[MaineVoter2002]

RINOs move the party left in time. Imagine 4 - 8 years of a RINO for President. By the end of his term America will look back at GW as if he were Barry Goldwater. Frist would be considered by republicans as a right-wing, Olympia Snowe would be considered by republicans as well...what Bush has been considered and Kerry will considered what Joe Liberman is today. Nope, sorry... a RINO would redefine the center over time.

By the end of the Clinton term it was impossible to think America would ever elect another Reagan again. The closest we got was GW Bush and look at the fight we got from the left during campaign 2000 all the way up to now.

Believe me, we have to play it smart and get in conservatives when we can but a RINO is not always best for the republican party in the long term.

[Huck]

RINOs move the party left in time.

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.

[JCEccles]

a RINO is not always best for the republican party in the long term.

You need to learn to look at a RINO like Snowe or Specter as a place holder until more conservative candidates can be elected. That might not happen in your state, but it is almost certainly achievable somewhere. The point is, you don't concede even a fraction of an inch to the democrats let alone a whole seat. You hold all Republican seats including the RINOs and look to add to them, pushing and contributing to the most competitive conservative candidates nationally, wherever they might be.