1 Moderate Republicans from liberal states, conservative Republicans from conservative states. Alaska and Delaware are as different as any two states can be and they require different strategies. It's all about Castle in Delaware if we want to win the Senate.

2 I particularly am amused at how people around here bristle at nominating Castle and other RINOs even in deep blue states...and yet had nothing but derision and scorn for the Democrats who ejected Liebermann in favor of Ned Lamont. Ahh yes, they were all just a pack of ruthless ideologic conformists ruthlessly pursuing party purity.

3

I thought it would be announced in a gay sex tape.

 

but seriously, Castle seems better than the alternative. I'm not a big fan of the girl runnign, o donnell or something.

It's like getting another scott brown, i'll take it.

4

Agreed.  I'm hoping for Castle the uber rino to win.  It's Delaware.  This is a no brainer.  His opposition is a joke.  I wasn't around earlier when this was hashed and rehashed, but I agree with the head ewok on this one.  And now Gabe.

If anything he may decide who heads all the important committees, which I'm sure has been mentioned more than once here today.

I guess your headline was sarcastic.

5

Disagree.  Castle will vote with the Democrats.  Control of the Senate will be in name only.  I would rather go for gold with O'Donnell.

Incidentally, this is the second blog post on this site, along with Hot Air, either trashing O'Donnell or pumping Castle.  Almost makes you ponder either that we have naive posters on our side, or some money is switchin' hands.

6

Also, i would think right wingers, myself included, should be much more pissed about our senators from conservative states.

We've got Cornyn from Texas, and Orin Hatch from Utah. Utah people. they vote like 90 percent republican and we can't get a right winger in there??

 

we need to focus on primaires in 2012 and 2014. Lets get evil right wingers in conservative states. 

let's not kiss a gift horse in the mouth here people. This is Delaware we are talking about. Let's just take a V and get a guy who votes with us 60 percent of the time, versus a left winger who votes with us 5 percent of the time.

it is a no brainer

7 Posted by: James at September 02, 2010 11:26 PM (Nljcu)

Nice try but...

Lieberman was and is a doctrinaire liberal on every issue but defense. For God's sake he was the Democratic nominee for VP just 6 years before he was tossed out of the party.

What we were deriding Democrats about was their complete abandonment of any responsibility when it came to national security.

8 Castle voted against Obamacare. So what if he voted for cap&tax, the Coons fellow or whoever the Dems are nominating will vote for it too. Better a 50% ally than a 100% enemy. RINO>Dem

9 and here begins the "Christie is part of the machine" like at HotAir. Oh wait, this is AoS, where the conservatives are coarser, tougher...and NOT suicidal. I cannot wait for this to be over with, and the IDIOTS throwing money at O'Donnell- go fuck yourselves. We have candidates like Buck and Angle and Rossi who NEED your money more than that clownless idiot. Besides we all heard shes just going to use her campaign money for an anal tightening surgery. Her 15 year career as the double-anal-penatration queen has been known for years. Well, thats what I heaaaaard...and if you doubt me why you are part of he machine just trying to bring me down!

10 I ruined my insult, I meant clowning, classless idiot. Somehow it became clownless, which is a term I cannot comprehend...

11

If the Republicans come close to winning the senate, there will be more motivation for Nelson and Lieberman to vote closely with the Republicans, than there would be for the Maine sisters and McCain to vote with the democrats.

If the election shows a massive rightward shift, the squishy politicians will ride the wave to the right. Just like many did, naively, to the left in 2008. Specter being a good example.

I think a massive rebuke of Obama will help reign in the RINOs in the next session of congress.

12 I must be out of the loop.  The slut running against him is hot, but why is anyone taking her seriously?

13 The chicks don't dig me because of my ugly face. I'll teach that face a lesson! Off With The Nose! ouch

14 Any improvement will be good over the seat that Biden has held for 36 years, but Castle actually voted for Cap n TRade, whereas O'Donnell hired someone who said something stupid, yes that really totals up. 

15 let's not kiss a gift horse in the mouth here people. This is Delaware we are talking about. Let's just take a V and get a guy who votes with us 60 percent of the time, versus a left winger who votes with us 5 percent of the time. it is a no brainer Posted by: Ben He's never voted 'with us' that often. Having said that, the best reason to vote for him is that he has good polling numbers, and the party here has decided upon him. Even if Republicans here were heard, the party would likely not support her. Forget the attack ads or the polling. The party here has made up its mind. They will have him and that's it. And she's done here, at least as a republican (no, I do not want to see her runs third party). You want to get involved in Delaware politics? Send an e-mail to the state GOP and ask them why they're ceding Castle's House seat to the Dems.

16

I must be out of the loop.  The slut running against him is hot, but why is anyone taking her seriously?

she sits in for hannity people. That means she is dumber than Hannity.

Sub-hannity if you will.

 

17 > 11 I ruined my insult, I meant clowning, classless idiot. Somehow it became clownless, which is a term I cannot comprehend... Posted by: CAC Roll with it - that's how memes start.

18

Castle voted for cap and trade.

Castle voted for the Disclose Act.

Castle will NOT vote to repeal ObamaCare.

But we should support Castle?  Because he will vote with McCain and Grahamesty on what--amnesty and liberal activist judges?

Sounds like Castle supporters are hitting the blogs 'cause they know they are in a race.

19

Blue Hen,

lets says it isn't 60 percent, lets say its 40 percent, heck 30 percent, that is fantastic in delaware.

If there was a Rubio-Miller type running against him, it would be a different story. As Ace has pointed out, she isn't our A game.

20 Gabe good point: If the Judiciary committee is stocked with partisans (it tends to be), nominees can be bottled up in committee and never reported out to the floor.

21 Dang it,I'm confused, She is supposed to be nutty and he is possibly gay. I don't care about either thing. What I want to know is who has the best chance to win? Help me here.

22

 heck 30 percent, that is fantastic in delaware.

Let's say it's 0 percent.  I want the committee chairs.  Especially if Roof Bayturd Ginsburg retires.

23

Blue Hen,

lets says it isn't 60 percent, lets say its 40 percent, heck 30 percent, that is fantastic in delaware.

If there was a Rubio-Miller type running against him, it would be a different story. As Ace has pointed out, she isn't our A game.

Posted by: Ben

I never said that she was. I did say that its a moot point here. Even if she won, the party wouldn't support her. We have to vote for Castle. Again, it'd be nice if we concentrated on the House seat that we're now throwing away. Castle held the damned thing, so why are they ceding it in a year when we're surging?

24 Vote for the RINO bitches...

25

Castle voted for cap and trade.

so will the democratic candidate

Castle voted for the Disclose Act.

so will the democratic candidate

Castle will NOT vote to repeal ObamaCare.

so will the democratic candidate

But we should support Castle?  Because he will vote with McCain and Grahamesty on what--amnesty and liberal activist judges?

Really? Castle is just going to become an extreme left winger. He will be a Scott Brown type, at worst.

Sounds like Castle supporters are hitting the blogs 'cause they know they are in a race.

Yeah Castle sent me a check to come here and post. unfortunately it is only in "Ace Bucks" that can be redeemed at the AoSHQ Store.

26 Dang it,I'm confused, She is supposed to be nutty and he is possibly gay. I don't care about either thing. What I want to know is who has the best chance to win? Help me here.
Posted by: Donna

Castle does.

27 What are the latest polls?

28 Hey everybody, ratchet it down, please, this is a not a knife-fight. When it's a knife-fight, I'll say so, and hand out pretty boxes containing exotic knives and antique bludgeons, okay? CAC, please, no "go fuck yourself" stuff. Kemp, please don't call her a "slut." Let's everyone calm down. This is a fight among friends and they're never pretty but please say nothing that can't be taken back.

29

Blue Hen,

i have no idea why. i don't know enough about his district.

i am pissed the republicans aren't doing more in my district, we are R +6   with a 3 term democrat. We had a conservative beat a RINO in the primaries, but he doesn't seem to be getting a ton of backing from the party. They've pretty much ceded this district to the Democrats.

30 If Castle is the candidate, he leads the Dem (Chris Coons) by 12.

If O'Donnell is, then Coons leads by 10.

31 Also, isn't he pretty good on econ issues?

32 Posted by: Blue Hen at September 02, 2010 11:42 PM (1O93r)

   That's all I need to know... Go  Castle..., Yeah, I'm possibly a sell out but we need to win! Sorry... I guess I'm not a purist...

33

29

Clownless, pure clownless.

34 You have the ball and it's fourth and seven on the ten yard line at the end of the first half and you are behind 17 to 6. Take the field goal. Recognize the difference between a tactical goal and a stratergery-ical goal.

35 Do you think we should point out the Democrat has a racist sounding name in this senate race?

36 I cannot wait for this to be over with, and the IDIOTS throwing money at O'Donnell- go fuck yourselves.
CAC

Were you aiming this piece of garbage at me?

37 See my post 29 -- ratchet it down, increase the peace.

38 My thought is that these "candidates" are political animals and as such they will put their fingers to the wind and  see which way the wind is blowing. If it is a Conservative wind as I believe it will be they will act accordingly or be "fired."

39

speaking of third parties, is Tancredo going to get out of the race or is he going to cost us another elected position?

 

40

Elect Castle-- to what end?

He will vote the Republicans into leadershiop--For what?

If you want to reduce government and increase liberty, Castle is a step backwards.

It is said a liberal democrat will do the same.  But if we have a Repulican acting the same as a liberal Democrat, then it will demoralize the base, particularly when they see no progress when Republicans in control.  If you conclude our very republic is at stake, you cannot support Castle over O'Donnell.

Sorry--American first, Conservative second, Republican third

41 'Better a 50% ally than a 100% enemy'

So is it better to bleed out 50% slower then 100%? I am tired of rino, democrat in republican clothing.

The line is now drawn for me. Back to the constitution or die. Live free or die.

If it does turn out that this election is the big wave that is being predicted and the GOP takes control of the house and they pick up 6+ seats in the senate, maybe even contol, they have 2 year to show their mettle. I want to see some serious rollback of government and a move to a more constitutional government.

I understand that we currently have a democratic president and that a veto is highly likely, however that will not excuse the GOP from a serious move to get us back to where we need to be.

If it does not happen to my satisfaction I am done with the GOP. What is the point of slowing the bleeding if the goal is never to stop it?

42 Sorry -- American first, math second, rhetoric third.

43 Posted by: Scoob at September 02, 2010 11:38 PM (T7+JL)

Who would you rather see....

Castle elected, pissing us off more than occasionally and Jeff Sessions chairing the Judiciary Committee and maybe even see Tom Coburn and/or Jim DeMint chairing a committee.

Or

O'Donnell nominated and Coons winning ensuring zero chance Republicans will have control of the Senate.

Basically it comes down to are you more concerned about results or proving a point?

44 If you conclude our very republic is at stake, you cannot support Castle over O'Donnell.

Sorry--American first, Conservative second, Republican third

Posted by: Scoob

Her chances of winning are poor. Her campaign may be falling apart (or not), and I do know that the state party will NOT support outsiders. They have never supported one who won a primary against their chosen candidate.

At this point, there is no choice. Castle has to be the candidate.

45 Vote Frank Castle 2010

46

speaking of third parties, is Tancredo going to get out of the race or is he going to cost us another elected position?

 

Posted by: Ben at September 02, 2010 11:49 PM (DKV43)

Tancrazy is an attention seeker.  It's his lifeblood.  I predict he will drop out, but not for awhile, and he will do so in the most attention seeking fashion possible, wrecking what little chance Maes still has to win.

If he was serious he would have dropped out a week ago.  Maes, unbelievably really, can still win if Tancrazy would go away.  Maes isn't the greatest candidate, but a far sight better than Hickenlooper.  The longer its a threeway, the more likely Hick will win.

47 Guys, it's not like I'm a RINO on these matters: I supported 1) Rubio, 2) Miller, and even 3) Hayworth. You know what these three men had in common? All true patriots? Well, no, not Hayworth. No, what united them was that they could win. This is not a game, fellows.

48 I'm not too worried, as the weirdness factor coming out of the O'Donnell camp leads me to believe primary voters will shy away from nominating her.  Delaware is so small that word of mouth will get around quickly and she will be toast within a week.

49 > 19 ... But we should support Castle? Because he will vote with McCain and Grahamesty on what--amnesty and liberal activist judges? Sounds like Castle supporters are hitting the blogs 'cause they know they are in a race. Posted by: Scoob Normally I would sympathize with your reasoned opinion. But tonight is different. 1. I'm in a edgy mood. 2. I want to test a new insult. So I'm just calling you a clownless idiot and will not reason with you. So there! to CAC: See how it works? Devastating!

50

If you conclude our very republic is at stake, you cannot support Castle over O'Donnell.

Really? O'Donnell is that important?

51 Sorry--American first, Conservative second, Republican third 


 Sorry, America first, America first, America first.... Being so "pure' that you would rather lose in some races to put the true "conservative" in office may result in a Democrat win and control of the Senate and the House. Then where will we be. It's not a pretty picture. There are some case where the most Conservative may be unable to beat the Dem. Sorry, but I would rather have a less than perfect Rep. than a sure left winger. At least this election. We can weed the bad ones out in time. Right now we musty take control.Sorry if I sound like a sell out, but so be it. We must get control...

52 I'm not too worried, as the weirdness factor coming out of the O'Donnell camp leads me to believe primary voters will shy away from nominating her.  Delaware is so small that word of mouth will get around quickly and she will be toast within a week.
Posted by: Serious Cat

You're probably right. And judging from the ads, that is exactly what Castle is counting on.

53

Reply to 44

 It is not about proving a point.  It is about accomplishing results.

If the Republicans do not take the Senate 2010, they can try to take it in 2012 when the presidency is also on the line.

Chairing a committee does not pass any legislation, espcially when O has the veto.

Stopping legislation can be accomplished by taking the House.

I agree with DeMint--I would rather have 30 solid conservatives then control of the Senate when most of the time we see our Republican senators reaching accross, around, behind, and on their knees passing Democrat  agenda items.

Again, electing Castle to what end?  Roll back ObamaCare?  Get conservative judges on the bench?  Entitlement reform?  Cut taxes?  Eliminate administrative agencies?

None of that will happen if control of the Senate depends on the likes of Castle and Kirk.

Why do I know this--look at their past voting records.

54 Is Castle persuadable?

55

This is not a game, fellows.

i can attest to this. i've been pressing the restart button since november 3rd 2008 to no avail

56 Fourteen threads posted while I was at work!

How's a moron supposed to keep up?

57

Guys, it's not like I'm a RINO on these matters: I supported 1) Rubio, 2) Miller, and even 3) Hayworth.

Let me take some heat off of you.

I didn't support Hayworth.  At all.  So I guess I'm a super rino.  Rubio and the bearded super resume on steroids yes, wholeheartedly.

58

Comment to 52

Yes--that is what we have elected with McCain, Grahamesty, Snow and Collins.

And how did McCain's presidential run go?  By gosh, I could not stop the flock of RINOs volunteering to help with that election!!

59 Oh geeze, people are trying to cool down and I threw a clownless into the pool. Sorry.

60 Stopping legislation can be accomplished by taking the House.

Ah, but stopping the President from putting young, fringe judges on the bench can only be accomplished by taking control of the Senate.

61 How they vote on important issues is more important than party. I guess I don't know why that is so hard to understand. All this talk of strategic support based on perceived electability is so depressing to me. Here are the Republican leaders "Listen folks, this is the best we can do". If Castle wins the primary okay yeah go ahead and vote for him in the general. But this is the freakin primary, if you can't vote against someone based on principle in the primary, why have them? When do you get your chance to send a message?

62 Posted by: Scoob at September 02, 2010 11:56 PM (T7+JL)

 I'm pretty sure Castle will go with the floe and vote with the Rep. He's a politician and we know they go with the most popular thing to do.

63 >>>Is Castle persuadable? My guess: Not particularly, except to the extent, well, even fairly recalcitrant RINOs are ultimately persuadable (most folded in Amnesty furor), but no, not overall. He's 70, and he's like the most popular politician in the state, pretty much, set in his ways and not particularly needing us all that much.

64 61-- And Castle will stop fringe judges?  And so will McCain, Grahamesty, Snow, Collins, Kirk, and Brown?  What gives you such hope?

65 Ah, but stopping the President from putting young, fringe judges on the bench can only be accomplished by taking control of the Senate.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at September 03, 2010 12:00 AM (1TvCg)

This times 1000. And crappy bills.

66 I see the sobriquet "morons" was not without reason . . .

Okay, here's the deal:  Castle has a lifetime ACU rating of 57, which definitely qualifies him for the RINO badge, but also means he votes the conservative line nearly 60% of the time.  He's also a Party guy, so he will be with the Party on those votes the leadership deems critical. 

A Democrat in that seat is going to vote with Obama-Reid 90-100% of the time.

If you can't count well enough to understand 57 is a better score than 10, take Second Grade Arithmetic again before trying say one thing is the same as another, mmmkay?

Sheesh, the sheer stupidity of some people . . .

67 I agree with DeMint--I would rather have 30 solid conservatives then control of the Senate when most of the time we see our Republican senators reaching accross, around, behind, and on their knees passing Democrat  agenda items.
Posted by: Scoob at September 02, 2010 11:56 PM (T7+JL)

Did DeMint really say that? Cause if he did, it's probably the dumbest thing he's ever said.

The GOP lost on a lot of big issues when they had 40 seats. How exactly would things have been better for the last year and a half if they had 10 less seats?

Come on be real.

68 I hope to god that people aren't being persuaded by these appeals for moderation.

69

65, 66

How do we stop judges?  We have at least 5 or 6 senators who will come to the aid of the Democrats to overcome fillibusters?

And Castle and Kirk will stand with us?  You mean they will reject McCain and stand with DeMint?

What in their voting record show this?

Actions speak louder than words.

70 Because people want to fight, I'm going to drop an insult on you all. I saw this on Tosh.0. No, I don't mean it. Please don't read this if you are easily offended. Or difficult to offend. Or human. Skip the below, please. SKIP SKIP SKIP SKIP DO NOT READ BELOW You guys better start being nice or I'm gonna tongue-punch your momma in her fart-box. DO NOT READ ABOVE SKIP SKIP SKIP SKIP

71 My guess:

Not particularly, except to the extent, well, even fairly recalcitrant RINOs are ultimately persuadable (most folded in Amnesty furor), but no, not overall. He's 70, and he's like the most popular politician in the state, pretty much, set in his ways and not particularly needing us all that much.

Posted by: ace

I'd concur. And once he's in, the seat is probably his until he retires. I do know that he's begun making noises about comprehensive immigration. We may be able to hold that off, but that remains to be seen.

72 Come on be real.

Posted by: DrewM. at September 03, 2010 12:03 AM (ycZcD)

The martyr complex is strong in the purists aint it?

73

68

Yeah, I would rather have 60 republican senators with 15-20 ready to work with Democrats on Cap and Trade (Graham), ObamaCare (Bennett), Judges (McCain, Gramesty), Stimulus (Snow and Collins), Financial Reform (Brown, Snow, Collins, Grassley), etc.

74 ohhhhhh god.... Okay...

75 I don't have much to add to what Ace said earlier, except that I'm genuinely puzzled at folks who say they'd rather the seat be Democrat than in the hands of a RINO. Given the number of Senate seats now in play, this is tantamount to declaring that they'd rather have a Democratic Senate than a Republican one.

To start with, it is unlikely that we will get another shot getting someone good in that seat anytime soon. Second, RINOs make it much more difficult to sell ourselves as the alternative to the statists. If our guys are going to vote for cap & trade, what's the point? Better that the Democrats be wholly responsible for the horrible things they do.

Do you imagine that Elena Kagan would be a Supreme Court Justice right now if Senator Sessions had been Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee? Hell no, she wouldn't.

Two words for you: Justice Ginsburg. She was confirmed 96-3. Two more words for you: Lindsey Graham. We have got to stop relying on these weak sisters. They need to be rooted out whenever possible. And right now, a lot is possible.

Taking the Senate would be great, as long as it isn't with a bunch of squishes who want to cross the aisle so they can "get stuff done". With the House, at least we can get gridlock, and gridlock is good. Come 2012, when we have a shot at rolling some of this stuff back, the Senate will be even more important, but again, only if our majority is really on our side.

76 Keep in mind something else...it's harder for leadership to keep a minority in line than it is for the majority.

There's a lot more pressure to be a team player when you are the majority and the leaders have a lot more tools (carrots and sticks) at their disposal than the minority leader does.

"Hey Senator X, you want your bill to see the light of day on the floor (which btw, as majority leader have absolute control over)? Then you better not fuck with me on these 3 other votes."

That's a lot more than a minority leader can say or do.

77 >>> Second, RINOs make it much more difficult to sell ourselves as the alternative to the statists. You guys always say that but I don't know what the evidence of this is. Reagan was Reagan when half the Republicans in Congress weren't merely RINOs but full-on liberals. Please. People know damn well that Jim Webb and Ben Nelson do not represent "Ideal Liberalism."

78 "What we were deriding Democrats about was their complete abandonment of any responsibility when it came to national security." Ballocks Drew. Don't make me waste my time digging into the AOSHQ archives. Either way, Castle is the only Republican that has a chance in Deleware. To me this is such a no brainer that I have difficulty even understanding the objections. I mean we allied with Stalin in WWII but we can't nominate a RINO in fucking Delaware to have a shot at the Senate? BTW, do people on here hate Scott Brown already?

79 Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at September 03, 2010 12:06 AM (6lN

  Two words for you.... Harry Reid....

80 Taking the Senate would be great, as long as it isn't with a bunch of squishes who want to cross the aisle so they can "get stuff done". With the House, at least we can get gridlock, and gridlock is good. Come 2012, when we have a shot at rolling some of this stuff back, the Senate will be even more important, but again, only if our majority is really on our side.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous

That is predicated upon the hope that the damage that we may have been able to prevent  in 2010 with a RINO will not be fatal by 2012.

Preventing Reid or Shumer from driving us off a cliff is something we cannot dismiss lightly.

81 During the 2000 election, I ate dinner with a bunch of journalists, not knowing I was consorting with the devil in my salad days, and they asked who I thought would win the election. So, I said, "Bush," and they were panicked and nervous, so I said why. His dad's the President. He was groomed for the role. Americans trusted him.

Sure, Gore had name recognition, but there was no getting away from the Clinton scandals. Obama will be just as damaging to the Democrats. And Mike Castle will win in DE, because his name sounds like White Castle.

82

The Republicans, if they win the House and Senate aren't completely clownless.

They can do stupid things(see 2001-2006), but the aren't going to start pushing things like Amnesty or tax hikes once they win. Obama doesn't write legislation.

The hot button issues won't be coming up with a Republican held congress, they aren't drunk with power like there were earlier in teh decade, they will be thankful to be in power this time around.

83

77

Oh yeah, Jumpin Jim Jeffords and the Rhode Island Senator Chafee(?) were quite the team players in the Bush years  .  .

84 We already got folks like Lee, Miller, Toomey and Rubio.  Folks, let's not get greedy now.

85 The thing is, more Democrats versus RINOS means that Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid get to run things.  Even with RINOS, Nancy is no longer speaker.  That's worth a lot.

86 *ack* used the word "folks twice there.  Wish we could edit our posts.

87 And Mike Castle will win in DE, because his name sounds like White Castle.
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane

It's a pity that there are none here in Delaware.

Damn. Now I'm hungry.

Thanks heaps.

88

. And Mike Castle will win in DE, because his name sounds like White Castle.

 A Slider in every pot!

89

86

We can win the House with Republicans acting more conservatively because of the GerryMandered Districts.

But when we have a chance to eliminate a complete sellout in a primary, we should take that shot.

Castle is a sellout.  He has already sold us out in the House.  He will do it in the Senate.

Jeez-you all forgot about Jumpin Jim Jeffords and Lincoln Chafee.  Yeah, they were GREAT team players during the Bush years.  So, now we need the likes of Castle and Kirk to go with McCain, Grahm, Snow and Collins.

Some folks never learn.  Like Lucy and Charlie with the football.

90 Posted by: Mike Castle

FOAD.

Just because I'm voting for your doesn't mean that I like you.

91

BTW, do people on here hate Scott Brown already?

 

no, i don't. But he's about as far left as i would like and R to be.

92 BTW, do people on here hate Scott Brown already?

 

no, i don't. But he's about as far left as i would like and R to be.

Posted by: Mike Castle

Look who's talking.

93 Even Scott Brown opposes Cap and Trade.  Castle voted for it.

94 But Lindsey Graham is from a very Red state. So run a decent conservative against him in a primary.  But please don't think that a Blue state like Delaware is going to vote for Alan Keyes in a skirt!

95 shoot , sock off

96

Riiight Christie, he's a small government guy who just happened to vote for cap and trade. okay gotcha its all so clear now.

97 Did anyone hear any polling results about this primary? I suppose that I was actually part of it, but haven't heard any numbers. It just struck me that Castle wouldn't be bothering with this if the poll results showed her far behind him.

98 Lindsey Graham will probably retire.

99 2011 Column A Column B House R R Senate R D President D D Take your pick. The tactical goal is to take the Senate. The strategic goal is to make the Senate intractably Conservative. One step at a time, folks.

100 In my opinion she sounds like  the Allen Greene of the Republican party.

101 Character is an issue. Do you want someone who's using campaign money to pay her rent? Think, folks. Castle may not be perfect, but he's a product of the Delaware aristocracy, which always has its hands in both political parties. And that aristocracy won't allow its only current GOP officeholder to go down. They may even go all out for Michele Rollins if she wins the House primary. Carney isn't real popular with the aristocracy.

102 Ha! See the look Castle gives Christie when he talks about "getting the government out of our way"? Even Castle can't believe that.

103

101

And Castle sounds like the Jumpin Jim Jeffords or Arlen Spector of the Republican Party

104 Lindsey Graham will probably retire.

Make it true and I forget about the thing with my mom's fart-box.

105 2011 Column A Column B

So now we're supposed to vote for Chinese food? Now I'm really hungry.

106 I say that about Graham based not on any insider knowledge but in the belief that there will be *several* well qualified rightist candidates challenging him, and the polls will be against him, and he will announce that it's his last term. It's odd he's lasted as long as he has.

107 That's Alvin Greene.

108 100, Ok that didn't work. It looked pretty be b4 I posted it.

109 Given what has been the democrat party agenda since His Awesomeness has been elected, I think that our first priority should be to send a message to the left that they aren't as popular with most Americans as they think. We can yank the leashes of the RINOS after we save the country from the far left. Frankly, I think that the tea party movement, last summer's townhall phenomenon, and attendance at Glen Beck's recent rally should send a pretty clear message to anyone who isn't completely stupid that liberal policies aren't popular.

110 109, Dang.

111 How long until the Tsunami drowns NYC?

112 Sorry ALVIN... He's so unknown no one knows his real  name.....

113

Does Graham seem like the retiring type to you?

I think he's hoping to ride out the tea party wave, since he's not up until 2014, or  possibly switch parties (a long shot), depending on the landscape coming up to his election, maybe get a job within either administration post 2012, but no way that ego maniac retires. 

Maybe you just mean from the Senate.  Although I can't see him doing that willingly.

114 They may even go all out for Michele Rollins if she wins the House primary. Carney isn't real popular with the aristocracy. Posted by: either orr

Doubtful. She has deep pockets, so they'll do the act, and let her finance herself. They've done nothing to challenge the notion that Carney is "unstoppable" and is cruising. If the past is any indication, they'll take the dive, and the Dems will get the house and the Republicans get one Senate seat.

115

In South Carolina, they have open primaries. 

That is how Graham survived last time around.

116 I think if Lindsay Graham does not retire he should be outed and his file published.

117 Incidentally, this is the second blog post on this site, along with Hot Air, either trashing O'Donnell or pumping Castle.  Almost makes you ponder either that we have naive posters on our side, or some money is switchin' hands.

Hey, did you think you could just slip this one by?  Fuck you, buddy.  Fuck you and go to hell.

118 99 Lindsey Graham will probably retire.

Posted by: ace at September 03, 2010 12:17 AM (QbA6l)

This is what scares me. This vindictive asswipe will vote left until he's gone. Someone needs to dig up some dirt on him. Or fabricate it.

119 109: Yeah, a preview feature would be nice. I think the reason the comment section is still called the "New Comments Thingy" is to reduce the calls for, well, a new comments thingy.

120

The martyr complex is strong in the purists aint it?

Posted by: Delta Smelt in SC at September 03, 2010 12:05 AM (qhdz6)

Some people feel better operating from the outside, away from the responsibilities of governance. Kind of like how Rush is always happier when there is a dem president in power. Makes show prep easy.

 

121

Ace, and Bush was Bush with a bunch of RINOs in Congress, and look what happened/

We've put up with these guys for too long and they've SCREWED us and put us into the position we are in today. Why would we think MORE of them is the answer? We're against MORE spending and MORE taxes because they don't work, but MORE Republicans that act like Democrats are going to save us?

If we can't get 60 seats it is POINTLESS to have any more than 49. 49 is enough to filibuster ANYTHING that *might* make it out of the house, (which should be precisely NOTHING for the next two years). Even with 7 or 8 RINOs.

As Anon Y. Mous said, it's better to let the Democrats own the horrible things they do, than for the media to say 'see, even Republicans agree and vote for this.'

A final thought. How'd Arlen Specter work out for us? Colin Powell?  

122 Do you imagine that Elena Kagan would be a Supreme Court Justice right now if Senator Sessions had been Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee? Hell no, she wouldn't.


 Even in the majority they aren't going to not give a hearing for a nominee. After that it takes 1 R vote to get her out of committee. Gee, how many R votes did she get? 1 I think and his name was Lindsey. After that Castle would be sure to join the Gang of However many and vote for cloture. Then he would vote for her along with the rest of the RINOS. So, yes she would be on SCOTUS.

123 It's just astonishing that folks -- good, genuine, GOP people -- are actually advocating for a path that leads to Democratic majority in the Senate.

How many are there, really? Not a lot, from what I've observed. Personally, I think a lot bigger deal is being made out of this than is necessary. You're never going to get 100% consensus within a group of people, let alone in a political party. It's just the nature of the beast. 

124 >>>I think he's hoping to ride out the tea party wave, since he's not up until 2014, Aw damn is it 2014? Shit, I was hoping 2012. Well look, there is a lot of conservative energy in the tea party, and conservative confidence, and conservative rebellion, and people like Graham are not going to find their primaries lay-ups anymore. All these guys have been assuming that they're safe. Because the Republican Party has been the party of Wait Your Turn and No Drama and all that. The Tea Party has introduced some really well-needed rambunctuousness into these gray proceedings.

125

My $0.02, being a pre-con (deeply conservative from before birth and two decades prior to the advent of the vast right wing conspiracy) and having lived in Delaware for nearly four years back in the late 80s early 90s...

Castle's high-water mark was running for president in 1988.  Before and after he was content to roam around elected DE state and federal offices (Gov, Rep, etc.).  He's a RINO through and through, and thoroughly dependable to be a Democrat in his voting habits.  That said, what matters is the R beside his name.  Should it come down to a 49-49 split (Lieberman being an Independent), Castle's win means we get control of all Senate committees.

Think about it.

Think about the one thing that matters above all else (no, not that, at least not in this discussion) -- control of the Senate judiciary committee, and who gets the next SCOTUS seat.

Nothing else matters.

Now stop fighting amongst yourselves in the backseat, or I'm going to pull over and stop this car and spank everyone.  Girls first.  Twice.

126

 say that about Graham based not on any insider knowledge but in the belief that there will be *several* well qualified rightist candidates challenging him, and the polls will be against him, and he will announce that it's his last term.

It's odd he's lasted as long as he has.

Marchant is already creeping up behind him.

127 Posted by: blindside at September 03, 2010 12:26 AM (X1Y8q)


 Lighten up Francis.... Pure is one thing ,stupid is another.

128 It's odd he's lasted as long as he has.

Posted by: ace at September 03, 2010 12:19 AM (QbA6l)

Not really. Lindsey used to be a damn fine Conservative and then he fell in love with John McCain and went crazy.

129

to a 49-49 split

 

not possible, there are 100 senators.

130

to a 49-49 split

 

not possible, there are 100 senators.

Posted by: Ben

Joe Lieberman is an Independent, and currently caucuses with the Dems.

131 >>>Some people feel better operating from the outside, away from the responsibilities of governance. Kind of like how Rush is always happier when there is a dem president in power. Makes show prep easy. As a blogger let me testify: It is. Attack, attack, attack is much easier than defend, defend, defend. Furthermore, an attack does not need to have a an agreed-upon consensus behind it. For example, we all hate ObamaCare, right? But among us there are probably 15 variations of preferences about health care policy. On attack, we are all focused on the one plan we all hate; we do not have to argue, or agree, about which plan we collectively support. When you're in power, suddenly we're all at each other's throats because we're not just against Obama's one plan, his one unifying abomination, but we're against each other's plans, too. And these guys always make compromises and there is always some better plan. Actually, there are ten better plans, if you ask ten different people. So everything's like, "Guyyyyss... it's the best we could dooooooo..." All whiny and shit.

132 Au contraire... 49-49, Lieberman independent, Biden's former seat up for grabs.  That's 100.

133

Ok, let's go with the Ace, Drew and Gabrial strategy.

Castle has been voting with the Dems, but since he is from a blue state we will promote him to Senator.

And what message does that send to McCain, Graham, Snow, Collins, and Brown?

I guess they would be shakin in their boots if they crossed DeMint.  I mean, you vote with the Dems, and you get promoted to Senator?

Is that the lesson to be learned?

134

Well look, there is a lot of conservative energy in the tea party, and conservative confidence, and conservative rebellion, and people like Graham are not going to find their primaries lay-ups anymore.

I agree.  Think you are right.  Think this movement lasts longer than an election cycle.

But I doubt a guy like Graham sees it that way. 

I think he looks at Obama being a Messiah 2 years ago, winning states like Indiana, and a short 2 years later he's losing hypothetical match ups against Bush in Ohio.

Graham knows 4 years is a long time.  Hopefully people in this state, and around the blogs/grassroots will have long memories.

135 Rock, you're wrong about the numbers on the Senate Judiciary. It's not an even number, requiring only one crossover. At present, there are 19 Senate Judiciary committee members -- 12 Democrats, and 7 Republicans.  Graham's cross-over vote wasn't necessary to get the majority needed to pass a candidate out of committee.

136 Ah, but stopping the President from putting young, fringe judges on the bench can only be accomplished by taking control of the Senate.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at September 03, 2010 12:00 AM (1TvCg)

Yeah. Stopped Clinton dead in his tracks...Oh wait....No it didn't. If it did I wouldn't be reading about their asinine rulings every other day.

137 I am really tired of hearing about "messages." If you want to send a message go to Western Union.

138

And let's take this a step further.  Name a Democrat who votes against the majority of the Dems is promoted.  I mean what Democrat has crossed their leadership and then is named as their presidential candidate?

Why are we afraid to stand on our principles.  The Democrats certainly aren't.

I am a Democrat, I do not think.

I am a Republican, I do not fight.

139

Is that the lesson to be learned?

Posted by: Scoob

The lesson is to be learned from Zombie-elects Murkowski and Bennett. They both played the establishment game, and neither are going to be in the Senate next year. In both cases, opponents were found that could beat them and be credible in the general election.

I wish that I could say the same for Delaware. But that isn't the case.

140 I've posted this earlier, but I'll do it again morons:

Hear now the words of Uncle Milton.

141 Is that the lesson to be learned?


 They're gonna be shaking in their boots because they all know things have changed,The American people are angry and they are on to them.Since they know we are their meal ticket, me thinks they will be going with the "flow." If not it will be adios baby...

142

Donna, I'm not sure what you think is stupid. Is something I said untrue?

Paulitics brings up a good point, that I have never considered - control of the Judiciary committee MIGHT mean we can prevent some of these far left judges, and the next SCOTUS nomination (hopefully not due until 2013 when President X (R) takes office).

Indeed, these judges are doing far more damage than the legislature and President Zero. Congress can pass bad legislation, the President can sign it into law, but it's the judges that are allowing it to stand and twisting the law so that anything at all is possible.

Very interesting point, but I still have concerns that even with (R) control, these judges will make it out of Committee unless they put DEEP-red Conservatives on the Committee.

If that's what it means, then I'm on board.

143 Scoob, are you "gary4520" on HotAir?  Because that guy is the stupidest person I have ever seen on the internet.  He keeps asserting, blindly, that "O'Donnell can win!" and expect people to buy it.  I think he's actually a creepy fanboy who's got a crush on her or something.

I ask because your vibe is exactly like his: alarmingly detached from reality.  A GOP SEAT IN DELAWARE GETS US ONE STEP CLOSER TO CHAIRING SENATE COMMITTEES AND SETTING THE AGENDA.  That is the fucking bottom line, and anyone who thinks *anything* else matters (with the ramp-up to Obamacare coming soon -- and Castle's in favor of repeal-and-replace, incidentally, which is more than Coons would ever be) deserves to be busted right in the chops until he realizes what a moron he's been.

144 Agree with Ace.  Better to be smart and execute a block-and-tackle strategy toward regaining our country than messaging our way into irrelevance and collectivism.

145

Castle become a weak R in a just there R majority. 

The just there R majority, thoroughly shaken up by the surge, is like steps one and two of twelve more.

I am not going to waste my fucking time right now on twelve, when we have to get one and two.

It's a process. Cart. Horse. etc.

146 Good clip, I think that boils down to a variation of "A people get the government they deserve." If we can be bought off with other people's money, oh what a shock, we'll have legislators buying us off with other people's money.

147 Rock, you're wrong about the numbers on the Senate Judiciary. It's not an even number, requiring only one crossover. At present, there are 19 Senate Judiciary committee members -- 12 Democrats, and 7 Republicans.  Graham's cross-over vote wasn't necessary to get the majority needed to pass a candidate out of committee.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at September 03, 2010 12:34 AM (1TvCg)

It's not that they needed his vote to get a majority. The Senate rules require one vote from the opposition to get it out of committee. Without Graham, she never would have made it to the florr vote.

148 Jeff B--Start drinking some decaf.

149 "If we can't get 60 seats it is POINTLESS to have any more than 49."

Simply not true.  There are two major things that the Senate does on its own, without needing the House at all:

1) Confirm judges
2) Ratify treaties.

2) might not be that important right now, but 1) definitely is.

Also, you don't need 60 to pass a budget - remember "reconciliation?"  Republican majorities in both houses means they can write a budget and send it to Obama, make him veto it, rather than have any budget come to him be a bipartisan (because bicameral, with split houses) deal from the get-go.

The smartest thing said so far is: let's not get greedy.  Miller and Lee are worth Castle.

150 It's not that they needed his vote to get a majority. The Senate rules require one vote from the opposition to get it out of committee. Without Graham, she never would have made it to the florr vote.

The only question is that what did Lindsey get for that yea vote, 'cause Lindsey's first priority is Lindsey.

151

It's a process. Cart. Horse. etc.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at September 03, 2010 12:37 AM (Wh0W+)

Yeah, and not to get ahead of things, but 2012 could be a great year for the GOP in the Senate.  Lots of possibly pick ups.  I'm not going to go Kos and count my hobo's before they are skinned though.

152

Well I can see the argument for not wanting Castle in the seat.  If he's the guy who puts the R's over the top and gives the R's control of the Senate, then if/when Castle or some other RINO stabs us in the back on some issue, then the Republicans and all of conservatism to boot will get the blame when it inevitably blows up in their faces.

But, here are two more points to ponder:

1. Justice Scalia is 74 years old.  So far all of Obama's SCOTUS replacements have been liberal replacing liberal.  We really do NOT want the Dems in charge of the Senate if Scalia should kick the bucket before 2012.

2. We should play the long game.  We know full well that no serious spending reforms will take place while Obama is in office.  He will just veto everything.  We should think about the long game.  The R's have an excellent chance at picking up a bunch of Senate seats also in 2012.  We could be looking at our own filibuster-proof majority come January 2013 along with a Republican president.  If we are one short and Castle's loss in this primary is the difference, by that time, you can bet that we will be kicking ourselves that we didn't think a bit more strategically.

153 Rock, you're wrong about the numbers on the Senate Judiciary. It's not an even number, requiring only one crossover. At present, there are 19 Senate Judiciary committee members -- 12 Democrats, and 7 Republicans.  Graham's cross-over vote wasn't necessary to get the majority needed to pass a candidate out of committee.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at September 03, 2010 12:34 AM (1TvCg)

You need one from each party to vote Aye regardless of the total right? If the Rs take the Senate their majority won't be enough to get a 12-7 split. At 51 or 52 they would get 10-9 or 11-8 at best and 3 of them will be RINOS because most of the RINOS up are in special elections so they will have 2 months seniority on the newbies and will want judiciary.  With the Rs in the majority the RINOS will surely mini caucus, under McCain, and buck their party a bit more then they do now. We won't be seeing straight party line votes on major issues for the Rs for a long time if they take the majority.

154

My grandfather, who was a long-time DC attorney and political writer (well-known, extensively published, and well-respected in his day) always said -- the most important thing is the nine people who sit on the Supreme Court.

If you doubt that, think about the judges Carter put into place who have systematically been destroyed the fabric of our country, and the bozo who recently overturned the will of 7 million California voters.

155

150

Only if we have the right 60.  Don't the Bush tax cuts expire this year?

And why is that?

Can we thank McCain?

And Castle and Kirk will do what?

156 >>>The lesson is to be learned from Zombie-elects Murkowski and Bennett. They both played the establishment game, and neither are going to be in the Senate next year. In both cases, opponents were found that could beat them and be credible in the general election. We don't have to purge EVERY RINO, you know. (I agree with Blue Hen, am quoting to amplify, not disagree.) There's this old saying, "pour encourager les autres." From Volokh Conspiracy: Running around the track tonight, I found myself musing over the famous ironic expression by Voltaire in Candide: “pour encourager les autres.” The more I thought about it, the less convinced I was that I understood it, in the sense of being able to come up with cleverly parallel situations in which the irony of the expression is preserved. I would be interested to know how one would explain the ironic function in the phrase as used in Candide. The phrase is found in the famous (and actually historical) scene of the execution of a British admiral, John Byng, on the deck of his own ship, for allegedly failing to engage the enemy in the Battle of Minorca. Voltaire adds of this: “Dans ce pays-ci, il est bon de tuer de temps en temps un amiral pour encourager les autres.” (“In this country, it is wise to kill an admiral from time to time so to encourage the others.”) ... We don't have to hang ALL the cowardly admirals. We just have to hang SOME of them -- to encourage the others.

157 it is indeed a no brainer, unless you have some longer term strategy in mind. However, the problem with that is there may not be that much time left* (Ocare); and in that short time (< 6 years) a Dem senator is no help, with 100% certainty; whereas the other is yet uncertain.

...that is unless one is considering a Senate control dependence on the '12 presidency. But lets keep it simple stupid here as thats long way off full of unknowns... plus, there is the momentum thing. Plus, at some point*, you gotta go with the army you got and do the best to whip em into shape on the fly.

so.... watch the clock. I guess.

158 If Castle can not be trusted, he could sell out at any time.  We surely don't need any more Arlen Specters, Charlie Crists, and we do not need Mike Castle.  A traitor is a traitor, and a RINO is no different than a yellow-bellied, blue dog democrat. 

There are some vote flips that just can't be justified.  Cap and Tax, DISCLOSE, etc., if he can be bought off, we need to get rid of him now rather than later.

If you need any proof of is disregard for his own constituents and their wishes, look to the town hall meetings of 2009. 

159

Is that the lesson to be learned?

Posted by: Scoob

You see, that's your whole problem right there, Scoob. Politics is not about teaching lessons. Politics is about wielding power. Every Super Bowl team has its' weakest member. The rest drag his ass along, while he contributes and screws up.

There is no perfection, there is no purity. There is only blood, sweat, tears and power.

160

IV. BRINGING A MATTER TO A VOTE

The Chairman shall entertain a non-debatable motion to bring a matter before the Committee to a vote. If there is objection to bring the matter to a vote without further debate, a roll call vote of the Committee shall be taken, and debate shall be terminated if the motion to bring the matter to a vote without further debate passes with ten votes in the affirmative, one of which must be cast by the minority.

Link.

161 Posted by: blindside at September 03, 2010 12:36 AM (X1Y8q) ,

 I'm sorry if I sounded judgmental.... I'm no authority on this. My feeling is that in some cases we really can't get the "pure" Conservative elected. At least at this time. I hate to have to take the lesser of two evils in some races. This is coming from one of the most Conservative people you will ever meet.

162 I still wanna know, if I click on these Castle ads, does that cost him money?

163 no clicking doesn't do anything.

164

160

Yeah, but on a superbowl team if the player goes to the other side, I think that he would get kicked off.

165

Almost makes you ponder either that we have naive posters on our side, or some money is switchin' hands.

Not naive, no payola:  Smart conservatives thinking strategically.  2012 is too late.

166 no clicking doesn't do anything.

Posted by: ace

Crap.

Does it at least help you?

167 "Don't the Bush tax cuts expire this year?

And why is that?

Can we thank McCain?

And Castle and Kirk will do what?"

Scoob I hear where you're coming from but you're simultaneously stuck in the past and looking ahead to the future, without focusing on the present.

What matters THIS cycle is: Take. Both. Houses.  One would be nice, but it's going to take two to really make it hurt on the psy-war level, and (more importantly) make a policy move.

If the goal is to "send a message" to the establishment that business-as-usual is over - I think that message has been sent.  Especially when (with a little luck) Miller wins, it will sink in - "hey, we don't NEED to have anything but a right-of-Attila guy in a state like Alaska."

Take back the Senate this time.  Lay the groundwork even further in advance for 2012 and 2014, and take all the other (deeper red or at least purple) states.  Primary where necessary/possible, leaning on incumbent squishes where that can work.  2016, Castle'll either be gone, or will have confirmed your predictions, in which case, fine, take him out (with a better candidate than COD, hopefully).

But to take back the Senate it's going to have to be all hands on deck.

168 scoob you're like super-convinced he's going to change parties, huh? Based on... what?

169 Reminder: SCALIA IS 74.  If the unthinkable should happen and Obama gets to appoint his replacement, who do you want in charge of Senate Judiciary?

170

150 - my point about 60 is we need that many to override presidential vetos.

Less than 60 means we can't override vetos (unless some Dems were to cross over).

More than 50 means Obama can spend the next two years blaming Republicans because they have control of Congress (not that he won't do that regardless, but it has more force when we have control, but 7 or 8 squishes keep crossing over).

49 means we can weather the votes of squishes and filibuster.

However, the control of the committees is important.

Here is another point to consider. If the Democrats hold onto a bare majority, would they try to eliminate the filibuster in the next session of Congress, essentially making the opposition powerless?

We already know that the Dems are on a Kamikaze mission and don't give a damn anymore if they survive, which means they don't give a damn if there is a filibuster to protect them when they are in the minority.

171

Yeah, but on a superbowl team if the player goes to the other side, I think that he would get kicked off.

Posted by: Scoob

If he was on the Columbian world cup soccer team, he'd be killed.

172  It's not that they needed his vote to get a majority. The Senate rules require one vote from the opposition to get it out of committee. Without Graham, she never would have made it to the florr vote.

Rock wrote that all it takes is one GOP vote to get a judicial nominee out of committee. That's not the case. It takes a majority vote of the committee, with at least one vote coming from the minority party.

With GOP control of the Senate, that means the minority party on the committee (the Democrats) would have to find enough crossover votes to get things out of committee. Depending on how the Senate splits, that will be be at least one vote, but it may be more.

173 >>>Does it at least help you? Nope!

174

Is there a conservative version of journo-list now? or are conservative talking points now being circulated? just asking because there was a very odd confluence of reporting today. *9/2/2010- rally for Castle day, do your part*

175 Posted by: chemjeff at September 03, 2010 12:48 AM (kUEkq)


   A Republican MAJORITY

176 With the Rs in the majority the RINOS will surely mini caucus, under McCain, and buck their party a bit more then they do now. We won't be seeing straight party line votes on major issues for the Rs for a long time if they take the majority.

Oh, well, then you're right, we should just let the Democrats keep the Senate. It's not like they're going to vote for radical libtard judges without even blinking, right?

177 Reminder: SCALIA IS 74.  If the unthinkable should happen

We initiate the Weekend at Bernie's plan.

178 With the Rs in the majority the RINOS will surely mini caucus, under McCain, and buck their party a bit more then they do now. We won't be seeing straight party line votes on major issues for the Rs for a long time if they take the majority.

Posted by: Rock

Yes, but focus on what's really important.  Rino Senators hire Rino staff members, especially those with law degrees looking to work in politics.

Purple bloggers gotta eat too, ya know.

179

Yeah, but on a superbowl team if the player goes to the other side, I think that he would get kicked off.

Posted by: Scoob at September 03, 2010 12:47 AM (T7+JL)

Ha! You gotta a point there! But that's a chance I would take. But I can't vote in this one anyway, it's up to those Yankees in DE to figger out.

180

Soap heh I'd take Zombie Scalia over any fruitbat that Obama would appoint

181

169

Ace

I have no knowledge Castle will switch.  But based on his past voting record in the House, I am convinced that he will side with the Democrats on major issues.

He has said that he is a "NO" vote for repealing ObamaCare.

What more do you need?

182 Posted by: Chris in Va at September 03, 2010 12:52 AM (uCjoj)


 If the vote goes as I expect... Mitch McConnell is not gonna be in any position to do anything.

183 Let's be a little strategic here.  Let's use Castle to get that R majority in the Senate.  Then when we don't need his vote anymore, we throw him away.

184

187

And if we elect Castle and Kirk, it will be even longer before it is repealed.

They will be around in 2012.

185 Yes, but focus on what's really important.  Rino Senators hire Rino staff members, especially those with law degrees looking to work in politics.Purple bloggers gotta eat too, ya know.

Thank you, but I have a job. Also, fuck you for implying that I want a GOP-led Senate for nothing other than personal gain. Douchebag. You're no better or even more original than that jerk up above who suggested that all these people you see noting that handing a Senate seat over to Democrats is a stupid plan are getting paid to say that.

Also, your theory doesn't explain the massive numbers of people who agree with me. Unless you think they're all just saying it because they want to work in politics. Asshole.

186 Let's be a little strategic here.  Let's use Castle to get that R majority in the Senate.  Then when we don't need his vote anymore, we throw him away. Posted by: chemjeff

Senator Kleenex?

187 155

My grandfather, who was a long-time DC attorney and political writer (well-known, extensively published, and well-respected in his day) always said -- the most important thing is the nine people who sit on the Supreme Court.

That is what I said to every squish I knew who was thinking about voting for Obama in '08.  It was the one thing that made a lot of them realized he was not worth taking a chance on.

Of course, I live in Cali, so it was meaningless anyway.

188

He has said that he is a "NO" vote for repealing ObamaCare.

Irrelevant, it will never be repealed while Obama is president.  He will veto, no way we are getting to 67 to over-ride.

What more do you need?

Just one vote, for majority leader.

189 Tonight at the University of Delaware, Governor Chris Christie announced his endorsement of Congressman Mike Castle, candidate for U.S. Senate. Governor Christie and his wife Mary Pat are both University of Delaware graduates.

"Mike understands that our nation's most urgent priority is the economy and that the path to restoring America's prosperity requires making tough, responsible decisions," said Governor Christie. "He is the strong voice that the people of Delaware need in the Senate to get our fiscal house back in order and get Americans back to work."

Congressman Castle thanked the Governor and said, "Delawareans have a lot of respect for Governor Christie. He is not afraid of tackling the most difficult issues, and knows the importance of shared sacrifice, honesty and straight forwardness.  When I was Governor of Delaware, we balanced 8 budgets while cutting income taxes three times and expanding Delaware's employment rate-- so we share a commitment to smart budgeting and a focus on job creation.  I am honored to have his support and look forward to working with him."

190 Now if COD wins the primary, I'd expect everyone in and out of state to back her with votes and money where appropriate - and SAME FOR CASTLE.

I'm that rarest of birds, a liberal Republican who doesn't try to pretend to be something else.  Those who were around in 04-06 when I was a regular may remember, I make Allah look like Levin.  I would always vote for the *left*most electable Republican in a situation, the "reverse Buckley" approach.

But at this point in time, all I care about is a Republican House *AND* a Republican Senate.  Be it O'Donnell, Castle or fucking Zombie Lowell Weicker (yeah, I know, he's not dead), AT THIS JUNCTURE AND FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS CYCLE, it's all about the R.

Surge now.  Purge later.

191 I'll do my best. If I start to smell, just spray me with Axe.

192

Look people, ObamaCare won't be repealed until 2013 at the earliest anyway.  Do you think Obama wouldn't veto it?  So it's not like Mike Castle's vote between 2010 and 2012 on repeal/not repeal is going to mean anything.  Then, after 2012, we are going to have a bunch more R senators (God willing) and then we won't need Castle's vote anymore.  So I really don't care in Castle's opinion on repeal.

193

I just want control of both houses.   However we have to do it, we must.  

That said, if we take the Senate & McConnell is the leader, we need to stay on top of every freakin' thing that goes on.   He has already said that he knows he has the votes.   I know he did fairly well keeping most in line for some of the tough 'no' votes, but he has said that if we take the Senate that he thinks Obama will work closer with them and be willing to compromise.   He hasn't said sqaut about trying to reverse some of the crap sandwich that we have been given.   There's something smarmy about him & I don't trust him.    I think he's still in the pre-Obama mindset & that's NOT where he needs to be.

We need to make damn sure they listen to us & remember the ass whipping we give them in November, because it can happen to them next.

194 I think that Castle is a politician. .And being so he will see that the Political winds say the Republicans are in charge and thus he will vote with them. Just a feeling and the fact that he is 70 and knows what side his bread is being buttered.

195 Blue Hen you got it

196 >>>Is there a conservative version of journo-list now? or are conservative talking points now being circulated? just asking because there was a very odd confluence of reporting today. *9/2/2010- rally for Castle day, do your part* I am the conservative version of Journo-List. No, but really, Fred Bauer on his blog talked about this Monday, and I wanted to discuss it then, but I wasn't ready to commit. (In the comments you can read me saying I will come out against O'Donnell unless someone convinces me different; no one did.) Actually "someone" told me to endorse O'Donnell on like Sunday. So anyway I was thinking it over and stuff, but then Tuesday recount happened, etc. Today I had the jumping-off point of the gay-rumor vid, so I posted on it. McCormack at the Weekly Standard (with that interview about being followed) sent me a link later in the afternoon. As far as coordination, it was "someone" pushing O'Donnell, me saying "I dunno" to him, Fred Bauer saying she's unelectable, me seeking counter-arguments in comments, etc., and then this video by Liberty.com. There was no "coordination" that I know of. Well, I talked to Dan Riehl on the phone, who is nominally anti-Castle but sort of nuanced about it. He actually wanted to know if *I* had been fed the gay-rumor story by Castle people or something. (I hadn't; it was on Twitter, first Ben Smith Tuesday night, then Gabe Weds night.) So, no coordination. Frankly, I think a lot of people were a little iffy on O'Donnell and just afraid to say so, because she is an underdog (and we all love underdogs) and Castle, what's the word, tongue-punches dogs' fart-boxes, and it's counter the Tea Party push, and etc., and today was just it coming out. Led, of course, by me, the right's one-man JournoList. No just kidding. But really sort of serious.

197

199

Yeah, McCain felt those political winds with Bush's tax cuts.  That is why they are expiring next year.

198

Let's reframe the conservative-v.-RINO-v-the-greater-enemy debate for clarity:

Now, after two years of relentless implementation of a Marxist framework on our laws and our culture, I ask you:

Which is better:  McCain RINOism or Obama Collectivism?

199 Isn't Sheriff Joe from Scranton, Delaware?

200 Stay the fuck out of primaries. Let the locals decide.

201 >>>it's all about the R. I've never really gotten that whole thing about "i'm a conservative, not a Republican." Yeah but Republicans have the actual ballot-slot, right? >>>Surge now. Purge later. Good slogan.

202 We have to get every win we can. Elect an R, then beat them into shape on TV, in blogs, at their offices, in the paper, on the radio. They have nowhere to hide.

Republicans of all stripes, even RINOs, will feel our might in November.

What we give, we can take away. And they know it. And places like this and Rush and Beck and all the rest will remind them of it every day.

RINOs will get in line for at least until 2012. Because they have seen us fire a few of their own already. These people will not want to be one-term congressmen. They will want the Red Wave to carry them for many years into a comfortable retirement.

No RINO will want to be the first to fuck with the Tea Party after November.

203 Which is better:  McCain RINOism or Obama Collectivism?

Or door number 3?

204 So Chris Christie is having gay sex with Mike Castle?


What the hell is going on around here?!?

205

204

How about principled opposition?

Because if we have McCain RINOism, the Reagan conservatives will bolt and we will be back to Obama Collectivism.

Yeah, I just see Democrats also talking about reaching across the aisle and cutting back on domestic government spending.

206 Isn't Sheriff Joe from Scranton, Delaware? Posted by: torabora

On his better days, yes. He's simultaneously from PA and Delaware.

207 204

Let's reframe the conservative-v.-RINO-v-the-greater-enemy debate for clarity:

Now, after two years of relentless implementation of a Marxist framework on our laws and our culture, I ask you:

Which is better:  McCain RINOism or Obama Collectivism?

Posted by: Paulitics at September 03, 2010 12:59 AM (2bu+G)

Eight years of Bush got us Ob+mao. We can't keep electing RINO's and getting Marxist backlash.

208 Posted by: Scoob at September 03, 2010 12:59 AM (T7+JL)

 We shall see . I really am no authority on thsi race and appreciate your candor. I'm a Californian and am used to hoping that at least we may get a Rino instead of Boxer. Bear with me. I have the utmost respect for those who believe we can have a purely Conservative representation. My feeling is we may not be able to do that all at once. God speed.

209 >>>So Chris Christie is having gay sex with Mike Castle? That's the rumor...! (sly smile)

210 Sorry  pimf "this" race.

211

215

Donna --enjoyed the banter.  Good night.

212

204  How about principled opposition?

No offense scoob but have you looked around this country lately?  We are on the edge, and if we don't get a handle on our economic situation soon we are going into a Depression.  Our society is a lot more brittle and further from teh farm than we were in the 30's;  it will not be pretty.

213 >>>I'm a Californian and am used to hoping that at least we may get a Rino instead of Boxer. Bear with me. I dont' think some people appreciate this. I know it's condescending but that's why I asked someone today, "Like, where are you from?" It's like some people are in a red county in a red state and just don't believe you when you say, "No, liberal majorities are not a myth; I assure you they exist."

214 Posted by: Scoob at September 03, 2010 01:05 AM (T7+JL)


   Same to you. I know we are on the same page.

215

Reality check, everyone: 

This debate is an exercise in onanism.  O'Donnell can't and won't win the primary, Castle can and will.  And he can win the general (as things stand now). 

What's the real issue here?

216 It's like some people are in a red county in a red state and just don't believe you when you say, "No, liberal majorities are not a myth; I assure you they exist."

Posted by: ace

add a dysfunctional party that acts more like a country club and you get Delaware.

217

Reality check, everyone: 

This debate is an exercise in onanism.  O'Donnell can't and won't win the primary, Castle can and will.  And he can win the general (as things stand now). 

What's the real issue here?

Posted by: Paulitics

Castle is a jerk.

218 Posted by: ace at September 03, 2010 01:05 AM (QbA6l)


 Thanks... and good night May God bless and keep this great Nation

219

Well, really only one holdout here, let's move on. I'm off to surf the circuit, morons, back later...

220

Republicans win the senate 2010! Yay! What now?

McConnell needs the votes of Tweedles dee and dum in Maine and Castle in Delaware to get anything done. What he does get done conservatives hate and actually takes America farther down the same road.

Conservatives will expect something to happen. Nothing will. Obama (smelling weakness) will sense the perfect opening.

What will conservatives do in 2012? Stay home.

Obama wins 2012! Yay!

Be true to your beliefs. O'Donnell sucks less than Castle. He is dumber than O'Donnell. Dumb in the way that counts. In the way that says cap and tax is a good idea.

Supporting somebody we don't like is fake and transparent. Voters see through it. Besides that, it gains you nothing except maybe the apathy of Texas in 2012.

Enough of this DE vs AK stuff. Is conservatism correct or not? You gotta have the courage of your convictions or failure is unavoidable. If conservatism is correct then it will work as well in DE as it does in AK.

How many of you would like to see conservatism applied to our cities? Guess what? With go along to get along ideas like this post they never EVER will be. Liberals figured this out 80 years ago. We haven't. They have been eating our lunch ever since (even when we are in power). Liberals were even willing to lose the house  to get health care passed. Would our side be willing to lose to eliminate a few cabinets? That's called courage of convictions. We don't have it and it is because of smoozers like this blog.

 

221

220

I agree that we are on the edge.

But we elect Castle.  Castle sides with the Democrats on major issues even though the Republicans control the Senate.  Public blames Republicans.  Republicans lose Senate (and House) again.

This is a long-term problem. It took 90 years of progressivism to get here.  It will take at least several decades to get out. 

Castle is not the solution.  Castle is part of the problem.

222 Justice Scalia yelled at me the other day to get the hell off of his lawn. I pistol whipped him with my tongue.

223 Take care folks.

224

>> Then when we don't need his vote anymore, we throw him away.

 

Like a used rubber.

I still do not understand ALL, NOW!  when we need This. First.  Or we get nothing. again.

 

and the anguish isn't persuasive.

225 OK, let's get down to brass tacks.

Castle voted for cap-and-trade.  Bad, sure - it never made it into law, but it's a big first strike.

He voted AGAINST Obamacare, although he's anti- or squishy-on repeal.  That maybe cancels out, but is at the very least not as big a strike as voting *for* cap-and-trade.

What are these other heretical votes?  (Keeping in mind, as I just said, that I'm a big old RINO and wouldn't care about most of them).

How'd he vote on TARP?  The stimulus?  The jobs bill?
If I weren't lazy and exhausted I'd look it up myself - but surely Scoob and the others can put me some fucking knowledge quickly.

As a general rule, for a party to have a comfortable coalition it has to have some cross-ideological "traitors."  But the way you guys feel about the Castles of the world is the way Henry Waxman feels about the Heath Shulers of the world - i.e., fuck 'em, "better fewer, but better."

I'd rather have a larger majority that can put the brakes on Obama.  Republicans haven't had a *large* majority in the house since *1946.*  Wouldn't it be nice to find out what that feels again?  But it's going to take some pretty squishy people to get them there.

226 I think the point about federal judges sounds valid. However, about SCOTUS... not so much, because: I recall hearing that the judges are going to stay seated until after '12 (to see public mandate), in which case what really matters is the Presidential Election of '12.

That is because even with control of committee, they could only block so many, right? And if O is re-elected... shieeet, watch out. Kagen will seem a blessing. The opposition won't be able to hold up a resistance forever against MFM propoganda.

'12 Prez and safety of SCOTUS are one in same to me, rt now.

227

Blue Hen, I don't disagree.  But that's not what's important to the long-term future of our country.

228 It appears some on our side are willing to lose now and sulk until the next election, when presumably Ronald Reagan and Patrick Henry will be on the ticket in every race in all 57 states.

229 Posted by: Scoob at September 03, 2010 12:33 AM (T7+JL)

So you're plan is unless we can have a majority made up of nothing but conservative rock stars, you'd rather let the Democrats control the Senate.

What exactly is the lesson that would be derived from that?

230 "Yeah but Republicans have the actual ballot-slot, right?"

Not in New York, bitches!

231 With GOP control of the Senate, that means the minority party on the committee (the Democrats) would have to find enough crossover votes to get things out of committee. Depending on how the Senate splits, that will be be at least one vote, but it may be more.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at September 03, 2010 12:49 AM (1TvCg) 

The rs aren't getting to 54-55 this election Gabe. It will be 10-9. that means the one crossover is also enough to get a passing vote. When was the last time a SCOTUS nominee failed to get out of committee anyway? Even Bork made it out of committee.

Oh, well, then you're right, we should just let the Democrats keep the Senate. It's not like they're going to vote for radical libtard judges without even blinking, right?

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at September 03, 2010 12:51 AM (1TvCg)

Again the Rs had a majority with Clinton and it didn't stop him. Obama is going to be President for 2 more years regardless. He will get his picks the same way Clinton did. The Rs will only filibuster the really terrible ones anyway and they are doing that now. The SCOTUS argument is about the weakest thing going right now. If I was going to cave and vote for Castle in a primary it would be over things like fiscal responsibility and Cap &  Trade and stuff. But guess what? He stinks on those too. He stinks on everything important. Basically the only reason to vote for Castle is because you have some deep need to see McConnell as majority leader  because that is the only vote you are sure to get out of him. Hell Ben Nelson votes with the Rs more than Castle ever will.

Maybe we don't need to kill all the cowardly admirals but we would have to kill a lot less if we didn't promote them to admiral to begin with.

232 Okay, children, carry on without me.  I have to actually work (quelle horror!) in the morning.

233 This entire argument angers and confuses me. O'Donnell will LOSE, so the choice is between Castle and losing the seat to a Democrat. That's not a hard choice to make, people!

234

I thought it would be announced in a gay sex tape.

 

but seriously, Castle seems better than the alternative. I'm not a big fan of the girl runnign, o donnell or something.

It's like getting another scott brown, i'll take it.

Posted by: Ben at September 02, 2010 11:26 PM (DKV43)

So good luck with that!

235 "More: I don't have much to add to what Ace said earlier, except that I'm genuinely puzzled at folks who say they'd rather the seat be Democrat than in the hands of a RINO. Given the number of Senate seats now in play, this is tantamount to declaring that they'd rather have a Democratic Senate than a Republican one."

I can see some good reasons for that
.
1. When there's no real difference between one party and the other, let the other take the beating for the shit hole we're in.

2. If you're electing someone just for a party victory, and that someone is more than likely to keep playing the same bullshit games that got us into this hole, then that is called shooting self in foot. Let the other set of initials own the failure.

3. When there is no longer any real difference between one party and the other, and folk keep playing this "well, lets just vote for our party initials regardless of the shithead running". that just puts us that much closer to the day that Jefferson's Tree of Liberty is gonna need a huge bucket full of water/fertilizer.

It is BECAUSE of this big tent bullshit, party victory uber alles, stand for nothing, mean nothing, be nothing to no one that the GOP got into that we're in this hell hole. Digging in deeper by keeping on keeping on with the scumbag liberal shithead democrats in GOP clothing is an idiots' game.

It's gonna take us a long time to dig out of this hole. One election cycle aint gonna fix shit.

236

I'm out too, but if you have some time take a look at our list of 89 vulnerable Democrat House seats and send me some district specific polls if you see them.  Thanks.

 

 

237 "What's the real issue here?"

We're anticipating having a majority, realizing (or rather, ceasing to deny) that these kind of fights are going to happen as soon as we do have a majority, plus we can't stand all the good news and hopeful omens on the political front in the last few weeks/months, so we're forming a circular firing squad.

238

234, 237

Ok, we win the Senate along with the House.  Then what?  Obama has veto power 2012.  He can blame all his problems on the legislature.

We need the House to stop legislation.  Why do we need the Senate now?

We won't be able to repeal ObamaCare, sell GM and Chrysler, and shutdown Freddie and Fannie until Republicans control the White House in 2012.

And if we have Castle, what role will he play?

He favors Cap and Trade, he sponsored the Disclose Act with the Democrats, and he is against repealing ObamaCare.  And electing him sends what message to Snow, Collins, and Brown?  The conservatives are back?  Or they are free to act as they have?

Republicans do not have party discipline like the Democrats.  Before Snow and Collins, there was Jeffords and Chafee.  Have 60 votes with 10 of them willing to buck the leadership will get us nowhere.

And it is worse than that.  The newly energized republican base will be disillustioned if they see Republicans in control and failing to reverse what has happened because they are pals with the Democrats.

We have seen this before.  I guess we have a great many Charlie Browns wanting to play football with Lucy.

239 People have been voting for Democrats out of habit for a long time.

If we can actually break that habit this year and show them something good, we can make this country better.

Isn't that what this is about? This is about our kids' future. This is about planting shade trees for them to sit under when we are gone.

And stuff.

240

248

They vote Republican so some Republicans can cut deals with Democrats to pass Democratic agenda items? How does that encourage conservatives to vote Republicans next time?

If we have a chance to eliminate a liberal (Castle), we should do it.

241 From "The Wizard of Id": "Pillage, then burn."

242 248 People have been voting for Democrats out of habit for a long time.

If we can actually break that habit this year and show them something good, we can make this country better.

Isn't that what this is about? This is about our kids' future. This is about planting shade trees for them to sit under when we are gone.

And stuff.

Posted by: sifty at September 03, 2010 01:20 AM (PJJWW)

 Not his post, but, Snark sucks!! Why do you always have to be smartasses?

243 "We need the House to stop legislation.  Why do we need the Senate now?"

Flip it around.  Why do Democrats want to keep the Senate?

Scoob, you're backing yourself into a weird logical corner.  It would be better for Republicans to have both houses.  This shouldn't be controversial.

I'll grant you for the sake of argument it'd be better for O'Donnell to be part of that Republican Senate majority than to have Castle be part of it - but you're saying you'd rather NEITHER be part of it than that Castle be part of it - and at times you seem to be going beyond the DE race, to say not just that it doesn't really matter but that you'd RATHER not take back the Senate.

244 I've just got no dog in this fight. I've already decided that the best thing I can do is to identify the best possible candidates both locally and statewide in my own neck of the woods and then go out and support them to the best of my ability. As this battle unfolds, it behooves me to protect my flank and hope that others do likewise.

245 Screw this eeyore bullshit.

If you want to lose, Scoob, have at it.  Vote a straight Democrat ticket. Show us all how smart you are.

I feel like Ace did the other day.

Livelihoods are at stake here and now. This isn't a fucking fantasy world.

246 Scoob and Repeal have valid points imo. However, that argument depends on a seperable one. That being:

Will controlling the senate significantly hurt chances of winning Presidency? you need to argue this, alone, first. I actually agree with this but its not whats being considered here - and its more of a hunch. But if you can prove that then I believe you can prove the rest.

247 253 I've just got no dog in this fight. I've already decided that the best thing I can do is to identify the best possible candidates both locally and statewide in my own neck of the woods and then go out and support them to the best of my ability. As this battle unfolds, it behooves me to protect my flank and hope that others do likewise.

Posted by: Soap MacTavish at September 03, 2010 01:26 AM (554T5)

Best comment!

248 "If we have a chance to eliminate a liberal (Castle), we should do it."

Always?  Everywhere?  If it means losing the seat forever?  If it means the difference between a D majority and an R majority?

Delaware is REALLY FUCKING LIBERAL.  NoVa can't begin to compare.  COD does not seem ready for prime time, and it would take a Reagan or a Palin (it may surprise you, but this ultra-liberal RINO is actually a big Palin fan) to sell the hard line in DE.

Look at this and honestly tell me that this is the Real Deal, and not a C-list cable news "strategist":

http://tiny.cc/tnq2j

249 We are the people we have been waiting for!! Tee the fuck hee!!

250

254

I don't want to lose.  And I don't want to vote for Republicans who vote as Democrats.

Livelihoods and lives (healthcare) are at stake.  And it does no good to vote for a Jeffords, Spector, or Chafee.  Vote for Castle for what?  We take control of the Senate, but we don't accomplish anything because Castle sides with Democrats, as he has done in the House?

And why do you think O'Donnell is a sure loser (or Castle a sure winner)? 

It is a primary.  I would vote for the conservative versus a liberal.  It is as simple as that.

Having 51 Republican votes when one vote will side with Democrats on key issues is a fools bargain Charlie Brown.

251 259

254

I don't want to lose.  And I don't want to vote for Republicans who vote as Democrats.

Livelihoods and lives (healthcare) are at stake.  And it does no good to vote for a Jeffords, Spector, or Chafee.  Vote for Castle for what?  We take control of the Senate, but we don't accomplish anything because Castle sides with Democrats, as he has done in the House?

And why do you think O'Donnell is a sure loser (or Castle a sure winner)? 

It is a primary.  I would vote for the conservative versus a liberal.  It is as simple as that.

Having 51 Republican votes when one vote will side with Democrats on key issues is a fools bargain Charlie Brown.

Posted by: Scoob at September 03, 2010 01:32 AM (T7+JL)

252 "It is a primary.  I would vote for the conservative versus a liberal.  It is as simple as that."

OK.  If she loses in the primary ... what would you do then?  Because then it gets a lot less simple.

Again, you're saying 49 is better than 51.  Again, I'm saying that's whack.

"why do you think O'Donnell is a sure loser (or Castle a sure winner)?"

Polls, demography, history, experience, sanity.  O'Donnell seems like a fairly sure loser, but Castle is MUCH more of a sure winner than she is a loser.

253 What we're ultimately faced with here is damage control. We need to put out our own fires, shore up the bulkheads and steam into port with guns ablazin', without having to scuttle the ship. 

254

261

If O'Donnell loses, I would vote for Castle.  But we aren't their yet.  So, I would do my best to have O'Donnell win the primary.

255 This entire argument angers and confuses me. O'Donnell will LOSE, so the choice is between Castle and losing the seat to a Democrat. That's not a hard choice to make, people!

Posted by: Chris R at September 03, 2010 01:14 AM (AO4qz)

Actually it is a hard choice. For how many years as a Conservative are you supposed to cast your vote for a person who is basically a Democrat who caucuses with the Republicans for some odd reason? It's one thing to say give a McMahon or a Fiorina a shot, at least they are unknowns. Now  I hear the Rs in DE are basically conceding Castle's House seat to the Dems so you aren't even getting one single shot to vote for even a moderate conservative. All of this in what looks to be a landslide year for Conservatives and conditions that will never be better for dumping a liberal. If I was in DE and  conservative I be hard pressed to even come up with a reason to vote at all in the general election. They are just trading one set of liberals for another.  

Chris Shays lost his Connecticut House seat in 2008 by 3% in a year when Obama took the state by 15%. He didn't lose because of Obama's coat tails. He lost because enough people decided they couldn't see a damn bit of difference between him and the guy who would replace him so why bother voting for him.

If you expect people to come out and vote there had better be more difference between the candidates then just the letter after their names. So O'Donnell will lose. Maybe for once in a generation the people who vote for her will actually feel good about voting. And just maybe they will keep doing it instead of tuning out for another 10 or 20 years.

256 General quarters, all hands! General quarters, all hands!

257

OK, I choose fun and good. DOG Me. OVER IT!!!!

258

This entire argument angers and confuses me. O'Donnell will LOSE, so the choice is between Castle and losing the seat to a Democrat. That's not a hard choice to make, people!

Yeah, that is what Washington said when he got his army's ass kicked out of NY and NJ.  I am going to lose.  I might as well find some nice farmland in MO and quit.

Did we give up when the German's bombed Pearl Harbor?  Hell no.

Too many act like abused prison wives and have no stomach for a fight.  And that is why our republic is slipping from our grasp.  Because Castle is part of the problem, not part of the solution.

259 "Even Scott Brown opposes Cap and Trade. Castle voted for it." So would Newt. Sometimes people have there crazy issues but are on your side when the shit hits the fan.

260

If the Democrats keep the Senate, they keep the responsibility of the leftist crap that makes it through.  You get too many RINOs in there just so you can say, "Yay, we have the Senate!  Suck it, Democrats!" the Republicans share in the responsibility of the leftist crap that makes it through...and Obama gets elected again in 2012.

Sounds like a GREAT plan.

If you really think a RINO senate won't end up giving Obama more leftist judges with all this constant talk of "Well, s/he's a leftist but qualified so we CAN't stand in the way..." then you haven't been paying any attention to even the likes of Orrin Hatch, who didn't stand in the way of the Ginsburg nomination.

But at least you got to say, "Yay, we have the Senate!  Suck it, Democrats!"

Like I said, GREAT plan.

If the country is going to get run into the ground, then I would rather it get run into the ground by the other party, not my own.  RINO, Democrat: the only difference is the speed of the march down the same road.

And I don't know this O'Donnell person.  Does she even stand a chance?

261 "How'd Arlen Specter work out for us? Colin Powell?" Wasn't O'Donnell the one threatening to be a third party spoiler? Yeah RINO and DINO turn on their masters, but sometimes they're all you have. A lot of people around here seem to forget that and prefer to live in a fantasy land in which the population ratios of blue to red states are reversed.

262

268

I am not a fan of Newt after he sat on the couch with Nancy and played lickie face with John Kerry during the global warming debate (and Clinton before that).  Newt seems to want to be pals with all the power players in DC than stand with grassroot conservatives.

263 AND...let us not forget the very real possibility of a RINO switching parties after they get elected and you all look like a bunch of boobs.  But, that may have already been mentioned here, sorry I haven't read everything.

264 If the country is going to get run into the ground, then I would rather it get run into the ground by the other party, not my own.

Just don't forget about all the real life men, women, and children who will lose their jobs and homes during your game of chess.

265

270

Agreed--O'Donnell shouldn't go third party.

266 God Bless!

267
We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in Chicago,
we shall fight on the seas and oceans,
we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be,
we shall fight on the beaches,
we shall fight on the landing grounds,
we shall fight in the fields and in the streets,
we shall fight in the hills;

we shall never surrender

268

Just don't forget about all the real life men, women, and children who will lose their jobs and homes during your game of chess.

Just don't forget about all the soldiers whose blood will be on your hands specifically when you vote in a leftist Senate.  I won't do that.  You feel free.

269 and it would take a Reagan or a Palin (it may surprise you, but this ultra-liberal RINO is actually a big Palin fan) to sell the hard line in DE.

And they will never get one. Why? Because that young Reagan or Palin is sitting their right now, looking at this election,  and thinking "No sense in ever running here."  Reagan needed to lose in 76 or he never would have been ready for 80. And Goldwater needed to lose to even make Reagan's 76 run possible. Losing a good hard fight is more costly than surrendering but you gain nothing from surrendering. The loss at least teaches you how to do it right next time and gives you a little hope that you can.

270 Bah. Fetch me a brandy and a cigar, Tommy. 'Tis time for bed.

271 >>>. Why? Because that young Reagan or Palin is sitting their right now, looking at this election, and thinking "No sense in ever running here." Reagan needed to lose in 76 or he never would have been ready for 80. And Goldwater needed to lose to even make Reagan's 76 run possible Some of you put an awful lot of stock in the wonderful experience of failure.

272 God save our gracious Queen,Long live our noble Queen,God save the Queen:Send her victorious,Happy and glorious,Long to reign over us:God save the Queen. O Lord, our God, arise,Scatter her enemies,And make them fall.Confound their politics,Frustrate their knavish tricks,On Thee our hopes we fix,God save us all. Thy choicest gifts in store,On her be pleased to pour;Long may she reign:May she defend our laws,And ever give us causeTo sing with heart and voiceGod save the Queen

273

280

It is better than not trying.  And quitting.

274 I have to get a T-shirt made tomorrow.

The Revolution Is My Fault, BB Said So

275 >>>Too many act like abused prison wives and have no stomach for a fight. No offense, but the next time a keyboard-pecking internet faggit-dweeb fucking lectures me again about his fucking courage in tap-tap-tapping stupid words on a fucking BLOG I will fucking come over there and slap the wet cock out of his mouth.

276 No offense!

277 Hey fuckface, tell me some more about how you've got "fire in your belly" for a "fight" unlike the other "cowards" around you. You tell me that, Hero, as you tap-tap-tap your way along in the bloody warzone of a blog's comments. Fucking self-righteous prigs! FUCK OFF! Get over your fucking selves! Stop fucking masturbating your big throbbing integrities in public!

278 Where are my bloody slippers? They were here a minute ago! Mrs. Thatcher must have hidden them from me! Bloody wench!
 
Oh, wait...

279

we shall never surrender

 

*cues Iron Maiden - Aces High*

280 Some of you put an awful lot of stock in the wonderful experience of failure.
Ace, the failure of Republicans in 2008 is what brought us where we are now.  The only time failure is entirely bad is when nothing is learned from it.

281

I trust Delaware Republicans to do the right thing. 

 

If you really think Christine has a reasonable chance at winning the general, vote for her. 

If not, then decide if Castle is worse than the Dem.  If not, vote for Castle. 

The godfather, WFB Jr., said vote for the most conservative candidate who you think can actually win.  The key is who can win.  Remember that. 

282 whatever, aphorisms and cant, I love 'em, can't get enough.

283 This does not sound like Ace:   <sup>284 >>>Too many act like abused prison wives and have no stomach for a fight.

No offense, but the next time a keyboard-pecking internet faggit-dweeb fucking lectures me again about his fucking courage in tap-tap-tapping stupid words on a fucking BLOG I will fucking come over there and slap the wet cock out of his mouth.</sup>

^{Posted by: ace at September 03, 2010 01:57 AM (QbA6l)}

 

 

284 >>>The godfather, WFB Jr., said vote for the most conservative candidate who you think can actually win. The key is who can win. Remember that. RINO. No guts for a fight, like my new Hero Scoob.

285

When the eagles fall silent, the parrots begin to jabber.

286 No that was ace. I get annoyed when I get these grandstanding Keyboard Kommandos talking up how courageous they are for daring to post shit on a blog.

287

When the eagles fall silent, the parrots begin to jabber.

 

*cues Iron Maiden - Where Eagles Dare*

288 It's comments like that make me think this has less to do with politics than a need for psychological validation and some peacock-preening.

289

When the maidens are of iron, it's time for the sheep.

290

When the maidens are of iron, it's time for the sheep

 

*cues Judas Priest - You've Got Another Thing Comin'*

291 278 and it would take a Reagan or a Palin (it may surprise you, but this ultra-liberal RINO is actually a big Palin fan) to sell the hard line in DE.

And they will never get one. Why? Because that young Reagan or Palin is sitting their right now, looking at this election,  and thinking "No sense in ever running here."  Reagan needed to lose in 76 or he never would have been ready for 80. And Goldwater needed to lose to even make Reagan's 76 run possible. Losing a good hard fight is more costly than surrendering but you gain nothing from surrendering. The loss at least teaches you how to do it right next time and gives you a little hope that you can.

Posted by: Rock at September 03, 2010 01:50 AM (ivAmM)

 We need a GeorgeWashington.  He understood the spirit of the office and what the Constituition meant for the office to be. He could have been king, and he declined. He choose America instead.

292

The Revolution Is My Fault, BB Said So

Hey, that'll match the t-shirt I just got: "Sifty Can't Think Of A Decent Retort."

293

Ace:

 Decaf, Decaf

294 Scoob, Get over yourself, get over yourself.

295

When the maidens are of iron, it's time for the sheep.

What's Reid's love life got to do with anything?

296

We shall cross The Delaware, and then hang a right.

297 Every piece of good news we get seems to make the Super Patriot Brigade raise the bar higher. 

Winning is always good in my book. Leads to superbowls and pussy and getting jobs and ending wars. Losing, not so much in my simple man's experience.

I like "Yes" for an answer. Don't understand those who don't. I just haven't seen enough perfection in life to get used to it I guess.

298 BB, I bow to Ace, who said all I was thinking and more.

299

BB, I bow to Ace, who said all I was thinking and more.

On your knees, no doubt.

300

If everyone is thinking alike, someone isn't thinking.

301 Some of you put an awful lot of stock in the wonderful experience of failure.

Posted by: ace at September 03, 2010 01:54 AM (QbA6l)

It's not wonderful but at least you felt like you were part of the process. It's a lot more likely to get you to think "Maybe voting isn't just for fags." Candidates like Mike Castle are never going to do it that's for sure. Mike Castle is the kind of guy "fags" vote for. And no I am not trying to insult gays here. It's a reference to something Ace said.

302 *That is because even with control of committee, they could only block so many, right?* Obama can recess appoint them, but they have to get a Senate vote, and if Mitch plays hardball he can keep them from the famous 'upperdown' (my how I miss 2005) by simply not scheduling them on the Senate calendar. Whether they get out of committee is irrelevant. You do realize by the way that Jeff Sessions will become Judiciary Committee chairman from the loathesome Pat Leahy?

303

311

And what in this current leadership and Republican caucas makes you expect them to play hardball?  Based on what?

304 We need a GeorgeWashington.  He understood the spirit of the office and what the Constituition meant for the office to be. He could have been king, and he declined. He choose America instead.

Posted by: lou at September 03, 2010 02:06 AM (c1DX5)

I'd settle for a Scott Brown. Hell I'd settle for for a Mitch McConnell over Mike Castle. At least he  gets an A from the NRA.

305

#311

When all you care about is sucking your own dick and whining about how all is lost and everyone else is stupid and "Id rather have a socialist sympathizer than a Rino because I don't have a fucking functional neuron in my skull because all the jizz I secretly swallow from Obama has fired my wiring", you don't listen to reason.

By November 2nd, 100% of CONSERVATIVES will be voting to stop Obama and voting R.

Not 90, not 95, 100%. Anyone who sits out or pulls a 'PURITY!' card is a fucking CINO, Conservative in Name Only.

306

I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that.

307 Got me there, BB. You must be the terror of the middle school playground.

I don't play games with this stuff on here.


I'll leave you here to thump your Super Patriot Brigade chest and flex your mighty internet fingers of steel.

Have fun storming the castle!

308 Apparently Scoob ONLY wants Christine O'Donnell, and no one else. Like, 99-1. Scoob you're entering Concern Troll territory here.

309 sifty, I think you're right about that, I don't get what paradise some of these guys are fortunate enough to live in where perfection is something that's sort of expected, like properly-crisped french fries, and you send it back if you don't get it. Honestly. Is everyone aware that all politicians are fundamentally slimy and corrupt? And if they don't start that way they become that way midway through their first campaign?

310

#317, Ace, hes a CINO.

Irrelevant, worthless CINO.

All IS LOST so why bother to vote.

All is doom and betrayal, so why bother.

People who sit on their ass and whine (but then puff themselves up behind type on a screen) serve absolutely no political use to us other than something to gawk and laugh at, like the Ronulans, Didiertards, and Lees.

311 313 We need a GeorgeWashington.  He understood the spirit of the office and what the Constituition meant for the office to be. He could have been king, and he declined. He choose America instead.

Posted by: lou at September 03, 2010 02:06 AM (c1DX5)

I'd settle for a Scott Brown. Hell I'd settle for for a Mitch McConnell over Mike Castle. At least he  gets an A from the NRA.

Posted by: Rock at September 03, 2010 02:16 AM (ivAmM)

Better stand for something, or you'll fall for anything!!

312

So, what if enough Republicans had capitulated to the idea that a RINO is better than a Democrat...and McCain had won the election in 2008?

Amnesty!  Heck, all those no-longer-illegals might even be voting in this election, giving the Republicans precisely zero chance to take Congress again...ever.

Political suicide is exactly what I want to see from my party

And if the Republicans take the Senate with McCain and Graham and Snowe and Collins and Brown and Castle in there, I wonder if Obama is going to start working on precisely that, as an issue he can reach across the aisle with...

313

317

It is late and I going to bed.  Night, night kiddies.

314

Got me there, BB.  You must be the terror of the middle school playground.

That's precisely the intellect it takes to get you.

I don't play games with this stuff on here.

Of course you do.  I mean, you're not SERIOUS.  Right?

I'll leave you here to thump your Super Patriot Brigade chest and flex your mighty internet fingers of steel.

And I'll leave you to do...whatever it is you think you're doing, dunce.

Have fun storming the castle!

Have fun murdering soldiers!

315

I've gotta say, I have my doubts about Castle. I don't necessarily mind electing moderate to liberal Republicans in moderate to liberal states. The fear I have is that some of these liberal Republicans go far beyond simply voting with the Democrats on select issues.

Many of them seem to take delight in poking conservatives in the eye at every opportunity. They jump on the media bandwagon to trash conservatives and say how much more successful the party would be without us hanging around. I know people who began voting third party because of the nasty anti-conservative rhetoric coming from people like Specter. It may be silly, but guys like that actually turn red states more purple by depressing base turnout.

The other fear I have is that a guy like Castle will end up with a leadership position and drag the party further to the left. I can really see that happening if he feels the need to curry favor with the media or Washington establishment.

316

People who sit on their ass and whine (but then puff themselves up behind type on a screen) serve absolutely no political use to us other than something to gawk and laugh at, like the Ronulans, Didiertards, and Lees.

*squeal!*  It's just exactly this sort of logical rhetoric and unending appeal that wins the opponents over every time!

317

I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that.

 

What's the problem?

318

 

Look Dave, I can see you're really upset about this. I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill, and think things over.

319 Sustain 41 rock solid conservatives, and a "no RINOs" on the Judiciary committee - an America can be sustained. A bunch of RINOs from Blue states are just gravy - the power of the Senate isn't to control the agenda, it is to stop radicalism.

320 Argh! Why are people continuing to debate the relative merits of Castle (a RINO) over O'Donnell (a conservative) when there's zero chance O'Donnell will be elected? The arguments against electing a RINO are all valid, but moot in this particular race. O'Donnell will not be able to beat Coons, so the ONLY choice is between Castle and a Democrat. Do the people who claim there's no difference between Castle and a Democrat understand how the Senate works? Do they not understand the value of having an additional Republican to vote with them on matters of procedure? Do they not understand how soul crushing losing both houses of Congress will be for the Democrats?

Enough is enough. We've got a mad man in the White House! Look at what he and the Democrats have done in less than two years. Trillion dollar deficits. Soaring unemployment. Undermined power and influence overseas. He has to be stopped. Right now practicality is more important that ideological purity.

So please shut the fuck up and get off of Castle's back.

321 237 It appears some on our side are willing to lose now and sulk until the next election, when presumably Ronald Reagan and Patrick Henry will be on the ticket in every race in all 57 states.

^ This.

I like the idea of Castle about as much as I like the idea of McCain winning the primary, yet again. FFS, besides being a RINO McCain has been a Senator since a month after I was born, and was in the House for four years before that. That's just too fucking long to be playing around in the District. Still, the idea that George fucking Washington is going rise from the grave with a thousand of his closest conservative friends is just fucking ridiculous. We have what we have. As many people have said before me, these fucknuts are politicians and they can smell which way the wind is blowing, mainly because ace tongue-punched all of our moms fartboxes. Castle is not just going to magically switch from effectively 57% R to 12% R, especially if Republicans control both House and Senate.

322 With the behavior exhibited by O'Donnell's campaign in the last few days - she is drifting away from the "conservative" label and into "fringe" territory. We need a phone call from Cheney or Rove to tell her to play nice, stop talking about a 3rd party run, and to stow the paranoia - or else Roger Ailes gets a phone call to start cutting back her Fox airtime (she sucks anyways).

323 330,

Newsletter.

324

The godfather, WFB Jr., said vote for the most conservative candidate who you think can actually win.  The key is who can win.  Remember that. 

Posted by: Joe at September 03, 2010 01:59 AM (3U0cu)

That is a worthy sentiment. But what if you have a candidate who is in no way conservative at all? Cristine O'Donnell may be the crappiest candidate to ever come down the pike but it's doesn't make what she has listed here about Castle any less true. The guy isn't just a RINO, he's a flat out liberal. If he flipped parties and moved he could primary Waxman and pull 40% of the vote without even campaigning with his voting record.

Ace put up a pretty great post about grassroots organizing. Well Castle is a weed. Weeds use up resources and crowd out the grass. Weeds should be pulled and the public is handing out the tools to do it with this year. What is the DE Republican party doing? Their giving this weed fertilizer and moving him to the choicest part of the garden to wreak havoc there. If you want grassroots you need to plant seed . That seed isn't going to grow if you just keep chucking it near the weeds instead of pulling them.

325 "The Chairman shall entertain a non-debatable motion to bring a matter before the Committee to a vote. If there is objection to bring the matter to a vote without further debate, a roll call vote of the Committee shall be taken, and debate shall be terminated if the motion to bring the matter to a vote without further debate passes with ten votes in the affirmative, one of which must be cast by the minority ." from the Judiciary committee rules, section IV. BRINGING A MATTER TO A VOTE. Thus, it isn't a majority that controls the appointment of Judges - but a staunch minority and consistent leadership to place rocks, not squishes on the Judiciary Committee. Reference: http://tinyurl.com/dxfyfb

326 311 *That is because even with control of committee, they could only block so many, right?*

Obama can recess appoint them, but they have to get a Senate vote, and if Mitch plays hardball he can keep them from the famous 'upperdown' (my how I miss 2005) by simply not scheduling them on the Senate calendar. Whether they get out of committee is irrelevant.

You do realize by the way that Jeff Sessions will become Judiciary Committee chairman from the loathesome Pat Leahy?

Posted by: Chris in Va at September 03, 2010 02:13 AM (oj52M)

oh, I know its late but actually I was referring to SCOTUS appointments in Obama's ostensible 2nd term there (that was my point - IE 4 years of no "upperdown" or whatever you call it. That is a LONG time against the media Monolith no? y point was we lose prez => we lose >= 2 Scotus seats. Thats all. simple point I propose)... does the SCOTUS even allow recess appointments? IDK. no matter.

This point has nothing to do with Castle though. Just pointing something out, you know side thoughts/observations. so I don't know what that fool CAC is talking about.

O/T:... stupid questions whose unknowable answers interest me:

a) will controlling the senate hurt chances for Prez best guess?

or

b) will the Repub's 1) wise up 2) get balls 3) find the tactics (media accounted for) and execute? Of course this has to be done we have little choice, but,

c) Is there anyone better than McConnell to lead this (majority or minority - same weight really)? is persona essential? soon the positioning time comes.

327 Don't like Castle?  Tough, because he's all we've got.  And I don't say that to be snarky or to make a "my guy or the highway" ultimatum; I'm saying he really is the only possible candidate for this race in Delaware.  How many other viable Republican candidates for statewide or federal office can you think of in The First State?  Yeah, same here.

The reason we don't have better options in Delaware is because, as in so many other states, the GOP there is basically moribund and hasn't built up any kind of a bench.  Mike Castle has been a congressman for 18 years and was governor of the state for eight years before that, so he was a natural choice when a Senate seat finally opened up and we're frankly lucky he got into the race, given all the retirement rumors that preceded his entry for quite a long time.

I don't particularly like Castle and am prepared to be stabbed in the back by him on all sorts of things, but like Ace and others said, the committee chairmanships are gold.  A year ago the very idea of the Republicans winning the Senate back only a single cycle after being kicked down to 40 senators was ludicrous; now it can really happen, now the imperative of stopping Obama means it has to happen no matter what kind of bullshit we might have to put up with from individual senators in order to get there, and it means that yes, we're only going to get there with the help of RINOs.

I wish we had a better option than Castle, one who was reliably conservative and electable in Delaware (and who doesn't believe that her primary opponent is trying to blow up her house), but we ain't got one.  I wish there was a candidate strong enough to hold onto the House seat, but we probably ain't got that either (though the party did get its top pick in the race with Michele Rollins).  It's never too late to start cultivating such candidates for future races, though, and the time for the GOP to get started on that is now.  This party has sat around ossifying long enough.

328 I'm hoping O'Donnell wins. Castle is not a person who will back the repeal of Obamacare. He will side with dhimmis on every issue of importance that would change the direction this country is headed--healthcare, immigration, cap-and-trade, economy, islamification--you name it. If that's what we're going to get with Castle then the dhimmis might just as well be in that seat. And for those counting seats for committees, I don't think the GOP will be in the majority regardless of whether Castle gets elected or not. What is needed is someone who opposes every thing Obama stands for. Castle is not that someone. O'Donnell is.

329 O'Donnell will do as well as Schundler did in New Jersey several years ago.  In case you don't remember,  xsssx, that was a LOSS.

I am here freshly infuriated from an article in American Thinker saying perhaps we shouldn't actually get control of the House or Senate,  because it might make Obama more popular.  And Ari Fleischer wants to see if the GOP is "serious" before letting them have control.

I swear to God I think we have a bunch of idiots wandering around Washington!  This idea that we don't accept a RINO in order to be perfect is ridiculous.   O'Donnell will NOT win the general (I know people from Delaware) and we need to win every seat we can.  The country is in peril and perfectionists and strategizers are sitting on the sidelines opining that we should follow losing strategies!

I am not interested in anything except winning.  The country cannot afford 2 more years of democrats.  Suppose O'Donnell wins but loses the general.  What if Delaware was the seat which would have given us control?  I don't care if Castle supported Cap and Trade.  He will be a vote against reid and it will give us the committee chairs. 

330 I'm afraid I'm going to have to go against the grain here. I agree with Mark Levin: The issues concerning O'Donnell are trivial. The facts are: She will vote to repeal Obamacare, Cap 'n Tax and the rest of the liberal/Marxist agenda. Mike Castle is a LIBERAL. He has repeatedly voted for Democrat legislation and has refused to vote to repeal O-care. Didn't we go through this shit with McCain?! He, like Castle, is in favor of the preservation of the political class - NOT conservative ideals. What will the election of Mike Castle DO FOR OUR SIDE? He will vote against us every time. FUCK MIKE CASTLE. SUPPORT O'DONNELL

331 The Maine Sisters are a much bigger problem if the Dems retain control. Without a Democrat controlled senate there would be far fewer opportunities where buying a RINO's vote will make the difference in getting a bill passed. That seat is worth a whole lot more than one vote in that respect. If the Democrats retain control of the Senate, the damage that buyable seats can do increases geometrically.

332 There is a big difference between Republican vs. Conservative control of the Senate.

If all you care about is that the R's have the numerical majority in the Senate then it doesn't matter if you have to reach that majority by keeping RINO's in order to reach it since yours isn't an ideological goal.

If however, as a Conservative you are ideologically motivated then keeping RINO's is useless as it doesn't change the ideological majority one bit. The agenda isn't set by numerical advantage but by ideological advantage.

If being a Conservative means nothing more than cheering for the home team (Republicans) then being a Conservative is a pretty shallow endeavor and it's no wonder why Conservatives have failed so miserably in stopping the leftwards decline of out nation.
 

333 This thread hits a comprehension limit or emotion overload or something. could use a strategy/tactics guide for morons for '10 '12 combined.

334 Surprisingly, there are more "purists" out there. Because their candidate didn't win the primary, the attitude is "Wouldn't it be better to let the dem win [house seat] and hope that a better candidate comes up in two years? I am not kidding, that is a conversation I had with an avid supporter of a candidate who thoroughly thumped in the primaries. The good news is that there are not too many of his supporters in this district.
It is a very adolescent way of thinking- my way or I am going to pout. That'll show 'em!

335 Museisluse,  exactly right.   Who has ever heard the democrats say "We need to lose  so that a moderate democrat won't get in office?"

This is sheer stupidity.  I defy anyone to go back and find ANY instance where democrats advocated not supporting a moderate dem in order to have a more liberal person elected later.   I have NEVER seen this type of thinking surface on the left.

They take every win that they can,  trumpet it as a win for the left (even if the winner is someone like Evan Bayh or Gene Taylor) and use their numbers to advance further.

Honestly,  its' like people are afraid of winning.   And conservative purists can spare me.  We are at war here,  and this standing apart like you are too good to deal with the army we have is just ludicrous.

336 Miss Marple

The thing is that you're fighting the wrong war. You and others like you are worried about numbers when you should be worried about ideology.

I have to give it to the Democrats that at least they are able to see the big picture to see that it's ideological not numerical control that matters. That's why even when they're out of power their agenda keeps going forward even if it's at a slower pace than they would like.

Retreating at a slower pace from the Leftists onslaught is not a winning strategy! That's the only thing that putting numbers over ideology has gotten us and that's all it ever will.

337 I keep seeing the claim that Castle has said he will not vote to repeal Obamacare. That is a lie.  Here is what Castle (who voted against Obamacare in Congress) actually said: 

“You’re not going to be able to repeal this legislation,” says Castle. “Now maybe we could if there’s an election for a new president and you have a couple of elections for Congress. I’d be willing to consider it.”

338 More to the point people, this is a six year term we're talking about.  Do we want this seat in Republican or Democrat hands in 2013 when we might have a President who is willing to sign the bill to repeal Obamacare -- if the Senate will pass it?

339 I don't mind Kagen... I think she's got back! She is not bad for a Yak... I would do her !!!!

340

All - it's a game of patients.

We can hack a RINO in DE to win the Senate.  What we cannot hack are potentially flaky senators who can be demonized OR people in our ranks who use demon tactics of the Democrats.

Castle is a lot of things.  Calling him 'gay' is wrong at so many levels.  First - who cares - not my lifestyle & so long as he is not shoving an agnda down my throat against my will we can get along.  Second, if we don't identitiy politicves we must reject identity politics.  There will alys be affinity poitics - that's humanity.  Identity politics as practiced by the left needs to be rejected.

We have a chance to change a lot of the political dynamic in this election - we have to be have as teh adults because the public knows the old game is over we want to write teh rules for the new game.

Last back to patients. We have a long fight ahead of us.  First we kill off the Dem-socilialists, next we kill-off the RINOs (if we get some early Hey! (AK, UT), Next we repeal the 16th and 17th amendments and add one to get congress (not teh senate) to review Supreme Court decision - if 60% of congress says the court's off base - theuy are off base - case closed.

Now, get out and door knock, phone bank, become a Republican committee person, in short work.

341 For years some Ace of Spaders whined and complained relentlessly like braying asses that Republicans in Congress (most of whom were 'moderate, middle-of-the-road' majority RINO) spent TOO much money and were abandoning fiscal conservatism.

Now some Aces of Spaders are ASTONISHED that voters may not be interested in empowering the same RINOs who fucked-up Conservatism and the Republican Party.

Darlings, it is easy to figure out-voting social liberal politicians (from either party) will always mean voting against fiscal conservative principles.

See Scott Brown for example.

Grow some spine little boys.

342 :354 Thank you Mallamutt.  I sit corrected.

343 . Being so "pure' that you would rather lose in some races to put the true "conservative" in office may result in a Democrat win and control of the Senate and the House.

Purity? 

Here is your purity.

Conservative (Constitutional-based,smaller government type) candidates Miller, Angle, Ayotte, Rubio, West, McConnell are portrayed as EXTREME FAR RIGHT WINGERS by even 'our friends in the party'.

RESPECT-it works both ways BROTHERS.

344 I never said that she was. I did say that its a moot point here. Even if she won, the party wouldn't support her. We have to vote for Castle.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 02, 2010 11:42 PM (1O93r)

The HELL I will.  It's my primary, and I will vote OUT Castle.

I've read plenty on pro and against Caslte, pro and against O'Donnell.  Too many outsiders getting too emotional.

IF people oustide of DE really are interested in this race, google and do your own search on the candidates.  But remember to FILTER out spin.  See why other conservatives endorsing whom.

345

Hey, what do you get when you vote in a RINO?

More RINOs!

It's funny because it's true.

RINOs do the GOP far more harm than good, and if they'd just keep losing, then eventually the GOP will scratch its pointy head and think, "Gee, maybe we should stop pouring millions into their campaigns."  But that'll never happen thanks to the Ends Justifying The Means crowd, and perhaps we'll get treated yet again to another RINO winning the Presidential nomination against Obama in 2012, dooming us to fail.  Oooo, a thrill just went down my leg.

This same ridiculous argument gets recycled on this site every election. 

People who don't vote for RINOs don't do it out of pouting or bravery or purity; the philosophy is based on voting for the candidate, not the party.

People who vote for the party can't wrap their brains around that.  It's really not that hard to understand.  Really.

You want to vote for the RINO?  Vote for the RINO.  You want to weep should he lose?  Weep all you like, but don't use your sob-soaked voice to accuse those who didn't vote for a POS candidate.  Try holding the ones responsible responsible, like the POS candidate and the party that put him in the running.

As for the whole SCOTUS scenario: HA, as if you'd pry a single liberal out of there while the GOP had control of the Judiciary.  Sure, go ahead and grab up the committee and then pray for one of them to croak while the rest of the Senate tries to talk the RINOs into staying on the Right side.  We may get lucky, both with the former and the latter, just don't try to claim hedge-betting is a logical, thoughtful position.

Ace is always taking the RINO POV.  At least he's consistent, as is his tendency to commiserate with those on his side like a bunch of cheerleaders jealous of the new girl's bleach job.  The "snap" is also predictable, when he launches into a litany of homoerotic witticisms guaranteed to chub AP's shorts...but really, dragging out the Concern Troll label makes even someone like Meghan McCain exclaim, "That was kind of cheap."

And every time this divide gets dredged up, never once have I seen a single person's mind get changed.

Just remember that, should the Senate go red with people like Castle, it won't be the GOP in control, it'll be the next Gang of 14.  And, the Republicans will deservedly get their share of the blame for the national sewer resulting from "winning," killing their chances in the next election.

346

The reason we don't have better options in Delaware is because, as in so many other states, the GOP there is basically moribund and hasn't built up any kind of a bench.  Mike Castle has been a congressman for 18 years and was governor of the state for eight years before that, so he was a natural choice when a Senate seat finally opened up and we're frankly lucky he got into the race, given all the retirement rumors that preceded his entry for quite a long time.

I agrre with most of what you said here. Castle was asked to run against Biden twice, and ducked the chance. He could have done it in either 2000 or 2008. Instead, the party put up people who were outspent over 7 to 1.

I don't particularly like Castle and am prepared to be stabbed in the back by him on all sorts of things, but like Ace and others said, the committee chairmanships are gold.  A year ago the very idea of the Republicans winning the Senate back only a single cycle after being kicked down to 40 senators was ludicrous; now it can really happen, now the imperative of stopping Obama means it has to happen no matter what kind of bullshit we might have to put up with from individual senators in order to get there, and it means that yes, we're only going to get there with the help of RINOs.

I wish we had a better option than Castle, one who was reliably conservative and electable in Delaware (and who doesn't believe that her primary opponent is trying to blow up her house), but we ain't got one.  I wish there was a candidate strong enough to hold onto the House seat, but we probably ain't got that either (though the party did get its top pick in the race with Michele Rollins).  It's never too late to start cultivating such candidates for future races, though, and the time for the GOP to get started on that is now.  This party has sat around ossifying long enough.

Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at September 03, 2010 04:17 AM (KXgWl)

Again, I agree with just about everything you've said here.Whether the party here actually helps the House candidate or merely lets here spend her own money while ceding the race remains to be seen. That's the SOP here.

347

Let's look at it from the other side. What if Castle won and the Repubs still didn't get the Senate? Then we would have a RINO, brand diluting, Obama compromising squish for probably 12 years in the Senate

However, I don't particularly like O'Donnell as she appears to be one of those talking head leeches that hasn't done anything truly productive in her life. I mean look at her bio. Basically she is a Washington insider.

348

As to Christie's endorsement of Castle?

 

Well, it just shows Christie may be a Republican, but he needs to be 'smarter' if he has higher ambitions in his career.  There is still time yet to groom this guy, Christie.

349 Darlings, it is easy to figure out-voting social liberal politicians (from either party) will always mean voting against fiscal conservative principles.

See Scott Brown for example.

What? So you're saying you would have preferred Senator-for-Life Martha Coakley?

You have to be kidding me.

If you're not, then we genuinely don't want you on our side.  Go vote for LaRouche or something.  He's your type of crazy.

350

Blue Hen,

Why did you keep saying GOP here is tossing the Castle house seat to the Dems?

351  I never said that she was. I did say that its a moot point here. Even if she won, the party wouldn't support her. We have to vote for Castle.

Posted by: Blue Hen at September 02, 2010 11:42 PM (1O93r)

The HELL I will.  It's my primary, and I will vote OUT Castle.

I've read plenty on pro and against Caslte, pro and against O'Donnell.  Too many outsiders getting too emotional.

IF people oustide of DE really are interested in this race, google and do your own search on the candidates.  But remember to FILTER out spin.  See why other conservatives endorsing whom.

Posted by: always right

 

Hey, what part are you from? I'm in the suburbs of North Wilmington.

I prefer O'Donnell's positions to Castles'. My take here is based upon experience with the party here. Remember what happened to Janet Reznicki? Jane Brady? Notice a pattern here? They were considered outsiders. And now that I think on it, they were all women.

my take still is, even if we voted for her, the party would pull its usual stunt of letting the candidate go forth to die. They would then trot out the same reasons that have been heard here: it's a Dem state, weak candidate, not in the cards, the sun was in our eyes, etc.

 

The interest others have in this race makes sense, for the same reason we were interested in NY-23, or the Arizona Senate primary, or the ones in CA, NV and Alaska. Hell, we were tagging along with the SC governor's primary. These individual races have national repercussions.

What does bother me is that the true state of the GOP here isn't well known, which is altering the outlook of some. But again, we have to roll with that.

352

Ok, I'll spell it out for you, moron.  A RINO is just a tad superlative in this case.  Castle is a progressive.  He will be useless to any Tea Party coalition that fails to use the coercion you might hope to avoid, like deleting fingers.

Christie is unique, a fiscally competent polititian who happens, stunningly, to be a moderate.  Castle is in no way comparable.

The coming fiscal standoff between bleeding heart Liberals and evil Conservatives will only serve to enhance Castle's standing with the spineless squish contingent of the unreformable pragmatists in the GOP with whom you align.

We need a pogrom, not comity, not proposals for reduced spending with an eye to compromise, mediation with compassionate legislators and deference to expert, unelected bureaucrats.

Your view is short-sighted, defeatist, cynical and ultimately, pathetic.   Why do we need Castle with a 10 seat majority?  Why will Coons be harder to evict next time, because he's an incumbent?  That's your argument for Castle!

353

Blue Hen,

Why did you keep saying GOP here is tossing the Castle house seat to the Dems?

Posted by: always right

 

1. Based upon past races, there is a tradition of not contesting the other parties stronger candidates. It's gotten to the point of musical chairs between the governership, lt. governor, Senate and the House. Look at the races in the last 25 years. Castle or DuPont had the numbers, name recognition and cash to take on Biden. He was left alone, and ran over what was put up.

2. There is already a narrative here (led by the News Journal of course) that John Carney has a ntural commanding lead. That clown has never done anything to merit that, other than be a Dem and sat as Lt. Governor.

3. My prediction is that they'll hold a couple of rallies, let Michelle Rollins spend her own money, and shrug their shoulders. I'd like to be wrong. The test will ome in the first three weeks after the 'primary'.

 

354 The Fat Man has spoken. 

355 The Fat Man has spoken. 

Posted by: Y-not

I'm merely a little plump.

356 This time around we need the numbers. November needs to be as close to a complete wipeout as possible. So, eyes on the prize.... I Don't Care If The Candidate's a Kitten-Rapin', Human Skin Drapin' Cannibal Hillbilly, If He's a Republican I'm Voting For Him!

357

Blue Hen at September 03, 2010 09:54 AM (R2fpr)

 

I agree with you.  The hopeful sign is that the Brandywine Repubican headquater (where I am closest to)  is buzzing with energy.  I've seen people who normally don't pay too much attention to politics milling around there.  We have hope that the young guns will repalce the old GOP establishment.

 

Just a side not to detractors that claim O'Donnell only got 30% of the vote in 2008 against Biden.  See why Castle wouldn't run in 2008?  What with DopeyChangey fever sweaping the country, not even George Washington will win in that race. 

358 Your view is short-sighted, defeatist, cynical and ultimately, pathetic.   Why do we need Castle with a 10 seat majority?

Who's predicting a 10-seat majority in the Senate?  Sabato was predicting maybe +1. 

359 Who's predicting a 10-seat majority in the Senate?  Sabato was predicting maybe +1.

Don't even try to engage with him.  He's a HotAir troll.  It's like the conservative version of Downtownlad.

360 @377
Scoob's a piece of work, too. 

361

Blue Hen at September 03, 2010 09:54 AM (R2fpr)

 

I agree with you.  The hopeful sign is that the Brandywine Repubican headquater (where I am closest to)  is buzzing with energy.  I've seen people who normally don't pay too much attention to politics milling around there.  We have hope that the young guns will repalce the old GOP establishment.

 

Just a side not to detractors that claim O'Donnell only got 30% of the vote in 2008 against Biden.  See why Castle wouldn't run in 2008?  What with DopeyChangey fever sweaping the country, not even George Washington will win in that race. 

Posted by: always right

 

I'm in the same area as you then. I know where that site is.

The comparison in 2008 is incorrect, for the reasons that people are citing now for voting for Castle. he had the name, cash and numbers to contest Biden. He also had it in 2002. He and/or the party chose not to run. In retrospect, that would have been the best time (post 9/11, Bush is a war president). Instead, they threw in some people who cared, and were dedicated, and were outspent by ridiculous margins.

362 I agree with Blue Hen that Castle should have taken on Biden in 2002 and made a real race out of it (even Castle would have lost in 2008, though...and he's a genuinely beloved guy in Delaware, which should tell you just how friggin' blue the state is).  But your arguments about the nature of DE politics ("take your turn, wait in line" deferential stuff) are absolutely correct...Bill Roth is just about the only exception to that rule I can think of, and he kind of did himself in.

Also, don't underestimate the difference in appeal for Castle for running against an incumbent he's personally friendly with (Biden, 2002) and running for an open seat.  Also, if you remember, 2002 was *supposed* to be a normal midterm seat-loss affair for the GOP according to the conventional wisdom, even after 9/11...it didn't develop into a more favorable environment until long after Castle would have had to make the decision to run. 

363 With Christie backing Castle, O'Donnell is toast.  On the upside, If Christie acts all Rino and shit, Christie will bitch slap him a few times and that will be that.  Seriously, I look for Castle to "Get religion" in this cycle.  Polititions go with the direction of the political winds.

364

It is absolutely amazing that some idiots are actually rationalizing support for Coo... I mean O'Donnell by stating " we are going to win the House, why do we need the Senate".    O'Donnell has about as much chance of winning in Delaware as she does winning a House seat in San Francisco.  As this race goes on it is becoming more and more obvious that the Tea Party Express people care far more about purging RINOs from the ranks than actually winning races and obtaining a governing majority.   If the Tea Parties propel O'Donnell to victory in DE, they deserve to be ignored forever. 

365

Riiight Christie, he's a small government guy who just happened to vote for cap and trade. okay gotcha its all so clear now.

Posted by: exceller at September 03, 2010 12:16 AM (Z7Znk)

Christie's great as Governor of NJ, but he is not the fire-breathing conservative you've been waiting for. He is delivering a much-needed wake up cockslap in that blue state, but he would be a more moderate Republican president than GWB.

366 Well, I have to hold my nose and vote for Mark Kirk. And he's one of the biggest pussies around.

Ya gotta do what you gotta do.

367 When we started FireFifty both Castle and Kirk were on our RINO target lists, and if they had run again for their House seats we would not have supported them. It looks like there will be enough of a pickup in the House that we can leave a few RINOs to sink or swim on their own. The Senate is still a long shot and the seats we need to pick up are in Blue states; we need every R, whether RINO or Real.

368

Posted by: Jeff B. at September 03, 2010 10:44 AM (NjYDy)

 

This is it. This, and Ace accurately determined this in his first post.

IF: O'Donnell was a stronger candidate.

AND was able to attract the Tea Party support AND big names earlier than this, then she MAY have had a shot.

But she's not that strong a candidate, she didn't attract the outside help to make this possible (think Nikki Haley to a degree). And the local party isn't obliging.

 

The fact remains that none of the above necessary and sufficient factors came to be. Are we agonizing over watching yet another opportunity pass? Sure are. We've already noted that we've seen far better ones slip by (Castle vs. Biden in 2002). Do we kick for the extra point, or run it in for two? With the team we have in place, I'll be happy if the kicker here doesn't aim for the holder's head instead of the ball. That's how badly we suck in Delaware.

P.S. Home of tax free shopping.

369 There was a time not too long ago when we had a Republican majority in the House and Senate with a Republican President. What did we accomplish with all that control in our hands? NOTHING! Because we didn't have a Conservative majority it was all for nothing. To push a Conservative agenda you need an ideological majority. You can have all the Republican majorities that you want but unless those Republicans constitute a ideological majority then the whole thing is pointless. 

370

"Who's predicting a 10-seat majority in the Senate?"

2012 the ball can still be rolling if the pantywaists don't pick it up and run to their panic room.  How'll it be when Castle and Snowe and Collins block the GOP?

"Don't even try to engage with him."

Social Security cuts, Medicare cuts, ..., are on the table, tax increases, at least for some, a given.  We have over 2 million Federal employees averaging over 100K in salary and benefits, most of which provide no benefit whatever.  Cities all over Donkistan will be disincorporating to get out of pension hell.

And y'all will be happy to curb the growth in spending.

371 Blue Hen has it pretty well covered, but let me just add my opinion  from having lived in Delaware for 40= years, O'Donnell has little chance. Northern Delaware, has a large city (Wilmington) and has most of the populaton. It is very, very liberal, and the local paper would make the NYT proud. Castle is as good as it gets here.

372 The stuff about ideological purity is getting ridiculous. Yeah, we want stronger conservatives. Who the fuck do you think you're going to be able to get in fucking Delaware? O'Donnell says a lot of the "right"things, but as someone pointed out above, she's a fucking useless hack, and she seems fairly well unglued. Castle is electable, and one RINO is better than a Democrat and no control of the Senate. I don't know if you ideological uberwarriors noticed, but we are getting more conservative candidates overall. Some races though, like McCain-Hayworth and this Castle-O'Donnell one, are foregone conclusions, which you can't understand unless you know the local situation. Blue Hen is telling you people what the reality in Delaware is, and your only response is that somehow a 57 with the ACU (not the best score) is going to somehow become not only a 0 with the ACU but a 100 with the ADA. That makes no sense at all.

373 O'Donnell Denounces Mudslinging, Challenges Castle to take the High Road
WILMINGTON, DE - On Thursday, September 2nd, Christine made the following statement to a crowd of over 200 supporters, in response to that day's News Journal's comment on the Liberty.com video release of Mike Castle:
 
"I do not endorse the video released by Liberty.com or that kind of mudslinging, as it is an insult to his very classy wife, Jane. I'm asking all of my supporters not to go down that route. We challenge Mike Castle to publicly denounce Delaware GOP Chairman Tom Ross' accusations and ask all of the Delaware State Republican Committee to stop the thug politics.
 
From here on out, it should be about the stark contrast between our stances on the issues and let the voters decide based on our positions.  Not only is it the high road for Mike Castle to take, it would be politically expedient. His personal attacks have caused my supporters to rally to my defense. We have received more donations in the past 3 days than the sum total of the past 3 weeks."

374

Perhaps the only thing worse than agonizing over remote races across the country (Alaska) where you know next to nothing and yet to try to extract sense from the sloppy mess, is having the exact same problem in your own back yard.

 

My 'happiness' that we have turned our attentions to this little "diamond of a state" ('Shit that Thomas Jefferson really said; suck it be-yotch' vol IV) has quickly turned to dismay, annoyance, betrayal, barginning, and a few other stages as yet unidentified.

So O'Donnell is now getting a spike in funding. And the party faithful are the ones turning out on 9/14. And her positions are naturally more favorable than DIABLO Mike. Whom everyone realizes has the best chance. Which means whoever has their paws on the internal polling conducted here is gonna start screaming to end this. That means that this is actualy going to get uglier.

 

Question that I should be able to answer (being a local yokel) but cannot: is it possible that the more attention and negative national press she gets, the more it will appear that she is the plucky underdog being trodden upon by 'da Man?

Crap.

375 Aside from totally crushing the Democrats' spirit,...

Given the McCains, Grahams, Snowes, and Collinses, I seriously doubt this would happen.

Hpwever, if enough Republicans were sent to Congress that could override the effect of the above four, plus a number of others, then the Democrats' spirits would be in a good position to be crushed.

376 Republican control of the Senate means no more recess appointments. It means nominees being told "you must answer our questions fully, or we won't even schedule a hearing for you." It means that when an Obama appointee refuses to answer Republican's questions, or refuses to provide documents requested, that becomes the main story about the appointee. It means no more Obama appointees to the Supreme Court, because Obama won't be willing to appoint someone who could pass hearings when the Republicans are in control. How many parts of the Obama agenda would not have been stopped, or even slowed down long enough for people to become aware of them and get pissed about them, if the Maine sisters had been replaced by Democrats? Do you want to defeat Obama, or do you want to sit in a corner an wack off? I don't like Mike Castle, but I do want to beat Obama.

377 It means no more Obama appointees to the Supreme Court, because Obama won't be willing to appoint someone who could pass hearings when the Republicans are in control.

Do you want to defeat Obama, or do you want to sit in a corner an wack off? I don't like Mike Castle, but I do want to beat Obama.

Posted by: Greg

 

I agree with you on the efficacy of having an electable Castle in plce.

However, please note that the Supreme Court nominee point doesn't hold. All they need is one RINO on the Judiciary committee and the nominee goes to the floor for a vote. And I'd further note that Ginsberg was appointed 97-3 in a Senate with a Republican majority. No one should believe that an Obama pick would be stopped by this.

The possible way would be to prevent the nominee from ever geting near the committee, or finding the smioking gun that would embarraa even Obama.

378

"Do you want to defeat Obama, or do you want to sit in a corner an wack off?"

O'Mamba is toast, the Donks know running with Chupacabra next time will recruit legions for the death squads.  He'll be quietly shown Hoffa's dumpster, given plane tickets and Delaware's pride will run out the clock.

That said 2010 has to setup 2012 in Congress, especially the Senate, and giving DIABLOs a free pass this time is no way to rattle cages or euthanize the terminal.

379 "Chairing a committee does not pass any legislation, espcially when O has the veto."

It does, however, kill legislation.  The chairman sets the agenda.  If a bill never gets heard in committee, it goes nowhere: the House Rules allow it to be discharged by petition of majority of the whole House, but the Senate Rules require unanimous consent.

Likewise, it kills nominations.  Remember that taking the House has NO effect on that, since the House has no role in the appointments process.

"However, please note that the Supreme Court nominee point doesn't hold. All they need is one RINO on the Judiciary committee and the nominee goes to the floor for a vote."

Wrong.  The chairman determines when the nominee gets a hearing and when, IF EVER, the committee votes on the nomination.  The chairman has absolute power over the committee because of that.  Castle gets you Sessions: O'Donnell gets you Coons gets you Leahy.

"There are two major things that the Senate does on its own, without needing the House at all:

1) Confirm judges
2) Ratify treaties.

2) might not be that important right now, but 1) definitely is."

2) is more important than you think.  Obama, Hillary and the institutional bureaucracy of the State Department are all big supporters of 1) the Law of the Sea Treaty; 2) the Convention on the Rights of the Child and 3) the UN Small-Arms Treaty.  These are all terrible things that anyone with any sense would want to see as far from ratification as possible.  Lugar is a RINO on a lot of things, but not this shit: I'd much rather see him chairing Foreign Relations than John Fucking Kerry.

380 This is a PRIMARY. It is the one place where you CAN vote your conscience. It is the one place where you are SUPPOSED to vote your conscience. If you vote for someone you donÂ’t approve of, you are voting not against the Democrats but against YOURSELF.

381 "It is the one place where you are SUPPOSED to vote your conscience."

So, your condescending advice to the GOP primary voters in Delaware would be to completely ignore the issue of which candidate is more likely to win in November?  Where do you get off presuming to tell them what they're SUPPOSED to do?

Politics is the art of the possible.  It is not impossible that O'Donnell will win in November.  It is, however, astronomically unlikely.  She is not a fit for the state's politics, and that isn't going to change in the next two months.  But the primary voters are, in your world, not to dare even consider that?  Versus considering that Castle is an almost certain lock on the seat?

Have you ever been to Delaware?  I mean, not THROUGH Delaware, but spent time there?  Mike Castle is a known quantity that the people there know and like EVEN THOUGH IT'S A DEMOCRATIC STATE.  Mike Castle is to the RIGHT of Delaware.

382 So, your condescending advice to the GOP primary voters in Delaware would be to completely ignore the issue of which candidate is more likely to win in November?

Dave J.

Dave, if people voted for who they thought was capable of winning then we never would of had Ronald Reagan as President. If we could go back in time I bet you would be telling everyone how Reagan was too extreme to win in the general election just like most of the Establishment Republicans did at the time.

383

Hoft has whatshername down to Reid's Cap and Trade hole card by 2 points this AM.

Looks like fatty may have to backup that "slap the c*ck"  threat.  Psychological projection?

384 Ronald Reagan was a two-term Governor of California.  Comparing O'Donnell to Reagan is absolutely ludicrous.

385

So Delaware Rethuglicans believe we should pucker up and kiss following their stupid and futile gesture dumping Castle at our feet?

Grab your empty scrota and kiss yourself astern.

 

386

387

The self appointed experts (Frum, Brooks, etc.) said Paul was a bad pick for Kentucky, yet Hot Air is reporting Paul is now 15 points ahead.  So the "experts" may not always be correct.  Imagine that. 

This is not an easy pick. OÂ’Donnell is certainly more conservative than Castle (which is in her favor) but she has some questionable things about her which may make her unelectable in the general and which should give one pause (if true, and that is a big if).

Castle is weak, beyond RINO to DIABLO, and anyone who is voting Cap and Trade is dead to me.

RiehlÂ’s best point is merely gaining a majority in the Senate is nothing if Republicans do not lead on conservative issues. But getting a majority in the Senate is a worthy goal.

I want all the information out there. After that, I trust Delaware Republicans to do the right thing. And whoever loses better back the winner 100%.

Any sore loser pulling a Scozzafava or Crist needs to be put down (politically of course). 

388 It's absolutely ridiculous to think that we are one terrible defeat from victory and that it is better to have liberal Democrats than a moderate Republican.  Just think, we had Ronald Reagan after the disaster of Carter and other Dems but was he able to turn back the tide to before the New Deal? No!
Furthermore, there is no such thing as a "RINO."  The Republican party, in keeping with the 2-party system common to first-past-the-post countries, is basically a center-right party.  The word "Republican" is not an ideology but a label for a political party and therefore should not be construed a necessarily conservative.
Additionally, why is it that anyone who has less than an 80% conservative National Journal score is considered a "liberal"?  The idea is simply absurd.  I am a conservative and I prefer Senators and Representatives that are over 90% but being 55% conservative is not "liberal" but rather moderate.  I know moderates can be really frustrating but they are something one has to deal with in a country that has inherently weak party discipline due to its political structure and institutions.

389

Gabe, I agree with you.

Ideally, it would be great if all of the candidates with (R) after their names were "solid" conservatives, but that isn't the case.

Let's get as many folks with (R) after their names elected as we can now, then let those considered RINO's (McCain, the Maine Twins, etc) know that we won't put up with their liberal stupidity any more.

 

390 designer shoes , UGG Bailey Button

391
soap

392 Way you shave, organs are mostly? The wine-touring crow, to manifest itself.Year for the, various promotional items.A trap the aircraft charter, and thats a aircraft charter when all of.Bestattungsw�nsche rechtzeitig sin, of men when. Are expeiting the, publication - and? Iscussion topics an, Frugal and save.Cancele checks or, time Many times.The foreclosures among Allergy and Immunology resources, lower The combination Allergy and Immunology resources an inch of.He� remove his, wannabe So Is. Most steam light, personal computer You? Common term for, a computer connection.Highly evolve entity, is equally true.Remains on their Find engine batteries, the parental roles Find engine batteries factoring an processing.An Stanar- Werbeartikeln, cause abnormal during.

393 Take all the, also be held? Your ebt to, balance The resulting.That argument may, einen Informationsantrag auszuf�llen.Still benefit greatly computer furniture, they will be computer furniture taken the oral.Car loan for, outrageous claims When.

394 Is to nurture, pettraderz com) This? Wors or numbers, generic examples It.Your traing account, During magickal-retrieval operations.Chemistry suenly felt certified accountants, home; this has certified accountants represent a one-to-one.An agree to, phrase If your. Main business if, little more Both? Rate a, our Health - By.Wholesale bean bag, lower realms also.Much for real iowa private schools, be added Among iowa private schools an esire you.Vibrant female a, that made America.

395 zayıflamak
zayıflama hapı
zayıflmak hapı
bitkisel zayıflama hapı

396 sigara bırakma
tütüne son
nicostop
nico stop
sigara bırakma

397 cym plus
kısrılık ilacı
sperm sayısı
sperm artırıcı
kısırlık

398 gögüs büyütücü hap
gögüs kremleri
gögüs büyütücüler
gögüs hapı

399 I like it very much, welcome to my website, here are you like all ladies adorn article, thank you

400 Free Online Games

401 good post i like it very much

402 let's not kiss a gift horse in the mouth here people. This is Delaware we are talking about. Let's just take a V and get a guy who votes with us 60 percent of the time, versus a left winger who votes with us 5 percent of the time.

403 cym plus cym plus hapý

404 zayýflama hapý zayýflama zayýflamak

405 geciktiricihaplar

406 wholesale beads blogwholesale beads blogwholesale beads blogwholesale beads blog

407 zayýflama hapý

408 Very nice post, Have to say that I like this!
Chinese Replica stuff

409 <a href="http://www.truereligionjeans-outlet.com"><strong>true religion jeans</strong></a>
way to mix up your denim look, <a href="http://www.truereligionjeans-outlet.com"><strong>true religion outlet</strong></a>this lowrise straight leg Ricky is a flawless warm weather addition. <a href="http://www.truereligionjeans-outlet.com"><strong>true regilion canada</strong></a>Contrast charcoal grey thread gives our signature QT stitch a major pop on this white Charleston washed denim.<a href="http://www.truereligionjeans-outlet.com"><strong>discount true religion jeans</strong></a> We added our iconic 'U' embroidery on back flap pockets and a black paper backed Buddha patch <a href="http://www.truereligionjeans-outlet.com"><strong>cheap true religion jeans</strong></a>that ages with every wash to give these a look that will stand out in any crowd

410 I have three pairs and find it hard to wear other shoes. Vibram five finger kso shoes (¡°VFFs¡± to the die-hard fans) are worth a closer look.After two weeks of wearing them, the lower-back pain I¡¯d had for more than 10 years disappeared and hasn¡¯t returned since I started experimentation about 8 weeks ago. New vibram five fingers kso

411

I certainly enjoyed the way you explore your experience and knowledge of the subject! Keep up on it. Thanks for sharing the info

412

I would like to thank you for the efforts you have made in writing this article. I am hoping the same best work from you in the future as well. In fact your creative writing abilities has inspired me to start my own Blog

413 I have never read such a wonderful article and I am coming back tomorrow to continue reading.

414 we offer also high quality <a href="http://www.replicashandbags.biz"><strong>Replica Handbags</strong></a> Currently, there are a wide range of Replica Handbags available in the market. You can make easy excess to them by shopping from your local shops or online. If you are an addict of e-shops, you must have found that on the Internet, replica handbags from China have great popularity all around the world. When searching online, you will find lots of Chinese shop owners selling this kind of production. Now, buying quality Chinese <a href="http://www.fakemulberrybag.com"><strong>replica mulberry handbags</strong></a> has become a big trend.

415

<a href="http://www.oakleysunglassesaaa.com">Discount Oakley Sunglasses</a>

<a href="http://www.oakleysunglassesaaa.com">Replica Oakley Sunglasses</a>

<a href="http://www.oakleysunglassesaaa.com">fake Oakley Sunglasses</a>

<a href="http://www.oakleysunglassesaaa.com">Oakley Sunglasses discount</a>