Replies

How do you feel about the Lugar defeat in IN? Lugar was a lock to be reelected, which would help the GOP take over the Senate. Instead, during the primaries, a more conservative Rep, Richard Mourdock, was nominated. He will face a much more difficult election. Using your logic, you would have advised the voters to go for Lugar, despite his RINO voting record and the fact he didn't even live in the state anymore. Your "logic" only works if you think Romney and Obama are exactly the same and that Goode or someone else can actually win. As an aside, Lugar has proven to be a sore loser refusing to help Mourdock in his campaign. This is the problem with having politicians who have been feeding at the public trough most of their adult lives. They feel entitled to the position. You should walk the halls of Congress to see the trappings of power and the special interests standing at their door. You criticize Ross Perot, but fail to understand why he had such traction among the voters. Third parties have a positive impact on the system. The two major parties start paying attention to third parties when their ideas gain traction among the public. Usually, the major parties adopt those ideas. Unfortunately, this time, movements like the Tea Party are being demonized instead of being embraced. The GOP does it as its peril. I understood Ross Perot's traction and would have gladly voted for him if he had a snowball's chance of being other than a spoiler. Many voted for Ross and look who we got. You want to do it all over again.

I see the Kool Aid is flowing freely at FR these days - Rush, Palin, Levin, and a host of other conservative paragons are being cast off as unclean because they see a clear difference between Obama and Romney. I guess lesser minds will philosophize and then bend to stronger personalities in order to validate themselves, but this is lunacy.

Your "logic" only works if you think Romney and Obama are exactly the same and that Goode or someone else can actually win.

Nonsense. What you seem to be missing is that voting is a matter of principle and conscience as well as pragmatism. You don't vote for people only if you think they can win or he/she is the lesser of two evils. For example, everyone knows that Obama is a lock to win in CA. Setting aside the downticket choices, what does it matter if someone votes for Goode in CA versus Romney?