[ansel12]

They should have pulled him after what he did to Christine O’Donnell on the night that she won her primary, and how he did everything he could to throw ice water on her momentum during that week.

He really went after the tea party that year and hurt us bad.

[Strategerist]

You’re still blaming a SIXTEEN POINT LOSS on Rove?

He only dreams he was that powerful.

MAYBE a bad candidate like O’Donnell’s bad loss is the fault of the candidate. I realize that’s a completely insane, out there, crazy theory.

[American Dream 246]

They should have pulled him after what he did to Christine O’Donnell

And Sarah Palin, and Newt and...should I go on? Nasty nasty piece of... I am glad he is out. Just for the pleasure of seeing these nasty rinos finally get what they deserve after they have succeded to put down so many good conservatives.

Hope the door will hit you hard where it should..

[Dave W]

O'Donnell was a bad candidate - proven by her abysmal vote tally at the end of the 2010 Senate election. I may agree with O'Donnell, but you have to understand, voters are not going to vote for someone who they think is dumb. It is not going to happen.

You can fool yourself as many times as you want (Aikin and Murd...whatever his name is) but voters will not bite and vote for candidates they think are dumb or discredited.

A good candidate will take steps to make themselves credible to the voting public; bad ones won't.

That is politics 101 - plain and simple.

Deny it all you want, but it was proven in 2010 and again in 2012. Bad candidates don't win elections even when voters agree with their views. I am sure Missouri voters as a whole are more pro life than pro choice, but they won't vote for a candidate they think is dumb.