Comments on: Thanks, Pat Toomey!

By: Why Moderate Republicans Suck- REPOSTED | Republicans United.

Why Moderate Republicans Suck- REPOSTED | Republicans United. — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 18:48:30 +0000

[...] out of the party with their emphasis on issues like abortion and gay rights as litmus tests. As David Jenkins has reported, hard right conservatives have done what they can to get rid of GOP leaders that are deemed not [...]

By: Why Moderate Republicans Suck - Hip Hop Republican

Why Moderate Republicans Suck - Hip Hop Republican — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 15:14:25 +0000

By: Around The Web | The Progressive Republican

Around The Web | The Progressive Republican — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 04:35:55 +0000

By: Realist

Realist — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 15:26:08 +0000

Toomey Leads Specter by 21 Points

A new Rasmussen Reports poll in Pennsylvania finds Pat Toomey (R) crushing Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) in a GOP primary match up, 51% to 30%.

Key finding: Specter is viewed favorably by 42% of Pennsylvania Republicans and unfavorably by 55%.

OUCH!! I wonder if Chris Matthews is reconsidering.

By: ireign

ireign — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 13:40:09 +0000

I also wanted to point out that Wayne Gilchrest endorsed Obama. The fact that the Club for Growth endorsed a terrible candidate in the primary (as this was a district Republicans should have kept) shouldn’t detract from the fact that is justifiable anger that some of the Republicans that have been characterized as “moderate” have basically been with Democrats on most issues and have not been particularly loyal to the GOP and there is genuine anger at people like Gilchrest, Chafee, and Jim Leach. I don’t know a single southern Democrat in the House who endorsed McCain or Bush.

By: ireign

ireign — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 13:35:25 +0000

I agree with Chekote. The ACU ratings include a lot of fairly unimportant votes. The ACU ratings include a lot of procedural votes. Since even the most "mavericky" Senators vote typically with their party on procedural matters, a conservative Democrat is typically going to come out to the left of the a very liberal Republican even if the Democrat is far more conservative on substantitive issues.

As to Adam Yu's comments, he is correct that Republicans should support Specter but that is not the best argument. Specter, also did not support Bork and he has supported every Democratic judicial nominee. Specter was effective for Bush and probably will be effecitive in the future if Republicans gain the majority. However, being in the minority, he is probably not that effective (although to be fair, Hatch was terrible).

And yes there is no comparison between Lieberman and Chafee. A more apt comparison is Lieberman and Hagel. I only wished that Chafee opposed the GOP on only one foreign policy issue instead of opposing the whole GOP agenda.

By: Adam_Yu

Adam_Yu — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 12:14:09 +0000

Although, I have to say that Sen. Specter is not the “Democrat” many conservatives accuse him of being. An important issue for them to look at is the case of judicial nominees. He supported the confirmations of John Roberts and Samuel Alito. If Republicans can hold onto every current seat and even pick more up to regain the majorities they can influence more appointees. Don’t forget, Specter is the Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee and if the GOP is in the majority, he could regain the Chairmanship. He could be a good ally for conservative judicial appointments.

By: Adam_Yu

Adam_Yu — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 12:10:56 +0000

Mr. Jenkins is right on target. If Toomey becomes the Republican nominee, this seat will definitely fall into Democratic hands. And further strengthening the Senate Democratic Caucus. It is a shame that the Club for Growth undermined Republican candidates because they were not “conservative” enough to Mr. Toomey’s taste. The party and movement has to be adaptable and has to run candidates that are appealing according to different constituencies. Certain areas might want more moderate Republicans and others not. What is the point of running on so-called “pure” conservatistm? It does not sit well with some voters. Is this the way Toomey wants to change America for the better? Enacting better changes for America by losing more seats to the Democrats.

By: ottovbvs

ottovbvs — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 10:13:58 +0000

“Maybe particularly annoying RINOs and DINOs could be traded, e.g. Joe Lieberman to the GOP in exchange for Lincoln Chafee in 2006.
That way, both parties get rid of ideological heretics and dissidents.”

……Actually apart from the Iraq war and matters impinging on Israel Lieberman is a very reliable democratic vote. My guess is he will try to work his way back into the Democratic party before his next election which is nearly five years away. Not sure it will work because a lot of democrats who stuck with him in CT were appalled when he campaigned for McCain. Lieberman’s career will probably be over.

By: Chekote

Chekote — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 09:59:41 +0000

“For the record, I am a social and fiscal conservative, but I reject the notion that every Republican must march in lockstep.”

I am a fiscal conservative and social moderate. I am not asking every Republican to march in lockstep. However, you have to have binding principles. Moreover, if the party decides to make a stand – as the GOP did on the stimulus bill – you need to stand with it. So I have no use for him, Collins and Snowe. Also, please let’s drop the ACU ratings. There are just a few votes that really matter. That is how a candidate should be judged.