Posted on 04/12/2006 2:34:47 PM PDT by neverdem
Don't forget about Edwards, Feingold, Biden and Dodd. I also wouldn't count out Sharpton, Kucinich and Sheehan.
"Well, I consider myself part of the base. I will not support a senator or a RINO, like McPain. I will not go for the lesser of evils and I'm not going to contribute in pushing the party closer to the center."
I wouldn't volunteer for McCain or contribute to him, but I would cast a vote for him against Hillary.
McCain however, is a fairly extreme example. I doubt he could win the Republican nomination. I was thinking more of somebody who was just uninspiring---not sickening.
My sentiments exactly! I would be very unhappy if McVain were the Pubbie candidate, but just about ANYTHING would be better than Hillary! as president.
McPain, constantly sharing fleas with the likes of Kennedy could do more damage to this nation along with his MSM pals championing bad policies than Hillary ever could only because she is more hated. Not in a four-year term but in the long run. We still haven't recovered from the damage both economically and in foreign policy (see Iran) from Carter's one-termer, and that's 30 years already and he's still running his trap. I'm old enough to remember - and then Reagan followed.
The reason the republican party is in the mess it is recently is not because of the failure of conservative idealisms, but the lack of them.
I've had enough of RINOs. In my state of MI the republicans introduced legislation to increase the state minimum wage by a huge chunk and of course it was signed by the socialist, Canadian governor. In a state that's 'numero uno' in job loss these numbskulls thought this would sidestep a socialist ballot initiative. And the dem gov is tied in the polls and the race hasn't even started, WTHeck?
We don't need no stinkin' RINOs, period.
If Dick Morris says it, it must be wrong.
Glad to see someone else remembers how the DemoRats REALLY feel about immigration.
You are right, Conservatives do have one issue: PRINCIPLE.
Anything less is no vote at all.
"We still haven't recovered from the damage both economically and in foreign policy (see Iran) from Carter's one-termer, and that's 30 years already and he's still running his trap. I'm old enough to remember - and then Reagan followed."
I remember too!
"The reason the republican party is in the mess it is recently is not because of the failure of conservative idealisms, but the lack of them.
I've had enough of RINOs. In my state of MI the republicans introduced legislation to increase the state minimum wage by a huge chunk and of course it was signed by the socialist, Canadian governor. In a state that's 'numero uno' in job loss these numbskulls thought this would sidestep a socialist ballot initiative. And the dem gov is tied in the polls and the race hasn't even started, WTHeck?
We don't need no stinkin' RINOs, period."
Yes, Michigan is a sad case. It reminds me of my city: Pittsburgh. We are perfectly defended against the exploitation of labor---but unfortunately have no factories anymore and no one will ever place one here again!
Pennsylvania is supposedly a state that is half Democrat half Republican, more or less. We actually have a Republican legislature now and a democratic governor. But the whole Republican organization is primarily RINO.
We had this great guy, Bill Scranton running for governor. Solid conservative. Scared the hell out of the RINOs, and he's the son of Bill Scranton who was a former governor and, I guess you may remember, as a presidential candidate years ago. (The current Bill Scranton is a former lieutenant governor.)
So what do these RINOs do? First, they trot out Lynn Swann, the famous Steeler pass receiver from the Super Bowl 70s. Then, every Republican committee in the state endorses Swann. Faced with no support at all, Scranton bows out.
Now, having accomplished their goal of eliminating the threat of a real conservative running the state government, they are giving Swann minimal support and he seems headed for certain defeat. That is because, we have a term limit of two for the governorship, and every governor always gets two terms. The party always seems to alternate as well, since after two terms of one party people are ready for the other party. gap It's like a gentleman's agreement thing.
Yes, MI and PA are indeed very similar. I think it not going to be oh-so-great this fall, but that's typical. Problem is, the MSM is going to make a few house and senate seat losses like a revolution or something.
On the other hand, I think our two states will get two new governors this fall. Isn't Swann doing pretty good in the polls?
"On the other hand, I think our two states will get two new governors this fall. Isn't Swann doing pretty good in the polls?"
To be honest about it, I haven't caught the poll numbers lately but you're probably right. Rendell is a horrible governor and Swann may win. But so far, he is not doing well in terms of money. On the other hand, that may be less critical when you start out famous.
I guess the bottom line for me on Swann is, I am quite sure that he won't do anything substantial to turn the state around. That means a continuance of our steady decline, even if he wins. Whereas had Scranton won, he would've fought for things like lower taxes, better depreciation rates for businesses, etc.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.