Vote Republican, Even If It Hurts

grasstopsusa.com ^ | 11/01/2014 | Don Feder

[Rides_A_Red_Horse]

So, it’s a bit difficult to understand the ‘het up’ attitude of ‘OMIGOD YOU HAVE TO VOTE REPUBLICAN OR THE WORLD WILL END!’ posters.

---

We did things their way for two Presidential cycles. When they don't screw up through cowardice or incompetence they stab us in the back.

It's time to do what we should have done about fifteen years ago!

[OneWingedShark]

Every day the GOPe RINO lovin’ liberal lickers sound more and more like the Democrats.

I honestly can't tell anymore — there's so little difference that it's nearly impossible to differentiate the two.
If there's an infinitesimal in politics, I think we've found it.

(Now if only we could define integration and derivation for politics… — [;)])

[OneWingedShark]

So, it’s a bit difficult to understand the ‘het up’ attitude of ‘OMIGOD YOU HAVE TO VOTE REPUBLICAN OR THE WORLD WILL END!’ posters.

---

We did things their way for two Presidential cycles. When they don't screw up through cowardice or incompetence they stab us in the back.

It's time to do what we should have done about fifteen years ago!

No kidding.
Remember I've abandoned free market principles to save the free market system?
And before that it was the airline bailouts. (And these were a long time before the Republican do-nothing WRT the NSA, IRS, Fast & Furious [BATFE, FBI, ICE, DHS, DEA], and so forth.)

[SoConPubbie]

We all have our opinions but I have yet to hear yours on my original post about Mark Mayfield. Did you miss that?

Did Mayfield work for the McDaniel campaign?

[Yosemitest]

I agree, extremely!

[Yosemitest]

"- “Purists” suffer because they demand perfection or they stay home -"

You OBVIOUSLY have NOT read Jack Kerwick's article The Tea Partier versus The Republican .
Compromisers ALWAYS LOSE !

"Establishment Republicans" lose everytime they're listened to.
They wouldn't care if they DO lose.
If they can't be in power, they don't want US in power.
It's just that simple.
It's WAR!

We will never unify under "Establishment Republicans" .
"Establishment Republicans" have more in common with the Democrats, than they do with Conservatives.
The weak candidates are "Establishment Republicans", weak on national security, amnesty for illegals, abortion, and government spending.
"Establishment Republicans" scream "COMPROMISE".
And people who study the Bible know that COMPROMISE almost always leads to destruction.
Someone once said [We're] 'Not victims of "the Establishment." '
I disagree.
I ask you again:

Who was it that dumped all those negative adds on Conservative Candidates in the primary?
Who was it that constantly battered each leading Conservative in the primary with an average of three to one negative ads against our real candidates?
Who's money was dumped against the conservative choices?

It WAS Mitt Romney, leader of the "Establishment Republicans"
and it WAS the "Establishment Republicans" who funded all those negative ads against Conservatives.

So conservatives, the BASE of the Republican Party, WERE ' victims of "the Establishment." '

These "Establishment Republicans" are being weeded out, one by one, and slowly but surely, the TEA Party is taking over.

"Establishment Republicans" Want to Redefine the Term "Conservative"

"DO CONSERVATIVES WANT TO WIN IN 2012 OR NOT?"

DO CONSERVATIVES "ESTABLISHMENT REPUBLICANS" WANT TO WIN IN 2014 OR NOT?

Jack Kerwick wrote an article on May 24, 2011 titled The Tea Partier versus The Republican and he expressed some important issues that I agree with.

Thus far, the field of GOP presidential contenders, actual and potential, isn’t looking too terribly promising.

This, though, isn’t meant to suggest that any of the candidates, all things being equal, lack what it takes to insure
that Barack Obama never sees the light of a second term; nor is it the case that I find none of the candidates appealing.
Rather, I simply mean that at this juncture, the party faithful is far from unanimously energized over any of them.

It is true that it was the rapidity and aggressiveness with which President Obama proceeded to impose his perilous designs upon the country
that proved to be the final spark to ignite the Tea Party movement.
But the chain of events that lead to its emergence began long before Obama was elected.
That is, it was actually the disenchantment with the Republican Party under our “compassionate conservative” president, George W. Bush,
which overcame legions of conservatives that was the initial inspiration that gave rise to the Tea Party.

It is this frustration with the GOP’s betrayal of the values that it affirms that accounts for why the overwhelming majority
of those who associate with or otherwise sympathize with the Tea Party movement
refuse to explicitly or formally identify with the Republican Party.
And it is this frustration that informs the Tea Partiers’ threat to create a third party
in the event that the GOP continues business as usual.

If and when those conservatives and libertarians who compose the bulk of the Tea Party, decided that the Republican establishment
has yet to learn the lessons of ’06 and ’08, choose to follow through with their promise,
they will invariably be met by Republicans with two distinct but interrelated objections.

First,
they will be told that they are utopian, “purists” foolishly holding out for an “ideal” candidate.

Second, because virtually all members of the Tea Party would have otherwise voted Republican if not for this new third party,
they will be castigated for essentially giving elections away to Democrats.



Both of these criticisms are, at best, misplaced; at worst, they are just disingenuous.
At any rate, they are easily answerable.

Let’s begin with the argument against “purism.” To this line, two replies are in the coming.


No one, as far as I have ever been able to determine, refuses to vote for anyone who isn’t an ideal candidate.
Ideal candidates, by definition, don’t exist.
This, after all, is what makes them ideal.
This counter-objection alone suffices to expose the argument of the Anti-Purist as so much counterfeit.
But there is another consideration that militates decisively against it.

A Tea Partier who refrains from voting for a Republican candidate who shares few if any of his beliefs
can no more be accused of holding out for an ideal candidate
than can someone who refuses to marry a person with whom he has little to anything in common
be accused of holding out for an ideal spouse.
In other words, the object of the argument against purism is the most glaring of straw men:
“I will not vote for a thoroughly flawed candidate” is one thing;
“I will only vote for a perfect candidate” is something else entirely.



As for the second objection against the Tea Partier’s rejection of those Republican candidates who eschew his values and convictions,
it can be dispensed with just as effortlessly as the first.

Every election season—and at no time more so than this past season—Republicans pledge to “reform Washington,” “trim down” the federal government, and so forth.
Once, however, they get elected and they conduct themselves with none of the confidence and enthusiasm with which they expressed themselves on the campaign trail,
those who placed them in office are treated to one lecture after the other on the need for “compromise” and “patience.”

Well, when the Tea Partier’s impatience with establishment Republican candidates intimates a Democratic victory,
he can use this same line of reasoning against his Republican critics.
My dislike for the Democratic Party is second to none, he can insist.
But in order to advance in the long run my conservative or Constitutionalist values, it may be necessary to compromise some in the short term.

For example,

as Glenn Beck once correctly noted in an interview with Katie Couric,
had John McCain been elected in 2008, it is not at all improbable that, in the final analysis,
the country would have been worse off than it is under a President Obama.
McCain would have furthered the country’s leftward drift,
but because this movement would have been slower,
and because McCain is a Republican, it is not likely that the apparent awakening that occurred under Obama would have occurred under McCain.


It may be worth it, the Tea Partier can tell Republicans, for the GOP to lose some elections if it means that conservatives—and the country—will ultimately win.

If he didn’t know it before, the Tea Partier now knows that accepting short-term loss in exchange for long-term gain is the essence of compromise, the essence of politics.

Ironically, he can thank the Republican for impressing this so indelibly upon him.

I'm fresh out of "patience", and I'm not in the mood for "compromise".
"COMPROMISE" to me is a dirty word.
Let the RINO's compromise their values, with the conservatives, for a change.
Take a good long look at where "Establishment Republicans" ALWAYS take us.



The "Establishment Republicans" can GO TO HELL !

[Yosemitest]

My response is in Comment #206, and earlier in Comment #157.

[Yosemitest]

"Well then, I guess staying home is the only answer. "

OH, HELL NO !
It takes TWOI votes FOR COCKROACH, to overcome my ONE VOTE AGAINST COCKROACH .
If I stay at home, it only takes ONE vote to overcome my INaction.

[Jet Jaguar]

Voted this afternoon in Fairbanks. Steady stream of people filing in.

Begich should be gone on Tuesday.

[OneWingedShark]

My response is in Comment #206, and earlier in Comment #157.

#157 was good, but #206 was excellent, knocked the ball right out of the park, IMO.
Thank you; especially for #206.

[Yosemitest]

You're welcome.
Now republish #206 every time someone throws one of those "straws man" arguments in your face.

[Dark Knight]

A politician said once, and I really wished I remembered which one, it is never the fault of voters who they wouldn’t vote for. It was his JOB to get them excited about what they would do. Failure to do that more than the other people running was always his/her fault. Voting for someone you have to hold your nose for is not a privilege that a politician should think of as a right. Any party with that attitude wants to lose. ANYONE that makes fun of a voter, like a libertarian or Christian in order to get their vote, should realize they are a moron. It is only an excuse for losers, and that attitude this politician would not allow.

If the Republicans are going to get a landslide by being “not democrats”, don’t expect to repeat this result in 2016.

DK

[cynwoody]

Should McDaniel vote for Cochran?

Yep. But I doubt he will, LOL!

[cynwoody]

Don't deny yourself the pleasure of seeing the dems wailing, finger pointing and making excuses on Wednesday morning

Absolutely!

Make the night an epic of MSM teeth-gnashing to be remembered. And uploaded to YouTube.

[billhilly]

Yes, he did. He also seems to have already been forgotten. Here is a link to an article about his suicide. http://www.politico.com/story/2014/06/mark-mayfield-dies-108388.html
He is the only one who died, as far as I know, for his role in the McDaniel campaign. Personally, I think one is too many. I understand that Mr. Mayfield was a very good man.

[billhilly]

I’m laughing as I read your post. For months you and others have characterized Thad Cochran as a senile old man slobbering on his collar, too old to even do his job. Now you characterize him as a sex maniac. I’m his age and of sound mind and body but I don’t think you can have it both ways.

[billhilly]

You’re a man, or woman of few words aren’t you.

[billhilly]

Here are your options. If you are registered to vote in Mississippi, vote your preference. If you are not, well you get my point.

[Erik Latranyi]

The bastards whose feet you lick paid for adds and robo-calls demonizing McDaniel in the Mississippi race. They distributed leaflets calling the TEA Party “Racist.”

You have no class. You act like a lowlife with your name-calling.

We need to take the GOP back from those who oppose constitutional order. That does not happen by whining like a liberal about injustice and Karl Rove.

It happens by growing a pair and taking out the elements that oppose us, taking out the state, county and local party chairs. It happens by finding great candidates who can run against the swine, Cochran in the primaries.

Nothing happens when you piss and moan.

[Erik Latranyi]

Sure...just like we control the vote...except that's crooked, too.

If you see it as over, then get out of the way of real men who are trying to fix it. Stop your liberal-like whining about Karl Rove and the establishment because the GOP is being taken over by the Tea Party.

But, like anything worthwhile, it takes time, hard work and a spine to overcome obstacles.

We have plenty of obstacles, but we are winning.

You are not helping.