Libertarian ping! To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here.
Posted on 05/20/2006 1:16:03 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
Conservatives, nationwide are getting angry about the loss of principle by GOP'ers in office. Big spending in Washington and Sacramento. The inability to control illegal aliens. Failure to protect jobs and the failure to stop the social agenda of liberals in our schools in finally causing conservatives to say NO to GOP incumbents, even if it means we could lose seats in a legislative body. The thought is simple, why protect a Republican running for office if their voting record will differ little from the Democrats.
In Utah, GOP Congressman Chris Cannon could not win his Parties endorsement for re-election--his opponent got more votes in Convention then he did.
In Nebraska, Congressman tom Osborne, and legend in the state, was defeated for the nomination for Governor due to his weak stand on illegal aliens.
In Heardon, Virginia, five incumbent city council members lost re-election due to their creation of a "Day Labor Center" for illegal aliens.
In the California 50th Congressional District Special Election, the Democrat is ahead of the Republican, since the Republican has been portrayed as more liberal than many Democrats--has even supported Democrats in the past.
But, Pennsylvania last Tuesday should have been the two by four to every GOP candidate and office holder in the nation.At least 14 incumbent GOP office holders, including the top two in the State Senate were defeated in a Republican primary, by Republicans. The good news is that if they had not been defeated, many GOP voters would have stayed home in November. This is a lesson for us in California, and the nation, GOP voters have had enough of Republicans acting like Democrats. Our candidates need to stand for GOP principles, then vote and govern that way once in office.
No longer will GOP voters settle for, "well at least they have a "R" after their name." There is a revolt going on in GOP ranks and it is moving across the nation.
What's the point? If a state is blue, that means they elect libs, right? So why should the lib be a DEM, and add to their numbers? There's no advantage in that.
Interesting article. I thought Bush backed the wrong horse when he helped Specter beat Toomey in the primaries last year. The MSM has been painting this as a loss for Republicans, but I'm hoping it's a warning shot that wakes them up.
No they don't. Voters do. I'd argue that RINOs prevent worse movement left. If you don't think a DEM controlled Senate would move us farther left, you're crazy.
a RINO is not always best for the republican party in the long term.
A RINO is better than a DEM always. Any argument against a RINO applies double to a DEM.
You're showing your ignorance. They need it because if they are in the majority, they get 10 votes and we get 8. Do the math, genius.
Just what I thought. You're making stuff up. You don't have any proof at all that Specter wanted those nominations killed. Hell, he voted for both of them. He may well have been their saving grace for all you know.
Libertarian ping! To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here.
At least with a Dem, you KNOW that they will NOT support conservative values.
I have never understood this excuse for logic. It is better to know you are going to get screwed than to occasionally get screwed when you weren't expecting it? Anyone who thinks like that shouldn't be allowed to vote.
LOL. Yeah, the nation is dying to know.
That you refuse to respond is telling.
The reason I didn't respond was because you were diverting the discussion away from actual substantive points. But since the nation depends on my answering the question, here goes. I have never voted for an incumbent in a national primary election (US Senate/House/President.) I've only voted for an incumbent in a general national election once (GWB in 04). The only other time I can think of that I voted for an incumbent in a primary was my state assemblyman, who was solidly conservative. And when my Congressman reups, I expect to vote for him again. Satisfied? I am, because you're making a jerk out of yourself.
PS- It's RINOs. No apostrophe. Plural acronyms don't get an apostrophe.
If you mean us the nation... that depends. Sometimes gridlock can put the brakes our little trip towards liberalism.
If you mean to say that a DEM would move the republican party more to the left than a RINO, I disagree.
It would be more difficult for a democrat to redefine the republican party than it would be a Rebublican (RINO) to redefine the party.
I'm not afraid of anything. Voting is such a no-brainer, I only pay attention at all for the fun of it. I could train a rooster to vote for me. I ain't votin' for the DEM party, so that pretty much settles it. If you ain't votin' GOP, who you gonna vote for?
Newt is unfit for command. He's an entertaining bloviator, but that's about it.
To quote a predominant somebody: "I would sooner vote for Al-Qaeda than vote for a Democrat".
I mean us, the nation. But if you're now going to argue that we're better off with a DEM majority, then we'll just have to call it a day. Life's too short for arguments like that.
You know, I think I've figured out that this thread, and any other thread like it, is a waste of time. I hope I remember that fact. Because all that's going on is that people who are pissed off are throwing a tantrum, and anyone who argues for common sense is going to serve as a surrogate punching bag for the terminally disgruntled. What's the point of that? Let em rant at someone else. Life's too short.
There goes the thread...
"... Ah yes, but how do you feel about..."
Thanks for posting this; it's encouraging in an unsettling way. Could this site be effecting national trends? I think so.
Well, I have good news for you, Huck. Olympia Snow will most likely win re-election to the Senate in my state. So, she's safe. If a conservative did run against her I would vote for him/her instead. But I don't see that happening, so you have nothing to worry about there.
My plan is to not work to help Snowe. She's secure. I am focusing on our governor race. I will be supporting whoever the republican is. Baldacci's destroying the state. Also, there's a female republican running against Tom Allen. I will be supporting her.
Other than that... I can use the time I would have used for Snowe to help any vulnerable conservative republicans in other states.
If your state is secure this 2006 I recommend others do the same. ADOPT A CANDIDATE
Another thing I plan on doing is posting articles I see here at FR in other newsgroups where everybody is NOT a republican. Sometimes we forget that we are preaching to the choir and we need to go out among the "sinners" and spread the good news of conservatism. So I often combat the liberal moonbats in USENET / GOOGLE POLITICAL NEWSGROUPS
I also recommend joining (for free) this wonderful site called www.gopteamleader.com
we're better off with a CONSERVATIVE majority... something we seem to lack at this time
It sounds to me that if you had a choice between Spector or Zell Miller, you would vote for the liberal over the conservative. Well, I dont vote for the R...I vote for the C in Conservative
Of course you are right, we shouldn't have RINOs from red states because these states could potentially elect conservatives. But incumbency is a major weapon in close states.
I get my red and blue confused sometimes, it seems like we should be blue not red.
Specter should have been removed from leadership....
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.