I'm talking about exactly that. Are you telling me DeWine didn't have an advantage over his challengers due to the party infrastructure?
You proved the point. Can you point to a single case where "the party" supported a challenger to their existing incumbent? (I'm not puting the burden of proof on you, it's just that I can't think of any case where "the party" was motivated to do anything other than milquetoastify a candidate the longer he stays on.)
I am NOT denying my cuplability, even in Ohio's election, which I can't vote in. Because in the past, I have donated to the GOP, which has funded people like DeWine and Specter.
That makes me guilty of supporting the machinery that is doing some things I don't want. It is also doing some things I do want (such as "nothing.") I perfer a party to do less, rather than more!
So I dunno what the answer is.
At the same time, the GOP threw DeLay under a bus, and would support McPain as their standard bearer if they thought he was moderate enough. So again, damnedifIno.
No. But I'm telling you that Jim Petro had the advantage over Ken Blackwell due to party infrastructure, and the voters overrode it.
It's the PEOPLE who make the decisions, sam. That's what this country is all about.
Placing blame on the party alone may be convenient, but it's not Constitutional.
I didn't prove your point. But you provided me a fine opportunity to prove mine.
I don't know a single FReeper, other than recent sign-ons, who advocated that DeLay "hit the road". The GOP for the most part, stayed the hell out of the fray. The Democrats and certain FReepers put a bullseye on his back and they were willing to use it. Delay stepped down and retired because he knew it.
He's not going anywhere. He's going to be speaking for and stumping for GOP candidates in future elections.
As to McCain, I'm not the least bit worried about him. He won't be nominated in the first place anyway.
As to you, you need some new talking points which to shoot down. The same tired old ranting gets old.
That was the point I was going to make. Republican incumbents of a liberal persuasion are often protected by the party against conservative challengers. I've seen it time and time again. I can't think of a SINGLE race where a conservative challenger has beaten an liberal Republican incumbent in the Primary Election. And I can think of several where the Republican Party provided overt and covert support to the liberal incumbent.