This has been a very interesting thread, but I’m glad that I didn’t waste my time posting arguments. Spent yesterday with my one day old granddaughter, and the wisdom that comes from her was much better than reading this nonsense.
The common theme in all of this is a very simplistic argument that because the Republican Party is not ideologically pure and would prefer to win rather than go down to defeat supporting an unelectable candidate, they do not deserve our support. The convoluted logic is that another two years with Harry Reid as Majority Leader is a better outcome and will teach those wishy washy Republicans a lesson.
One of the most striking aspects of these comments is what is missing. Elections are not about individual races, or even the political philosophy of individual candidates. Elections are about political power and power is exercised through the two major political parties. Nothing else counts. As the Democrats have demonstrated, you don’t need to have a majority in your party to exercise control. Most Democrats aren’t the lunatic lefties who control the Congress and the White House, but they go along with the leadership and the Democrats advance their agenda. This is what the conservatives need to do and they can achieve this by electing conservatives to both local and national office and seizing control of the party leadership. That is done with a few quality candidates, not a full slate of self selected knuckleheads who are never going to win an election.
Also missing is any mention of how power is exercised in the Senate. The most powerful people in Washington are the Chairmen of Senate committees. They are appointed by the Majority Leader which is the number one reason why we need a Republican Majority Leaders. A number of those committee chairs will be rock solid conservatives and they will have real power to advance a conservative agenda. That’s why the pledge of the purists that they will only vote a real conservative is a self defeating behavior. It fails to recognize how power is organized and applied.
Conservatives have been much more successful in this cycle nominating electable candidates who can win races in the General Election. The weak ones did not survive the primaries. Are there establishment types still in play? Of course, you cannot dismiss the power of incumbency or the plain fact that die hard conservative purists do not represent a majority in the Republican Party. See how the Democrats handle that same dynamic and use it to win. Those establishment types are much more likely to support a conservative issue than any Democrat will ever be.
There is no power in the senate really, its been shifted to the executive.
The argument being made is not: “elect Republicans and we’ll get conservative legislation passed!”
It is: “Elect Republicans so we can made Obama look bad when he vetoes all this great stuff we send him!”
And from what I’ve seen of the GOP media wing, Obama will STILL make the GOP look to be at fault when he vetoes everything. The GOP are totally feckless at public relations
Brilliant post had to be repeated.
” Elections are not about individual races, or even the political philosophy of individual candidates. Elections are about political power and power is exercised through the two major political parties. “
I absolutely agree with your statement. The Republicans love power as much as any Commie.
Why should us peons desire a limited G’ment when our bettors can tell us what to do, when to do it and how to do it?
Then what are we talking about? Sounds like it's a done deal, they're electable, so why are these discussions so heated?