Replies

Unfortunately, there is not much you can do in a case like that. But you have to keep in mind the bigger picture. You can try to complain to the state or federal republican committees and voice your concerns. If enough people in your area are complaining about the guy and thing he may be losing is ability to win elections or is somehow damaging the party, they may be inclined to put pressure on him to straighten up.

As long as he votes with the rest of the party and supports its legislative initiatives, and is not fundamentally dishonest, as opposed to not being particularly competent, consider it a vote for the party, not the individual. And keep working to get a better candidate. The only time I have ever voted outside the Republican party has been at the lowest local levels, for conservative independents or libertarians that I thought could be trusted when there were no desirable Republican candidates. But I have been very careful about doing that, and have only done it for those that seemed to have a chance of winning.

At the upper levels of the state and federal level though, I do a straight party ticket. Even if I don't like the particular candidate, politics is a numbers game. If you don't have the seats, you've got nothing, even if you have to live with the occasional cardboard cutout. Unless the guy is completely off the reservation, like Jeffords, keep him/her in place till you can get a better candidate.

If enough people in your area are complaining about the guy and thing he may be losing is ability to win elections or is somehow damaging the party, they may be inclined to put pressure on him to straighten up.

But if he keeps getting the votes, why should he straghten up?

He can get the Republicans and the Democrats to vote for him.

He is a Republican, so let's all vote for him. Never mind that he votes with the Dems. He has R after his name.

The Republican who lost the Congressional race in large part do to running such an inept campaign is now the State Party Chairman recruiting and aiding other Republicans in running their campaigns. Apart from aiding a few local candidates who may have a chance the State party is worthless and has essentially surrendered to the Democrats.

"..politics is a numbers game."

It is also a leadership game. Reagan was one man against a Democratic Congress that was filibuster proof in the Senate for awhile. Newt was one man, but his leadership gave us the Contract with America and what was essentially the first Republican congress in a generation and one of two in seventy years. Electing spineless Republicans or RINOS who vote with Democrats is so little different from a Democratically controlled Congress that Republicans and the electorate mount more opposition to socialism when they are out of power than they are doing while in power. I suspect the Democrats are better off in the present situation than any other possible circumstance. They are getting more of their agenda passed than they could pass themselves and they can still block all of Bush's judicial appointments and many of his administrative appointments if he ever decides to replace Clinton's appointees with whom he seems perfectly satisfied.

Since there is an increasing probability that Bush will be a one termer, he may not get a single Supreme Court Justice appointment confirmed and on the court.