in detail, exactly what’s wrong with the ratings. As someone who has been critical of ratings in the past, I have to admit I’m pleased to see the case made.

The one point I didn’t see you make is that these metrics only track votes, they don’t go into detail on bill sponsorship, committee activities, authorship.. the sausage-making process, to use the old analogy.

Or, to put it in terms even someone voting based on a “voters’ guide”, if your guides’ method shows Ron Paul as a conservative, perhaps you need a better guide…

Mew

Is it too much to ask you to choose your battles, and candidate quality, wisely?

We sat right here and watched, after Erik himself had admitted Christine O’Donnel behaved idiotically, accusing the interviewer on a radio of show of being on the take from her opponent, and still endorsed her in the end. All so she could not only go on to defeat in a deep blue state, but give serious Tea Party candidates an undeserved reputation as flakes nationwide.

It would be impossible to quantify, but I suspect her antics may very well have cost us a few close races. Intangibles can be factors in politics, too.

Choose quality, and fight only on WINNABLE turf, please.

Yes. Wisconsin is purple-to-blue and he defeated an iconic incumbent, In 2010, if you could beat a strong candidate on neutral turf, you could probably pull it off against a bad candidate on hostile turf. I certainly think that kind of quality could carry the day against a fringe novice like Coons, even if the territory was bluer.

to just look over and see how Senator DeMint is voting and do the same instead of reaching across the aisle to hold hands with the enemy. Fortunately, Senator Sessions lines up pretty close to DeMint. Shelby not so much. It’s past time to vote him out.

only challenge incumbents in a state where a more conservative candidate can get elected. Like Indiana, Leave Collins and Snowe Alone. Reagan said take 80% when you can and come back for the other 20 later. we cant afford to damage ourselves by loosing moderates when a more conservative person cant win.

John McCain, and a few others will be very conservative when a liberal like Obama is in office. But he will be far less conservative when his own party is in office. It’s the old Maverick thing.

RINO, that is. It’s just as bad as neocon. Both are used to refer to someone not as conservative as me.

Going after some on this list is going to work against the goals of Republicans, and that is to elect Republicans. I saw it live last year in Colorado.

for both the National Journal and the ACU is either flawed or lazy when Jim Demint, Saxby Chambliss and John McCain are listed together with the same conservative scores.

Voting records don’t mean squat. It means they voted. John Cornyn is a RINO. When media puts out a polls its irrelevant. Its a skewed poll b/c the object of the poll anyway is to “guage” public opinion and “then” publish skewed poll results. John Cornyn is a Rino. He is a party man. He wants what the party to be able to control and “negotiate” compromises. Cornyn is also a natorious pork barrel spender, He supported Lisa Murkowski after she lost the primary. He didn’t support Rand Paul. He wanted Mike Castle … John Cornyn is not a true conservative. He’s a corrupt Politician and thats all.

RINOs and politicians in general will say and do anything to keep getting re-elected to keep the money rolling in. Did you know that insider trading IS NOT ILLEGAL for members of Congress and the Senate?

possible candidates, this whole discussion is nothing but mental masturbation.

The part about ratings is on point (and I’ve made it myself a zillion times), but the comments digress when the discussion goes beyond the obvious and the nuance about ratings.

“Senator X is a RINO”. Yeah, so what. Unless you (royal “you” dh, not you) have a potential candidate to discuss, there is no discussion. McCain for instance. I’ve never voted for him in a statewide election in AZ & I’ve been here since ’92. In ’10 he could have faced a very strong challenge from Shadegg or Flake but there was no organized recruitment of either of them so JDH stepped up and filled a hole. Worst possible candidate, a waste of money, time and resources. Snowe or Brown? Got a name? Because without specifics I’ve gotta say we won’t do better and while I’m perfectly happy to see either of them go away in a primary, I’m not perfectly happy to spend resources we certainly won’t have in ’12 jousting at windmills and weakening a winning candidate for a loss in the general. Unless you’ve got a credible candidate – see Indiana and Texas – we don’t do better than the incumbent and I’m personally good with the incumbent.

There are lots of people I’d love to see lose in a primary, but if we don’t have recruitment well ahead of the election cycle, we’re just jousting at windmills. Lindsey Graham anyone?

McCain disguised himself for the electorate, and is once again acting up, reverting to his old habits. Which is why it is vital to defeat, via a primary, Lugar and Hatch. If they are elected, it will be the last terms for both, and as such they will have ZERO accountability to the voters. They can do whatever they want, and they can do considerably damage. I expect that McCain and Graham ( for Lindsay is effectively a lame duck..there is no way he survies a primary) will combine to cause significant problems for conservatives in the Senate.

I was not surprised to see him show 100 percent in the ACU scoring. The rating I saw last year — the early part of the year — was ACU 95-point-something-or-other, one of the highest scores in the Senate at that time. He is running again in 2012, and should have a fairly smooth campaign in Alabama, which went even redder(is that a word?) in 2010. The dark side will throw some piece of cannon fodder in the listings, but with things as they are here now, he should have pretty smooth sailing. He has had very few votes with which any good conservative could disagree, and in a flipped Senate he would be a key player on Judiciary — which may be where he’ll be most needed should any supreme court seat come up.

as an example of John McCain’s numerous betrayals.
I think that moment was far more defining (and damaging) than most in the GOP realize.
Social Conservatives had been rallied for the 2002 and 2004 elections and worked tirelessly to give Republicans control of the U.S. Senate for the purpose of stopping the unconstitutional filibuster of judicial appointees. This issue was core to them as they saw judicial activism chipping away at the culture of our nation. To them, culture and country are indelibly linked.
When McCain pulled his Judas along with his sycophant Lindsey Graham to sell out for political expediency, Social Conservatives left the party in droves. Argue if you wish, but it is the hard truth. Social Conservatives have never really come back and the huge loss in 2006 started with them leaving in 2005. To further illustrate the point, take a look at the 2008 election returns with emphasis on demographics. It is clear who stayed home.

Just a quick thought. Incumbent Republicans implies that all previously elected individuals who belong to the Republican party are equal because there is an R next to their name.

Legacy republicans separates those who have been here before the shifting paradigm and those elected since then.

The term “legacy” could prove a valuable tool for conservatives since it implies, not so subtlety, that it isn’t only Republican freshmen that are on probation.