Posted on 09/10/2013 5:32:57 PM PDT by barmag25
A new Landmark/Rosetta Stone poll of the upcoming South Carolina senate primary, released last night, shows incumbent Senator Lindsey Graham to be facing a strong primary challenge in his bid for reelection next year. While Graham polls at 42 percent, that is well below the 50 percent needed to avoid a runoff. Should a runoff take place, he would run against the second place candidate, and if most of that other 58 percent unified behind the challenger, Graham could find himself being fired by Republican primary voters in his bid for another six-year term as South Carolina's Senior Senator.
Aside from that seat, there are 33 other senate seats in contention during this election cycle. With the Democrats finding themselves defending many of these seats, including some in so-called “red” Republican-leaning states, the GOP has an excellent opportunity to regain majority control of the U. S. Senate after the 2014 elections.
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
TEApublicans mostly become REpublicans upon taking their legislative seats. The NSA blackmail and the bribery start immediately.
We would be better off with the purple finger the Iraqis used. And at this point I think only taxpayers should be able to vote..otherwise it’s just “legal” stealing.
“Conservative” Ron Paul Jr. endorsed RINO McConnel.
bump
How accurate were they in 2012?
Might as well just kill ourselves then.
Great.
Just one thing, win the Senate by voting in Senators who will BRING BACK AMERICAN JOBS.
(hint)
The day after a GOP Senate majority is sworn in, the House should start passing impeachment bills - and do nothing else - until Obama is out of office.
On the surface it sounds great to be able to stick it to Harry Reid, but if the new additions are like McLame and Lindsey, then we’re not much better off.
If the GOPe passes amnesty I think they might become a very very small minority in the 2014 elections.
Ditto. Seems we heard this before in both 2010 and 2012.
If the GOP gets a senate majority, they can slow down, delay and kill a lot of Obama appointments to the federal bench.
That’s not unimportant.
Agree 100%
Rand Paul’s immigration speech
03.19.13 | Hon Sen Rand Paul (KY)
Posted on 03/19/2013 7:04:07 AM PDT by Perdogg
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2998395/posts
...The Republican Party must embrace more legal immigration.
Unfortunately, like many of the major debates in Washington, immigration has become a stalemate-where both sides are imprisoned by their own rhetoric or attachment to sacred cows that prevent the possibility of a balanced solution.
Immigration Reform will not occur until Conservative Republicans, like myself, become part of the solution. I am here today to begin that conversation.
Let’s start that conversation by acknowledging we aren’t going to deport 12 million illegal immigrants.
If you wish to work, if you wish to live and work in America, then we will find a place for you...
This is where prudence, compassion and thrift all point us toward the same goal: bringing these workers out of the shadows and into being taxpaying members of society.
Imagine 12 million people who are already here coming out of the shadows to become new taxpayers.12 million more people assimilating into society. 12 million more people being productive contributors.
[but he’s not in favor of amnesty, snicker, definition of is is]
Here's the passage at issue:In the 1980s, the war caucus in Congress armed bin Laden and the mujaheddin in their fight with the Soviet Union. In fact, it was the official position of the State Department to support radical jihad against the Soviets. We all know how well that worked out.Let's leave aside for now the insulting, utterly asinine, sickening, inexcusable use of the phrase "war caucus" to describe those (including Reagan!) who supported the mujaheddin against the Soviets. That word choice alone is almost entirely disqualifying for its purveyor to ever be president.
Instead, let's just look at a little history here -- because the ignorance evident in this paragraph is truly astonishing. One would be hard pressed to find even a single historian, whether right, left, or center, who would argue anything other than that the Soviet failure in Afghanistan was not just a huge factor, but probably an essential one, in the Soviets' ultimate loss of the Cold War. [Rand Paul’s Really Ignorant Paragraph | 7 Feb 2013]
Rand Slams Congress for Funding Egypt’s Generals:
‘How Does Your Conscience Feel Now?’
Foreign Policy | 15 Aug 2013 | John Hudson
Posted on 08/15/2013 5:44:10 PM PDT by Hoodat
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3055253/posts
Sen. Rand Paul is hammering his fellow senators for keeping billions in financial aid flowing to Egypt’s military — even as Cairo’s security forces massacre anti-government activists.
[by “anti-government activists” is meant church-burning jihadists]
Sen. Cruz Statement on Egypt (Suspend aid over anti-Muslim Brotherhood ‘coup’)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3055492/posts
Ted Cruz blames Egyptian violence on Obama’s disregard for foreign aid law
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3055589/posts
Thanks barmag25.
Graham is the worst of the backstabbers - worse than even Susan Collins or Olympia Snowe - they just are what they are, while Graham is just a turncoat who does it to get attention, not due to mere ideological differences - and he’s from a conservative state to boot. Of all the incumbents, removing him and replacing him with a conservative Senator would make a huge difference in the attitude of the caucus.
The leader doesn’t matter if people like Graham are holding the caucus hostage.
Didn’t we convince ourselves of that for the 2012 elections too? We thought that it couldn’t stay this bad and that the American public would wake up.
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.