Replies

I'm real tired of the good guys always losing. I can't think of a reason why a Republican worth their salt would vote for Spector. This sucks big time.

This election was supposed to be a fight for the heart of our party. I'm beginning to think the GOP is lost at it's grassroots. If we're recovering, the party is taking it's sweet time.

If the situation was reversed, and this was a Dem primary about to usher in a more liberal Dem in a time that favors Dem's, does anyone think an incumbent moderate Dem would have survived they way Spector did? Hell no, say what you want, but the Demonrats are a more passionate party then ours.

I love Bush. I'm voting for the man come Nov.. But why has the man who bucked Jeffords out of the party(in an effort to strengthen it) now decided to give his support to RINOs who despise his principles.

I'd rather not respond to a bunch of Spector voters rationalizing their votes.

But why has the man who bucked Jeffords out of the party(in an effort to strengthen it) now decided to give his support to RINOs who despise his principles.

Because it's all part of the "ideological cleansing" plan for the Northeast that I suspect is a very important priority for this Administration. Take a look at this idea that I posted on a PA primary thread last week:

I've suspected for some time that the Bush administration is playing a very interesting game with regard to these U.S. Senate seats. Their primary concern isn't necessarily seniority, and it has nothing to do with incumbency -- it has everything to do with "ideological cleansing" in the Senate from both sides of the aisle.

To the Bush team, I'm convinced that the absolute worst thing for any state in the Northeast is a pair of U.S. Senators split between the two parties. In my opinion, the Bush administration would rather deal with two Democratic senators from a "Blue" state than deal with a Senator from each party -- because it's a lot easier to screw a Democratic state when it comes to Federal appropriations bills. This is exactly why the Bush administration did not lose much sleep when Jeffords jumped ship in 2001, and why they did not try very hard to defeat Lautenberg in New Jersey in 2002.

This election was supposed to be a fight for the heart of our party. I'm beginning to think the GOP is lost at it's grassroots. If we're recovering, the party is taking it's sweet time.

I don't think you understand. Social conservatives are allowed to vote for republicans. However, as all the really smart folks know, a socially conservative candidate cannot win. Therefor, it is imperative that none make it through the primaries.

As Safire put it a couple of years ago (not an exact quote 'cause I didn't memorize it), 'Social conservatives need to get to the back of the bus and let the adults steer!'.

Why is it social conservatives are supposed to ralley around the republican candidate, while socially liberal republicans are allowed to vote democrat?

Don't live in PA...but if I did, I would sit out the Senate vote this fall. Specter as Judiciary Chairman would be worse than a democrat, since he gives 'bipartisan' cover to the democrats.