Never said he will. But I don't think his vote will matter on that issue anyway. The Dems are going to either lose their majority or have it severely parred back. They couldn't pass cap and trade with 59-60 seats because of opposition by coal state Republican and Democratic Senators. They'll have even less chance of passing it after this election with a severely trimmed back majority--or even losing the majority in which case the GOP leadership need not even allow cap and trade a vote.
What about all the times Kirk's vote will matter and that we could probably count on him for, like rolling back some of Obamacare's provisions as he said he would vote to do or extending ALL the Bush tax cuts as he indicated he would vote to do?
As for the February primary, fair or not, it's over. Where was all this unfairness to stop Tea Party candidates elsewhere like in the races with the candidates you named? They managed to win their races despite what "the establishment" wanted. And Miller and O'Donnell won their primaries as Republicans, not as Libertarians. That was a primary race with a more narrow universe of voters than you have in a general election and thus upsets have more potential. I don't see a comparison to their races indicating a Libertarian can win a statewide Senate race in a blue state like Illinois when a Libertarian's never won such a race in more Republican states. For Labno to win, EVERYONE currently voting for Mark Kirk would have to race over to Labno's side instead. Not likely.
It's not his vote I'm concerned, it's his opinions. You need to understand that Kirk will be one of those go-to RINOs that the media and Obama will exploit to paint the rest of the Republicans as "extreme." He'll be on the Sunday shows saying that the new Republicans need to compromise and work with "our President." Do you really want Republicans to work with Obama?
They'll have even less chance of passing it after this election with a severely trimmed back majority
They could bring it up for a vote and throw in some tax credits, then Kirk will be used to sell it to the other Republicans. This is what happened in 1995 when Republicans took over Congress. The GOP lost seats in 1996 and 1998 because of this.
What about all the times Kirk's vote will matter and that we could probably count on him for, like rolling back some of Obamacare's provisions as he said he would vote to do or extending ALL the Bush tax cuts as he indicated he would vote to do?
I don't want to "roll back" some of Obamacare or "make it work better." I want the damn thing repealed. Do you understand what's at stake here? Why do you want somebody like Kirk who'll work with Obama and discourage the conservative agenda?
As for the February primary, fair or not, it's over.
Illinois had one of the earliest primaries in February. It is not fair to have such an early primary because nobody gets heard but the establishment candidate.