[Wayne07]

What is says is that if you have a candidate who can actually win in a very liberal state, even if is he a squishy RINO, it is better than having a liberal democrat instead.

You should hunt rinos in texas when you can get a real conservative elected, but if it is Massachusetts or Delaware, take what you can get.

I supported Mourdock over Lugar for Indiana, and he should have won. But it was pointless to support O'Donnell who never had a chance.

[Moseley]

What is says is that if you have a candidate who can actually win in a very liberal state, even if is he a squishy RINO, it is better than having a liberal democrat instead.

Then why did moderate Mitt Romney get the same percentage of the vote (40%) in Delaware as Christine O'Donnell got in Delaware (40%) for US Senate?

Mike Castle's last opponent spent only $26,000 yet Castle got only 61% of the vote. When you get only 61% against an opponent spending only $26,000 for a Congressional seat, Mike Castle was a dead man walking, politicall. Mike Castle would have been down in Jan Ting territory. Castle would have lost by a WORSE margin than O'Donnell. For one thing, Castle could not have raised any serious money for the campaign.