Where was it for Lincoln Chafee, Arlen Spector, Pataki, McCain, and now Crist, Hutchinson, Snowe, and Collins? These along with people like Scozzafava are little to no guarantee against voting for the same Liberal policies you mention.

These idiots continue to acquiesce, moderate, and “negotiate” to make deals with the likes of Pelosi, Reid, and Obama out of some sense of “gotta get something done.” Well, in my book then why bother having an R next to your name at all.

These types of people have no interest in “defeating” liberal policies, they only “hope” to “change” them a bit so that they appear bi-partisan. These types of republicans have already destroyed the party… we’re trying to rebuild it, again!

would know how adamant you are about supporting Republican candidates, and no third party formation. Except as it has been made clear here, in very select circumstances. A win by Dede would still be a loss for the GOP, he just doesn’t get it.

All he sees is a letter by the candidate’s name and hasn’t looked at anything the candidate has said. Hoffman talks about taking back the party. Sure, he’s running on a C ticket but he’s a Republican of the kind we need.

The Republican Party is doing a fine job of destroying itself by not listening to the base. I will vote for the candidate that best reflects my value and if there isn’t one I’ll do a write in. In spite of very eloquent and persuasive arguments by Newt and other party leaders, the train has left the station and is gaining momentum, to late to stop it now.

that his name is Douglas J. Rains. Anyone got an anagram filter to see if the letters can be re-arranged to spell Newt?

Who will stand on either hand and keep this bridge with me?

We’re not talking about saving our souls, we’re talking about electoral politics and 3rd party runs in a 2 party country.

Obama, et al, why did they chose a candidate who is more likely to vote with Obama than her own party?

I recently did a search of the results of the 1992 election. Most articles still extant indicate that Perot’s impact on Bush was no more than against Clinton and that he may have affected Clinton more.

Just sayin’.

I guess it’s like the third party mantra–it’s either too late this election or it’s a vote for the other side. IMHO, neither is true. Folks are being ruled by the fear they will lose and hence we wind up with status quo.

If a pitiful Republican candidate like Dede were the ONLY electable alternative to a worse Democrat, then I would have to steel myself, barf bag at the ready, and vote for her. But that is not the case.

What Mr. Rains is missing, and missing rather completely, is that there IS an electable conservative alternative in Hoffman, someone who will caucus with Republicans in a far more substantial way than liberal tool Dede ever would.

The comparison between this NY23 situation and the Ross Perot fiasco is simply not valid.

Mr. Rains, if you’re reading this, please put down the bottle of Mr. Newt Kool-aid, and join us in trying to elect a conservative.

I too do not want anymore Arlen Specters, Snowes and Collins’.

However there is something, second best for sure, to be said for controlling the agenda.

As we can see controlling the agenda is EVERYTHING.

Right now I find it more important to get that control back. Even if your peers don’t vote with you.. no one can vote on an issue that is not brought to the floor by the leadership.

Therefore leadership control is EVERYTHING. We need to stop the damage, even if it is incremental to the goal of getting rid of the RINO’S.

I too was around for the Perot debacle…..never again. Look at what is happening in the New Jersey! 3rd parties never help anyone and always hurt someone, usually republicans.

We have a momentum that we can surely make a mess of if we start with 3rd party stuff. I admit the one situation in NY23 worked out but it is not the usual result!

The RINOs are there because the Party backs them. NY 23 has a GOP candidate who’s to the left of Michael Moore. Illinois has a (current) Rep as a 2010 Senate candidate with (premature) GOP backing, who voted for Cap & Trade. The good potentials, and there are a couple of them, won’t get the Party’s backing and might get the Party’s boot. California, another Party-backed sure-loser, with a good conservative being shunned by the RNCC.

We can’t have good election results unless we first reform the Party - and winning elections by biting our lips and voting for RINOs will just more broadly pack the Party with career RINOs until the whole country is down the tubes.

Look in to it! Two words of encouragement Doug. NY-23 and the National GOP’s support for more of the same.

We either retake the party or we have two socialist parties and candidates. It’s that simple.

It really is wonderful news that increasingly Americans are identifying themselves as conservatives rather than liberals. However, even with the current conservative insurgency polls topping out with 40% of the electorate self-identifying as conserrvatives. The bad news is that we will need moderates as part of the governing coalition. So why are you picking on Joe here?

I think he has a valid point. For starters, I agree with Mark Levin and others who see national health care as end game. Once enacted The form of health care that Nancy Pelosi chooses to impose on us may very well come down to just one vote. Denying the Speaker one more vote in her caucus may be the difference. The 2009 special elections may be our last chance to stop it. It may very well come down to R vs D.

I do not agree with the point. I want Hoffman to win. At the same time, I want to avoid conservative schism. I think that Erick and most of the commentors on RedState have gone overboard on NY-23. For example, I read almost nothing about the California race where we have a GOP candidate running to the right of his district. I thought that this was something to be encouraged. Instead, the focus is Anti-GOP and NY-23, a veritable Whack-A-RINO tourney. I post on this subject while I am normally silent because I want to lance the boil.

You posted Joe’s email along with his email address knowing that he would be ridiculed. I know that the terms of use allow it. I have seen you do this in the past with nasty emails. Joe was not nasty. He only disagrees with your strategy, not the goal. Nevertheless, you quote the Gospel in act devoid of charity. That bothers me. It is not Christ-like. Next time quote the Founders when you do that. Keep perspective.

And I did not intend to start a scripture discussion. But it is ironic to quote a passage about the dangers of temporal power, in a discussion about an election (the American pursuit of temporal power) in which a critic requests to have his email address removed and instead finds it published.

It is a sad commentary that there are still people aligned with the GOP who think they can sustain a viable party while at the same time they turn their backs on conservative core values, simply to “beat the other guy”. I have noted recently that politics in America has replaced professional sports in many people’s lives. They have the players on their team and their “sports braodcasters” aka Fox News and conservative talk radio, and the other teams have their players and their sports broadcast networks ie CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS and NPR. I’ve heard all the admonitions about “doing whatever it takes” to defeat the Democrats in the next election, but if that means selling my soul, sorry I kindly thank you not! Although it has taken on an air of “sports”, fighting for one’s principles and simply what is right, is trivialized when it simply becomes a game..