Quotes of the day

posted at 10:35 pm on October 21, 2010 by Allahpundit

“Christine O’Donnell is only on one state’s ballot this year, but it would be easy for voters elsewhere to think otherwise. Democrats in some of the nation’s most competitive Senate races are invoking the Delaware Republican Senate nominee’s name almost as frequently as their actual opponents…

“In all these cases, the implication was clear: My opponent agrees with the wacky lady who is regularly spoofed on Saturday Night Live and in various YouTube parodies. The result is to position O’Donnell as the election cycle’s signature fruitcake…

“‘If you’re winning a campaign, you try to talk about the issues. If that doesn’t work, attack the character of the candidate you’re running against,’ said Republican consultant John Feehery. ‘If that doesn’t work, try to associate your opponent with somebody else – and if that doesn’t work, blame Christine O’Donnell.’”

***
“Her shocking victory in the Delaware Republican primary was a breakthrough for the conservative Tea Party movement that has up-ended U.S. politics. But while her grassroots fund-raising has been more than respectable, O’Donnell’s tense relations with mainstream Republicans and her floundering campaign have led bigtime donors to shun her, albeit quietly…

“‘Were American Crossroads to invest there (in Delaware), they could not invest in Colorado, where the polls are within the margin of error,’ [Crossroads spokesman Jonathan] Collegio told Reuters. He said that if O’Donnell’s poll numbers improve markedly in the last days of the campaign, it is possible Crossroads could reassess its position. ‘But at the moment, spending money there would mean not spending money in races which are legitimately competitive,’ he said…

“Even the Tea Party Express, the Sacramento-based national organization that launched a well-financed, late-stage advertising campaign which helped O’Donnell win her primary race, has dialed back its financial support for her.

“Documents filed with the Federal Election Commission show that between O’Donnell’s September 14 primary victory and mid-October, the Tea Party Express paid for around $11,000 in e-mail blasts and radio ads supporting her. By comparison, records show the group spent more than $64,000 in support of Angle during that period. (Tea Party Express representatives did not respond to messages requesting comment.)”

***
“Christine O’Donnell said she would close the gap in the Delaware Senate race if national Republicans would give her additional support, but that type of help is not going to come, according to NRSC Chairman John Cornyn…

“The Texas Republican added that the GOP was behind O’Donnell and had already contributed to her campaign. He wished O’Donnell well but stressed that the NRSC’s resources are needed elsewhere.

“Cornyn also suggested that perhaps O’Donnell was a bit too green for the party saying she is ‘new to the kind of scrutiny that she’s getting, and it’s tough.’”

***
Donation link here.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

maverick muse on October 22, 2010 at 7:46 AM

So let’s preserve poor practices in amber, is that what you’re saying?

This isn’t stare decisis.

So the new movement wants the “freedom” to nominate subpar candidates, because that’s what went on in the past?

Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.

NoDonkey on October 22, 2010 at 7:51 AM

Coons being investigated?
http://thehayride.com/2010/10/chris-coons-under-investigation/

Kermit on October 21, 2010 at 10:38 PM

That investigation is from 2007.

mizflame98 on October 22, 2010 at 7:52 AM

NoDonkey on October 22, 2010 at 7:45 AM

I agree.

Notice that the same people requiring O’Donnell as a “conservative litmus test” are Palin fans.

And as for Rove, he never liked Palin in national politics so why would he ever approve of O’Donnell whose only “qualification” is looking sort-of like the former Alaskan Governor.

Point is, Delaware elected O’Donnell with all her glaring “faults” because they know O’Donnell offers taxpayers a vote against suicidal government spending pushed on by Democrats and wobbly “like-able” or “electable” RINOs.

So bashing her only vents frustration that lends volume to her opponent, Coons.

It isn’t as if the next generations of “Tea Party” candidates are going to model their campaigns on O’Donnell’s.

maverick muse on October 22, 2010 at 7:53 AM

Bradky on October 22, 2010 at 6:59 AM

You may well laugh but I doubt that the people on the other end of those fund raising letters will.

Cindy Munford on October 22, 2010 at 7:59 AM

It isn’t as if the next generations of “Tea Party” candidates are going to model their campaigns on O’Donnell’s.

maverick muse on October 22, 2010 at 7:53 AM

That’s the point.

Now is the time to start finding primary challengers for the 2012 elections.

I understand the unusual situation with O’Donnell and I don’t wish her ill personally, she’s just far, far below what our expecatations should be for a US Senator, so it irritates me when she’s built up to be some sort of ideal candidate.

NoDonkey on October 22, 2010 at 8:02 AM

NoDonkey on October 22, 2010 at 7:51 AM

Nope. O’Donnell is Delaware’s phenomena. She happened there because no other Republican candidate ran effectively there against the incumbent RINO.

But limiting criticism of clown qualifications to O’Donnell is neither credible nor productive.

The next crop of conservative candidates in the ’12 election will undoubtedly be held under primary scrutiny unlike previously precisely because of O’Donnell.

I’ll repeat, the next round of conservative candidates will NOT want to repeat the O’Donnell campaign experience.

Productive scrutiny is the point you emphasize as pertinent. Wasting time bashing her isn’t productive, nothing “new” being accomplished by the bashing. It isn’t as if the Republican establishment is “learning” its lesson; rather, bashing O’Donnell only strokes their sense of entitlement, owning the Republican Party. Though she may not “deserve” her place on the ticket, she won it fair and square.

maverick muse on October 22, 2010 at 8:03 AM

maverick muse on October 22, 2010 at 7:53 AM

It’s funny that you should say that most O’Donnell’s supporters are also Palin supporters. To a degree I am both but I don’t like the reason. Neither of these women are my idea of perfect candidates, I’m a Lynn Cheney kind of person, but I can’t get past the reasons they are dismissed. For some reason it is not enough to win the battle on ideology and issues, they have to be destroyed. They are portrayed as crazy, untrustworthy and every aspect of their lives are laid out for public derision and it brings out the mom in me.

Cindy Munford on October 22, 2010 at 8:09 AM

Now is the time to start finding primary challengers for the 2012 elections.

NoDonkey on October 22, 2010 at 8:02 AM

My point in previous posts; I couldn’t agree with you more.

I’d add that plain-jane candidates shouldn’t suffer outright rejection in knee-jerk response to O’Donnell’s affect (given an ultra-defensive personality, O’Donnell remains personally incapable of accepting criticism with a positive attitude to improve herself). RATHER, SUPPORT the NEW candidates, sometimes BECAUSE they don’t have “government experience” that corrupts. Support them given solid conservative “life experience” outside of government vs. Ivy League credentials and “government experience” that smacks of kickback obligations hurting taxpayers.

maverick muse on October 22, 2010 at 8:10 AM

maverick muse on October 22, 2010 at 8:10 AM

Agree but I want to see achievement in something.

I have been in and around the military for the last 22 plus years.

The experience, the achievements, the depth, the ability to persuade and to lead, working one’s way up through the ranks, it’s all there.

No one just shows up one day out of nowhere and gets elected General or Admiral.

Then we get these politicians, who, in effect, do just that. Just show up and BANG, they are in charge of us. Not just COD, but Obama, Biden.

My disgust with them is now reflected in my disgust with anyone like them, including COD.

NoDonkey on October 22, 2010 at 8:21 AM

maverick muse on October 22, 2010 at 8:10 AM NoDonkey on October 22, 2010 at 8:21 AM

You are both correct about the criticism, Ms. O’Donnell could certainly learn to take that better.

Cindy Munford on October 22, 2010 at 8:33 AM

Cindy Munford on October 22, 2010 at 8:09 AM

That Palin fans support O’Donnell doesn’t imply that others don’t support O’Donnell. Since she’s the conservative anti-corruption in federal government candidate who will vote against Obama, I support O’Donnell. She’s the one who stepped up against the RINO to be the alternative to the Marxist.

And noting that O’Donnell is vilified so rabidly, and Palin was/is, would not prove that legitimate criticism lodged against O’Donnell as a candidate “matches” criticism lodged against Palin. One notes, however, that the same people who lodge that sort of hate are at heart absolutists, usually liberally progressive, angry to be exposed as wolves in sheep’s clothing running the Republican Party “professionally”.

I’ve noted as you have that establishment elitists have no boundaries preventing their smear jobs leveled against the “new” brand of candidates for national office who campaign against corruption, including Republican corruption in government, who campaign strongly for small government limited in powers by the Constitution. I speak of an original organizer of the Tea Party, an intelligent Libertarian-Republican woman actively campaigning on domestic issues basing her platform and agenda upon the US Constitution and the State of Texas Constitution. For instance, Debra Medina was smeared as a rube “truther” by Rick Perry, decimating public credibility just as her POSITIVE recognition amongst voters was rising on a strong tide in the Tea Party and Texas State Republican Party. Based upon the response from the 9/11 Commission Leaders and Members AFTER THEY RELEASED THE REPORT and were thereafter presented with further information proving that the federal government prevented witnesses from testifying fully, Medina UPON PERSISTENT QUESTIONING BY MEDIA simply allowed the possibility of credibility ACCORDING TO COMMISSIONERS that the federal government was not completely forthcoming with information requested by the Commission for consideration to the entire scenario. And for noting that occurrence, progressives will kneejerk a flame-war attack on anyone for noticing history as it occurs. (As if I ever thought that metal can’t melt. As if our Founders’ distrust of governmental power is only rubbish where conspiracy theorists wallow for want of fact.) That exemplary sort of malice would have scoffed at the “wackos in Waco” for being burnt to death by federal agents under Clinton’s command. Progressives do love their human sacrifices.

“The Rapture, and I quote, ‘is the immediate departure from this Earth of over four million people in less than a fifth of a second,’ unquote. This happily-volatilized mass of the saved were born again in Jesus Christ….The evaporation of four million people who believe this crap would leave the world an instantly better place.” — New Orleans-based National Public Radio commentator Andrei Codrescu, December 19, 1995 All Things Considered.

No, I don’t smear O’Donnell, or for that matter Palin, with whole cloth.

I’ve campaigned at HotAir for years that conservatives of all tangents need to comply with each other in order to be an effective coalition against the monstrous powers of federal corruption and abuse of powers.

Establish the platform first.

The Candidates Will Come, united on platform.

maverick muse on October 22, 2010 at 8:39 AM

Cindy Munford on October 22, 2010 at 8:33 AM

And again, that goes with experience.

People who worked their way up, with experience, screwed up somewhere. Probably big-time.

But they got over it. They worked through it. They survived. Gives them confidence.

Someone who gets into a job that they weren’t prepared for (e.g. Barack Obama), is thin-skinned precisely because they are inexperienced. They think it’s possible to go through life without a mistake.

President Bush had experience. That’s why he didn’t let the press get to him.

And that’s why Barry does.

NoDonkey on October 22, 2010 at 8:39 AM

Alvin Green gets less attention than CO. Why’s that?

“Oh, Green’s a fluke.”

Ok.

Akzed on October 22, 2010 at 8:44 AM

NoDonkey on October 22, 2010 at 8:21 AM

It would be foolish to ignore wisdom accumulated from great diligence. I’ve agreed that “life experience” matters in making decisions.

It would also be foolish to mutilate the only option willing to vote against Marxism because of obvious imperfections in the option.

When stuck between a rock and a hard place, you gotta do what you gotta do, for better or worse, hoping for the better, ALLOWING the better result from a lousy only option. O’Donnell will offend a lot of people. But then, anyone who actually fights for the Tea Party offends a lot of corrupt people and corrupt government officials, personality and experience aside.

I’ve written consistently that it’s time to motivate and find “good” new candidates who align upon the Constitution against Marxism, who align on behalf of small government, cut federal spending, and lower taxes.

maverick muse on October 22, 2010 at 8:49 AM

Surprisingly good interview, from Christine’s end.

MadisonConservative on October 22, 2010 at 8:50 AM

maverick muse on October 22, 2010 at 8:39 AM NoDonkey on October 22, 2010 at 8:39 AM

First let me make a correction, I meant that I like Liz Cheney and I hope public office is in her future. I guess I hadn’t thought about the new comers who had tried and lost (Ms. Medina), there have probably been some good people and some unfair charges. I understand the need to have a proven record of accomplishment to run on but I have to admit that my desire to have new people in D.C. is strong. I know that many are doing their job and not corrupted, I need assurance that it is the majority. When you read about staffers being investigated for insider trading, it is hard not think the whole place isn’t just a wasted swampland. When you send new people there it seems you have a 50/50 chance that they will go to enrich themselves or serve the people. I think the people deserve better odds.

Cindy Munford on October 22, 2010 at 8:54 AM

Akzed on October 22, 2010 at 8:44 AM

I don’t know how to say this nicely. Making fun of Mr. Greene is like throwing rocks at the short bus. It would make me feel like a bully and we already have plenty of them.

Cindy Munford on October 22, 2010 at 8:55 AM

President Bush had experience. That’s why he didn’t let the press get to him.

And that’s why Barry does.

NoDonkey on October 22, 2010 at 8:39 AM

True enough, but perhaps not the whole story.

Barry is owned by the press, and when his owner beats him, it ain’t pretty.

Bush knew the press was never with him. But perhaps his retreat into his shell wasn’t the best way to respond, though the silent treatment is advocated by progressives as the best response to immature tantrums. Rove admits being wrong for advising silence rather than rebuttal from Bush to the media’s severe criticism.

I don’t blame Bush for keeping to himself.

No, I blame Bush for accomplishing so much progressive agenda during his administrations, and for ignoring/despising conservative agenda.

The “Vigilante” Bush antagonism hurled against anti-illegal-alien MinuteMen US citizen volunteers reporting real-time illegal border crossings to Border Control agents suffices on bias and prejudice against US citizens and pro-illegal-alien workforce, and pro subsidizing illegal-alien “benefits” with US citizen paid taxes providing free housing, food, medical care, and education to the illegal-aliens.

That slur against law abiding citizenry concerns was nada compared to creating the monumentally corrupt DHS bureaucracy augmenting federal abuse of powers, as if more administrators translates into effectivity.

“Vigilante” was nada compared to Bush’s executive order deputizing the Sec./Treasury with autonomous powers, beholden to no court, beholden to no Congress, even not beholden to the Potus.

I blame Bush for achieving his progressive agenda on behalf of the Republican Party establishment that loves it all still, bail-outs and all.

maverick muse on October 22, 2010 at 9:08 AM

When you send new people there it seems you have a 50/50 chance that they will go to enrich themselves or serve the people. I think the people deserve better odds.

Cindy Munford on October 22, 2010 at 8:54 AM

So long as we keep sending newbies, at least we have half a chance.

I’ve gotta say, my Congressman John Carter is marvelous, and extremely dedicated warrior for Constitutionally balanced government. But our Texas Senators are as corrupt as ever, right along with both candidates left running in the TX Governor race.

maverick muse on October 22, 2010 at 9:12 AM

Cindy Munford on October 22, 2010 at 8:09 AM

Yes. There are some pretty bleak Democratic candidates out there, yet the Conservative Republican women seem to draw the most attention and derision. The constant use of the word “crazy” is so Alinsky.

No one is perfect. “W” wasn’t perfect. Reagan wasn’t perfect. But, these women definitely have large targets on their backs and the arrows are coming from everyone on the left and, unfortunately, from too many on the right.

Fallon on October 22, 2010 at 9:12 AM

Cindy Munford on October 22, 2010 at 8:55 AM

I’m not sayin nothin I’m jus sayin…

Akzed on October 22, 2010 at 9:13 AM

maverick muse on October 22, 2010 at 8:49 AM

I have a higher standard for myself and for the institutions I support.

The Democrats are terrible and that’s them. That’s why I like the Republicans. They are better and there are differences.

It upsets me when a new movement wants to replicate some of the same idiocies that the Democrats have done, like electing substandard candidates.

If anything, I get more upset when the GOP does it. Democrats I expect it from, they are a disgraceful, unethical, unprepared, unorganized bunch of utterly worthless people.

NoDonkey on October 22, 2010 at 9:15 AM

They are portrayed as crazy, untrustworthy and every aspect of their lives are laid out for public derision and it brings out the mom in me.

Cindy Munford on October 22, 2010 at 8:09 AM

Yeah, but it’s the “given” in politics. “Water off a duck’s back” as my Dad used to say. Tough skin should accompany a reliable background.

There’s good reason to feel positive, given candidates like the “rocket scientist” physicist woman running against the incumbent socialist from AZ.

maverick muse on October 22, 2010 at 9:16 AM

Fallon on October 22, 2010 at 9:12 AM

Fiorna doesn’t have a target on her back.

Why? Because she’s what people think of when they think of a Senator.

She started as a receptionist and ended up as CEO of HP.

She’s a serious person who doesn’t say ditzy things.

The last thing any new movement wants to do is to get too attached to individual candidates.

If at some point, a candidate’s persona is preventing you from getting out your message and getting things done, jettison them.

The movement should be more important and there are plenty of worthy candidates who can carry the message.

NoDonkey on October 22, 2010 at 9:18 AM

sbark on October 22, 2010 at 6:02 AM

I don’t know if you were responding to me.

Once again, and LISTEN CAREFULLY: When one of us writes something stupid and you see a slash ‘/‘,
followed by an ‘s’ or a troll’s name such as crr6, IT IS MEANT AS SARCASM. Or meant in jest.

Lanceman on October 22, 2010 at 9:18 AM

NoDonkey on October 22, 2010 at 9:15 AM

I completely understand that.

But it isn’t as if this moment is the only one in the chain of events.

If O’Donnell loses as expected, she loses. Her loss does not “prove” that the primary candidate Delaware discarded should have been the one running against Coons. Given the general election choice, if O’Donnell loses, it is because Delaware hosts/creates more Marxist than Conservative voters.

That is neither here nor there in the value system of what conservative voters require of LIMITED political candidates on a ballot. Given the choice between at least two “Tea Party” constitutional candidates amongst the several primary Republican alternatives on the ballot, OBVIOUSLY the wise will vote on the basis of the candidate’s responsible life experience. I’m with you there.

maverick muse on October 22, 2010 at 9:23 AM

maverick muse on October 22, 2010 at 9:16 AM

I agree, they have to learn to take it. I would still prefer to feel totally supportive of a candidate and argue for their ideology instead of whatever errors they have made in life. It’s a tactic, I know it, and I’m falling for it. I didn’t do it for my own kids but I do it for candidates. Your idea of a platform to draw people to is probably the way to go.

Cindy Munford on October 22, 2010 at 9:26 AM

She started as a receptionist and ended up as CEO of HP.

She’s a serious person who doesn’t say ditzy things.

NoDonkey, I agree that Fiorina is a professional businesslike politician. She skirted Chris Wallace’s nagging like the pro she is, refusing to stipulate what she’ll advocate cutting from federal “entitlement” funds.

But then, I don’t expect Fiorina to perform any differently than the current Republican establishment which she so clearly resembles already.

maverick muse on October 22, 2010 at 9:27 AM

Your idea of a platform to draw people to is probably the way to go.

Cindy Munford on October 22, 2010 at 9:26 AM

Sadly, it’s not only logical, but the Marxist Democrats already perfected the system for their own ’08 effective victory tsunami. Democrats don’t simply run against Republicans. They run FOR socialism, hoping to bribe votes, willing to corrupt elections through fraud and intimidation.

The Republican sad state of unity has always existed since FDR, and despite the Reagan “unity” the Republican looseness still functioned pro progressive politics, failing to maintain any “Goldwater Conservatism” in what remains of the party’s legacy.

If anything, the Tea Party needn’t simply reference our Founders ideology for grounding. Goldwater should be recalled every bit as frequently as anyone references the sorry SOB who assumed the Oval Office with JFK’s assassination. It wasn’t THAT long ago. I’m not a senior citizen YET. So within my generation, Goldwater Libertarian-Republican values have re-emerged from the groundswell springing of grassroots Tea Party spontaneity. That the TP movement isn’t polished doesn’t bother me at all given the timing. Aside from the story of Christ’s birth, nothing emerges perfectly from inception. We mortals muddle on as best we can with what we have towards what we dream.

maverick muse on October 22, 2010 at 9:40 AM

Thanks, NoDonkey and Cindy for the enjoyable dialogue this morning.

The sun’s trying to prove it’s already up, here. We’re hoping for some rain in Texas.

See you later.

maverick muse on October 22, 2010 at 9:42 AM

Where I contend that the GOP has blooped on this is not understanding that she’s merely iconoclastic, the poster child for their entire base.

Allowing and even encouraging the notion that she’s too “stupid” to serve has hurt ALL the senate races.

Look at the tightening. The GOP establishment totally blew this one.

AnninCA on October 22, 2010 at 9:45 AM

The GOP establishment totally blew this one.

AnninCA on October 22, 2010 at 9:45 AM

We understand your point..Delusional as it is..:)

Dire Straits on October 22, 2010 at 9:49 AM

AnninCA on October 22, 2010 at 9:45 AM

I’ve been less than thrilled about the way the leaders of the GOP have handled this election starting before the primaries but I think Ms. O’Donnell as the poster child and that her campaign bleeding into others is a bridge too far. If we must have a poster child I personally would pick Marco Rubio. Ms. O’Donnell, fair or not, is in large part the product of the media and that shouldn’t be allowed to happen.

Cindy Munford on October 22, 2010 at 10:11 AM

Cornyn supports O’Donnell the same way he supported Palin when she was under attack.

SilentWatcher on October 22, 2010 at 10:42 AM

Ann’s right. By not hitting hard against (an in fact encouraging) the meme that this “tea party” candidate is “stupid” it’s hurt all tea party candidates. Since the entire GOP supports the tea party (publicly), it’s hurt the entire GOP. I am frankly shocked that Karl Rove, uber-genius, couldn’t see that.

alwaysfiredup on October 22, 2010 at 11:20 AM

The time for an intra-GOP fight between the establishment and the tea party is not September/October before a midterm election, in other words.

alwaysfiredup on October 22, 2010 at 11:21 AM

Wah, wah, wah!

Spend months bashing the “Republican establishment” and then whine when they don’t rush to your aid?

O’Donnell’s already got more money than any Senate candidate in Delaware has ever raised, what the heck does she want? She’s not actively scheduling events – in a small state like Delaware she could be having several every day. She wasted precious time before airing her first ad, which she now says shouldn’t have aired!

I hope she wins, but she is an awfully weak candidate and there is no reason to send precious resources – including current members – to Delaware until she demonstrates some potential to close it up.

Adjoran on October 22, 2010 at 5:04 AM

This has nothing to do with money. It has to do with the fact the establishment losers like Karl Rove and Charles Krauthhammer bashed her relentlessly for a solid week after she won, rather than either get behind her of shut up.

Then the GOP, the NRSC did absolutely nothing. No one put any effort out there at all.

Christine doesn’t need money, she needs support.

The best thing about this deal though is it show just more people that need to be run out of positions of power in the party.

We gotta clean house.

gary4205 on October 22, 2010 at 11:26 AM

Cornyn, McConnell, Boehner…. all career politicians that need to be pushed out of Washington, the RNC, the GOP, the RNCC and whatever else. Nothing but career, elitist, politicians that have their own interests at heart. God I hate them and their elitist attitudes.

ultracon on October 22, 2010 at 11:43 AM

We understand your point..Delusional as it is..:)

Dire Straits on October 22, 2010 at 9:49 AM

Ha! Zing!

Lanceman on October 22, 2010 at 12:55 PM

Poor Christine, the whole Republican universe hasn’t come to rescue this poor damsel in distress. Victimhood ain’t pretty.

swamp_yankee on October 22, 2010 at 12:58 PM

Where I contend that the GOP has blooped on this is not understanding that she’s merely iconoclastic, the poster child for their entire base.

Allowing and even encouraging the notion that she’s too “stupid” to serve has hurt ALL the senate races.

Look at the tightening. The GOP establishment totally blew this one.

AnninCA on October 22, 2010 at 9:45 AM

I may disagree with AnninCA a lot, but I think she’s right on the money here. By treating O’Donnell as a nut even though she is the Republican candidate for Senator in Delaware, the GOP has hurt other candidates.

Note that I blame the GOP here, not the Democrats who try to use O’Donnell to smear other candidates. The Democrats are just doing what they always do: pick a target, smear the target, and use the smeared target to smear others. It’s exactly what they did to Dan Quayle, and then used the meme of “Stupid Dan Quayle” to attack Bush 41.

But the GOP doesn’t have to co-operate with the Democrats tactics! Especially since personal attacks are the only tactic the Democrats have left this year.

The big question to me is, “Why are Republicans doing this?!” I believe there’s a reason why leaders in the GOP are working against their own candidates.

The purpose of a political party is to win elections. That’s how they stay in power. Those leading the party derive their personal power from helping their party win elections. That works most of the time.

But we have a different dynamic going on now. The tea party movement and the re-awakening of conservatism will help the GOP win elections and gain political power, but those leading the party in many cases see more conservative candidates coming and realize they can be replaced. Some of them are more interested in their personal power than in seeing their party win elections. How else do you explain the GOP doing such things as helping Miklaurski challenge the winner of the Republican primary in Alaska, or the savage attacks against the winner of the Republican primary in Delaware?

The establishment Republicans are working against the interests of their own party. For that, they deserve to be replaced.

O’Donnell may have her faults, but so do the establishment Republicans. I think it’s a very healthy thing that Bennett lost in Utah, and that Castle lost in Delaware. It puts those establishment Republicans on notice that they can be replaced also.

I still think Delaware can be won. But even if O’Donnell loses, we still win, because the leaders of the GOP are getting the message that they’re going to have to accept the new political reality. They can’t just give lip service to conservatives and still win elections.

tom on October 22, 2010 at 1:25 PM

The key point is that there is a constitutional conservative candidate running against a pure-blood tax, spend, gummint without bounds leftist–and a condescending JA of one at that. So who you gonna vote for? We’ve all held our noses and voted for a slightly lesser evil before, because that was the best we could get. In this case, in Delaware, at this time, this is the best you’re gonna get. Stop being ninnies and get behind the candidate who at least believes the Constitution still means what it says.

Ay Uaxe on October 22, 2010 at 6:52 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3