Posted on 10/13/2017 12:01:58 AM PDT by Moseley
Our political establishment always eagerly supports reform as long as it is no more than theater meant to fool the voters, an entirely phony exercise. In the early 1990s, I held in my hand a small-run book, “Lip Service,” by Richard Viguerie, which highlighted the attempts of Republican leaders to fool conservatives.
Finally, after years of conservatives ignoring the obvious need, Steve Bannon, former Trump White House adviser and Breitbart editor, is launching a sustained war to eject Democrats pretending to be Republicans and elect actual, genuine Republicans to the U.S. Congress. Our country is lost without this. But many have started such efforts before and have always lacked the persistence, wisdom and determination to carry it through. Efforts like Bannon’s have always failed because conservatives excel at giving up too soon.
On Wednesday, leading conservatives like Ken Cuccinelli and Brent Bozell demanded that Mitch McConnell resign as Senate majority leader, along with his entire leadership team in Congress. (Trump should announce a nomination of McConnell as ambassador to Australia.)
But predictably, on cue, we hear howls and shrieks from the swamp. Nominating conservative candidates will result in Democrats winning the seats in the general election. Against all historical evidence, the establishment always argues that we must never nominate a real conservative because the Democrat will win the office.
Christine O’Donnell pops up in political commentary almost every day in my news alerts, citing the example of her 2010 run for the U.S. Senate from Delaware. Apologists for the swamp try to persuade us never to elect conservative candidates. But this is the same false narrative that dishonest members of the establishment have been peddling for 50 to 60 years. Just hand write the latest name into the blanks of the template and change a few details.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
But this war started for me in 1994 with the Oliver North campaign in Virginia. I didn’t meet Christine until Jan. 31, 2003, the last night of CPAC that year. As much as I have witnessed Christine’s wisdom, abilities and amazing intelligence, and on and off have counted her as a friend when she’ll put up with me, this is mainly about the Republican spoiler Marshall Coleman and the establishment sabotage attacks on Col. North. Christine O’Donnell’s sabotage by the establishment in 2010 was merely a rerun of North ’94, like Rocky 17.
The reality is this: From the fall of 2002 through October 2010, voter registration of Democrats soared 31.12 percent in Delaware. In the same period, Republican voter registration grew by only 4.74 percent. By the November 2010 election, registered Democratic voters outnumbered Republican voters by 110,000, by 293,817 to 183,623.
Delaware is very liberal. No witch or warlock commercials and Bannon’s kids should do just fine.
The war for me started back in the late seventies when Pete McClisjey begged dems to vote for him so the conservative Republicans wouldn’t unseat him
“Bannon’s kids should do just fine.”
I think that Bannon will be careful screening his kids. The 2010 disasters happened because the Tea Party was treated like crap by The Establishment and we were not organized in a way to carefully choose candidates. There are plenty of conservatives who are not witches and who understand what rape is...normally they’d be vetted by the party which claims to support conservatism, but that didn’t happen back then, but is happening now (although outside of The Establishment) by Bannon.
You did not read the article, did you?
John McCain got the same vote percentage as Christine O’Donnell on the same ballot on the same day.
So it wasn’t the candidate, was it?
Christine O’Donnell did better than any other Republican running for US Senate in Delaware since Bill Roth.
So, no, other candidates are not going to do just fine.
Jan Ting lost by a 41.5% margin.
Since Christine O’Donnell did BETTER than any other Republican since Bill Roth, you are going to have to search for the problem elsewhere.
If you don’t deal with real-world facts you cannot come up with solutions.
Furthermore, the party cannot “vet” candidates without denying people the right to run for office.
Anyone is free to run for office.
So there can be no “vetting.”
In 2010, the Republican voters rejected the party’s candidate.
The voters knew everything. All of the arguments — lies, mostly — about Christine O’Donnell were circulated started in December 2009.
The voters of Delaware in the Republican party said we don’t care. We are fed up with establishment phonies like Mike Castle.
The issue was not vetting.
The issue was a complete and total rejection of the GOP establishment.
The GOP establishment earned every vote against it fair and square.
My comments on vetting were directed to you, actually.
The party vetted the candidates. The voters heard the arguments and rejected them.
The voters chose the candidate they wanted.
Mike Castle had no chance at all of winning the 2010 general election for Senate in Delaware.
Christine O’Donnell did BETTER in the general election than any other Republican since Bill Roth running in Delaware for US Senate.
If Christine O’Donnell did BETTER running in Delaware than any other Republican since Bill Roth,
WHAT THEN are your (erroneous) conclusions (free of all facts)?
What conclusions can you draw if Christine O’Donnell performed BETTER than any other Republican in Delaware running for US Senate and almost as good as John McCain?
A really good article, eye-opening.
I was a volunteer for Christine O’Donnell - knocking on doors, distributing campaign literature, etc. Some of the worst comments came from Castle Republicans. Her numbers would have a lot better if the establishment hadn’t voted against her.
Her campaign HQ in Newark was invaded by the establishment and their candidates, crowding her out. Republican HQ refused to have her campaign materials. One official screamed at me that she would lose following the primary and that they were not going to lift a finger to help her!
In the end, Democrat AND Republicans preferred a self-avowed Marxist over a Conservative. F them.
>>In the end, Democrat AND Republicans preferred a self-avowed Marxist over a Conservative. F them.
***********************************************************
I remember this re: Christine O’Donnell/Mike Castle. What the GOPe did to her was despicable and exposed them for who they are. But many were not awake at the time, and could not see it.
The GOPe are NO different than the Dems. They just wear different costumes. May the Uniparty and their Masters soon crash and burn for good.
There are those who realized the entrenched GOP’ers (like Mike Castle) ARE the problem
A LOT EARLIER
than your general mill Republican voters.
And during the 2010 election cycle, there were lots of verbal abuses thrown down by the GOP machine. Supporters of CO’D begged them to just listen to us for once, but they’d rather have Coons win than to have a Tea Party member to threaten their livelihood.
Now (year 2017) years later, more and more people wake up to such cozy Republican-Democrats relationship, i.e., the Swamp.
This wasn’t the only election like this. There were several elections where GOPe actively undercut the tea party candidate to help the Dems.
Usually Rove and McConnell were involved.
Ignore the Establishment scare tactics.
Everything from you and that article would be just fine if the news regarding Senate races stayed within the state...but all people outside Delaware heard was the ‘witch’ stuff. It affected other elections...just as the horrific candidate from Missouri did.
I have no issue with Republicans not wanting Castle, the guy’s a total loser, and yes, Christine or anyone else is welcome to run, and yes, any decent Republican would have lost there...but we don’t need candidates serving up material for late-night talk show hosts because that does affect other elections...many of which are much closer.
So if it is important and has an impact outside of the State in question, would you expect Democrats and the liberal news media to:
1) Distort any Republican and try to find some detail to blow out of proportion and completely twist?
or
2) Fairly and accurately report the truth about your favorite candidate?
If there is “profit” in it politically, do you really expect Democrats and liberal journalists to REFRAIN from smearing EVERY and ANY Republican candidate?
How do Democrats handle this? Their candidates have far worse scandals, but the Democrats close ranks and the news media covers it up.
The real issue is that Republican attack our own while Democrats protect their own.
You can kiss your country goodbye, you will never win a majority of Congress of REAL Republicans, so long as the news media can pick some detail and LIE about it and the Republican Party joins in and piles on instead of defending their candidates the way Democrats defend their own candidates.
The detailed electoral analytics in the article at the link may be of interest.
On March 9, 2010, the day she revealed her plan to run for the Senate in a press release, a tax lien was placed on a house purported to be hers and publicized. The problem was she no longer owned the house. The IRS eventually blamed the lien on a computer glitch and withdrew it.Now Mr. Martel, a criminal investigator for the Treasury Department’s inspector general for tax administration, was telling her that an official in Delaware state government had improperly accessed her records on that very same day.
Beyond that, Ms. O'Donnell and Senate investigators who have tried to help her have run into a wall of silence, leaving more questions than answers about whether abuses of the IRS system extend to private individuals and not just the tax-exempt groups already identified as victims...
All the IRS will say is that the one person believed to have willfully misused the tax record system worked outside the agency.
Ms. O'Donnell has spent the past six months trying to find out more about what happened to her personally, with little success.
Investigators have told her the probe has been closed, without offering an explanation. Ms. O'Donnell’s attempts to get records about the possible misuse of her tax files through Freedom of Information Act requests have been delayed or denied...
Ms. O'Donnell said she has reason to believe her political opponents were behind the scheme.
“An official with this investigation told me that there was evidence linking this inappropriate use of my tax records with the Delaware political leadership, Delaware political leaders on both sides of the aisle,” she said, though she declined to identify the official with whom she spoke.
In the midst of the 2010 campaign, long before it was revealed that her tax information had been accessed, Ms. O'Donnell’s financial life was a subject of intense media scrutiny and was used repeatedly by her enemies.
Republican Party heavyweight Karl Rove, who was an adviser to President George W. Bush, was among the critics who blasted Ms. O'Donnell for, among other things, falling behind on her mortgage.
How should future conservative candidates manage the fragging they will receive from their own side?
-PJ
Yup. And yes it is true. And Senator Grassley promised that he would investigate. But he did not.
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.