That would be well intentioned but foolish. Having an open seat has it's advantages but overall it's better to face the damaged incumbent. Like when allegedly some Missouri Republicans crossed over into the 2004 rat gubernatorial primary and defeated Governor Bob Holden who was a lock to lose in November. The winning rat Claire McCaskill nearly won. When discussing this years later I had a disagreement with some Missouri freeper.
Them: We got rid of Holden!
Me: But McCaskill nearly won. Holden was toast for November.
Them: We got rid of Holden!!
Me: That was foolish, helping the stronger general election rat win.
Them: Shut up!
Oliverio may be conservative for a rat but AFAIC he's pond scum so long as he's in the party of Obama, Byrd, and Pelosi whom I assume he'd vote for as Speaker. If the man wanted to switch he could have done so months ago and ran as a Republican. I'm not greatly optimistic he would if he wins in November.
So those Tea Parties better turn out in the general and beat him.
If the primary turnout was about even as freeper Kabar has stated then maybe Tea Partiers did not cross over. You'd figure on more people voting in the rat primary in that district.
I agree. Would much rather have faced Mollohan.
Republicans had their hands full with 6! choices in this primary. I doubt they crossed over and meddled on the Democrat side. I’d be inclined to believe if they bothered to come out, they had a favorite candidate on the R side they wanted to support.
The ferocity with which Dems threw out Mollohan reveals a lot of voter angst. Just what triggered that angst and how it can be tapped into for R benefit is something the McKinley team needs to discern.
You’re right on all counts! A vote for Oliverio (now or in November) is a vote for Nazi Pelosi & the socialist demoRATs. No matter how “conservative” Oliverio supposedly is, he will vote for Nazi Pelosi 90% of the time or more, just like “conservative” Heath Shuler does.