Replies

X WRITES: For example, every Republican in the House voted against Stimulus-Porkulus. To me that's a sign that this RINO thing is getting to be a red herring.

Yes, but this show of unity is SINCE the last election. It is encouraging that the GOP is showing signs of life. It is because the GOP DID NOT do that before that we got slaughered in the eleciton.

AND X WRITES: Some districts won't elect someone you'd recognize as conservative. Would they be better off with a Democrat, who, by your own view, would likely be more liberal than any Republican would be?

But that has nothing to do with it. A candidate needs to persuade the voters why his or her policies and ideas and qualifications are better for that district than the Democrat. And if you TRY, it is not that hard. If you DON'T try, it is impossible.

Furthermore, this sets up a false idea. If you run a pale, watered-down version of a liberal Democrat, you think anyone is going to vote for him? Why? Why not vote for the genuine article, the Democrat? If you run a pale echo of the Democrat, you have not given any incentive for anyone to vote for the Republian. PLUS you have repulsed the conservatives in the district. So you have lost your conservative base but you HAVE NOT gained liberal votes.

Notice, though, that persuasion is hard work and takes time. So you cannot get a quick and easy solution. There is no short-cut. THere is no way to FOOL the electorate. And that is the problem. Moderates and RINO's think they can FOOL the voters, instead of persuading them. As to Ollie North, so what? Liberals demand that conservatives support liberal nominees no matter how many stupid policies the liberal Republican has advocated, no matter how many times the liberal Republican has kicked conservatives in the teeth, no matter how bad a candidate the liberal is.

Conservatives are expected to overlook the "baggage" of liberal GOP nominees. The whole point is that it is a one-way street with the Vichy Republicans. NEVER would a liberal Republican accept the idea that conservatives are uncomfortable with the liberal nominee. But, on the other hand, liberals ALWAYS find some excuse to attack, sabotage, and betray conservative nominees.

Furthermore, this sets up a false idea. If you run a pale, watered-down version of a liberal Democrat, you think anyone is going to vote for him? Why? Why not vote for the genuine article, the Democrat? If you run a pale echo of the Democrat, you have not given any incentive for anyone to vote for the Republian. PLUS you have repulsed the conservatives in the district. So you have lost your conservative base but you HAVE NOT gained liberal votes.

There are some districts where there just isn't a conservative base, or what people in other parts of the country would call a conservative base -- or at least there aren't enough real conservatives to get anyone elected. Republicans may run a candidate there who really is an alternative to the Democrat, but their candidate looks like a "pale echo" to conservatives elsewhere in the country.

I guess we'd have to get down to specifics, to who is and who isn't a RINO, who and who is and isn't a real conservative. One problem is that a lot of those Representatives in marginal districts got swept out in the last two elections. If Republicans retake Congress, though, there will probably be more Republicans from less conservative districts -- and therefore, more RINOs -- rather than less.

Liberals demand that conservatives support liberal nominees no matter how many stupid policies the liberal Republican has advocated, no matter how many times the liberal Republican has kicked conservatives in the teeth, no matter how bad a candidate the liberal is.

Conservatives are expected to overlook the "baggage" of liberal GOP nominees. The whole point is that it is a one-way street with the Vichy Republicans. NEVER would a liberal Republican accept the idea that conservatives are uncomfortable with the liberal nominee. But, on the other hand, liberals ALWAYS find some excuse to attack, sabotage, and betray conservative nominees.

You may be right. But it also depends on what you mean by "baggage". I don't hear anybody saying, "How could you not vote for Lincoln Chaffee? How could you just stand by and let the only working blacksmith get thrown out of Congress? And after he went to all the trouble to get born into the right family, too?" So sometimes, even liberals have too much baggage for their supporters to accept.