Posted on 04/08/2014 6:48:30 AM PDT by nhwingut
Republican Scott Brown leads incumbent Democratic senator Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire by five points in a recent poll obtained by THE WEEKLY STANDARD. The poll, commissioned by the Republican Governor's Association, was conducted on March 19 and 20 and asked 600 likely voters in New Hampshire who they would vote for in the U.S. Senate election. Respondents were given both Brown and Shaheen's names and their respective parties.
(Excerpt) Read more at weeklystandard.com ...
We are at a critical point in history---decimating Dummycrats should be the utmost priority---if we have to do it w/ RINOS, so be it.
B/C I firmly believe once we get 'em all together in the majority---getting RINOs to toe the line will be easier than it is now----b/c they see themselves as free agents fighting the Dummycrat majority power plays.
That would make sense in a world of perfect choices and clear delineations. Sadly, this world is one of degrees.
The formula you've espoused is:
1. Won't vote for less than perfect GOP candidate.
2. That candidate loses.
3. A candidate that votes 0% to your standards wins.
You've set up a scenario in which your worst choice wins. That's not logical or sensible. If a guy like Scott Brown or Sen. Mark Kirk (R - IL) wins you have a chance to work with them and worst case you get their votes so that you control committees and the legislative agenda. You're better off with sheep like that, being lead by lions like Cruz, Paul and Lee, than a Congress full of Democrats for whom Natural Rights are an abomination to be destroyed.
In the end Politicians sell a product: their vote. They must be reelected and therefore have to play ball somehow. It's easier to get a RINO to come to your side, than a Democrat. That's the facts of this world.
Spot on, again. What few FReepers seem to understand is that Democrats don’t like losing. Their entire reason to be is to prove their superiority and self-worth. Remember how many House Dems just took their ball and went home when Gingrich and that Congress swept in?
If we can control Congress through two or three election cycles the oldest and worst Democrats will bail and quickly. They live for power and authority and being the minority and watching your agenda be dismantled Congress after Congress is depressing. We can crush them and send them packing.
A Senate of 60 GOP votes means we’ll have some RINOs, but if the American people demand action those RINOs will jump ship. The critical key is understanding that the Democrats are the opposition and the Senate is the enemy. It’s the House we need to hold and hold and hold as conservative as possible. Given our control of Governorships and statehouses we’ll do that. Holder and the DOJ had very limited effect in forcing districts to be redrawn. The SCOTUS is helping on that front as well.
> The formula you’ve espoused is:
>
> 1. Won’t vote for less than perfect GOP candidate.
Not true. I am more concerned about the moral issues than the financial ones. By my reckoning, if you’ve got your morals right, your finances will follow suit. It does not work the other way around.
> 2. That candidate loses.
If the candidate supports abortion, the gay mafia, and gun-control, I don’t see that as a loss.
> 3. A candidate that votes 0% to your standards wins.
Candidates like Scott Brown vote 0% on my standards already.
My issues are
1. Pro-Life
2. Anti LGBTQI whatever agenda
3. Pro-gun
There is no compromising with issue 1.
If a candidate has the other two things at least MOSTLY right, then I could probably vote for him or her.
Any candidate with the good sense to be on the correct side of #1 100% of the time, and issues #2 and #3 most of the time, is likely to have all the other things lined up pretty well, too.
NO . MORE . RINOS
If we have to KILL the Republican Party to stop the endless parade of useless, sellout, backstabbing RINOs, then so be it.
Boy this would be a tough one. Vote for a RINO to get rid of Harry Reid? Problem is Reid will probably be replaced by a RINO.
We agree on the issues, just not on the tactics. There are certain states where in a statewide race only the RINO will beat the Dem. That’s not ideal, but America isn’t a conservative country across the board.
What does a RINO do that a Democrat cannot: give you control of committees and the agenda. It’s in committees that you can create legislation to roll back, protect or support those things most important to you - life, guns and godly marriage.
Brown isn’t my favorite or my ideal candidate, but I am looking at the alternatives and despite himself, he’s better than a Dem.
Take a look at this comparison:
We are, quite literally, ten times better off with a Brown than with a Democrat. Keep in mind that he didn’t side with the Dems on Democratcare or repealing citizen’s united:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3097726/posts
I guess the New Hampshire citizens who wanted Freedom is now dead, replaced by Massachusetts liberals. I’m glad the poll is showing. Brown leading, but we need a CONSERVATIVE not Scott.
No the 80% interpretation is not what he said. He was willing to vote for the most conservative conservative candidate who could be elected. So by extension, allowing a liberal to win isn’t a viable conclusion
Ahhhh...that repeat felt good.
================================================
Granted, Scott wont be a conservative stadard-bearer---but we will get something out of him. Every vote counts, as opposed to enduring the preening, self-serving Shaheen act.
As you say, "If we can control Congress through 2-3 election cycles the oldest and worst Democrats will bail and quickly."
I'm not a single issue voter. As a conservative with a bit of libertarian, I am looking for people who is looking atthe Constitution and see freedom, not seeing victims.
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.