Santorum lost because he's in a liberal state. Allen lost because he ran a terrible campaign. Other Republicans lost because they went up against conservative Democrats in swing districts.
2nd midterm elections are historically bad for the President's party. I don't think the election was a rejection of conservatism.
Yeah, in the end Santorum was just too conservative for many of his constituents. I'm all for standing for your principles, but past a certain point you have to remember that you're in the Senate to represent every citizen in your entire state, not just yourself. If you're unwilling to compromise on some of the stronger stuff, then you'll have to accept the risk that you might get voted out next time around. (For the reverse side of the same coin, look at Ned Lamont in Connecticut, who was far too insane of a moonbat even for a deep blue state.)
Likewise JD Hayworth, a strong conservative, campaigning as a conservative espousing conservative positions, in a conservative-leaning state (supposedly), anti-illegal immigration in a state threatened to be overwhelmed by illegal immigrants, and he gets beaten? Come on.
2nd midterm elections are historically bad for the President's party. I don't think the election was a rejection of conservatism.
_____________________________________________________
AMEN!!! I am waiting for someone to point out that losing seats during a president's second midterm is what historically happens. Sure, we have a lot of work ahead of us but we need to keep this loss in perspective. If nothing else, we finally have the chance to get some real conservatives in leadership positions in our party.
...Santorum has been in this 'liberal; state as a Senator since 1994...he wasn't all of a sudden voted out by a bunch of liberals...he was voted out primarily because the media joined him at the hip with Bush and Iraq, and because Casey has the PA bloodlines...