Agreed.
I have no tolerance for those that do not have, for example, Patty Murray, Cantwell, Gregoire and Dem state House and Senate.
We voted for Rossi, but he was taken from us. To have Santorum instead of two Specter's or WORSE is a blessing given the demos of the state. He deserves strong support for his re-election.
Rush asking Santorum about this now.
Santorum's insight into incumbent support- These senators vote against their interests on some items like procedural votes. They do so against interests with the understanding as part of a party you have to give a little, and in return they'll receive support in their elections. For the President or leadership to not support them would cause distrust among all members. It would mean they are out there on their own against better interests, so they may as well go their own way which would lead to complete disunity.
Actually, this is the best argument I've heard for incumbancy support. I personally don't feel WE (the base) are bound to this support and cannot challenge in primaries, but consider this goes beyond Specter of Chafee. Take Coleman for example. Been a good addition to the Reublican ranks. Pretty solid guy most of the time. lue state. Against best interests at times. Should the leadership not support Spectre, it could cause people like Coleman to wonder how far they can step 'off the reservation' and still have support in their elections. Dittos very stong conservatives who may buck the President in favor of more conservative measures. It can go both ways.
It's a strong argument worth consideration.
For my part, there is nothing to state the base cannot function independantly by fronting our own candidate in primaries either. The two are not necessarily incompatible.