Posted on 09/10/2010 8:28:01 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
I wondered yesterday whether Palin’s endorsement would pave the way for other prominent righties to weigh in. Here’s the answer, just across on Twitter:
I’m proud to endorse Christine O’Donnell for US Senate in Delaware. She will stand strong for the principles of freedom.
Did he hold off because he wasn’t convinced until today that O’Donnell can win, or was he under pressure from grassroots conservatives to jump in because Palin had taken a stand? Either way, DeMint has made his feelings about races like this crystal clear in the past. If O’Donnell wins the general election, great; one more “true conservative” in the Senate. If O’Donnell loses the general election, no big deal; a principled, conservative, RINO-free minority will guarantee total victory for “true conservatism” … eventually.
I’ve been criticized by some of my Republican colleagues for saying I’d rather have 30 Republicans in the Senate who believe in the principles of freedom than 60 who don’t believe in anything.
Let me make myself even clearer: I’d rather have 30 Marco Rubios in the Senate than 60 Arlen Specters.
But, if that were the case I wouldn’t have to settle for 30, because strong conservatives who believe in a constitutional limited government like Marco Rubio will pave the way to a new Republican majority that will keep our promises to the American people!
The best way to re-earn the trust of the American people and to reclaim a Republican majority is to find and support more candidates who believe in the Principles of Freedom.
A hypothetical for you to kick around in the comments: How long would it take, and how much horrendous Democratic legislation would have to pass, before our roughly 50/50 nation was ready to elect 60 Marco Rubios to the Senate? (Per the latest Florida polls, we’re not yet assured of having even one Marco Rubio in the Senate.) And a second hypothetical: Assuming that 60 Rubios were — eventually — elected, would all 60 be prepared to act on “true conservative” principles under all circumstances? Remember, when polled, even a heavy majority of tea partiers say that the benefits of Social Security and Medicare are worth the costs.
I’ll leave you with the audio flashback below from the Andrew Wilkow show on the eve of Scott Brown’s victory in Massachusetts. (The post I wrote about it at the time is a fun read in hindsight.) If 30 Rubios are better than 60 moderates since they’re more likely to ensure eventual total victory for true conservatism, why on earth did any of us support Scotty B over Coakley? Better to elect her and accelerate the Democrats’ wrecking of America so that “true conservatives” can start rebuilding sooner, no?
Update: Commenters are calling foul on comparing a general election like Brown v. Coakley to a primary like Castle v. O’Donnell. Fair point — except that the logic of the passage from DeMint’s speech that I quoted destroys that distinction. His argument is that electing RINOs is counterproductive because it ruins the GOP’s brand as defenders of the Principles of Freedom. The best way for Republicans to “re-earn the trust of the American people” is to take principled, unified stands in the Senate against statist Democratic policies — and Scott Brown destroys that unity, as we saw with his vote on financial reform. If the path to total conservative victory runs through a pure Republican caucus, then we should prefer electing Democrats to RINOs. Which, as I explained above, is why this is a win/win endorsement for DeMint. Even if O’Donnell beats Castle but loses the general election to Coons, as most people expect, it’s still a win for “true conservatism” because it keeps the Republican membership in the Senate pure and principled. No Mike Castle there to dilute it.
I’ll happily let you correct me with Fiorinio if you wish, since that was a “stop Campbell” endorsement as well as a pro-Fiorino, but you ought to know that her endorsements of Didier was hardly poll driven, just like the numerous others she has brought from near obscurity to near wins and wins, Nikki Haley and Joe Miller to cite two recent wins.
Christine was close without any of these important endorsements. The tea party express getting involved with money was huge. This race, even though it is a compelling matchup, could’ve missed national attention. They get involved, and then the Delaware GOP and Castle panic, because their strategy, and the medias strategy was to ignore the race as much as possible and ignore Christine. The race becomes of national interest, and Sarah, NRA, DeMint get involved in quick order - vastly topping the Christie endorse.
Good timing, will push undecided votes to Christine.
It is also the new voters. Turnout for the primaries in the GOP this year have been up to 3 TIMES higher than recent projections.
This is ALL good news.
The liberals are typically the insiders in Delaware, right? Castle is a RINO, and yes, more of an insider than anyone, really, but it may very well be that liberal = insider, with Pres, House, Senate all in D hands. And Coons is a politician, just with less experience than Castle. If the race really boils down to who the real outsider is, Christine would win that.
No it doesn't.
The election of Brown was an emergency step taken to prevent an even worse version of Mengelecare from being passed in the Senate. It worked. Brown promised to side with Republicans on the issue and this promise got him elected. He gave the Republicans the one vote they needed to sustain a filibuster.
Brown, however, is currently in the process of destroying his "fifteen minutes" with the kind of cowardly votes he believes will please the Boston Globe. He thinks he can dance in the middle of the road without getting run over. Brown's problem is that conservative Massachusetts Republicans will stay home for the next election, thereby depriving him of the margin he needs in order to win re-election. Why would conservative Republicans get excited about voting for a "moderate" like Brown again? Who gets excited about "holding their nose" and voting "rat lite"?
The rats, meanwhile, will do what rats do every time and vote full rat.
Brown has doomed himself to lose. But he did the one job he was elected to do.
Thanks Scott. Now beat it.
There is nothing wrong with those people. It is a center-right country, not a far right country, like it or not.
Castle is nowhere near the center....period
I’m guessing that these new voters, tea party voters, are disallusioned R’s finding a reason to get involved.
Americans are 40% conservative. That’s a huge number. If they’re excited and happy with the candidate, we can win most anywhere, if the candidate has other plus factors going for them. Plenty of voters aren’t liberal, conservative or rigidly, ideologically moderate. There are very few rigidly ideologically moderate voters. It’s hard to be passionate about centrism. Many voters vote for the person. Maybe they’re women who want to see a woman in office. Anything.
Add voters on candidate likeability. Full Conservative participation and excitement, plus pull votes from the nonideological who just like the candidate.
If Patriots quarterback Tom Brady was a full 100% pro-life conservative would he win in Massachusetts? I would say yes, easily, at least in 2010. He’d get Conservatives, which are at least 20% even in MA, and all non ideological people who like the Patriots. Maybe 40% are ideologically leftists. That leaves 40% non ideological. Tom Brady gets at least 30% from that 40%. He wins.
Tom Campbell was way ahead of Fiorina, six days before voting was starting (absentee) when Palin jumped in to stop him, others have mentioned Joe Miller, Nikki Haley, Hoffman and more, that Palin endorsed while they appeared as sure losers.
Hugh Hewitt was working hard for Castle today, and dumping on Christine (and her supporters).
It looks like Hugh Hewitt is going down with Castle.
PPP is doing a poll of the Castle-O’Donnell contest over the weekend and should be out on Sunday night.
Regardless, I think the conservatives will turn out for Christine. When Hannity, Levin, Malkin, the TPE, Sarah Palin, the NRA, the Susan B Anthony group and Jim Demint all endorse you that pretty well seals the deal for conservatives.
To win Castle has got to get his voters to the polls. Can he? To me that is the $64,000 question.
Hewitt is always trying to move his audience to the left of center.
Good info, thanks.
I was not even talking about Castle. He is more left-center. I was responding to the comment why politicians who are not pure conservative get elected.
I have no problem with some less than pure conservatives being elected if thats what you can get....im talking about those that push the same ol same afraid to ever try just as long as they get a majority in lets say the senate but have a bunch of rinos that will give Obama victories by compromising to him
I’m not saying they only endorse people who are winners. But their endorsements have value and will only continue to have value if they hand it out selectively.
If they go around endorsing everyone pretty soon getting their endorsements will be a should shrug affair.
That’s why they would not have gotten involved in this race unless they have very good reason to believe that O’Donnell can win.
>>I’m guessing that these new voters, tea party voters, are disallusioned R’s finding a reason to get involved.<<
You betcha!
Gone are the days voting for yet another RINO in this part of the deep blue DE (northern Wilmington). Even if O’Donnell loses to Castle (my bet would be by a very narrow margin), the DE GOP has been served a strong notice. They have burned the bridge the way they campaigned against O’Donnell.
Others can calculate the 51 majority and committee chair, I will not vote for Castle in the general election, because Castle simply does not deserve to get yet another promotion to be a US Senator.
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.