Replies

Forrester "winning" with 36% proves that the lack of a run-off in non-Southern primaries benefits RINOs at the expense of conservatives. The same thing has happened in a gazillion other GOP primaries, even in heavily conservative districts, in which the lone RINO candidate manages to sneak by a multi-candidate field with 30% or so. We are in danger of the same thing happening in Ohio's 2nd CD, the most conservative and Republican in the state, in which RINO Pat DeWine (the even more liberal son of treasonous Senator Mike DeWine, who made the deal with the Democrats not to enforce the constitutional option on the judicial filibusters) is running against 3 well known conservatives and several lesser-known conservatives; if Pat DeWine wins with 30% or so, it would be obvious that he would have been shellacked in a run-off against whichever conservative finished second, but Ohio's lack of a primary would result in a RINO representing a district that gave President Bush over 62% in each of 2000 and 2004. I don't know how many similar wake-up calls conservatives will have before they finally figure out that only with run-offs when a primary does not yield a 50% winner (or perhaps, such as in North Carolina, a run-off only when the primary winner gets below 40%) will we be able to ensure that our party's nominee is truly a candidate who is supported by a majority of Republicans.