GOP must not sabotage themselves this November
By Nathan Inks on September 22, 2010 3:15 am / 5 comments
Nov. 2 will be a good day for Republicans — there is no doubt about that.
But leave it to the GOP to take what should be a phenomenal year electorally and start ruining races one by one.
Specifically, in the past week, Republicans have jeopardized what should have been two strong Republican victories: The Senate races in Delaware and Alaska.
The Senate race in Alaska was not so much the party’s fault as much as the fault of sore primary loser Senator Lisa Murkowski, a moderate who lost her primary race to conservative Tea Party candidate Joe Miller.
Murkowski announced that she would run as a write-in candidate, putting Miller in jeopardy of holding the Republican seat. For the good of the party, Murkowski should drop out and endorse Miller.
In Delaware, conservative Tea Party candidate Christine O’Donnell beat Congressman and former Governor Mike Castle for the GOP nomination to challenge Chris Coons. Castle, who had been labelled one of the most liberal Republicans in the House of Representatives lead Coons by at least 10 percent according to recent polls, whereas O’Donnell trails by more than 10 percent according to all recent polls, including one poll conducted after the primary.
Here, the conservative wing of the party, which was comprised of less than 5 percent of the total number of registered voters in the state, voted on principle while sacrificing electability.
If O’Donnell could win in November, I would have whole-heartedly backed her in the primary, but voting for the conservative does the GOP no good if that candidate does not end up getting seated in the Senate. A moderate Republican who, according to the American Conservative Union, votes conservative 52.49 percent of the time is better than a hardcore liberal such as Coons.
If the Republicans are going to make political gains in the future, they will have to realize that there are certain areas of the country, such as the Northeast, where moderates need to be nominated if the GOP is going to take those seats.
Luckily, it does not appear that Republicans were going to take control of the Senate anyway, but if the Delaware race does end up costing them the majority, those who backed O’Donnell in the primary “on principle” will be responsible for allowing the Democrats to stay in control.
Voting on principle is honorable, but in America’s two-party system, it can prove to be impractical at times, and electability of candidates must be taken into account.
Like us on Facebook
Recent Comments
- Kellie: We miss miss you Carolyn. You still are remember on the socc…
- anonymous: I know this girl was in the wrong, but, put yourself in her …
- : What is the standing cement block structure going to be for?…
- 5k: Solved the case!! …
- : SOLVED THE CASE …
AD LINKS
• Is your baby graduating CMU? Place a personal greeting and photo in CM Life's Baby Graduates special pages. Download the form here
• Contact local movers in Mount Pleasant to help with all of your moving needs.
• Download Campus Cash Coupons!
• Search for local apartments
• Add your link here





5 Comments
“Voting on principle is honorable, but in America’s two-party system, it can prove to be impractical at times, and electability of candidates must be taken into account.”
Mr. Inks, it is because American’s have STOPPED voting on principle that America has become a two-party system. O’Donnell will probably lose, but Castle would have voted similar to how Coons will vote in the Senate.
Hopefully, this November will be only the beginning of what needs to be done to clean house in Congress. RINO’s and liberals beware!
There should be proportional representation like in Europe, the parties would splinter in 3 or four parties reflecting true voter difference, and then would need to negotiate government programs. It would better reflect the will of the people.
I doubt it will matter if the Repubs win the senate. The president will veto every piece of republican crafted legislation that is sent to him. This president is not a pragmatist, he is a driven ideologue who refuses to understand he is not a king, but a servant of the people “all the people”.
Whether we have 49,50,51 Republicans, we're going to stop the socialism and marxism program of Barack Hussein Obama. We'll definitely win the House. The days of Obama are over. Then, we'll beat him in 2012…we're going to get this country back on the conservative side like it was during Reagan's years. Going to cut the wild spending and stopping socialism.
It's a neat trick trying to turn a pragmatic, “take what I can get” moderate into a liberal, let alone a Socialist, michmedia, but you just keep on trying. Aren't you just a little bit ashamed of using the Big Lie theory again and again, though? No matter how hard you shout, you're still wrong. It doesn't sound sincere anymore, so I wonder if even you believe the talking points from the radical right.