This is a bandwagon:
Former New York Gov. George Pataki endorsed Conservative party candidate Doug Hoffman tonight, the clearest sign yet that even the most establishment New York Republicans now view Hoffman as having the best shot at preventing a Democrat from winning next Tuesday’s special election.
When a squish like Pataki is jumping aboard, you know it’s got unstoppable momentum. And you know who started it? That idiot ex-governor from Alaska, who endorsed him before it was cool. Wonder how long Gingrich will hold out?
“There go my people. I must catch up so that I can lead them…”
What is a “squish”?
A politician with no firm political principles (e.g., a RINO).
When a squish like Pataki is jumping aboard, you know it’s got unstoppable momentum.
Momentum, yes, in the direction of driving away politicians and voters who previously felt at home in the GOP. An ideologically purer GOP may feel better about itself, but it won’t win national majorities.
A politician with no firm political principles (e.g., a RINO).
I think you’re conflating two different things: ideological flexibility, and deviation from GOP orthodoxy. Lincoln Chaffee was definitely a RINO (until he left the GOP), but it wasn’t because he had no firm political principles; it was because his principles were at odds with those held by most elected Republicans. Ronald Reagan was anything but a RINO, but he was very willing to bend his principles.
The sooner they admit to themselves that they really belong in the Democrat party, the happier they’ll be.
Um, Jim? The GOP nominee is looking to come in third. If a Hoffman win drives away the kind of people who think Scozzafava (sp?) is the “right” kind of candidate, it also draws in a much larger number of voters who disagree.
Sounds like a damn good trade to me.
Ronald Reagan was anything but a RINO, but he was very willing to bend his principles.
Of course he was. That’s why he pulled the Pershings out of Europe and cancelled Star Wars. [/sarc]
Do you read what you write before hitting “submit,” Jim? Or did you just happen to live through a very different Cold War than the rest of us?
Reagan had a core belief, that the socioeconomic system enshrined in the Soviet Union was counter to the core values of the US (the famous “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”). In this, a lot of Americans – correctly – shared his belief, which is why he was elected to a second term despite the economic havoc of his first term (havoc that he was cleaning up from the policies of a decade or so of non-conservative Presidents before him, most of whom had “R” after their names).
On this one core principle, Reagan never bent. If that meant humoring a Democrat-controlled House (who held the purse-strings) on their expansion of social programs, while he pursued a solution to the Cold War that didn’t involve either side launching their nukes, then so be it. It now falls to us to clear the wreckage from that policy, but without having it in the first place there’s no reason to think we’d be in a position to do so.
Reagan had a core belief, that the socioeconomic system enshrined in the Soviet Union was counter to the core values of the US
So did every member of Congress and every politician Reagan ever ran against. It would be hard to find any major American politician of the last fifty years who argued for collectivized farms, state ownership of all businesses, etc.
Now Reagan was somewhat unusual in believing that Medicare was a step towards a Soviet-style economy. And yet he did not cut Medicare — instead he signed an enormous tax hike to keep it solvent.
There were things that Reagan stood firm about, such as the Pershing deployment. But he also did a number of things that ran against his stated convictions: he conducted secret negotiations with Iran, pulled out of Lebanon four months after promising to stay, offered to eliminate the U.S. nuclear arsenal, legalized abortion in California, increased the size of the federal government, and so on.
Scozzafava throws in the towel. It’s the start of a beautiful weekend.
Go over to Iowahawk and check out Dave’s endorsement of Doug Hoffman. Put a 327 block on a 283 crankshaft to create a short-stroke high-revving 301 — Hoffman is the man for me.
Yeah, I suppose Doug Hoffman is going to “drive away” moderate voters, like the kind who don’t like cars, don’t even own a car, lives in some kind of 300K+ “streetcar line condo”, the kind of person who thinks a 300K plus another 800 a month in maintenance and another 900 a month in property tax constitutes “affordable housing.”
When you are over at Iowahawk, also check out Julius Caeser’s commentary on the short history to date of the Obama Administration. Tell me if that isn’t the funniest dang thang you ever read.
Iowahawk endorses and Scozzafava throws in the towell.
Coincdence? I think not.
LOL! Call Rahm Emanuel so he can play catch-up, too!
It gets better: the RINO is now doing robo-calls for Democrat.
I guess Steele won’t be getting his money back…. /guffaw
Oh, why oh why can’t these dirty republican voters back the RINOs the way the Democrats want them to? Don’t they want to “win”? /sarc
Wow, that’s embarrassing for the Republicans.
I know, Karl. It’s like the ghost of Sophocles is just off-camera calling all the shots. It’s too perfect.