Richard Lugar Loses GOP Indiana Senate Primary by Landslide

Daily Beast ^ | May 8, 2012 10:52 PM EDT | Lloyd Grove

[RC one]

The 36-year Senate veteran is trounced by Indiana State Treasurer Richard Mourdock, whose business and Tea Party backers spent $2.7 million to defeat a once-powerful pol they portrayed as out of touch.

That cracking, thudding sound emanating from Indiana on primary night Tuesday was the crumbling of a Washington institution, punctuated by muffled shrieks of terror from incumbent office-holders everywhere.

Republican Sen. Richard Lugar—a towering figure in the national-security, arms-control, and foreign-policy realms who six years ago was so popular in his home state that local Democrats didn’t bother to field an opponent—lost his bid for a seventh term to a lesser-known, more modestly financed challenger who successfully portrayed the 80-year-old incumbent as out of touch and not conservative enough.

[Conservativegreatgrandma]

Are you trying to say that we win by losing? OK.

[ObozoMustGo2012]

Chris Smith, gop rep for NJ is an NJ rep by that same reason. He lives in VA. He’s a HUGE RINO that needs to get booted for a strong conservative.

[BooBoo1000]

Those old fossils forget who elects them. They get so beholding to other outsider interests,(ie big commercial Donors) that they forget the folks back home. I was born and raised in Wyoming, and as far as I am concerned Alan Simpson can “ Shut up” also. He has had his day in the sun. Let him go lay on the porch.

[nuconvert]

What good is a RINO who votes with the Dems? How is there any difference?

[Conservativegreatgrandma]

First, Republicans MUST have more than 50 per cent in either the House or Senate. It doesn't matter how liberal a Republican is or how conservative is a Democrat--it's that party affiliation that matters. WE either have the majority, or we are dead in the water, just like what we have now in the Senate.

Besides, even the most liberal Republican will vote Republican in most crunch situations. If they vote with us 50% if the time, that's a lot better than zero per cent.

It's that majority that counts--it means EVERYTHING.

We must do everything possible to stop Democrats from having a majority. Right now, Reid controls the Senate, I'd much rather have McConnell.

[COBOL2Java]

If you really believe this, then you do not understand how the process works. I'll take a RINO to a "conservative" Dim any day. Frankly, there is no such thing as a "conservative" Democrat but that's beside the point.

The point is that first, we MUST have a majority and how we get there is secondary to just getting there.

Right now, I'd be thrilled to have Lugar back in place of Donnelly. I'd be thrilled to have Brown back in place of Warren, give me Snowe instead of Angus King, etc., etc., etc. You get the idea. Electing a Democrat instead of a RINO is NEVER a good idea. Which ever party is in the majority controls the agenda.

It is extremely disappointing to continually read these kinds of comments here on FR by those who obviously do not understand how the process works. Unfortunately, numbers are so tight, we do not have the luxury of ever voting for anyone other than a Republican.

"Oh, YES, please, PLEASE! Send me more RINOs! I love 'em! They're so squishy! So flexible! So ready to compromise and jettison their principles to get along! Nancy loves 'em! Harry loves 'em! Great, great people!"

[Conservativegreatgrandma]

OK, you don’t get it. In no way am I saying I prefer a RINO to a conservative. Are you saying you prefer a Democrat to a RINO?

[nuconvert]

” WE either have the majority, or we are dead in the water, just like what we have now in the Senate.”

There is no majority if the Republican always votes with the Democrats

[fieldmarshaldj]

"Besides, even the most liberal Republican will vote Republican in most crunch situations."

Are you kidding me ? We had Chafee in RI who was voting identical to Hillary Clinton, 90% leftist. If you're not electing a Conservative, you're not electing someone who will advance that agenda.

[nuconvert]

Lugar wasn’t just a RINO - he was to the left of most Democrats ....to the left of Hagel. He still had influence because of his yrs in the Senate and was therefore a dangerous man in the Senate.
Good Riddance!

[Conservativegreatgrandma]

Yes, we do. It isn’t how they vote, it’s what political party they belong to. We always want a Republican rather than a Democrat—always.

[Conservativegreatgrandma]

Are you really happy that he was replaced by a Democrat? We need two more Republicans to get rid of Dingy Harry Reid.

[Conservativegreatgrandma]

I agree Chafee is a piece of crap but right now, I’d take him if he counts toward a majority. We’d be farther ahead with Chafee than Reid. We cannot advance a conservative agenda in the minority—it’s a fact!!

[nuconvert]

No, I’m not happy that a democrat got the spot. But I’m very happy he’s gone. And given the choice of him or an average Dem, I’ll take the Dem, cuz they won’t be as left & dangerous as he was.

[ilgipper]

We lost seats in states like North Dakota that were comfortably won by Romney, like North Dakota. Your statement is completely irrelevant.

Those three ran horrible, pathetic campaigns and got beat. All three should have won, regardless of the top of the ticket. We had a Senate that basically disappeared for two years, and I never once saw Connie Mack talking about a broken Senate.

Frankly all three contributed to the loses, as we should have won two of the three in FL and VA. In FL, there really never was a Senate race. I have no clue what Mack’s stategy was. In a two week period, Nelson went from 39% as an incumbent to the high 40s, and Mack was AWOL. Mourdock was 10X the candidate as Mack. In Wisconsin, we had a popular former governor who should have far out paced the presidential race.

[PhilDragoo]

An excellent summation of the facts regarding the battle between conservatives and Democrats abetted by their GOP Establishment handmaiden:

Just something to combat the low-information voters or those who suck up the MSM/GOPe talking points.

Lugar: after his primary defeat, went into the background and trash-talked Mourdock at every opportunity with local Indiana GOP groups. If Indiana didn’t have “sore loser” law, that jerk would of run as a third candidate.

O’Donnell: According to party affiliation and exit polls, there was no way a Republican was gonna win Delaware 2010. Even Castle had no shot.

Angle: Harry Reid owns the state’s political machines, the funding and his seniority (or is it senility). GOP had no shot.

Akin: foot in mouth? yes....but you did know he was propped up by Mccaskill’s cronies in the primary by the tune of over one million dollars. Why? He was the weakest of the three GOP candidates.

Meanwhile, lets take a look at who lost and who won (Senate) in 2012.

ME: GOP in disarray and against a popular former governor.

MA: Brown flipped the bird to the TP, went all RINO and was up against a powerful candidate. Burned bridges. GOPe

VA: George Allen, three time loser, mr. “ma-ca-ca”, uninspired campaigner, slow, methodical, dull. GOPe.

FL: Connie Mack, three-time-loser, uninspired race. GOPe. “lost in space”

OH: Josh Mandel. Deer in the headlights against the hunter. In the big leagues Josh, they play for keeps NOT for Chuck-E-Cheese tokens. OUT OF HIS LEAGUE.

MT: Three way race and the Libertarian candidate spoils the show Tester 236,123-—Rehberg 218,051-—Cox 31,892. DNC plowed a lot of money for their favorite goon Tester.

WI: Tommy Thomson. Uninspired campaign. Thought that by simply announcing he would win by default. Burned a lot of bridges in the primary. GOPe

NE Deb Fischer, CONSERVATIVE....Endorsed by Palin and a great ground game. Defeated the GOPe back candidate in the primary. WINNER

AZ Jeff Flake, CONSERVATIVE....Endorsed by Palin and a great ground game. Did not run away from conservatism. WINNER

TX Ted Cruz, CONSERVATIVE....Endorsed by Palin and a great ground game. Defeated the GOPe candidate in the primary. WINNER

In the current wet ash background from serial Reichstag Fires it is well to clarify for GOP eunuchs who collaborate with Hussein's American Spring they'll be discarded by him as fast as Hitler's Night of the Long Knives removed the inconvenient SA and Roehm's crew once the Reichstag was dissolved and the Enabling Act obtained.

GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE ~ HOLDER & OBAMA DO

[Conservativegreatgrandma]

I understand being happy to replace Lugar but not with a Democrat—NEVER!!!! First, we need the majority, which means electing every possible Republican and I very much disagree that Lugar is more left of dangerous than a RAT—not even close.

[ilgipper]

Agreed. Mourdock’s mistake was inexplicable, especially after Akin. Outside of that moment, he would have sailed to a victory.

I agree with you assessment completely. We have to look at both message and messenger, and excellent communication skills is not an option. Thing is, we can never be 100% certain on any one candidate. Seeing people like this throw selective conservatives out as the problem while ignoring widespread failures from moderates gets me fired up.

[fieldmarshaldj]

But he doesn’t count towards a majority. It’s why we call them RINOs. They claim Republican membership but vote against virtually their entire agenda. A paper majority is a useless majority. If they’re not voting Conservative, they’re of no use. Worse, they give cover to the opposition. Lugar’s removal was of paramount importance, as is that of all anti-Conservatives in the GOP.

[Kolath]

he lost to O’donnell...get over it.

To get to the general, you have to win the primary.

details...details ;)