Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Qbert

I was NEVER a Christine O’Donnell hater and what I heard from her and seen from her never convinced me that she was the evil moron that Karl Rove and the MSM made her out to be, but I didn’t know until last night that she had run for senator twice and lost badly.

I am not saying we should roll over for RINOs like Castle, but maybe it would be better to nominate somebody who isn’t a consistent loser.


25 posted on 11/03/2010 11:57:17 AM PDT by radpolis (Liberals: You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: radpolis

“I am not saying we should roll over for RINOs like Castle, but maybe it would be better to nominate somebody who isn’t a consistent loser.”

In 1980, Ronald Reagan was an almost 70 year old, two-time failed presidential nominee. That one worked pretty well though...

But fair enough as to your larger point, for the next time around.


31 posted on 11/03/2010 12:04:51 PM PDT by Qbert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

To: radpolis

I never posted a negative word about Christine. To the contrary. I was pulling for her 100%.

But I think if she is set on running for public office, maybe next time she should set her sights a little lower than Senate. How about state legislature or, at most, U.S. House? Get a little more experience under her belt.


32 posted on 11/03/2010 12:06:54 PM PDT by kevao
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

To: radpolis
but I didn’t know until last night that she had run for senator twice and lost badly.

Why yes, and after her trouncing in the Republican primary for Senate in 2006, O'Donnell promptly refused to endorse or support the rightful winner and ran as a write in 3rd party candidate. It's been kind of amusing hearing Christine and her cheerleaders moaning about how horrible it was that Castle didn't support her considering she not only didn't support the Republican nominee in 2006 - she actually ran against him. Oh, Castle and the establishment certainly should have backed her, but the hypocrisy from COD and her supporters, considering her past actions on this front, is simply amazing.

I am not saying we should roll over for RINOs like Castle, but maybe it would be better to nominate somebody who isn’t a consistent loser.

Determining whether a candidate can actually win is sort of important in the primary process. Apparently the Tea Party and a majority of Delaware primary voters did not stop to consider this at all.

51 posted on 11/03/2010 12:44:24 PM PDT by Longbow1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

To: radpolis

The people who voted for COD in the primary knew all about her past Senate runs. The Delaware GOP had used her as cannon fodder against Biden before, so it was no surprise about her political past. Those who claim she wasn’t vetted well by the party should realize she had that prior approval to run and ran this time without their approval or ‘re-vetting’. The machine candidate [Castle] had just lost it finally with the more conservative base and they threw him out without worrying too much about who would win eventually. The principle was more important to us than D or R. I’d still vote the same way if I knew what the outcome would be.


89 posted on 11/03/2010 2:57:20 PM PDT by Hartlyboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson