Comments on: A message to GOP brass from Rasmussen http://monoblogue.us/2009/12/07/a-message-to-gop-brass-from-rasmussen/ I've presented news and views from Maryland's Eastern Shore since 2005, but my writing can be found at several conservative websites. Fri, 25 May 2012 03:19:14 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Marc http://monoblogue.us/2009/12/07/a-message-to-gop-brass-from-rasmussen/comment-page-1/#comment-105950 Marc Tue, 08 Dec 2009 14:39:57 +0000 http://monoblogue.us/?p=6200#comment-105950 This poll result can be read in a few ways. There is certainly your interpretation, which I mainly agree with. But it also points out that the coalition which makes up the GOP needs each faction in order to be successful electorally. We saw that in NY-23. A wishy-washy moderate couldn't attract conservative votes, but a combative conservative couldn't attract moderate votes. The end result was that the worst candidate running won. I see something similar happening in Delaware if conservatives don't support Mike Castle. There is no way any person more conservative than he will win the Senate seat there (oh, for the days when Bill Roth and Pete Du Pont could win election in that state), so if conservatives don't turn out for him, Delaware will get liberal Beau Biden in the Senate instead of moderate Mike Castle. When a conservative winner isn't an option, a moderate is certainly better than a liberal in my opinion. Both moderate Republicans and conservatives need to realize that elections are about electing the best candidate possible, not the ideal candidate. The Democratic strategy of supporting candidates tailored to their districts is wise. The Republicans should do the same. If it takes a pro-choice, pro-labor Republican to beat, say, Barbara Boxer, that should be enthusiastically supported by all Republicans. It's better to have someone in office who agrees with you 50% of the time rather than someone who agrees with you none of the time. This poll result can be read in a few ways. There is certainly your interpretation, which I mainly agree with. But it also points out that the coalition which makes up the GOP needs each faction in order to be successful electorally. We saw that in NY-23. A wishy-washy moderate couldn’t attract conservative votes, but a combative conservative couldn’t attract moderate votes. The end result was that the worst candidate running won. I see something similar happening in Delaware if conservatives don’t support Mike Castle. There is no way any person more conservative than he will win the Senate seat there (oh, for the days when Bill Roth and Pete Du Pont could win election in that state), so if conservatives don’t turn out for him, Delaware will get liberal Beau Biden in the Senate instead of moderate Mike Castle. When a conservative winner isn’t an option, a moderate is certainly better than a liberal in my opinion.

Both moderate Republicans and conservatives need to realize that elections are about electing the best candidate possible, not the ideal candidate. The Democratic strategy of supporting candidates tailored to their districts is wise. The Republicans should do the same. If it takes a pro-choice, pro-labor Republican to beat, say, Barbara Boxer, that should be enthusiastically supported by all Republicans. It’s better to have someone in office who agrees with you 50% of the time rather than someone who agrees with you none of the time.

]]>