“Several” Republican senators reportedly uneasy with GOP’s tactics in Mississippi runoff

posted at 2:41 pm on June 27, 2014 by Allahpundit

I’m going to go out on a limb and guess that it’s not the tactics themselves that bother them as much as the attention those tactics are receiving from conservative voters.

Says Red State’s Leon Wolf, “If any of these bastards want to avoid the fallout they should go on the record.”

According to these conversations [with two Republican Senate staffers], some $800,000 was raised for Cochran by his Senate colleagues after the McDaniel victory in the primary’s first round, largely under the rubric of the National Republican Senatorial Committee. This wasn’t seen as a particularly controversial matter at the time; the NRSC is an organization by and for the Republican members of the Senate and Cochran had raised money for his colleagues in the past, so there would have been no reason to deny him help. “It’s just what you do,” said one of the staffers. “It’s generally accepted that we probably can’t win the Senate if we lose our own people, so when Cochran’s people ask for help raising money, the answer is yes.”

Though there were published reports to the effect—and Barbour was open about it—that Cochran’s runoff strategy was to “expand the electorate” by seeking Democratic votes in a Republican primary, there wasn’t a lot of attention paid to where the funds being raised would go. And moreover, when Cochran lost a close race to McDaniel in the first round, there was a general assumption that his goose was cooked. “Nobody thought he’d win regardless of what he did,” said the staffer. “If you’re an incumbent and you’re behind a challenger that close to avoiding a runoff, you’re usually behind the eight-ball.”

As such, the staffers say, it wasn’t until Wednesday, when the fallout began to descend, that Cochran’s tactics became an issue. And now, several senators are more than a little uneasy with those tactics, which they feel responsible for since they raised money for Cochran.

AmSpec offers no names but says there’s “soul-searching” going on among “the Senate’s more outspoken conservatives” for not doing more to help McDaniel when they had the chance. *cough* (Rand Paul, of course, seems to think it was just awesome that Cochran won his party’s nomination with votes from the other party.) Was this, though, as Mollie Hemingway thinks, ultimately a pyrrhic victory for the GOP establishment? Before you say yes, tell me what you’re willing to do to punish the party for kitchen-sinking a guy who not only received the most votes in the first round of the primary but who, by wide consensus, won more Republican votes in the runoff too? Withholding donations is fine, but don’t kid yourselves: Money’s the one thing that GOP incumbents and the NRSC don’t want for. If they lose $10 million from the base in boycotted contributions, Sheldon Adelson can make it up for them in one check to the right Super PAC.

Are you willing to go this far?

Should the Republican establishment in Washington get away with tarring its own voters as racists? Should the Republican establishment in Washington get away with comparing its own base to Klansmen?

If there is no penalty for doing so, they will keep doing it. If there is no consequence, they will attack their own base to preserve their power. They will learn no lesson. In fact, some of you may want to donate to Travis Childers, Thad Cochran’s Democrat opponent. I cannot say that I blame you.

Cochran will now put the highest bidders first. The GOP will carry out this tactic of calling you racist klansmen Nazis everywhere it works. I would like to see the GOP get the majority and oust Harry Reid as leader. But I understand if you think Mississippi can still be sacrificed.

All true. If Cochran trounces Childers in the general election, the lesson learned by Republican incumbents will be that there’s no cost to beating conservative challengers by any means necessary. You guys will always turn out for them in November on the theory that the Democrat is worse, no matter how nasty to you they are in the primary, so they might as well be as nasty as they like. The question is, is the Democrat worse this time? He may be worse than Cochran on policy, but is he worse than the filthy patronage system that supports Cochran and which he supports in turn? That’s what you’re voting for, whether you like it or not, if you vote for Thad.

There are risks here. Electing Childers could give the Democrats the 50th Senate seat they need in the fall to preserve their majority. (Biden would cast the deciding vote in case of 50/50 ties, of course.) That’s not a big risk on legislation given that Republicans will control the House but it’s a huge risk on Supreme Court nominations, if/when Harry Reid ends up nuking the filibuster and allowing confirmation by simple majority vote. If O knows he can get a nominee through with just 51 votes, he’ll feel safer nominating someone who’s further left. Also, the more seats you hand to Democrats now, the better position they’ll be in come 2016, when they’re expected to clean up in battleground states. Sean Trende thinks there’s even a (small) chance that Democrats will win a filibuster-proof majority. If you sacrifice Mississippi now, you’re making that marginally more likely.

The counterargument is simple, though: If not now, when? The GOP might do well enough in the fall to retake the Senate even if they lose Mississippi. If they don’t retake it, that’s not a disaster — this is, by Nate Silver’s estimate, the “least important election in years” because control of the upper chamber matters so little. The GOP will have more leverage over Court confirmations if they have a majority, but who knows if there’ll even be a vacancy on the Court? And gridlock on legislation is a fait accompli given Obama’s standoff with the Republican House regardless of what the Senate does. If you’re unwilling to risk a protest vote for a Democrat after the grotesque spectacle of a group of GOP cronies using liberal votes to prop up an elderly man whose heart isn’t in it anymore, you’ll never be willing. And if you’re unwilling, maybe it’s time to stop complaining about Cochran and cronyism and the rest of it and accept that this is who we are and who we’re going to be.


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 4 5 6

In MS, Thad Cochran and Haley Barbour are bigger boogeymen than Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi…..we didn’t start the fire.

d1carter on June 29, 2014 at 2:47 PM

No, we didn’t start it. They did, by smearing the base, and proving they would rather let a D win than a conservative.

As Mark Levin says, if we don’t take the Senate, it’s all on them.

cat_owner on June 29, 2014 at 3:04 PM

People are very,very angry in MS and Thad is now quit hated here. So this will get settled and the dem votes were likely illegal.

sorrowen on June 29, 2014 at 3:08 PM

In MS, Thad Cochran and Haley Barbour are bigger boogeymen than Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi…..we didn’t start the fire.
d1carter on June 29, 2014 at 2:47 PM

No, we didn’t start it. They did, by smearing the base, and proving they would rather let a D win than a conservative.
As Mark Levin says, if we don’t take the Senate, it’s all on them.
cat_owner on June 29, 2014 at 3:04 PM

I think a bigger question is will they be able to keep the House?

Brock Robamney on June 29, 2014 at 3:39 PM

jake22 on June 29, 2014 at 12:44 PM

Sorry, disagree with you completely.

Cindy Munford on June 29, 2014 at 3:40 PM

There is a way to hurt the GOPe before the election – the conservative base can refuse to volunteer for a blacklist of campaigns. Sure, they can hire replacements, but that will be an expensive drain – more so than withholding small donations. There would still be time to come to some reconciliation before the election, unlike voting for Childers.
deadman on June 27, 2014 at 10:41 PM

Uhhhhh……. No. Why should we succumb to the whims of the Barbourcans? A vote for Childers would be a vote for the more conservative candidate, and will stick a finger in the eye of Haley Barbour. I know this will upset the Cheerleaders like yourself, but we possess independent thought

Brock Robamney on June 29, 2014 at 3:45 PM

Oh, I forgot to mention Todd Akin in Missouri. Worse, Miller is trying to foul it up a second time in Alaska. Wake us and start using some of this pent up energy to change the primary system and get rid of open primaries- Defeat Reid first, then have all the fights you want.

jake22 on June 29, 2014 at 12:58 PM

Akin was not backed by conservatives. In fact, the Democrats spent a lot of money making sure he’s be the nominee.

bw222 on June 29, 2014 at 5:19 PM

Brock Robamney on June 29, 2014 at 3:45 PM No it would be a vote for a pro Obama Democrate…more conservative my ass…

sorrowen on June 29, 2014 at 5:20 PM

I think a bigger question is will they be able to keep the House?

Brock Robamney on June 29, 2014 at 3:39 PM

I cant see them losing the House. Too many districts are just not competitive.

The Senate may be another matter though.

cat_owner on June 29, 2014 at 6:30 PM

The most damning tactics of Cochran and Barbour, even worse than soliciting crossover votes and the racist smears, was using Republican donor money to hire Democrat operatives to meddle in the GOP primary and deny the base their preferred candidate. In a deep red state like MS, the voters want the more conservative candidate. They should not have to tolerate a Lindsay Graham or a Lamar Alexander.

Whether that money came from K Street or Main Street, it rightfully should have gone to Republican strategists, advisers and GOTV. That doesn’t square well. You’ve seen the hated Republican leadership throw gas on the fire in a scorched earth campaign that proves there is no reason to vote for the Republican party, indistinguishable from the Dems, or donate to their campaigns.

Go ahead, GOP, fight with the Dems over liberal interest money. See how that works out for you.

ezspirit on June 28, 2014 at 10:40 AM
…………………….
Look everything you say is true. The GOPe are slime dogs as are the gang of Ocho and the rest of the RINOS.Did we just get our collective asses kicked by slick criminal lobbyists posing as conservatives—yes we did.
Does that mean you go fishing forget about politics, vote for the other side, or worse yet start mumbling about a third party? Hopefully, none of the above.
We all have to decide whether or not the party of Ronald Reagan is worth saving or not.
For myself I see only defeat in starting a third party. I’m not a stay at home kind of guy and I already fish.
IF we had a European type of govt. where a slim margin among numerous parties could have some effect that would be one thing but we don’t.
Starting a third party would only assure victory for the commies who have almost destroyed things as it is.
Once again speaking for myself I have kids and want to at least try and give them a shot once I’m gone and I don’t expect to live forever.
I will do my best to get rid of every rino every McCain, Graham McConnel and Cochran for as long as it takes.
Sooner or later people will come to their senses and conservative voices will be heard. That’s my take and I’m not giving up on taking over the Republican Party hope others will join me.

rodguy911 on June 29, 2014 at 6:32 PM

Defeat Reid first, then have all the fights you want.

jake22 on June 29, 2014 at 12:58 PM

Willfully blind!

Joe Miller defeated Lisa Murkowski in the Republican primary in
Alaska in 2010. Instead of supporting his party’s nominee in the general election Mitch McConnell pulled out all the stops to get Lisa Murkowski elected as a write in candidate including partnering with the Democrats and voter fraud.

Joe Miller is no unpolished TEA Party hay seed like Tokyo Rove tries to claim. He is a 1995 graduate of Yale Law School, a combat veteran of the 1991 Gulf War, and a graduate of the U.S. Military Academy at West
Point.

Crush Corrupt McConnell in 2014!

You who suffer from “Battered Conservative Syndrome” can spin it and try to rewrite history all you want, it’s still BS.

Fact: McConnell denied a conservative who won the GOP primary their senate seat. And you who suffer from “Battered Conservative Syndrome” want to reward McConnell with senate majority leader.

Your elevator doesn’t go up the top floor.

Jayrae on June 29, 2014 at 6:41 PM

Jayrae on June 29, 2014 at 6:41 PM

Yes, I totally agree with you. McConnell was also behind the Cochran campaign, fundraising and twisting Senators arms to support him. Then that money raised went to pander to DEMOCRATS so that they would deny the base of a McDaniel win.

They work against conservatives, not Democrats, and they do it in the most despicable ways possible.

cat_owner on June 29, 2014 at 6:48 PM

rodguy911 on June 29, 2014 at 6:32 PM

I’m sorry, but I’m not riding the locomotive over the cliff. If you want to support the Barbourcrats and their push for Amnesty and Welfare for illegals, then go for it. For me, I have had enough. I will vote for the conservative candidate, regardless if it is Democrat, Republican, or Independent. Enough is Enough

Brock Robamney on June 29, 2014 at 7:50 PM

The Democrats would take this to court, challenge the election and force the Democrats to prove all of those people didn’t vote in the previous primary as Democrats. That’s the rules and if you don’t have to prove anything, then it’s not a rule, it’s a suggestion. I can’t believe Mississippi is the only state in the Union that has honest Democrats so you have to know they’re lying.

I hope they make so much noise about this election that something has to be done, but it’s going to take a lot of noise to shake up Haley Barbour.

bflat879 on June 29, 2014 at 9:12 PM

Fact: McConnell denied a conservative who won the GOP primary their senate seat. And you who suffer from “Battered Conservative Syndrome” want to reward McConnell with senate majority leader.
Your elevator doesn’t go up the top floor.
Jayrae on June 29, 2014 at 6:41 PM

That’s why a vote for Allison Grimes is the answer

Brock Robamney on June 29, 2014 at 9:46 PM

Neocons in the RNC like the progressives in the DNC, like to tell us what to do, how to vote, and what to think. They hate independent thought. Independent thought must be eradicated at all costs. That is why they are getting so indignant

Brock Robamney on June 28, 2014 at 6:44 PM

Yep. The GOPe is nasty and unethical, and doesn’t like being challenged. What they don’t understand yet is that what they’ve done in MS is the final straw for the grassroots-we’ve had enough of them and their insults.

We in the grassroots just aren’t into them, and they can’t stand hearing it, as you can tell by their increased abuse. They’re like someone who resists a breakup, not understanding that their own unpleasantness is the real reason. “We need each other to beat the Demoncrats, you idiots!” they say. And we say back, “No, we don’t need you like you think. We’ll find our way, apart from you and your crap. =)”

non-nonpartisan on June 29, 2014 at 9:52 PM

non-nonpartisan on June 29, 2014 at 9:52 PM

Like you said, I’m note sure the Democrats are the enemy. Childers seems more in line with our values than Cochran. I say if the individual is the most conservative whether or not they are Democrat, Republican, or Independent, that they deserve our vote. This will eventually get some people to wake up. But considering we’re dealing with the GOP, it’s going to take a lot of election losses

Brock Robamney on June 29, 2014 at 9:59 PM

Like you said, I’m note sure the Democrats are the enemy. Childers seems more in line with our values than Cochran. I say if the individual is the most conservative whether or not they are Democrat, Republican, or Independent, that they deserve our vote.

Besides what you said about Childers, I can’t agree with this. I would never say that the Demoncrats aren’t the biggest enemy! They are far more dangerous overall than the GOPe. Childers may be pro-life and pro-2 Amendment, but how does he possibly think having a Demoncrat majority in the Senate could help this country out more in any way than having a GOP majority?

At best he’s incredibly naive. That said…

This will eventually get some people to wake up. But considering we’re dealing with the GOP, it’s going to take a lot of election losses

Brock Robamney on June 29, 2014 at 9:59 PM

In the name of our self-respect, we have to willing to take some short-term setbacks politically. The GOPe does need to be taught a good lesson.

I am convinced it’ll work out for us in the end if we hold our ground now. And I am confident we will. =)

non-nonpartisan on June 29, 2014 at 10:19 PM

Brock Robamney on June 29, 2014 at 3:45 PM

No it would be a vote for a pro Obama Democrate…more conservative my ass…
sorrowen on June 29, 2014 at 5:20 PM

Ok so vote for more Mike Castles and Sheep Molesters. I’m sure you will love Obamacare and welfare benefits causing out nation to collapse

Brock Robamney on June 29, 2014 at 10:19 PM

Besides what you said about Childers seeming to have better values than Cochran

non-nonpartisan on June 29, 2014 at 10:25 PM

Besides what you said about Childers seeming to have better values than Cochran
non-nonpartisan on June 29, 2014 at 10:25 PM

So what I hear from many of the GOP cheerleaders is that they would be happy with Mike Castle if he has an ‘R’ next to his name. Regardless of whether or not he/she has conservative values. So what does that tell you? It tells you that it is all about party/donors over principles. If you want to play that game, fine. I don’t care, good luck to you. For me, like the millions who stayed home in 2012, if the candidate doesn’t have a principle or platform to run on. Or principles they stand for, don’t be surprised if we stay home or support someone else.

Brock Robamney on June 29, 2014 at 10:34 PM

So what I hear from many of the GOP cheerleaders is that they would be happy with Mike Castle if he has an ‘R’ next to his name. Regardless of whether or not he/she has conservative values. So what does that tell you? It tells you that it is all about party/donors over principles. If you want to play that game, fine. I don’t care, good luck to you. For me, like the millions who stayed home in 2012, if the candidate doesn’t have a principle or platform to run on. Or principles they stand for, don’t be surprised if we stay home or support someone else.

Brock Robamney on June 29, 2014 at 10:34 PM

Have you not seen how much I’ve criticized the GOPe? You are failing to understand my position. There is more than one valid, ethical view here, more than one way to advance the ball downfield. Don’t be like those in the GOPe who are intolerant of independent thought.

If I would have voted for Mike Castle over Christine O’Donnell because I think he had a far better chance to beat Chris Coons, and because I would rather end up having a 1-seat Senate GOP majority with Castle than a Democrat majority with Coons, you’re going to attack me for having inadequate principles? Based upon the little I’ve said here about the DE race, and also factoring in what I’ve said about the GOPe’s involvement in MS, that would be just stupid on your part.

Politics is a lot more faceted and complicated than choosing your friends or the spouse you’re going to marry, or how you treat other people, and requires pragmatic compromises that a person shouldn’t put up with in his personal social life. Call it, “being realistic.” Don’t consider that perfectionism is better, because it isn’t-it’s actually worse.

non-nonpartisan on June 29, 2014 at 10:58 PM

non-nonpartisan on June 29, 2014 at 10:58 PM

Therein lies the problem. You would vote for someone who is for Cap and Trade. So how does that get us to a repeal of Obamacare? How does a big government republican shrink a bloated Government? I am. Of going down that road. I would rather stay home or vote 3rd party under those circumstances. Castle and Coons is commie vs commie

Brock Robamney on June 29, 2014 at 11:23 PM

Therein lies the problem. You would vote for someone who is for Cap and Trade. So how does that get us to a repeal of Obamacare? How does a big government republican shrink a bloated Government? I am. Of going down that road. I would rather stay home or vote 3rd party under those circumstances. Castle and Coons is commie vs commie

Brock Robamney on June 29, 2014 at 11:23 PM

What politician have you ever known who always votes the way you would like? lol That is not a smart standard.

Apparently, you think having a GOP majority in the Senate is meaningless with people like Collins, Castle, and Dick Lugar in it. That’s a foolish, emotional opinion made by a shortsighted perfectionist.

I don’t see any need to debate this, because I don’t believe it will accomplish much. While exiting, I will point out that perfectionism/unrealistic purism is unhealthy. =)

non-nonpartisan on June 29, 2014 at 11:36 PM

Just so that I am not misunderstood, I am glad Mourdock beat Lugar out.

non-nonpartisan on June 29, 2014 at 11:48 PM

Those “several” Republican Senators are not upset about the tactics they used in Mississippi. They are just mad that they got caught with their hand in the cookie jar.

Fireplug52 on June 30, 2014 at 12:17 AM

After reading most of the posts, I now understand what this element of the GOP wants- they want nothing. They don’t want to win the Senate. They don’t want to win the White House- you guys just want to complain forever. Obama isn’t bad enough, now you are ready to eat your own. The facts are simple. We will never have a Cruz elected President. It’s as simple as that- The days of a Ronald Reagan are long gone. In each and every purple state control of the outcome of any election hinges now on the suburban areas of the big cities. The rural areas and the city areas cancel each other out and the suburbs of the big cities decide the race, whether for Senate, Governor or President. These areas, for the most part are inhabited by economic conservatives and social liberals. Women in particular in these areas have been scared to death with all the hard right social conservatism and can’t and won’t swallow it. Only moderately conservative Republicans can win in those states. If that isn’t good enough, all you will get is what you have now- liberal Democrats in the Senate and White House. The establishment Republicans, as you call them understand all of this but you have decided you would rather have liberal Democrats than moderately conservative Republicans controlling the country. We won’t have a country if things keep up they way they are going and you don’t shut down a government to prove a point. The electorate won’t tolerate it- sometimes there has to be compromise, at least with someone like Obama in the White House. So there it is- take your marbles and go home if that’s what you want and complain all you want but you will never be in control-never with the attitudes expressed about this one primary election in Mississippi. Just be preprared to see ultra liberals running the country for the forseeable future and don’t cry about it and don’t complain either. We are sitting with a President that is acting beyond his authority and nothing can be done about it unless the Senate changes hands this fall. Many of you have said you don’t care- again, just to prove a point. So be prepared for even more disgraceful things to happen to the country while you continue to wail away at the loss of one primary election.

jake22 on June 30, 2014 at 2:20 AM

After reading most of the posts, I now understand what this element of the GOP wants- they want nothing. They don’t want to win the Senate. They don’t want to win the White House- you guys just want to complain forever. Obama isn’t bad enough, now you are ready to eat your own. The facts are simple. We will never have a Cruz elected President. It’s as simple as that- The days of a Ronald Reagan are long gone. In each and every purple state control of the outcome of any election hinges now on the suburban areas of the big cities. The rural areas and the city areas cancel each other out and the suburbs of the big cities decide the race, whether for Senate, Governor or President. These areas, for the most part are inhabited by economic conservatives and social liberals. Women in particular in these areas have been scared to death with all the hard right social conservatism and can’t and won’t swallow it. Only moderately conservative Republicans can win in those states. If that isn’t good enough, all you will get is what you have now- liberal Democrats in the Senate and White House. The establishment Republicans, as you call them understand all of this but you have decided you would rather have liberal Democrats than moderately conservative Republicans controlling the country. We won’t have a country if things keep up they way they are going and you don’t shut down a government to prove a point. The electorate won’t tolerate it- sometimes there has to be compromise, at least with someone like Obama in the White House. So there it is- take your marbles and go home if that’s what you want and complain all you want but you will never be in control-never with the attitudes expressed about this one primary election in Mississippi. Just be preprared to see ultra liberals running the country for the forseeable future and don’t cry about it and don’t complain either. We are sitting with a President that is acting beyond his authority and nothing can be done about it unless the Senate changes hands this fall. Many of you have said you don’t care- again, just to prove a point. So be prepared for even more disgraceful things to happen to the country while you continue to wail away at the loss of one primary election.

jake22 on June 30, 2014 at 2:20 AM

You do realize that we’re talking about Mississippi, where there is really no reason to settle for a squishy northeastern liberal? Also, remove the Democratic voters that are trying to choose our nominee for us, and McDaniel won the runoff by about 6-8%. For the challenger to a 40-year incumbent, that’s nearly a landslide.

It’s clear after this vote that the Republicans in Mississippi wanted McDaniel. And once they found out just how far Cochran went to stay in power, that sentiment has only grown. In fact, if the election were cancelled and done over now, I think that margin would double.

There Goes the Neighborhood on June 30, 2014 at 3:08 AM

You do realize that we’re talking about Mississippi, where there is really no reason to settle for a squishy northeastern liberal? Also, remove the Democratic voters that are trying to choose our nominee for us, and McDaniel won the runoff by about 6-8%. For the challenger to a 40-year incumbent, that’s nearly a landslide.

It’s clear after this vote that the Republicans in Mississippi wanted McDaniel. And once they found out just how far Cochran went to stay in power, that sentiment has only grown. In fact, if the election were cancelled and done over now, I think that margin would double.

There Goes the Neighborhood on June 30, 2014 at 3:08 AM

If the election were cancelled and redone (and very well could be with all the illegal crossovers that took place), I could see it going two ways:

All out war between the Conservatives/Tea Party Republican base vs the GOPe/Democrat Alliance. At this point the election could draw a general election like turnout with Republicans/Democrats at full strength. At this point, you will probably see a lot more Republicans turning out for McDaniel in disgust at Cochran’s campaign and he wins by over 10%.

OR

Cochran bows out because the GOPe leaders start to freak out at the damage he is doing them in the other states (still some primaries left, Roberts v Wolf in Kansas for ex and McConnell is still very weak in Kentucky).

EITHER case, McDaniel looks like a sure winner during an election rematch.

And I’m still not convinced McDaniel didn’t win outright the first time (he needed less than 1,300 votes). They are finding voter irregularities in the June 3rd election in Hinds/Rankin counties (didn’t count all the votes apparently).

NWConservative on June 30, 2014 at 3:53 AM

non-nonpartisan on June 29, 2014 at 11:36 PM

You do realize I has been over 30 years since the GOP has ran a conservative for President? So I guess using your logic, Scott Walker should not run for Governor in Wisconsin as he is too pure. The only Purists in the GOP are the Haley Barbours, the John McCains, the Thad Cochrans, and the Lindsey Graham’s of the GOP that need to push out all conservatives. That is why the GOP loses every election. When you have a candidate who loses to a failed president whose only platform is saving Big Bird and binders of Women, then you have no place to lecture me on candidates. I could never figure out why GOP cheerleaders claim to be ‘non partisan’ or ‘libertarian’ when clearly they are nothing but the most partisan.

Brock Robamney on June 30, 2014 at 5:15 AM

NWConservative on June 30, 2014 at 3:53 AM

Or, Door #3, which is the more likely outcome, where conservatives stay home, or vote for Childers out of anger.

Brock Robamney on June 30, 2014 at 5:19 AM

Brock Robamney on June 30, 2014 at 5:15 AM

I can see that you are a sh!tty listener who’s defensive and argumentative. I suggest you find someone else to try to engage-I’ve already tuned you out. =)

non-nonpartisan on June 30, 2014 at 5:24 AM

Since the GOP establishment thinks its ok to defeat a conservative candidate by urging democrats to vote in the GOP primary for the establishment candidate,

Can some of the GOP apologists on this site explain to me why conservatives should not do the same during the general election (i.e., vote for the democrat or don’t vote at all)?

After all, this is a tactic endorse and urged by the GOP itself. How can it be wrong for us to do it?

Please explain. Show your work.

Monkeytoe on June 30, 2014 at 7:46 AM

non-nonpartisan on June 30, 2014 at 5:24 AM

The GOP is not a conservative party, was not founded as a conservative party, has never been a conservative party, and as long as “conservative” apologists urge voting for it no matter what, will never become a conservative party.

The GOP runs against conservatives, hates conservatives, saves its only venom for conservatives (when has any GOP establishment figure attacked a lefty with the same vigor and passion as they attack conservatives, such as Ted Cruz?).

The GOP cheered the idea of democrats voting for Thad Cochran in a primary to defeat a conservative candidate, in a seat where you apologists can’t claim we needed Cochran to keep the seat. Showing, the GOP hates the idea of conservatism.

Yet, apologists don’t care. Too blinded by tribal loyalty to see the truth, apologists think that somehow the GOP will act differently this time, if we are just loyal enough. Like a battered spouse, apologists believe that it is our fault we are victimized by a lying, deceitful, lefty GOP.

What has the GOP actually done to deserve conservative loyalty? Fight the left tooth and nail? No.

Cut spending? No.

Cut federal programs? No.

Reform entitlements? No.

Reform SS? No.

Enforce the border? No.

Fight amnesty? No.

Work to repeal Obamacare? No – Boehner, McConnell and the rest of the GOP establishment made it clear they have no intention of repeal, even after 2016.

Do any actual work (i.e., get results) re: fast and furious or the IRS? No. they play kabuki theater, but don’t actually do anything. It’s been 6 years on fast and furious and still no answers. It’s been about 4 years on IRS, still no answers.

Oppose idiotic “climate change” nonsense? No – most of the GOP is fully on board with AGW claims.

What, exactly are apologists defending? What is it apologists think the GOP is good for?

the old canard of “lesser of two evils” is not remotely good enough, not when both evils are roughly the same. We are talking about a difference of about .01% here.

Arguing that we “have to” work “within the system” assumes, incorrectly, that we owe the GOP our allegiance. Even assuming that we did somehow owe the GOP our allegiance, “working within the system” has failed. We’ve done it for the last 30 years and the GOP is to the left of where it was in 1994. So, the idea that this tactic will suddenly start paying dividends, against the weight of evidence, is nothing more than wishful thinking. One or two allegedly conservative candidates a cycle (I say allegedly, because they all run as conservatives and become “moderate” one in DC) doesn’t and won’t change the GOP. And as long as the GOP is what it is, the GOP does more harm than good.

The GOP does more harm than good because it acts as an illusion to conservatives and right-leaning LIVs, keeping them believing that someone is fighting for conservative principles, when in fact, they are always selling us out to the left, because the GOP is a big-gov’t party. They run as conservatives (as do a lot of dems), they fund-raise as conservatives, but they govern left-of-center. So, they take our money and our labor, but give us nothing in return, but keep us in line because we foolishly believe them. Which allows the big-gov’t forces to always move forward.

The GOP is nothing more than the appeasement arm of the left. Keeping conservatives and right-leaning LIVs “happy enough not to do anything about the status quo. All the while the left keeps making gains and the gov’t keeps growing.

So, the GOP does more harm than good as it keeps us from actually fighting the left in ways that could work. While they keep us distracted focusing our energy and efforts at the GOP, the GOP and DNC continue pushing the left’s agenda forward, making it more and more difficult to ever be undone.

So, as long as “conservative” GOP apologists keep pushing the “vote GOP no matter what” line, conservatives will never accomplish anything.

Monkeytoe on June 30, 2014 at 8:05 AM

I don’t see any need to debate this, because I don’t believe it will accomplish much. While exiting, I will point out that perfectionism/unrealistic purism is unhealthy. =)

non-nonpartisan on June 29, 2014 at 11:36 PM

GOP apologists like you believe that having any principles whatsoever is “perfectionism”.

What is the point in voting at all if you don’t care what the GOP does once in power?

That is the problem with your type. You are not worth debating because you can’t think well enough or base anything on facts. You are purely emotional in that you believe, despite all evidence to the contrary, that a GOP majority in the Senate will accomplish something conservative.

You are emotionally tied to the GOP in a tribal way, unwilling to actually hold it to any standard, unwilling to care about what happens after the vote – you only care whether there is an “r” next to the name – which is unthinking tribal loyalty.

And, people unable to think critically or long-term are not persuadable, so debate with such emotional, non-thinking people is not worthwhile.

No matter what happens, no matter how much the GOP sells out conservatives, or helps the left with its agenda, you will vote GOP because you can’t see reason, only emotion and tribalism.

to you, GOP = perfection. that is the real perfectionism here. That is the real “trueGOP” nonsense. People unwilling to look at reality, stuck in the delusional belief that the GOP is worth something.

Monkeytoe on June 30, 2014 at 8:13 AM

Monkeytoe on June 30, 2014 at 8:05 AM

The truth is, that there are frauds on Hot Air that claim the GOP is a Conservative party, and to be honest, aren’t much of any kind of party other than a do nothing party that is Purist and is no longer a big tent party. They never have been a big tent party, but at least now they are exposed, like the emperor’s new clothes, and that’s what upsets them

Brock Robamney on June 30, 2014 at 10:51 AM

GOP apologists like you believe that having any principles whatsoever is “perfectionism”.

Monkeytoe on June 30, 2014 at 8:13 AM

That’s what I meant “perfectionism,” even though it’s not? Did I hit a nerve with you with you using that word? =) Being against the GOPe doesn’t mean a person is a genius, or sane, does it?

I’ve been a big critic here, in this thread and elsewhere at HA, of what the GOPe has done in MS, and what its defenders and enablers have done been doing everywhere. I’ve been clear I am rooting for McDaniel 100%. I said I was glad Mourdock beat out Lugar.

How you could get this knotheaded interpretation out of what I’ve said about “principles” is fascinating to me. And look at how many words you typed to me based upon your misunderstanding-wow! It looks to me that you’re loony. Completely, totally loony. Are you related to bluegill? lol

Because of this, what I said to Brock Robamney applies to you, too. You are a sh!tty listener, more so than I can and should take. Until you apologize for grossly misreading and misrepresenting me and what I said, I can see it would be a waste of my time to talk to you further.

non-nonpartisan on June 30, 2014 at 1:28 PM

How you could get this knotheaded interpretation out of what I’ve said about “principles” is fascinating to me. And look at how many words you typed to me based upon your misunderstanding-wow! It looks to me that you’re loony. Completely, totally loony. Are you related to bluegill? lol

Because of this, what I said to Brock Robamney applies to you, too. You are a sh!tty listener, more so than I can and should take. Until you apologize for grossly misreading and misrepresenting me and what I said, I can see it would be a waste of my time to talk to you further.

non-nonpartisan on June 30, 2014 at 1:28 PM

Please explain what you meant then.

Your comments are wholly unclear if you think they did anything other than support the GOP at all costs.

As far as me being loony, I’m happy to have anyone read your comments and mine and find which makes more sense or is intelligible rather than juvenile.

Here is what I was replying to:

What politician have you ever known who always votes the way you would like? lol That is not a smart standard.

Apparently, you think having a GOP majority in the Senate is meaningless with people like Collins, Castle, and Dick Lugar in it. That’s a foolish, emotional opinion made by a shortsighted perfectionist.

I don’t see any need to debate this, because I don’t believe it will accomplish much. While exiting, I will point out that perfectionism/unrealistic purism is unhealthy. =)

non-nonpartisan on June 29, 2014 at 11:36 PM

Explain how that is not apologism for the GOP? You are arguing that we should all still support the GOP and work to get it a majority this year, no?

Any time someone argues that the GOP is a problem (I note you don’t refute a single word I wrote in that regard, preferring instead to focuse on calling me loony as your best argument), someone like you comes along to argue:

We need to get the Senate Majority. If you argue against that, you are a perfectionist!!!!! 11!!

Explain please, using facts and logic rather than what you wrote in your last comment, how my comment you were responding to doesn’t, in fact, address your nonsense?

As an aside, I love how all you GOP apologist have the same schtick. Saying anyone who disagrees with you is “loony”; saying anyone who disagrees with you is “related to Bluegill”, saying anyone who disagrees with you is a “perfectionist”, and finally, the coup de grace, saying that you “hit a nerve” when anyone responds and refutes your nonsense.

I guess the fact that you comment here at all means I hit a nerve, right? After all, that is your “logic”, correct?

It’s amazing some of you people are able to read and write. I guess asking for some semblance of logic in your mutterings is too much.

Oh yeah, last thing I find hilarious – all you GOP apologists always say you are going to refuse to repond any further. typically, like now, it happens after you were taken down by and made a fool of. Your type never responds to points, only with the 3 or 4 totally leftist techniques described above, to wit: “loony!!”, “Bluegill!!”, “perfectionist!!”, etc.

so, take your demand for an apology and shove it where the sun don’t shine. You will receive no such here. Instead, I double down.

the apologists always say “I support this or that conservative candidate” that gets crushed by the establishment, but then tells us how we must, must, must support the GOP no matter what.

So, you can claim all the “conservative” bona fides you want. As long as you continue to support the GOP, you are not conservative, because the GOP works against conservatism. Always has, always will.

Monkeytoe on June 30, 2014 at 2:06 PM

Anyone who votes for the GOP is not conservative.

the GOP fights conservatism at all costs.

Thus, if you vote for the GOP in any election, you are voting against conservatism.

Monkeytoe on June 30, 2014 at 2:09 PM

Please explain what you meant then.

Your comments are wholly unclear if you think they did anything other than support the GOP at all costs.

Monkeytoe on June 30, 2014 at 2:06 PM

I decline the offer as politely as I can. I have directly stated I believe just the opposite of how you’ve portrayed me, and it’s not sinking in with you. My comments are not “wholly unclear” just because you say so, and I don’t believe you understand this concept.

I had said, “Until you apologize for grossly misreading and misrepresenting me and what I said, I can see it would be a waste of my time to talk to you further.” I completely stand by this. You are not backing off or down, as you should. I can see that you are still a sh!tty listener. You’re too aggressive and smug for me. Sorry!

non-nonpartisan on June 30, 2014 at 2:23 PM

Republicans should be concerned about the recent support of big money Republicans donors who are trying to keep Tea Party people out of running.

I was Republican for 40+ years until I realized how corrupt the big donors in the party were. Many Republican leaders follow their donors when voting on issues and disregard correct principles. Now I am an Independent voter.

Based on the current war between big money Republicans trying to keep Tea Party people out of the run for office, I may stop voting for Republicans all together.

Ronald Reagan won based on votes from the right, the middle and from independents. The current Republican party has cut off one of those three voter blocks. This is not a recipe for winning.

Romney lost because of a lack of support from the right. This in-fighting will only make matters worse, not better. In a election cycle where the Democrats could loose big, leave it to the Republican Party to find a way to loose anyway.

Big mistake for the future of our country.

kaclrc on June 30, 2014 at 2:30 PM

Anyone who votes for the GOP is not conservative.
the GOP fights conservatism at all costs.
Thus, if you vote for the GOP in any election, you are voting against conservatism.
Monkeytoe on June 30, 2014 at 2:09 PM

I can’t see why that would even be in question. Unless of course your an Uncle Tom Republican

Brock Robamney on June 30, 2014 at 7:42 PM

Hey Karl, you better be glad I don’t live in MS, cause I’d sit this one out because of you.

Keep trashing the tea party.

mmcnamer1 on June 30, 2014 at 11:57 PM

$15 to vote for a 196 year old senator who barely remembers his name, but apparently likes fondling animals

Brock Robamney on July 1, 2014 at 5:34 AM

Monkeytoe, what I’ve been saying has been going over your head. In case you haven’t yet seen any of my previous posts in the last 2-3 pages of this thread, I decided it couldn’t hurt to show why you owe me apology, and that you aren’t as smart as you like to think you are.

Explain how that is not apologism for the GOP? You are arguing that we should all still support the GOP and work to get it a majority this year, no?

No, that wasn’t really what I was arguing. Down below I will repost some of my previous quotes in this thread to show you what I think of the GOPe.

Any time someone argues that the GOP is a problem (I note you don’t refute a single word I wrote in that regard, preferring instead to focuse on calling me loony as your best argument), someone like you comes along to argue:

We need to get the Senate Majority. If you argue against that, you are a perfectionist!!!!! 11!!

This wasn’t ever my full argument, and it’s 100% your fault for jumping to this conclusion, not mine nor anyone else’s.

As an aside, I love how all you GOP apologist have the same schtick. Saying anyone who disagrees with you is “loony”; saying anyone who disagrees with you is “related to Bluegill”, saying anyone who disagrees with you is a “perfectionist”, and finally, the coup de grace, saying that you “hit a nerve” when anyone responds and refutes your nonsense.

Calling me a GOPe apologist makes you look like a loon. Not only that, the lengthy posts you’ve made to me based upon your straw men also contributed to why I called you in particular a loon-you spent a lot of words on me for no good reason, and it made you look unhinged.

It is true I called people who criticized having a GOP Senate with some NE liberal GOP Senators unrealistic purists and perfectionists because without ever having a GOP-controlled Senate, have fun trying to get conservative Supreme Court justices on the bench, just to name one problem that you run into when Demoncrats control the Senate.

Why people like you don’t get that sometimes you should tolerate liberal GOP Senators from blue states for the the good of the country isn’t something I’m going to argue with conservatives whom I think are close-minded and/or loony. And try telling me that the only GOP jerks and loons who exist are supporters of the GOPe-I’ll just laugh at you if you do. =)

I guess the fact that you comment here at all means I hit a nerve, right? After all, that is your “logic”, correct?

It’s amazing some of you people are able to read and write. I guess asking for some semblance of logic in your mutterings is too much.

Your projection, lack of self-awareness, and inability to withhold your shots before first getting the facts straight are not signs of great intelligence lol

so, take your demand for an apology and shove it where the sun don’t shine. You will receive no such here. Instead, I double down.

You’re class, all class lmao

the apologists always say “I support this or that conservative candidate” that gets crushed by the establishment, but then tells us how we must, must, must support the GOP no matter what.

Monkeytoe on June 30, 2014 at 2:06 PM

Too bad for you I never have nor would make this argument. It sure is funny how you believed I was arguing for this.

Here are some of my posts that you may not have seen which contrdict your stupid, misrepresentative portrayal of me and my thoughts.

We need to change the election laws and that’s where the anger should be focused.

jake22 on June 28, 2014 at 1:07 PM

How about people decide for themselves where to direct their anger? I direct mine at the dirty, unethical GOPe, and people who tell people like me to “get over” what the GOPe has been doing in MS. And if you attack people like me for our choice, you’re not a friend of ours.

non-nonpartisan on June 28, 2014 at 6:24 PM

As vid said how Bone headed could Thad and Haley be again it’s blatantly illegal.

sorrowen on June 28, 2014 at 6:35 PM

I think when your highest moral principle is “Just win, baby!” the fallout over the illegalities involved would be your secondary concern. And now that they “won,” the piper must be paid. Too bad for them they are not well-prepared to do so.

Watching the clueless idiots try with their pitiful attempts to manipulate the grassroots into supporting Cochran is just hilarious. =D

non-nonpartisan on June 28, 2014 at 6:45 PM

Yep. The GOPe is nasty and unethical, and doesn’t like being challenged. What they don’t understand yet is that what they’ve done in MS is the final straw for the grassroots-we’ve had enough of them and their insults.

We in the grassroots just aren’t into them, and they can’t stand hearing it, as you can tell by their increased abuse. They’re like someone who resists a breakup, not understanding that their own unpleasantness is the real reason. “We need each other to beat the Demoncrats, you idiots!” they say. And we say back, “No, we don’t need you like you think. We’ll find our way, apart from you and your crap. =)”

non-nonpartisan on June 29, 2014 at 9:52 PM

After reading this, if you don’t give me some kind of real apology, don’t expect any response from me-I am not interested in conversing with anyone who has the manners and social sophistication of childish illiberals.

non-nonpartisan on July 1, 2014 at 8:02 PM

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6