Posted on 10/21/2014 6:08:42 AM PDT by cotton1706
Republicans have the wind at their backs this year. But not every GOP nominee is taking advantage of that dynamic. As usual, some candidates are under-performing, proving once again that candidates and the campaigns they choose to run actually matter.
That should come as no surprise to anyone who watched Republican Senate nominees Todd Akin of Missouri and Richard Mourdock of Indiana implode in 2012 or Delaware Republican Christine O’Donnell and Colorado Republican Ken Buck lose in 2010.
But this year, the problem children are not candidates foisted on the party by the Club for Growth or tea party groups. This cycle, the problem is a handful of candidates favored by most in the Republican “establishment.” They looked like strong nominees (some even like slam dunks) a year before Election Day, but they haven’t acted that way.
In Georgia, GOP Senate nominee David Perdue continued to try to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory when he said that he was “proud” of his record of outsourcing jobs.
There clearly are benefits to individual businesses and consumers from outsourcing certain business activities, but the middle of a campaign is not the time to debate business strategy. Good candidates — experienced candidates — don’t fall into those kinds of traps.
Democrat Michelle Nunn has her own albatrosses — President Barack Obama and her Democratic label in Georgia — but Perdue has given her a campaign message that could help make the election about the Republican nominee rather than about Obama.
In Kansas, Republican Sen. Pat Roberts did the same thing when he allowed his re-election bid to be about him rather than about the president, the Affordable Care Act and the drumbeat of bad news over the past few months.
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.rollcall.com ...
Sounds like she believes in a 2nd revolution if the socialists prevail. So do I.
Angle was undercut by her own party.
So was Akin, because of a verbal slip. What he meant was just fine...that violent rape has a lower incidence of pregnancy. (Some young lady's parents probably have more than once breathed a sigh of relief on learning their daughter wasn't pregnant by a rapist.)
It was purely the way he said it, and his party should have sent in a media expert to help him out rather than destroying his campaign and giving that seat to a democrat.
In short, we should have fought instead of caved.
I’m not disagreeing with their stances in principle, but they should’ve been more judicious about it, since they were running for office. The whole “taking out your opponent” thing while discussing the tends to alarm the voters.
Should read:
“The whole “taking out your opponent” thing while running for office tends to alarm the voters.”
Thank you once again, “auto-correct.”
“In Georgia, GOP Senate nominee David Perdue continued to try to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory when he said that he was “proud” of his record of outsourcing jobs”
Of all the candidates that ran as republicans somehow we managed to nominate the most lackluster of the bunch. When you are running 3 pts behind a nothing burger like Michelle Nunn in a state like Georgia you are sub standard.
Don't. Most of the country including all of the Democrats will not trust a Republican led Senate Majority. You will have lots of people on your side.
OTOH, what could be worse than a Senate dominated by Obama and Harry Reid. I'll take one with anybody in charge that gives Ted Cruz and Mike Lee more power. You may not think they will get it but they think so.
Angle never had a chance.
See #12
I saw it already, as I did back in 2010. I was on record at the time ringing the alarm bell that her nomination would be a fiasco and that she was the one Republican who would hand Reid another easy win. She had lost office twice already (and was a VERY sore loser at that). Any of the other GOP candidates running would’ve won. Reid wanted her to be the nominee and he got his wish.
Ted Cruz was not the establishment choice. Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst was their guy.
Nonetheless, you don’t abandon your candidate like that once they’ve won the nomination.
I would abandon Thad Cochran in Mississippi, but only because he committed vote fraud to win. Endorsing vote fraud is eventually slitting your own throat.
If I have a pro-God, pro-Life, pro-Gun, pro-natural sexuality, pro-US security republican I will vote for them. I know there are other issues, but those are my core.
I abandoned her in 2006 after her blatantly false allegations of voter fraud against Dean Heller in the 1st Dist. House primary almost cost the GOP the safest seat in NV. She ran a disastrous challenge to Bill Raggio after she’d burned her bridges. That she ran at all in 2010 proved it was all about her and not about defeating Reid (even after that race, she threatened to run Indy if the NV GOP didn’t give her the nomination to succeed Heller in the House, which would guarantee a Dem win).
She was a loose cannon from the get-go, and as I said then and now, she was never going to win.
Ted Cruz was not the establishment choice. Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst was their guy.
++++
You make a good point.
But ask yourself who the GOPe will support when Cruz runs for reelection. I’ll answer that - Ted Cruz. They may prefer left leaning candidates but winning is more important. They will back Cruz.
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.