at <a href="http:\/\/www.allthingsdemocrat.com\/2011\/11\/hannitys-conservative-clowning-around\/" target="_blank">All Things Democrat</a>, with a nice picture of Hannity.

Expand full comment

It's a distinction without a difference since the candidates on the Conservative line are the GOP candidates, every time. I can't recall ever seeing a non-GOP candidate on that line in 30 years of NY voting.

Unlike, say, the Libertarian, Working Families, and Green parties, and whichever party is a front for Lyndon Larouche this year, which occasionally do run spoiler candidates of their own.

So Hannity is just posturing for his base, as usual.

Expand full comment

Richard Cohen's article sucked? BECAUSE HANNITY.

See? He really is the worst excuse.

Expand full comment

I think he's out on tour with the Washington Generals...

Expand full comment

It's not stupidity; it's ideolofy. The Murdoch ideology is that facts don't matter. Politics is driven by feelings. It's classic populism, dialed up to eleven.

It literally has no significance that any given statement can be disproved, just as Murdoch's "newspapers" don't care when they are caught making shit up or not fact-checking, or get sued for libel. They just shrug, pay up, and move on to the next thing. They've made their point and roused their rabble.

There's nothing new about this. Every time Joe McCarthy was asked how many Communists there were in the Congress, he came up with a different random number. It never bothered him or his followers. It's just straight-up demagoguery.

Expand full comment

Ellison must not have signed the contract stipulating that he can be contradicted and interrupted at any time and is to accept it graciously.

Expand full comment

Ellison out-shouted Hannity. That is really annoying but I can’t say that Hannity doesn’t deserve it. If I saw this on the TeeVee I wouldn’t have stayed on the channel more than a few seconds.

Expand full comment

I think it involves banging your head against a wall until Bachamnn or Palin starts to make sense.

Expand full comment

"Registered Conservative" = signed an employment contract with Fucks Gnus.

Expand full comment

If he expects the probability of quantum tunnelling to become significant, he's gonna have to lose a lot of weight. Starting with his clinically obese ego.

Expand full comment

At Faux, being educated disqualifies you from most jobs. An interesting contrast to <a href="http:\/\/economix.blogs.nytimes.com\/2012\/12\/04\/degree-inflation-jobs-that-newly-require-b-a-s\/" target="_blank">what's going on elsewhere. </a>

Expand full comment

Hannity owned, big time! I don't think we'll be seeing Ellison on Faux again anytime soon.

Expand full comment