This is how the MSM and RINO’s choose our candidates, textbook example
sad. MO has a conservative running who stumbled over his words....and they are willing to toss him aside for a RINO?
what on earth are we coming too? We deserve what we get then....shame on us....
and that not even elected by the PEOPLE!
“Emerson’s American Conservative Union ranking for 2011 was 56, and for 2010 88; Akin’s ratings, in contrast, were 91.67 and 100 in those years respectively.”
We Must Stand with Life, Stand with Conservatism, Stand with America and Stand with Todd Akin.
Who cares? This is an issue for the voters of MO to decide.
What are Conservative/GOP so easily distracted from by the bluster of the Democrat/Media propaganda machine?
We are winning big all over the place. Time to quit being suckers for the Democrat propaganda and stay on message.
The issue is still the economy people.
Who cares? This is an issue for the voters of MO to decide.
Why are Conservative/GOP so easily distracted from by the bluster of the Democrat/Media propaganda machine?
We are winning big all over the place. Time to quit being suckers for the Democrat propaganda and stay on message.
The issue is still the economy people.
Who finished second in that primary? Seems like that would be the logical choice.
Pile it on Freepers. Keep demanding that Akin pull out of the race. then we can replace him with another Susan Collins or Olympia Snowe.
If Akin pulls out the race, then we will be guaranteed another liberal Republican replacement.
If Akin does step down, and if the MO GOP appoints someone who didn’t run in the primaries, both Steelman and Brunner should sue. At a minimum, they could get an injunction against anyone who did not run the primary.
Brunner and Steelman should have the right of first refusal — they ran #2 and #3 in the primary.
Any appointee other than one who ran in the primary is a slap in the face to those who voted in the Republican Senatoral primary. The voters deserve better than a bunch of GOPelites ‘selecting’ a candidate.
If she finished second in the primary, a) she is not eligible, and b) if she were, she would be the logical choice to take the spot. Why WOULDN’T the second place finisher be elevated to first? But, as I say, she’s not eligible if she was on the primary ballot.
Why not try to all the next highest vote getter, John Brunner, take the slot, if it becomes open?
I can answer my own question, why not, he's NOT a RINO!!!
MO eGOP only RINOs need the job!
Talk about committing electoral suicide. You think you can get the prolife and conservative vote to turn out for her.
Akin isn’t dropping out, and if he did it would be a mistake for the MO GOP to nominate anyone but another conservative in his place. Anyone who opposes Obamacare would be an improvement over McCaskill though and would further our goal towards repealing it!
Are you saying that Akin is hanging on because he’s trying to negotiate his most conservative possible replacement?
“If the Missouri Republican Central Committee picks a replacement, this liberal RINO is a very big possibility.”
*************************************************************
If Akin withdraws and the MRCC picks a RINO/”Moderate” to run instead of either Sarah Steelman or John Brunner, the base will be COMPLETELY DEMORALIZED and p*ssed off in a major way. What an incredible stupid move that would be. Haven’t we seen enough of such idiotcy already?
If they instead pick Sarah Steelman as the replacement, I’d be “all in”.
If Akin quits it'll be Kit Bond.
She’s one of the few GOP moderates left, and by far the least conservative of the Missouri Republican congressional delegation. I predict a major backlash if Akin does leave and the GOP leadership picks her.
A colleague points out that Emerson is a member of the moderate-leaning Republican Main Street partnership, and generally less rightward than the three — Akin, Sarah Steelman, and John Brunner — who ran in the primary.It's out of the people's hands at this point.Emerson’s American Conservative Union ranking for 2011 was 56, and for 2010 88; Akin’s ratings, in contrast, were 91.67 and 100 in those years respectively."
If the GOP-e can force out a pro-life candidate and put in one of their top RINO's, that's what they will do.
Not exactly the second coming of Michelle Bachmann, but we’re not looking at Dede Scozzafava either:
www.ontheissues.org
Rated 0% by NARAL, indicating a pro-life voting record. (Dec 2003)
Rated 21% by the ACLU, indicating an anti-civil rights voting record. (Dec 2002)
Rated 0% by the HRC, indicating an anti-gay-rights stance. (Dec 2006)
Rated 47% by NAACP, indicating a mixed record on affirmative-action. (Dec 2006)
Rated 92% by the US COC, indicating a pro-business voting record. (Dec 2003)
Rated 14% by UFCW, indicating a pro-management voting record. (May 2012)
Rated 30% by CURE, indicating anti-rehabilitation crime votes. (Dec 2000
Rated -30 by NORML, indicating a “hard-on-drugs” stance. (Dec 2006)
Rated 27% by the NEA, indicating anti-public education votes. (Dec 2003)
Rated 17% by the CAF, indicating opposition to energy independence. (My addition.....BIG qualification needed here. NOT anti-energy independence.. anti-enviro-whacko programs) (Dec 2006)
Signed the No Climate Tax Pledge by AFP. (Nov 2010)
Rated -2 by AAI, indicating a anti-Arab anti-Palestine voting record. (May 2012)
Rated 50% by CATO, indicating a mixed record on trade issues. (Dec 2002)
Voted YES on the Ryan Budget: Medicare choice, tax & spending cuts. (Apr 2011)
Voted YES on repealing the “Prevention and Public Health” slush fund. (Apr 2011)
Rated 11% by SANE, indicating a pro-military voting record. (Dec 2003)
Rated 100% by FAIR, indicating a voting record restricting immigration. (Dec 2003)
Rated 100% by USBC, indicating a sealed-border stance. (Dec 2006)
Rated B+ by the ALI, indicating an acceptably anti-amnesty stance. (Nov 2010)
Rated 0% by the AU, indicating opposition to church-state separation. (Dec 2006)
Rated 54% by NTU, indicating “Satisfactory” on tax votes. (Dec 2003)
Rated 0% by the CTJ, indicating opposition to progressive taxation. (Dec 2006)
I just want to point out the obvious here.
Why is it that one asinine comment from a giy with a high-90s conservative ranking MUST!!! be tossed overboard while there’s still time and attacked by all these ‘conservative’ freepers, but the guy in the presidential slot with a lifetime of even more stupid statements and actual legislative actions must be rallied around because the primaries are over and there is no time left?
I want to see that addressed honestly before all the ‘Toss him’ crew gets too wound up.
I guess the candidates who actually ran in the primaries and gave the voters an opportunity to express their opinion don’t matter to the GOP kingmakers.