Delaware Senate Race: A Kamikaze Republican and the Tea Party (1 Viewer)

[zimmer]

In Tuesday's Delaware primary, the tea party movement may inflict its most devastating wound yet to the Republican establishment.

With an assist from Sarah Palin, tea party activists in Delaware are trying to defeat the Republican candidate with the best chance to win Joe Biden's old Senate seat and nominate instead a candidate Republican leaders say has no chance of winning the general election in November.
...

"The Republican Party has lost its way," O'Donnell said. "They get behind candidates like my opponent who don't even support the Republican platform, who continue to support the Democrats' agenda, lock-step-and-barrel."

"I have no doubt if she by some miracle became the nominee she would lose the seat by unprecedented numbers," Delaware Republican Party chairman Tom Ross said.

Delaware Senate Race: A Kamikaze Republican and the Tea Party - ABC News

Tom Ross is a complete and utter idiot.

I'd rather have a Democrat win than a RINO who would not aggressively repeal the Obama agenda. We need real Republicans in office, not Obama & Pelosi-lite.

I hope she takes this, for the race for the Senate seat will be interesting. I don't by into the RINO take on the election. People are pissed, and the village of Delaware, usually a lost cause, isn't exempt from the pain and suffering brought on by the radical leftists running the show.

Better a reformer than a chameleon.

Go O'Donnell.

PS. Don't you love the title of the article? That's Journolism at work.

.

 

[Wiseone]

"The Republican Party has lost its way," O'Donnell said. "They get behind candidates like my opponent who don't even support the Republican platform, who continue to support the Democrats' agenda, lock-step-and-barrel."

"The Republican Party has lost its way," O'Donnell said. "They get behind candidates like my opponent who don't even support the Republican platform, who continue to support the Democrats' agenda, lock-step-and-barrel, while he should be supporting the Republicans' agenda, lock-step-and-barrel."

That was the meaning I gathered out of his statement. God Forbid someone actually functions as a representative of his district and state, they've got a national party, preselected stances and beliefs to follow!!!

Since when do you promote uniformity on a national level? Starting to sound a little communist to me, wanting everyone to be exactly the same and all... (That communist part is sarcasm) But seriously wouldn't you agree that a Representative or Senator should actually represent his state as opposed to following what a party leader somewhere, probably across the country, says?

What if there was a democratic candidate who supported gun rights very strongly, or opposed abortion as many Southern Democrats do? And this candidate was being criticized by his own party for not following their doctrine strictly enough? Somehow I think you'd be arguing my position in that case.

Double standard bro, not cool

 

[American]

Castle isn't even a chameleon, he's a lapdog for the Democrat Party. As far as I can tell, Palin has been picking winners so far. Maybe she should be chairman of the Republican Party.

 

[Dav]

I'd rather have a Democrat win than a RINO who would not aggressively repeal the Obama agenda.

That makes no sense at all. A moderate Republican like Castle would vote conservative maybe 50% of the time, and probably more than that. Coons, the Democrat, would never vote conservative. That's the choice here. O'Donnell could never, ever win in Delaware, so the choice is either compromise with a moderate or let a Democrat take what had up to now been a safe GOP pickup.

Extremist conservatives are no different than extremist liberals... both think that you're either with them, or against them, and there is no in-between. Unfortunately, there may be enough of them in Delaware to blow what had been a semi-decent chance for the GOP to take the Senate. Hopefully they'll come to their senses and nominate Castle, though.

 

[Renae]

That makes no sense at all. A moderate Republican like Castle would vote conservative maybe 50% of the time, and probably more than that. Coons, the Democrat, would never vote conservative. That's the choice here. O'Donnell could never, ever win in Delaware, so the choice is either compromise with a moderate or let a Democrat take what had up to now been a safe GOP pickup.

Extremist conservatives are no different than extremist liberals... both think that you're either with them, or against them, and there is no in-between. Unfortunately, there may be enough of them in Delaware to blow what had been a semi-decent chance for the GOP to take the Senate. Hopefully they'll come to their senses and nominate Castle, though.

What's extreme about wanting Republicans that support Conservative Ideas? The real extreme here is being happy with a Senator who votes for you 50% or so of the time. What ends up happening is those Senators stab you in the back on big issues.

 

[Renae]

"The Republican Party has lost its way," O'Donnell said. "They get behind candidates like my opponent who don't even support the Republican platform, who continue to support the Democrats' agenda, lock-step-and-barrel."

"The Republican Party has lost its way," O'Donnell said. "They get behind candidates like my opponent who don't even support the Republican platform, who continue to support the Democrats' agenda, lock-step-and-barrel, while he should be supporting the Republicans' agenda, lock-step-and-barrel."

That was the meaning I gathered out of his statement. God Forbid someone actually functions as a representative of his district and state, they've got a national party, preselected stances and beliefs to follow!!!

Since when do you promote uniformity on a national level? Starting to sound a little communist to me, wanting everyone to be exactly the same and all... (That communist part is sarcasm) But seriously wouldn't you agree that a Representative or Senator should actually represent his state as opposed to following what a party leader somewhere, probably across the country, says?

What if there was a democratic candidate who supported gun rights very strongly, or opposed abortion as many Southern Democrats do? And this candidate was being criticized by his own party for not following their doctrine strictly enough? Somehow I think you'd be arguing my position in that case.

Double standard bro, not cool

Double Standards? I got one name for you: Joe Lieberman

 

[Wiseone]

Double Standards? I got one name for you: Joe Lieberman

I'm not Joe Lieberman, nor am I his babysitting, whatever he did u don't like has nothing to do with me or what I'm saying. I wish you could tell me exactly what Lieberman did that you hate.

If you mean how he left his party to better represent his voters than no I have no problem with that and I don't see how its a double standard. But if i did see it as a double standard, I'm not Joe Lieberman and your post has no purpose.

 

[Redress]

Tom Ross is a complete and utter idiot.

I'd rather have a Democrat win than a RINO who would not aggressively repeal the Obama agenda. We need real Republicans in office, not Obama & Pelosi-lite.

I hope she takes this, for the race for the Senate seat will be interesting. I don't by into the RINO take on the election. People are pissed, and the village of Delaware, usually a lost cause, isn't exempt from the pain and suffering brought on by the radical leftists running the show.

Better a reformer than a chameleon.

Go O'Donnell.

PS. Don't you love the title of the article? That's Journolism at work.

.

I hope she takes the race too. That makes it about 95 % sure democrats hold the seat.

 

[ptif219]

I hope she takes the race too. That makes it about 95 % sure democrats hold the seat.

Keep under estimating the tea party and the public dissatisfaction with Obama and democrats. I will watch as both parties look silly.

 

[Renae]

I'm not Joe Lieberman, nor am I his babysitting, whatever he did u don't like has nothing to do with me or what I'm saying. I wish you could tell me exactly what Lieberman did that you hate.

If you mean how he left his party to better represent his voters than no I have no problem with that and I don't see how its a double standard. But if i did see it as a double standard, I'm not Joe Lieberman and your post has no purpose.

He "left his Party"? Revisionist much? His party threw him out because he "worked with REPUBLICANS"

 

[Wiseone]

Keep under estimating the tea party and the public dissatisfaction with Obama and democrats. I will watch as both parties look silly.

Speaking only for Delaware, there's no way a tea party candidate is going to be elected. They elected this "Dem-lite" as many people are calling him for a reason, and that reason is that his polices are in line with what they want to see in a politican. There's no way people are going to change that much, that fast, and elect someone almost totally opposed to everything they want.

He might as well be running as the Communist candidate.

 

[Redress]

Keep under estimating the tea party and the public dissatisfaction with Obama and democrats. I will watch as both parties look silly.

I am not underestimating the tea party, I am realistic.

 

[Wiseone]

He "left his Party"? Revisionist much? His party threw him out because he "worked with REPUBLICANS"

Its not important if he left or they booted him or if it was a combination of both, the important thing is that he was loyal to the people who elected him not some national party telling him what to make his electors think and pushing a national message that designed at a national rather than local level.

And the Dems were wrong in booting him. I'm not a Dem or a Rep so catching me with guilt by association isn't going to work, I have the luxury of being separate from all political parties.

I honestly can't remember if he was booted or left but now that I think about it, its probably more accurate to say he was booted.

The problem I have with both the Lieberman case and this O'Donnely thing is that you have a national group telling their members what their stances on issues should be and punishing them and holding them hostage with money, endorsements, etc. Both the Dems and Reps, as a national party, are more concerned with their candidates and members in office supporting a national plan and conspiring which each other to make sure the PARTY does well, not the nation and NOT the voters. An elected official should be elected with views based on those who elected him, and they will never fall neatly into two categories, not elected because the national party refused to support him because his views, which in the case of Delaware are the PEOPLE's views, don't match with theirs. Its especially asinine because they are punishing him by possibly supporting a candidate, O'Donnell, who has NO chance of winning. But they don't mind because they want loyal members and sameness because its easier to control, they want their members to be responsive to the PARTY not the PEOPLE.

Let the PEOPLE decide what their representatives say, thats why its called a representative, the purpose of a Senator or Representative is to speak for the PEOPLE in his/her district or state, NOT THE PARTY.

 

[Dav]

What's extreme about wanting Republicans that support Conservative Ideas?

Nothing, in fact I'm fine with that. I'm glad Rubio and Miller and Lee and Rand Paul won their primaries. But the extreme part is to be so enamored with purism, you'd rather Democrats hold the Senate than nominate a single moderate. Worse yet are those who think "moderate" unambiguously means "liberal", and that a moderate Republican is somehow just as bad as a far-left Democrat, or even worse.

The real extreme here is being happy with a Senator who votes for you 50% or so of the time. What ends up happening is those Senators stab you in the back on big issues.

Whereas a Delaware Democrat would stab you in the back in every single issue.

There's nothing extreme about being happy with the best you could possibly hope for. There's even less extreme about being happy with a moderate, but that's beside the point.

 

[liblady]

He "left his Party"? Revisionist much? His party threw him out because he "worked with REPUBLICANS"

he lost his primary and chose to become an independent.

 

[Renae]

Nothing, in fact I'm fine with that. I'm glad Rubio and Miller and Lee and Rand Paul won their primaries. But the extreme part is to be so enamored with purism, you'd rather Democrats hold the Senate than nominate a single moderate. Worse yet are those who think "moderate" unambiguously means "liberal", and that a moderate Republican is somehow just as bad as a far-left Democrat, or even worse.



Whereas a Delaware Democrat would stab you in the back in every single issue.

There's nothing extreme about being happy with the best you could possibly hope for. There's even less extreme about being happy with a moderate, but that's beside the point.

Dav, we're gonna have to realize that while our GOALS are much aligned, you are willing to settle for half-measures where as I don't see the point. I'd toss out Snowe and Collins from the Party tomorrow if it was in my power. It's not so much about "purity", it's about supporting Candidates that are, conservative, not kinda sometimes when it's convenient.

 

[Dav]

I hope she takes the race too. That makes it about 95 % sure democrats hold the seat.

83%, according to the all-knowing Nate Silver: 2 Insurgents Could Hurt G.O.P. Chances for Senate Takeover - NYTimes.com

Whereas Castle currently has a 95% chance against Coons.

 

[Dav]

Dav, we're gonna have to realize that while our GOALS are much aligned, you are willing to settle for half-measures where as I don't see the point.

The point is that there are states where mega-conservatives can't win, won't win, and there's absolutely no point in running them. The goal for conservatives should be to try to get the most conservative canditate electable into office, and that means sometimes running moderates in liberal states/districts.

For goodness sake, I'd like to see Obamacare repealed sometime in the coming future. Right now, ironically, conservatives are the ones trying to make that less possible. I really don't understand how people could vote for O'Donnell knowing that she almost certainly won't win, and Castle almost certainly would.

I'd toss out Snowe and Collins from the Party tomorrow if it was in my power.

I wouldn't. We need both of them, this is Maine we're talking about.

It's not so much about "purity", it's about supporting Candidates that are, conservative, not kinda sometimes when it's convenient.

Which is purity, by definition.

 

[zimmer]

"The Republican Party has lost its way," O'Donnell said. "They get behind candidates like my opponent who don't even support the Republican platform, who continue to support the Democrats' agenda, lock-step-and-barrel."

"The Republican Party has lost its way," O'Donnell said. "They get behind candidates like my opponent who don't even support the Republican platform, who continue to support the Democrats' agenda, lock-step-and-barrel, while he should be supporting the Republicans' agenda, lock-step-and-barrel."

That was the meaning I gathered out of his statement. God Forbid someone actually functions as a representative of his district and state, they've got a national party, preselected stances and beliefs to follow!!!

Since when do you promote uniformity on a national level? Starting to sound a little communist to me, wanting everyone to be exactly the same and all... (That communist part is sarcasm) But seriously wouldn't you agree that a Representative or Senator should actually represent his state as opposed to following what a party leader somewhere, probably across the country, says?

What if there was a democratic candidate who supported gun rights very strongly, or opposed abortion as many Southern Democrats do? And this candidate was being criticized by his own party for not following their doctrine strictly enough? Somehow I think you'd be arguing my position in that case.

Double standard bro, not cool

What ain't cool is the Party Chair of the state slagging O'Donnell.

Castle is a 55% Republican who voted to investigate Bush on the Iraq was for lying. This being brought up by Libs. The follow-up was impeachment. Kucinich and the leftist nuts sponsored the bill and Cat-Skull signed on.

His record isn't Republican-like and at a time we need to repeal the Obama Socialist Agenda, we do not need RINO's giving the incompetent cover.

I am for a party that uses the Constitution as its base, it's platform, it's baseline. We won't agree on everything all the time, but we surely can do better than a Democrat in Republican's clothing.

.

 

[Dav]

Castle is a 55% Republican

...

but we surely can do better than a Democrat in Republican's clothing.

lol, so now someone who is "55% Republican" is a Democrat?

 

[Renae]

lol, so now someone who is "55% Republican" is a Democrat?

Some people are tired of settling for "55%", yeah we might lose that seat, but better the seat go to a democrat then to a RINO. Don't you get the rise of the Tea Party?

 

[Dav]

Some people are tired of settling for "55%", yeah we might lose that seat, but better the seat go to a democrat then to a RINO.

So then. You're apparently okay with passing Obamacare, Cap and Trade, more stimuluses, more welfare, tax increases, and goodness knows what else... as long as it means there aren't any damned dirty RINOs in the Senate. Hey, the GOP may be a permanent minority helpless to do anything as liberal bill after liberal bill passes, but at least they'll be full of conservatives in a permanent powerless minority!

 

[Renae]

So then. You're apparently okay with passing Obamacare, Cap and Trade, more stimuluses, more welfare, tax increases, and goodness knows what else... as long as it means there aren't any damned dirty RINOs in the Senate. Hey, the GOP may be a permanent minority helpless to do anything as liberal bill after liberal bill passes, but at least they'll be full of conservatives in a permanent powerless minority!

They won't be able to pass all that Dav, they don't have 60 seats now, and they WILL lose the House.

Besides, what good is are a few sometimes Republicans who VOTE with teh Dem's on big issues?

Besides, the guy is pro-guncontrol, that right there makes him worth knocking out.

 

[ptif219]

Speaking only for Delaware, there's no way a tea party candidate is going to be elected. They elected this "Dem-lite" as many people are calling him for a reason, and that reason is that his polices are in line with what they want to see in a politican. There's no way people are going to change that much, that fast, and elect someone almost totally opposed to everything they want.

He might as well be running as the Communist candidate.

If that is true why is Castle in such a tight race?

 

[texmaster]

They won't be able to pass all that Dav, they don't have 60 seats now, and they WILL lose the House.

Besides, what good is are a few sometimes Republicans who VOTE with teh Dem's on big issues?

Besides, the guy is pro-guncontrol, that right there makes him worth knocking out.

Exactly. I'd rather loose a seat than have a rino who votes with the dems anyway