Had a brain fart, could we win 2006 by torpedoing moderate Republicans by

[NNguyenMD]

covertly supporting their wingnut opponents in the primaries, though cynical and against our personal beliefs, I think that its the only way to take back the country.

Who legitimizes Bush/Frist's conservative idiocy? Moderate Republicans like McCain, Giuliani, Schwarzenegger, all of those bastards fool mainstream Americans that Bush and his idiot brand form of theocracy has a place for them in it, well it doesn't.

One of the things about Former California Governor Gray Davis that I absolutely loved and hated at the same time when he ran for reelection in 2002 was his under the table support for that thick headed idiot Bill Simon during the Republican gubernational primary. It was a brilliant play pulled out of the book of a Democrat who would have otherwise gotten trounced on by what could have ended up being California Governor Richard Riordan.

You see the wingnuts are so full of themselves and so shallow that they don't realize for a second that they're just floating on borrowed time. All we have to do is to swift boat McCain, Snowe, Hagel, Chafee, Pataki, Ah-nold, and all of these self-proclaimed moderates out of office, and when they're gone there will be few other choices for the remaining rational, sane Americans, and the best part is that we don't even have to do the heavy lifting ourselves, we just egg the zealot attack dogs into doing it for us on our dollar.

I say, we support the religious right's effort in defeating the moderate wing of the Republican party, that way the rest of America thats still got their fingers crossed will have only one choice left. I know that winning by the least common denominator sounds atrociously evil, but I just hope that Democrats stop falling into the trap that they can trust a moderate Republican, just remember that moderate Republicans (the politicians at least) still vote Bush, is there really anything else you need to know about them?

Oh yeah and we have to resist letting the GOP egg us into eating our own. Self-proclaimed purple Dems don't do much for me either, but if you think about it they are pretty powerless from committing acts of idiocy without their Moderate GOP "big sibs" fooling them into thinking that they'll one day get to sit at the cool kid's table if they vote bipartisan. When the moderate Republicans are out of the congress, the conservative dems will have nowhere else to go but to fall in line with a unified, Democratic message...just like the way the GOP did to moderate Republicans.

[KingFlorez]

1. It might work

But I doubt they'd let that happen. They never let any wingnuts pose a serious threat to their moderate wing.

[Dr.Phool]

4. Yes they do

look at the Nick Smith case in Michigan. And several other races around the country. If you don't toe Tom DeLays line, they'll fund a wing nut to run against you.

[NNguyenMD]

6. it happened in a local race for state Senator here in Syracuse

the moderate Repub/former Democrat Lorraine Hoffman got killed in the primary, she survived to see through the general election but by November it was game over, the Dem with little political experience, and who was greener than a lawn of grass beat her, a state senator with almost 20 years experience in office.

[LaurenG]

2. No don't do it

No no no. Just vote for the best candidate (democrat of course). Too scary to think of. What if the wing nut won? :shrug:

[NNguyenMD]

7. the best candidate for me is the one who doesn't give Bush public

endorsements of his leadership skills. Find me a moderate Republican who's willing to drop the Bush Bear Hugging and he can have my vote.

[NNguyenMD]

11. the wingnut might win in the reddest of red, but places that are getting

big population booms in the Southwest like Nevada, Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico have house and senate seats that are absolutely winnable (I don't know which ones are up for grabs in 2006 I'm jsut talking in general). The same goes with the midwest with places like Montana, Iowa, Michigan, Wisconsin, and lets not forget that the bluest states in the union, California, New York, and Massachussets, all have Republican governors, and one of the bluest, greatest cities in the world has a Repub mayor (probably just a RINO but he supports Bush so he's responsible for the state we're in too).

[rzemanfl]

3. Say "excuse me" and we won't mention your fart. n/t

[Cocoa]

5. no, do the opposite

the more moderate the GOP is, the better for the country.

[ten]

12. Shift the center

I agree with Cocoa. Getting nutjobs to win the primary just makes it that much more likely that a nutjob will actually win. Anybody so crazy that he'd have zero chance of winning a general election isn't going to win a primary even with our "help." (With the notable exception being states where the GOP shoots itself in the foot without any help. Like Oregon.)

Moderating the other party, though, shifts the political center in your favor.

[NNguyenMD]

14. Good point, but helping zealots win the primary isn't necessary the goal

By support zealots against moderates you deprive the moderate of the base vote which they would have gotten by default unopposed.

Thats what happened in the state senate race in my district, the moderate Repub still won the primary, but she lost the hard care conservative vote that used to vote for her thinking they had no other options. When their conservative psycho candidate got defeated in the primary, they abandoned her in the general election, I think they might have thrown their support to a third party guy. I any even the moderate Repub lost, and had she gotten those base votes they didn't go to her it wouldn't have turned out that way.

You fire up the religious right into hating the moderate Repub so much, that when it comes time to the general election they won't be able to stomach the thought of voting for that same person who defeated their guy.

[Guaranteed]

19. That's right. Exactly. nt

[Guaranteed]

18. That's right. That's what they did to US.

Moderation without hardliners within a party, believe it or not, weakens that party.

[NNguyenMD]

21. I agree, the hardliners make the moderates vulnerable...and you can defeat

the moderate if you deprive them of the hardline vote, and its entirely possible to do it too. If you exploit a moderate Republican's liberal stances against a hardliner in a primary, and force the moderate to either flip-flop on a liberal issue, or turn off the base vote, which they need to win, you're essentially chopping off one of their legs in a general election against respectable Dem opponent.

Think of a state like NY or California where there are more Democrats than Republicans. A moderate Republican without their base voters are screwed going against a Dem with both moderate and base Dem voters.

[Guaranteed]

22. No, I'm saying that the hardliners shift the center, and make

the moderates look entirely reasonable and electable.

[NNguyenMD]

23. well, I would see that as even more reason to at least focus resources

into defeating moderates, even if you don't want to do it by turning the zealots against them.

A moderate Republican who's electable, and well liked is a guy who's still voting for Bush, to me that makes them a very dangerous person.

[Guaranteed]

25. No, that's the reason for reducing the visibility of hardliners.

Their leadership defines the culture.

[Nite Owl]

8. Some states you need to be

registered in the party to vote in a primary. I'm not doing that, it would just kill me to see that card come in with an R on it. I think they do this to us already in places where they can.

We tend to not really go after the moderates and we should. By this time they need to leave their party for what it has become or they are just as complicit as the right wingers.

[esvhicl]

9. Ahhhnold's toast

He won't win CA again, unless Diebold prevails.

[WI_DEM]

10. Why do people think McCain is a moderate?

he is anti-choice, strongly pro war, anti-environment (a true moderate republican like Chaffe is at least on the green side on environmental issues), and has a overall strongly conservative voting record.

But as to the crust of your message, I agree--moderate republicans are enabling the right wing run shot gun over the house and senate. I say it is war and in states like MA, RI, CA, ME--we should be electing democrats not moderate republicans.

[NewJeffCT]

27. He's not a moderate - he's a conservative

Even Chris Matthews calls him a conservative. That just shows you how effective the Republicans have been at moving the dialogue to the right... Barry Goldwater - so radically conservative in 1964 that he was basically unelectable and lost in an all-time landslide - would be a "liberal" Republican these days for his pro-choice & pro-environment views. Heck, he was even pro gays in the military.

[NNguyenMD]

13. Just to follow up on this, I think New Yorkers ought to make Bloomberg's

reelection the most demoralizing experience he has for the rest of his life. Liberal NYCers just for fun should help propel the most conservative, evangelical, GOP zealot into giving Bloomberg the fight of his life in the Republican Primary (does NYC have a primary for Mayor?). Anyway, I actually have no opinion about Bloomberg one way or the other, but at this point I little compassion and much hatred for anyone who gives Bush the Nod.

[Blasphemer]

16. Wouldn't work in NY

A true zealot wouldn't stand a chance so he or she wouldn't have an effect in a primary other than making alot of noise. The primaries are in September and he has Republican challengers but near as I can figure, he's not going to have any problems there. He will lose in November though so it's pretty moot.

[Catbird]

15. This could backfire

Anyone who is seriously considering this kind of activity should remember that the "wingnut" might win the general election. South Carolina's junior senator, Jim DeMint, was generally regarded as one of (if not the most) conservative of the Republicans. He won the primary and then the general election. He is positioned to the right of Bush on many issues, including taxes.

[NNguyenMD]

17. well like I said to another poster, it won't work in the most conservative

areas, but if you look at the example of Arlen Specter, and Richard Riordon, moderate Republicans are in incredibly precarious positions during primaries. And I suppose what I was saying is more relevant to kicking current moderate Republiacns out of office.

You're right it could backfire, you could push the moderate into taking more conservative positions, and they could still win the general election as a more conservative candidate.

But the fact remains that moderate Republicans are not even close to being our friends, they're a dangerous and vital wing of the Republican party whom we should really consider hitting hard where they are most vulnerable, and thats in their primary.

[Lecky]

20. I don't agree with using sneaky tactics

because I'm not a republican. Besides I could never fake like I admired ultra conservative kooks like Frist.

The republicans are not undefeatable.

[NNguyenMD]

24. I would say its more divide and conquer versus sneaky tactics, and

it happens all the time everywhere. I think the Repubs have, or are appraoching the breaking point of their Evangelical/Corporate America alliance. It a chink in their armor that I think is worth exploiting.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

26. Forget party. Vote the issues.

Or, sit on your hands if no 3rd party candidate is available and you're stuck with 2 candidates from the major parties who are essentially tweedle-dum, tweedle-dee, on the issues that matter to you.

[NawlinsNed]

28. No,

There aren't a great many people who actually spend a lot of time looking at their House candidates further than what party they're in and whether or not they're doing a good job for the district as is. There's a decent possibility that the right wing candidate will win over the moderate and the Democratic candidate depending on what district they're in. Then we're screwed even worse than we are now.

I know that in my district (5th congressional district of Louisiana), Charlie Melancon is only a placeholder until he either proves to the district that he's worth keeping, or until another Republican with more experience than Tauzin Jr. takes it from him. Supporting both the war in Iraq and big oil is mandatory here for a political candidate.

And you're wrong about conservative Dems falling in line. Last time the Democratic party tried to get them to fall in line, a great number of conservative Democrats changed party affiliations. Popular local politicians won't be bullied by national parties if they can get money from elsewhere.