[Bikers4Bush]

We can risk losing the Senate in order to send the message. My personal opinion is that we should strengthen the position in the House and allow the position in the Senate to be weakened by ridding it of a few RINO's.

The message would be two fold. We will support the hardline conservative positions taken by those in the House but we shun the leftist leanings of the RINO's in the Senate.

A clearer message could not be sent to the GOP if it tattooed on the backs of their hands.

[mnehring]

Back to discussing strategy and the issue at hand.... In a lot of races, you don't have a conservative third party choice. Let's say, for example, you have a close race where you have a very liberal democrat and a 'moderate'(sic) conservative.

The Liberal Democrat stands against everything you believe, such as they are anti-gun rights, pro-abortion, anti-miltiary, etc.

The 'Moderate' Republican, on the other hand, is pro-life, pro-2nd amendment, pro-military..... but.... they supported the McCain/Kennedy immigration(sic) bill.

Would you vote to continue the progress on the issues you believe in spite of the candidates view on the one issue (illegal immigration) or would you risk giving up all the other issues 'to teach a lesson' on that one issue?

This is the quandary many of us face, and why I choose to vote strategically in the general election and focus only on teaching a lesson in the primaries and through my pocketbook in who I fund.

[kerryusama04]

Agreed. Now that we've solved this one, how's about that pesky Iran? LOL!