Comments on: GOP Not as Dead as Advertised

By: ATLconservative

ATLconservative — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 22:08:39 +0000

I agree, RU. Though Castle and Kirk aren’t our preferred “ideologically pure” Repubs, they’re easily-led squishes who side with us on most issues when Dems are in control, and always side with us when we’re running things and have strong leadership.

Just take a look at the ACU ratings cited by Right Reason above. Castle has a 52 lifetime rating, but he’s in the 20s since the Dems took Congress.

Our goal is strong conservative leadership, at all levels. Those with compromised principles will follow. Just look at Colin Powell…

By: dingo

dingo — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 20:04:15 +0000

The media has had a lot of fun with their “the GOP is dying” meme, but it was always a ridiculous argument. Not only does this country have a pretty strong two-party tradition, but the American people are also known for their preference for having checks and balances in government, and, most especially, for preferring politically divided government. Thus, with Dem super majorities obvious to all voters now, and with the Dems going crazy with their policies, a GOP resurrection was inevitable.

The GOP will most likely win both governorships up this year - NJ and VA. (Corzine is in especially bad shape - he can’t blame the GOP for NJ’s problems anymore, as they don’t control anything.) And they will likely pick up a large amount of House seats next year, and possibly some Senate seats as well. The more they campaign on checking Obama’s excesses - regardless of how personally popular Obama is - the more offices they will win.

By: realityunwound

realityunwound — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 18:26:48 +0000

what makes a guy like Castle or Kirk palatable is a strong unifying leader that builds bridges between strengths and minimizes weaknesses. A strong ideologically conservative party leader (Jim DeMint’s, or insert your favorite “true” conservative) then the lefties appear to be a rounding out influence, rather than the dominating voice, or one equal voice in the cacophony. That’s the kind of Reagan-esque leadership that leads to 49 state electoral landslides.

That’s what Obama has done, only he’s so far left, I’m starting to think of Hillary as a moderating voice in the party.

By: bs

bs — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 17:24:28 +0000

Yeah, Castle screwed up on C&T. But someone with an ACU rating that is that much higher than Biden is undoubtedly a step up for the GOP. Now if there was someone who was more conservative than Castle and who was a viable candidate, sure, we support ‘em over Castle, at least in the primary. But to refuse to support a Republican who can take the seat of the freaking Vice President would be a textbook case of cutting off one’s nose to spite their face.

By: Brian Faughnan

Brian Faughnan — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 17:09:45 +0000

Mike Castle is clearly no one’s definition of a conservative. However, he would be replacing a Senator (in Biden) who has a lifetime ACU rating of 14. Further, the internals of the poll show 46% of Delaware voters now identifying themselves as conservatives (http://www.susquehannapolling.com/DE_poll_5-5-09.pdf). That sounds like a lot to me, but I have not heard anyone challenge the accuracy of it.

So it may not quite be a case of voters turning to a conservative in the Reagan mold, but to me it still looks like a case of voters suddenly wanting much more conservative representation in DC.

By: IJB

IJB — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 17:05:38 +0000

The election of either won’t mark a “shift to the Right”, as much as it would indicate a shift to “somewhat less Left”.

Now, if Toomey wins in PA, or Rubio wins in FL, *that* would be significant…

By: Right Reason

Right Reason — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 16:54:15 +0000

Aftetr all, he’s one of the 8 Cap and Traitors. He has a lifetime 52.28 from the ACU, but a 20 in 2007 and a 28 in 2008.

His being ahead is more a rejection of the creation of a Biden dynasty, IMHO.