Posted on 08/31/2006 11:46:13 AM PDT by .cnI redruM
Er, staytrue, I am a *former* NSRC contributor precisely
because they waste money on RINOs while leaving conservatives out to dry. Good example was funding favored RINO candidates like in Alaska primary.
Are you saying Santorum and Talent are in safe seats and need no help?
On the good news side, let me say that Talent is edging up, its a "lean GOP" seat now:
http://kcbuzzblog.typepad.com/kcbuzzblog/missouri_senate_race/index.html
In yet another new poll, Zogby has Republican Jim Talent ahead of Democrat Claire McCaskill 50-45 percent in Missouri's U.S. Senate race.
Well, that's rounded off. To be precise, Zogby has it at 49.7 percent for Talent and 45.2 percent for McCaskill.
---
Then funnel it to Kean in NJ, to Washington and Minnesota, and for sure, do whatever it takes to help Santorum hold his seat ... But waste NSRC money on a *PRIMARY*?!?!? For a liberal Democrat (12% acu rating) -with-an-R-by-his-name?!? Get outta here.
I am saying that if Santorum and Talent can not win with 2-1 money advantage, it is not due to lack of funding from the NRSC.
Lincoln Chaffee thinks 'filibuster' is the latest drink at TGI Friday's " Ann Coulter
I agree with most of this, but it may not matter. It may be too little, too slow, too late.
Sad story. My guess is that this kind of scum can be caught, and weeded out of politics, by alert higher-ups in the party early in their careers. Too bad it didn't happen to Janklow before his career got going.
You make a very good point there. Some politicians vote a good Republican line, but still cannot be counted on to be loyal to the party in a pinch. There are indeed different types of RINOs.
Keeping the enemy alive within your camp and thinking that they are your friend is downright stupid and dangerous.
For 40 years or more we have followed the advice of voting for the lesser of two evils and look where it has brought us. Liberals are liberals no matter what uniform they wear.
What the GOP needs to do is have a consistent philosophy. The dems are the party of abortion. Fine. Let them be. We shouldn't try to be both pro life and pro abortion and we certainly can't expect to win consistently if we fight each other from within.
The dems are a coalition of various interests that don't conflict with each other. They vary only in the priority of which group's agenda gets advanced. We, OTOH, try to be all things to all people. We take both sides of every issue and then are surprised when a pro life voter refuses to vote for a pro abortion candidate; when a pro gun voter won't take one for the team and vote for a gun grabber; when a fiscal conservative withholds his vote from a 'compassionate conservative' who wants to spend our tax money to buy his reelection.
Values voters don't vote for the team when the team doesn't support our values. It's really just that simple. The GOP can position itself to win for generations to come but they can't do it by standing for nothing and expecting it's voters to vote against their interests for the sake of the Party.
Let's stay focused on the race that this article is about.
You say that RI elects Chafee because they liked his father. Well, did they stop liking his father? Why is Chafee doing so badly now.
I wonder at the motives of those cheering on the GOP over the possibility of losing a senate seat.
No wonder some Conservatives are the best help and friends radical Liberals can hope for in their efforts to win back their political office.
Good question. Maybe because it's not a completely open primary? As I understand it, only registered Republicans and unaffiliated voters can vote in this primary. Maybe, over the years, a lot of Chafee's supporters have re-registered as Democrats.
There's also the possibility that some "unaffiliated" voters are really Democrats who've changed their registration so as to vote for Laffey, thinking he'll be the easier opponent to beat in November.
New York restricts primaries to registered members of that party, and prohibits changes in party affiliation during the preprimary period. The rule seems unduly restrictive at times, but it does make it a lot harder for adherents of one party to mess around with the other party's selection of a candidate.
Better an infidel than heretic.
Chaffee and his father were a couple of swamp-sucking RINOS.
Good answers. All are good possibilities.
I didn't know the answer but no one else was even addressing that question or the one that I asked about why all those Dems and libs were electing a Republican.
That's just it--Chaffee is not really one of "our own".
We're supposedly in the majority and yet we can't seem to advance our agenda on many of the key issues. For heaven's sake, as others have already pointed out, not only did Linkie vote against Alito's confirmation, he didn't even vote to re-elect the sitting President from (theoretically) his own party. How exactly is that advancing our agenda?
Bye bye Linkie!
Allen is not going to lose.
Zogby's polls are artificially skewed in favor of DemonRats.
Rhode Island Red RINO
Huh? I wouldn't use Ohio as the crux of your argument. There was so much corruption there that the voters are obviously going to punish the GOP. So I am still correct.
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.