Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: fieldmarshaldj
Aside from Angle, there was no reason to believe Akin or Mourdock would lose. Look at the supposedly “safe” candidates we nominated: Mack in FL, Lingle in HI, Hoekstra in MI, Rehberg in MT, Wilson in NM, Berg in ND, Allen in VA, Thompson in WI, etc., all failed just as miserably.

You're the one calling them "safe" ... Mr. "Macaca" Allen was "safe" bet to lose just as he did a few years earlier. Thompson was not going to win in WI, but it's not like that was an easy pick up. The rest are noise to me right now.

There was plenty of reason to believe Akin would lose when he didn't step aside and allow someone else to take his spot. Sad and frightful it may be to say, we're better off with McCaskill than someone so pompous and delusional as Akin. Mourdock was clearly stuck on stupid for not learning from Akin's rape controversy.

The Akin and Mourdock races were easy pickings and thrown away.

32 posted on 01/22/2013 2:58:53 AM PST by newzjunkey (bah)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: newzjunkey; BillyBoy; Impy; AuH2ORepublican

I didn’t say safe as in a 100% sure bet to win, but safe in that the establishment assured us were non-controversial picks. We hear nothing but Akin this and Mourdock that and never about any of the other races with one of those aforementioned “safe” candidates. They all blew their races for one reason or another. This singling out of 2 Tea Party candidates when all those others lost, too, is absurd.

To say Thompson was not going to win in WI early on was silly. The Democrat was a crazy butch lesbian moonbat from Madistan, not exactly a mainstream candidate by any stretch. She had never won statewide. But, again, Thompson was the “safe” candidate to run, somebody whom had won 4 times statewide.

To address Allen, that “macaca” comment was way back in 2006, not a “few years” ago. He was either ahead of or tied Tim Kaine in the polls for quite some time in 2012, yet he failed to win (and this time around, you couldn’t blame “macaca”). A lot of individuals on our side ran bad or bland candidacies that failed to inspire. My entire point here is that a lot of these “safe” candidates that the establishment insisted we run still couldn’t win. So, again, why should we go after Akin & Mourdock with double barrels when so many others failed to deliver winnable seats ? I think it’s an excuse to knock Tea Party candidates when the establishment’s record is much worse (look at their epic fail disastrous Presidential nominees of the past two cycles... Conservatives/Tea Partiers need not apply).


37 posted on 01/22/2013 3:35:04 AM PST by fieldmarshaldj (Resist We Much)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson