there was no input from the party outside the establishment party hacks who selected her…she is not supported by the voters of the party…only the bosses….why that’s so hard to understand is beyond me…

It’d be different if there were even the slightest evidence that she ws the best candidate out of the field she was chosen from…but she was/is not…there in lies the rub…you have a few party bosses deciding they know better than everyone else…and shoving an unacceptable candidate down Republican voter’s throats. The NRCC was dealt a bad hand by the NYGOP…and they’re doing the best they can in a bad situation…but Sessions…and Gingrich’s comments are absurd on their faces and I see no reason not to call them on it

The “Big Tent” analogy isn’t the correct one…the correct one is a MAGNET…we need to be a MAGNET that draws these independents in who are sick and tired of what’s going on in Washington—Fred Thompson

Senate Conservatives Fund House Conservatives Fund Michael Williams for Senate

Marco 2010 Toomey US Senate SarahPAC

Your procedural concerns are quite legitimate and in general are in accord with the positions held by most RedStaters. The moderators/directors throughout the last election cycle argued against 3rd party actions - and this is a Republican site.

However, all rules do have their exceptional circumstances, and several are operating here, and randy streu and others have been pointing out since the start of this election cycle.

In brief, party leaders picked the most liberal candidate in a district that is rather conservative on no discernable grounds other than a bizarre belief that running to the left of the Democrat is a winning path.

True, this is the prescribed procedure, but since leaders are representatives, not monarchs, when they go against their constituency, the constituency has the right to take back power.

In addition, New York is a state where a 3rd party (the Conservative Party) is a viable safety valve when the Republican Party leaders go off the rails, as they have here. So we’re not talking a futile protest vote, but a genuine possiblity to win.

Randy and other can fill you in on details since they are locals, but to sum, the old saying is true here, that this is the exception that proves the rule.

Fact: Hoffman ran first as a Republican.
Fact 2: Hoffman will caucus with Republicans.
Fact 3: CPNY has a history of working WITH Republicans, especially up here, so long as the Republicans aren’t betraying principle for politics. In fact, this break between the GOP and CPNY is a DIRECT result of the “Eleven’s” stupidity in choosing Scozzafava over one of several more palatable potential nominees.
Fact 4: Scozzafava has been actively and publicly courted by the Democrat party, and was mulling the switch before being selected as GOP nominee. But sure — SHE’ll caucus with Republicans. Whatever.

Likelihood: Hoffman will switch party affiliation TO REPUBLICAN on election in order to run the next as the Republican candidate.

A political body or party that has lost its way is never going to have power. Conservative principles provide the “soul” for the body. The GOP has been losing because it does not stand on principle and do anything different from the Democrats. Having nothing to distinguish one side from the other leads to exactly what we have today. The GOP has/had its’ opportunity. We will do what we can to support them, but first in primaries, we want the Conservative candidate. What is happening in NY-23 is an example of politics as usual from the GOP. Your vision of the GOP is an old one, and we are tired of it.

I don’t think we have to worry about a “destructive conservative schism.” The liberals in our party are the ones causing this, let them reap the “rewards” of that.