rw_joke.jpg

Last night Mike Krempasky of Red State was on CNN saying how liberal blogs wouldn't be taken seriously because of Ned Lamont's loss.  We understand that Krempasky didn't quite get the implications of the Democratic landslide that Ned's campaign triggered, but maybe he didn't look at the fruits of their fundraising efforts on behalf of GOP candidates?

Bowers

Here's the 1-20 'losers' they supported….And just for the record, their sole victory came against Rahm Emanual's $3M+ selfish gambit. Had netroots-backed Christine Cegelis had just $500K of that amount and the nomination, instead of the machine-supported out-of-district-Duckworth, we could have defeated Roskam too.

Not that I'm opposed to backing candidates out of principle, but if Lamont's loss is his criteria for judging whether we should be taken seriously or not, how seriously should we be taking them?