Posted on 06/24/2006 8:44:06 AM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
You've lost your edge and become dull.
Cannon will have no rest.
Big whoop, as you "true conservative" tzncredo/bay buchanan zealots stay silent about true RINO's like Chris Shays and vent your anger at 100% ACU conservatives like Chris Cannon.
With "true conservative" friends like you, who needs enemies.
If that's the strategy it's working. :) I still tend to think Bush truly wants Kennedy's bill.
Yes, he's {W} always been an open-borders guy, dating way back to Gov/TX. But, in the short term, as he knows the Kennedy Bill's dead for this term, he might be thinking "what da heck...."
Jim Noorlander is the CP candidate. If Jacob loses, he might step up and have a legitimate shot at defeating Cannon in the general.
Dream on.
That we're hoping for. If we're lucky maybe next time the state GOP will give the challenger 60% outright...
I know a lot of conservatives who are willing to step up and push Cannon hard. If Jacob falls short, another candidate--perhaps Noorlander--will step up the next day. Cannon knows it too. He's going to be fighting primary battles EVERY DAY until he's defeated, bankrupted, or gets so tired of it he quits.
However, if the immigration debate is either resolved or relegated to the background by the time the next election cycle rolls around, wouldn't Cannon's otherwise conservative credentials carry him to {an easy} victory?
Cannon's crassly dishonest ad campaign has insulted a lot of the party faithful. They want to see him GONE.
Thanks, I will!
Please explain. I'm a being held captive in California.
You all are deperate and it shows.
Yep, being deperate makes one smarter.
I just did an innocent one-liner. I'm not getting on you at all. I've looked at and followed this race with interest. Jacob isn't any better than Cannon is. He's only jumped into the immigration fray lately because he saw an opportunity. He was pretty weak on it before.
??? is that supposed to make sense?
I don't think it is really going to matter as both candidates are very conservative and this seat will be a GOP seat no matter what. However, it does say a lot that you are relying on "unaffiliated" voters interfering in the GOP's choice to carry the day rather than members of your own party. Sounds like a very weak candidacy built on the McCain model.
Unaffiliated just means they haven't voted in a recent primary election since Utah had no requirement for closed party primaries prior to 1996 IIRC. To vote in a general election, no party affiliation has been required no is it traditional in Utah to declare party affiliation.
So when those of you outside want to tell us how to vote here in Utah, you really don't have a clue what you're talking about.
From this article http://www.deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,635206694,00.html we find the following exerpt:
But the current system is not perfect. Republicans closed their primary, and now you must be either a registered Republican or an unaffiliated (independent) voter to pick up a GOP primary ballot. If you show up on June 27 and are not a registered Republican, or an independent willing to register as a Republican, you will be denied a GOP ballot, says Salt Lake County Clerk Sherrie Swensen.
And because the 2006 Legislature adopted early voting — you can vote two weeks before Election Day now — if you are registered in a party other than the GOP and you want to vote in the Republican primary, you must reregister as a Republican by May 27, 30 days before the primary election.
As the universe of who picks GOP nominees dwindles, so do citizens' participation and interest in Utah politics. And less participation is never a good thing.
Good point.
(And yes I think they are that smart)
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.