Posted on 08/27/2014 5:53:45 AM PDT by cotton1706
“Republican” U.S. Sen. Pat Roberts is facing a tougher-than-expected reelection battle in Kansas – a state heretofore reliable in its election of GOP nominees.
Roberts recently won the “Republican” nomination in the Sunflower State by a 48-41 margin over Tea Party-backed candidate Milton Wolf (with 11 percent of voters supporting other candidates).
Game over, right? Wrong …
According to the results of a recent Survey USA poll, Roberts is only leading his Democratic opponent Chad Taylor by a 37-32 percent margin. Where’s the rest of the support going? Well, 20 percent of those polled say they’re backing independent candidate Greg Orman - three times the level of support he was receiving just two months ago.
“Roberts’ numbers have been steady,” noted political analyst Jeff Jarman of KSN.com. ”Taylor’s numbers have been steady. It’s Orman who is gaining ground.”
And if Orman continues to gain momentum, there’s speculation that national Democrats might ask Taylor to drop out of the race.
Orman isn’t the only potentially credible candidate threatening to throw a monkey wrench into the traditional “red” versus “blue” calculus.
In South Carolina, “Republican” Lindsey Graham is – like Roberts – deeply unpopular with voters. He’s facing a credible Democrat (S.C. Sen. Brad Hutto) as well as an independent challenger – former State Treasurer Thomas Ravenel. According to several internal polls provided to FITS, Ravenel is currently drawing between 13-15 percent support – and he has yet to spend a dime of his considerable fortune on media messaging.
Meanwhile in North Carolina vulnerable incumbent Kay Hagan is in a dogfight against establishment “Republican” Thom Tillis (both are drawing a little over 40 percent support) – although the real story is the emergence of Libertarian nominee Sean Haugh, who is currently drawing the support of eight percent of voters.
(Excerpt) Read more at fitsnews.com ...
Completely agree on that. I’m thinking that, like having a bad manager, we might have to (will have to, in many cases) hold our noses, pick the GOPe up and carry it over the finish line. For our own short-term self preservation.
Cochrane is an exception. Mark Levin (I think) made a suggestion a couple months back that every cycle Conservatives should pick a single non-Conservative Senator and target him for defeat in the General election by throwing votes to the Dem. Just to show that we can, and will. To encourage the others.
But only one. Enough to set an example but not enough to swing control of the Senate (our own self-preservation coming first)
Seems like a great idea to me, with this years political target being Cochrane.
Nope. Not voting for a liberal republican, now or ever.
They need to be politically destroyed, and never win another election.
Liberals won't save us. Especially liberal republicans.
/johnny
08/27/2014 6:23:41 AM PDT ? 21 of 21
Toddsterpatriot to Cringing Negativism Network
Simply repeating the word "troll" over and over, isn't really input at all.
Prove you're not a troll.
List 3 conservative policy recommendations that you think will help manufacturing and jobs return to
America.
Or run away.....again.
My comment: why would this comment be deleted?
Agree that we have to be very careful of falling for the divide and conquer approach I believe the Democrats are using against Republicans. The fact is that if a more conservative candidate loses the Republican primary (absent Democrat interference) the only thing going into the general election will do is split the vote so Democrats win. Are we really better off having a Democrat enabling leftists policies full speed than at least a nominal Republican that votes conservative at least some of the time? I’ll probably be flamed for not lining up with those who say they will refuse to vote for a less than totally conservative Republican - but we live in a real world and the fact is that ultimately the choice needs to be between 2, not three or more in the General election. Don’t have to provide money to those not aligned, but we need to at least show up and vote.
The last election likely would not have gone to Zero if the “true conservatives” that refused to vote for Romney for whatever reason had simply shown up and voted. Despite comments that have been made in this forum to the contrary, Obama got less votes than in 2008 and Romney got more votes than McCain in 2008. Romney may be far from perfect - but the absolute disaster on so many fronts we are now facing would have been avoided. Primaries are where we have to sort out our differences.
Remember Reagan’s 11th commandment. I believe the Democrats have been successful in making too many Republicans forget it.
“If I had $100 million dollars I wouldn’t give $10 to the GOPe.”
RNC fundraiser called yesterday. No friendly chit chat, just came flat out and asked me to give $500 in consideration of my past support of the party.
My response: “I am no longer a member of the Republican Party.” There was an awkward pause (for him). As he resumed started talking I hung up the phone
Last year, after 40 years as a Republican, I went down to the courthouse and declared my independence.
Liberal Republicans won’t save us. Conservative Senators like Ted Cruz will.
But without a Senate majority, or even a filibuster proof Senate minority, all the Ted Cruzes of the GOP can do is thumb their noses at Liberal legislation and appointments as they pass by.
That may mean having to think strategically and vote for GOPe to get the seats necessary for the Ted Cruzes to do some real good.
Romney didn't even match his party platform on abortion, amnesty, 2nd Amendment, socialized medicine and big government.
The perfection argument is a LIE spread by GOP-E operatives.
How about a candidate that matches the party platform?
I will do everything in my power to politically destroy liberal republicans.
I'm a conservative, not a republican.
No vote for liberal republicans here.
/johnny
A liberal republican senate won't help. Liberal republicans won't get my vote. Now or ever.
/johnny
Real world impact example: had Romney won the Presidency the DC Circuit Court of Appeals wouldn’t have been stacked with Liberals following the nuking of the appointment filibuster.
That means that if the recent panel decision overturning the Obamacare Federal Exchange subsidies were appealed en banc, the panel’s ruling would have been upheld. Instead it’s going to be overturned.
Now, this is in no way an endorsement of Romney for 2016, but it does illustrate that there are degrees of ideological acceptability. And consequences for placing them at certain points.
tanknetter wrote:
<<
I’m thinking that, like having a bad manager, we might have to (will have to, in many cases) hold our noses, pick the GOPe up and carry it over the finish line. For our own short-term self preservation.
>>
************************************************************
But aren’t we all completely sick and tired of having to keep doing this? We’ve been holding our noses at the ballot box for years now and where has it gotten us???
As a conservative, you are doing the ultra leftists work for them with that attitude. Perhaps you should expend your energy politically destroying the leftists. Within the framework we have we are stuck - and while Romney has a history of being on the wrong side of the issues you state -he was not as far left as what the alternative we now have is.
Fight these things out in the primaries. If you can’t get a winner there, your vote in the general for a “conservative” is one less vote the true leftists have to counter.
Do you really think we are better off with Obama on all the issues stated than we would have been with Romney?
JRandomFreeper wrote:
<<
All that your liberal republican leadership in the Senate has done is to support Reid’s liberal agenda with their critical cloture votes.
>>
************************************************************
An excellent point. If you want to see a Republican senator’s true colors, always pay close attention to their cloture votes.
I can't ever get rid of the liberals in the Democrat party, but I can make sure the liberals in the Republican party never, ever win again.
The leftists are happy with liberal republicans. Liberals republicans help enable the liberal agenda (see McConnell's cloture votes).
No, I'll keep working to destroy liberal republicans.
One liberal is as bad as any other, but I can do something about liberal republicans.
/johnny
LibertyOh wrote:
<<
As a conservative, you are doing the ultra leftists work for them with that attitude. Perhaps you should expend your energy politically destroying the leftists.
>>
************************************************************
With all due respect, isn’t your last statement exactly what the GOP Establishment is NOT doing?? And yet you insist we continue supporting them??
Absolutely agree regarding degrees of ideological acceptability. Also agree not endorsing Romney or anyone for 2016 - we’ll have to see who ultimately runs. Bottom line - at the end of the primaries we should have a candidate -and if not then at the end of the convention. Whoever it is will be “impure” on one or more conservative issues. But that is what we will have. Holding our noses to vote is an unfortunate consequence of the system we have. Coming up with a viable third party just will not happen - conservatives need to have patience for the long haul, take whatever victories they can achieve. Reagan was an outsider and transformed the party - for a season. Grassroots efforts and gaining control from the bottom up is what is essential. It will be a long, hard journey, but along the way we can’t give in to our pride when it enables the destruction of our nation.
It’s gotten us Ted Cruz. And Mike Lee. And Rand Paul
Ronald Reagan really liked the saying that a rising tide raises all boats. He was speaking economically, but it applies politically as well.
I may not like Mitch McConnell, or Boehner, or Lindsay Graham or John McCain. But I DO like Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, Trey Gowdy and even Rand Paul (who is wrong on enough issues to deny him my GOP presidential primary vote, but still right on enough that I like him as a Senator). And I want their boats to rise.
And I understand that their boats will only rise with a rising tide. Which means supporting folks I don’t like, abhor even. Mitch McConnell may see me as an enemy that needs to be crushed, but I look back see him, ruthlessly, as a political necessity so that the people I support (Cruz, Lee, even Rand Paul) can make it up the ladder into positions of tangible power.
We are in exactly the same place on all those issues as we would have been with Romney. Exactly. No difference.
Abortion - the same. Amnesty - the same. 2nd Amendment - the same. Socialized medicine - the same. Bigger government - the same.
One liberal leftist is as bad as another.
/johnny
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.