Posted on 09/08/2014 5:52:16 AM PDT by cotton1706
Several Republican candidates in the year's most competitive Senate races have begun their fall sprint to Election Day, not by embracing Tea Party-fueled conservatism but by defensively tacking leftward.
Let’s start in Colorado, site of a strategic GOP retreat in the “War on Women.” The Republican backtracking there is being done by Rep. Cory Gardner, following withering attacks by Democrats on his past support for “personhood amendments” that bestow rights to fertilized human eggs and effectively ban some forms of birth control. Gardner released an ad claiming he would make access to “the pill … cheaper and easier” than would his opponent, Sen. Mark Udall, by ending the need for prescriptions. This tactic quickly spread. In his first debate with Sen. Kay Hagan, North Carolina Republican nominee Thom Tillis embraced the same plan.
In Arkansas, meanwhile, Republican Rep. Tom Cotton is wilting under Democratic pressure on the minimum wage. Cotton is challenging Democratic Sen. Mark Pryor. Like nearly all GOP politicians, but not like most voters, Cotton is opposed to raising the federal minimum from its current level of $7.25. But on Election Day, Arkansans will vote on a ballot initiative to raise the state minimum to $8.50, squeezing Cotton to the breaking point. Put on the spot in a radio interview Friday, he said he would vote for the state measure, though he avoided answering a follow-up question about whether that means he would support raising the federal minimum to the same level.
Alaska Republican Dan Sullivan this week aired a new ad that practically makes him seem like a Democrat: embracing teachers and excoriating Wall Street.
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
Short answer: No.
I do not believe the Republicans have a chance to take the Senate. Too many opposed the tea party and Conservative base to win a majority.
“... I believe our only (slim) hope is drastic action.”
I think we are likely to see drastic action before we see the GOP establishment support “the core principles of liberty, free markets and Constitutional law ...”
I’ll see you at the barricades. No way I’m letting Freedom go down without a fight.
Worthless pooosay’s.
The parenthesis in your headline nails it.
I won’t vote for a Gibsmedat candidate, even if he/she has an R after his/her name.
“Gardner released an ad claiming he would make access to “the pill … cheaper and easier” than would his opponent, Sen. Mark Udall, by ending the need for prescriptions.”
“That actually is brilliant, and should be adopted by all GOPers. Most female voters are idiots, and will be taken in by such nonsense, as they were by the “War on women” garbage. Manipulate the dumb broads, as the RATs do, and therefore neutralize them, and the male vote will win the Senate with ease.”
You do make a good point. Most of the people I see on the roads who have Obummer bumper stickers are white females with dumb, blank looks on their faces, often with other idiotic bumper stickers like “Coexist.” (When I see a “Coexist” sticker I want to shoot their tires out.) There is no way you can ever win this mind-numbed group by talking about liberty, free enterprise, and personal responsibility.
Your foolishness has already been pointed out and detailed up thread.
They lost their way...they are not the Conservative party but just a light version of the Dhimmicrat party. That capitalism still works. That the events near St Louis are not a cause for apology but a cause to expose the leftist race baters for what they are.
I could go on forever.
“Let’s win the Senate. When we do, we can talk about strategy from there.”
Yeah.... pass it before you read it worked well for Pelosi, didn’t it...
The current position is grid-lock because the Republican controlled house and the Democrat controlled senate don’t see eye to eye. If the Republicans take the senate then there is pressure to pass legislation, to show they are doing something. Given their history of giving in to anything President Obama wants... I am quite skeptical that a bunch of Rinos are going to pass anything I want passed. When the results are bad, the Republicans get “credit” even though they compromised with Obama.
On the other hand, grid-lock means a time out until the next Presidential election when we will hopefully have the chance to elect a real conservative (like Ted Cruz!). In the mean time, Obama is solely responsible for his results. The supreme court appointments are pretty much done, that was the only thing even close to an argument... and Rinos rubber stamp those anyways.
So, please do explain how accepting Rino results now, followed by more Rino results later... is preferable to grid-lock for two more years followed by a conservative win?
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.