Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: grey_whiskers
It would be helpful if you were able to adduce even a single example in which the RINO strategy of bending over for the Democrats in an attempt to gain the hearts and minds of the mythical "mushy middle" ever really worked.

What on earth are you on about? Why did you even inject your commentary into this thread? You've wasted all this time because you apparently couldn't figure out my point that 2010 was NOT a "throw all the bums out on both sides" election. It was a throw the Democrats out election. When people say "throw all the bums out on both sides", the mean ALL incumbents (in case you hadn't figured that out). Such populist efforts never, ever work. In general elections you vote for Democrats or Republicans. If we actually ran a "throw all the bums out on both sides" general election in 2014 it would result in a Democrat House - which would mean MORE leftism, not less.

This discussion had nothing whatsoever to do with primaries. Nothing. Nowhere was I discussing primary strategy. It's fine if you'd like to talk about that, but primary strategy was NOT what my original comments to the other poster were about.

Since it seems like you are really determined to talk primary strategy, mine is exactly what William F Buckley said: vote for the most conservative candidate that CAN win. The exceptions might be outstanding movement type candidates that might not be seasoned quite enough to win yet, but obviously have an bright future. Nominating terrible candidates like O'Donnell, Angle, McMahon is simply a waste of time. In bright red states you can take some chances, push the envelope on some really great conservatives that would have a tough time making it elsewhere. An example would be Mourdoch. Yes, he turned out to be a bad candidate, but I think it was worth the gamble. Obviously we can't gamble wrong too much, but I really did think Mourdoch would be better than he was. Palin had Missouri right in endorsing Steelman who would easily have won, but the socon's were determined to go with Akin and he imploded as expected. But yeah, generally speaking in primaries, vote for the most conservative candidate that CAN win. You can't leave a lot of seats on the table over and over again - and we've done that at the statewide Senate level 2 cycles in a row.

101 posted on 12/30/2012 7:26:08 PM PST by Longbow1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies ]


To: Longbow1969
LOL! Push a troll hard enough, and they attempt to recast themselves as having been a true believer all along.

Here's the key, troll-boy.

You gave the game away here:

Since it seems like you are really determined to talk primary strategy, mine is exactly what William F Buckley said: vote for the most conservative candidate that CAN win.

This is code speak for "vote for Weepy Boner, vote for RINOs, because shut up."

McCain lost *despite* Palin -- after having dropped his campaign to run to DC to "solve the fiscal cliff" (that is, go spelunking). The mood of the voters was VERY anti-DC, so McCain's running to DC was EPIC FAIL.

Then he compounded it by saying in public of Obama, "You have nothing to fear from this man as your President" (which is codespeak for "slurp, slurp").

But remember? He was electable.

Then there was Romney whose butt-boys were instrumental in knifing Palin in the back from within the GOP, giving "bipartisan" cover to the Dems who were scared to death of her conservative-but-libertarian-leaning, Federalist, populist message, which was exactly right for the times.

The same Romney who went on to carpet-bomb conservatives in the Primaries; the same Romney who twisted the knife by changing primary rules in Virginia and elsewhere to eliminate other candidates.

But this was all OK, because he was "electable" -- because, you know, he wasn't one of those rabidly pro-life, fanatical, Tea-Partiers -- no, he was the wise, measured, sensible alternative, who could give reach-arounds reach across the aisle to Dems, just as he had as the Governor of Massachusetts.

And what happened outside of your autofellatory fever-dreams?

Reality, that's what.

TV ads where he was literally accused of MURDER -- over a women who was the wife of an employee of a company he *used* to own, lost her health insurance from *another* company, YEARS later.

"You didn't build that"

"Binders full of women."

Women of my acquaintance, with Master's Degrees, telling me with a straight face that if Romney were elected, contraception would be outlawed (they'd never heard of Griswold v. Connecticut, it seems).

Jabba the Crowley, the impartial, objective moderator, running interference for Obama MID-DEBATE, hiding behind her own skirts (as a woman) enabling her to snipe from behind cover.

Yeah, running to the left sure was electable.

Because, you know, leftists are fair-minded, and just, and are willing to work with Republicans, if only they'll just give up any core principles and bend over learn to "work together".

Unlike those racist bigot homophobe slutty gun nut stay-at-home-moms like Sarah Palin.

How's that hopey-changey stuff working out for you now, dipstick?

Oh, one other thing: you're lying about Akin. He wasn't the first choice -- there was a three-way race (fomented by RINOs like you in concert with the Dems, in order to discredit and marginalize conservatives).

Troll.

102 posted on 12/31/2012 8:28:26 AM PST by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson