As for honesty around here, I think there is honesty- but it isn't what some want to hear- on both sides of the coin. There's rhetoric everywhere. But this honest, too, also exists: there isn't a single conservative out there today who hasn't at one point or another endorsed a RINO. You know I'm going to always support the conservative regardless of endorsements. And what many here are missing is that there might, MIGHT, be a handful of Palin supporters on FR that would actually vote for McCain because of that endorsement. That's not a condemnation of Palin, but more so (and should be) one of the person voting. It isn't any different than voting for the Christian label, race, sex, etc.
Make up your own mind, folks!
The Carly thing is similar. Of course, I don't see Cali as any different than MA when Scott Brown ran. Conservatives here sacrificed principles in order to defeat healthcare. And look how that ended up.
I have never advocated voting the lesser of two evils. In fact, I've railed against it. It isn't purism, it’s just a differing philosophy- some would vote for the (R) no matter what.
It should always be principle before party.
Of course, some will say that Sarah Palin isn't doing that. And perhaps they're right. But then again, maybe that isn't how she's approaching things. Perhaps she's more pragmatist than purist. And that's fine.
Its when Palin starts taking her own beliefs and sacrificing them for political expediency that I will take many second, third looks, etc. Some may say she's already doing that by endorsing RINOs. I get that. But what I don't get is the clear blind eye that's given to all the other conservatives- including 2012 hopefuls- who've endorsed them as well (including a certain rep from Texas who endorsed Moonbat leftists). Did they, too, sacrifice principle over party? And if so, shouldn't they also be kicked to the curb?
If endorsing a RINO (and I don't care how RINO they are) is the bellwether for support, then there will be none left. Personally, I think Huckabee is the biggest and most dangerous RINO there is. But will I slight Duncan Hunter for endorsing him? No.
The whole screed, 'If McCain wins its Sarah's fault' is such a straw man. Sorry, but if McCain wins, its JD Hayworth's fault. The bigger issue here is, with the obvious anti-immigration climate in AZ, and JD's history of being anti-illegal immigration (and McCain's amnesty/pandering), why and the world isn't JD doing better?
JD should hire me as his adviser because he needs a strategy shift ASAP.
Clearly Palin's endorsements are influencing elections--one only need look at the recent Senate primary in California for an excellent example--and it would be dishonest to suggest that it's not influencing the Senate primary in Arizona.
McCain has spent the better part of the last nine months attempting to remake himself as a conservative, particularly after that Rasmussen poll in Nov. 2009 that put him in an effective dead heat with the then-prospective candidate Hayworth. His attempts would not have been nearly as successful as they have been without the full-throated endorsement and support of Palin.
Thanks for the response. I agree with some of what you said, and even the parts I don’t, I think there’s something to lofting those arguments even if they don’t win me over.
Look, I’m no fan of Huckabee, but saying he even comes close to a man that could do the things McCain has done, is a severely low blow. I don’t agree with that. And so when you try to tie Hunter to doing something similar to what Palin is doing in Arizona, I see it in shades of gray rather than the black and white with McCain vs Hayworth.
I would have held my nose and voted for Huckabee. There wasn’t a chance in hell I’d vote for a man that would team up with the people and support the things John McCain has.