“You are playing with fire by deliberately trying to replace Republicans with Democrats.”
Once again you read what you think I’m saying instead of what I’m actually saying.
So let me make it perfectly clear to you. I don’t want republicans replaced with democrats. I want the old guard go along republicans replaced on the ballot or in their offices with conservative republicans. And in particular, in Mitch McConnell’s case, SINCE HE IS THE REPUBLICAN LEADER AND NOBODY WILL CHALLENGE HIM, I want him removed from office one way or the other. I think a conservative could beat him in a primary, but only if he is weakened. Otherwise, the whole republican establishment will get behind him to make sure their go along leader remains in office.
I thought Coleman was a good senator. But if he was the republcan leader and was constantly capitulating to the democrats, I would advocate for his replacement with some other republican in the primary.
Now, you say Coleman was good enough. Well, there were 3000 voters in MN who pitched the same kind of hissy fit you want to pitch, who decided it was preferable to vote for the "third party" candidates.
Do you not see the evil that came out of their hisssy fits. Because of those 3000 morons, we have Obamacare. Even ONE senator makes a huge difference. You said you refused to vote for Scott Brown, well, Scott Brown voted against Obamacare and you're never going to do any better in MA.
Do you understand the necessity of majorities? We MUST get to 51 senators and it doesn't matter who they are--the crappiest RINO is still better than a Demcorat--any day. That R after the name is what is important. The party with 51 senators controls the agenda.
You're saying you don't care if Harry Reid continues to be Majority Leader--you'd rather have him that McConnell and I'm saying that is STUPID, STUPID, STUPID.
I have no problem replacing McConnell in a primary but be darned careful what you wish for but NEVER, NEVER allow a Democrat be elected if possible to prevent it--NEVER.