Posted on 08/30/2010 1:08:25 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Or another way to say it, Sarah Palin has become the star headliner and McCain is the opening act.
There are small victories and big victories. That was a BIG VICTORY!
Yep, and politicians recognize that power.
“Yeah, he’s a pro-baby-killing socialist. But he’s OUR baby-killing socialist!”
Signed,
The Republicans
brown was the 63rd vote on that ‘jobs forward bill’. cannot be sure he would have been the deciding vote. I hope we can elect a dozen house GOPers like him from places like ct, ri, vt, ny. we cannot live with a dem monopoly in the northeast.
i think some people just resent the fact that scott brown won and more conservative republicans lose. In new england. here is another new england republican. running against pat leahy vermont.
http://www.lenbritton.com/on-the-issues/
if he wins, we will have another new england Rino to complain about. do not get an ulcer over it. he has no chance.
yep, he’s OUR baby-killing socialist ... who voted NO on Elena Kagan. The real baby-killing socialist.
I knew I could count on you to brag on your pro-baby-killing socialist.
Then Hayworth should have won then, right? You just answered your own question. How did Hayworth lose in an environment that favored him?
Removing an incumbant from your own side of the isle is never a favored position to be in. In this instance, McCain being a devout Leftist and this being an open primary where Democrats could vote for him, did you really consider this to have been a favored environment for Hayworth? I doubt it.
And then you had McCain shelling out millions to keep airing Palin spots because of their impact, and yet some folks try to pass that off as of no significance related to Hayworth being able to gain traction.
It doesn't matter if the ads ran 24/7. It's Hayworth's job to get votes. In the end, Sarah's endorsement doesn't matter because it was a forgone conclusion that she was going to support McCain anyway. Even Hayworth recognized this fact.
It doesn't matter if the adds ran 24/7? Oh really.
It is Hayworth's job to try to convince enough Arizonans to back him, but it is other professed Conservatives job to help him do it, when there is a person of McCain's caliber running against them. Palin's only duty was to country and sound Conservative principles. It's why so many people voted for the McCain ticket, because Sarah was on it. He understood that. She didn't?
What do you think our job as Conservatives was in this Arizona primary, vote for McCain?
Hayworth wasn't going to trash Palin for backing McCain. The only credit he gets is for refraining, is folks like you to job him by saying he understood perfectly well why she did it. There's no excuse for her doing it and you know it.
How often do you see candidates being successful when out spent ten to one, with party leaders coming out against them even when the guy they’re running against is as clearly damaged goods as McCain was?
Cough Joe Miller, cough Marco Rubio, cough Nikki Haley, cough almost Handel in GA.
As near as I can tell, Miller was outspent about five to one. Suprisingly he got an edorsement that meant nothing, Sarah Palin's. He also got the Tea Party endorsement, rather strange since Murkowski is another RINO in need of a pasture just like McCain, yet the Tea Party took a pass on endorsing Hayworth.
As for Rubio, he seems to have gotten Tea Party support. Once again, it's rather strange that Crist being the sap he is, and McCain being the sap he is, the Tea Party didn't back Hayworth too. I'm sure it had nothing to do with Sarah Palin shouting from the podium that McCain was one with them. I'm not readily finding campaign expense figures for Rubio vs Crist. He may have been outspent 10 or more to one, but I can't verify it pro or con.
As for Haley, Palin's endorsement sent her from near oblivion to 300 appearances on the local television stations a week in short order. So much for Palin's endorsement not having any impact on states other than Alaska. It appears that Haley had less funds available than those she opposed, but I didn't find a good source for reference.
So I hope you get your throat cleared soon enough to realize Sarah Palin endorseed at least two of these folks, and the Tea Party did too, at least two of them. Of course that doesn't really matter, because donations, personal endorsements by Sarah Palin mean nothing in the overall scheme of things. Right?
It’s your take that the voters of Arizona weren’t affected by Palin’s endorsement
Nope because everyone knew that she was going to campaign for him, and most of them complained about it on her Facebook page. So logic dictates that they should have supported JD.
Except for the fact that the Democrats were also voting for McCain. Oh sheeze, there is that...
yet McCain likely spent between ten and fifteen million airing it because his internal numbers evidently pointed to the necessity? That makes sense to you?
Again, it's more vindication that Palin's endorsement was a non-factor.
Wow, at one point I thought you were pretty savvy. This is laying waste to your cred bud.
McCain is an incumbent with millions and seniority. JD lost his Republican-leaning district in 2006 and made some horrible mis-steps. Why do you think AZ voters voted the way they did?
I think the confusion about J. D.'s Conservative credentials after Palin and a host of Republican elected officials laid waste to his ability to claim he was the go-to candidate.
That coupled with the ability of Democrats to vote for McCain, pretty well sewed the victory up for McCain.
Horrible mis-steps? What is as horrible as McCain's carreer of mis-steps? Seriously. We've still goT folks like you here claiming that Hayworth was a hack, and McCain was the better candidate.
You folks are looking everywhere for an answer, when it’s right in front of you. Can’t say as I blame you though.
How are we looking for an answer when the question isn't germane to the central issue?
Look, you can dismiss the Palin endorsement and the millions that were spent on airing it for months on end if you like. That just leaves you out there hanging on a limb by yourself.
You can say it doesn't matter every minute for the rest of your life. The fact is, McCain spent $10 to $15 million dollars running the add. You evidently think he did that for the fun of it, just to keep radio stations in business.
Palin is no more a part of McCain than Bush I was when he went his own way after Reagan. She supported him purely out of political courtesy and to defuse an issue from the left.
Palin endorsed McCain. She participated in creating spots for him for airing in Arizona. She made a swing through the state making physical appearances there. She went on FoxNews with him, to push him for re-election. She made appearances at Tea Party events saying he supported the Tea Party movement.
Out side of returning to the state to campaign with him again, when he didn't need it by that point, she did everything she could to support him.
I suppose you think she did that on her own, without McCain asking her to. She just supported him because it really didn't make any difference.
Wow.
LOL, out of gas huh Ansel. I was asked for my personal opinion and I gave it. Now spend the rest of the night throwing a hissy fit over it. I don’t mind.
None are so blind as those who will not see, they say.
Well, seems like it to me anyway in this instance. It’s an old saying that seems to fit rather well at times huh.
It really does.
So, right and wrong are relative, depending on location?
No matter how you color or spin it, it is hypocritical to criticize Brown and simultaneously support McCain, when McCain is more liberal of the two and has harmed our nation much more.
Actually, those who took the time found out quite a bit about Brown and he has turned out to be more or less what we expected. He’s a good solid citizen who’ll vote with conservatives maybe 60-70% of the time and that’s pretty good from Massachusetts. After this election he’ll be one in 47 or so, and thus the bloom is off the rose. I predict Miller from Alaska will be the “Real Deal” as far as conservative stars and Brown with fade into the solid but stolid mode, much the same way that Warren Rudman did.
The problem with a guy like Brown is this. If he enters the Senate and get solid advice from a reasoned Conservative, he’ll probably be a lot more likely to side with them. Why? Because the Conservative arguments make sense.
Enter the RINO McCain. He holds a meeting with him within 48 hours of his entry into the U. S. Senate and explains that it is important that he keep a level head and keep open lines of communication with the Democrats as well as the Republicans in the interest of comity.
The lines of Conservatism are blurred, and McCain makes it sound as if the Liberal mindset makes sense quite often. That sounds good to him because he comes from a liberal state. No need to upset anyone. He’ll just vote with the Democrats when he feels like it.
I don’t think Brown had to be as bad as he will be. I think the meeting with McCain was very unfortunate. And now I’m fearful that he’ll have another six years to meet new Senators, that could have been solid on our side.
Fiorina will be a perfect example should she win.
Eh, I think honestly McCain is going to be marginalized in the same way Goldwater was after 1980. Brown seems to be his own man. I’ll give you another example. The easiest thing he could have done was to go along with homosexualizing the military. It would have played well here. Instead, he stuck to his guns and refused to side with Barney Frank over the Marine Corps (Kudos to Jim Webb as well!). I think this points to the fact Brown is approaching this issue by issue and while he may listen to other views ultimately he makes up his own mind.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.