[adorno]

I don't think we should be so paternalistic to say that the voters should learn a lesson. Just nominate someone for whom conservatives can vote, maybe even while holding their noses, not another big spender like president Bush.

Let's not conveniently forget that the person in power had to go through primaries where the people voted. And the person that leads a party's ticket in the general election is the person selected in those primaries. If the person elected, Bush and the RINOs in congress, are not exactly what we expected, then the errors can be corrected though the primaries. It is in the primaries that republican voters need to make sure that conservatives are selected to run in the general election. If by chance RINOs get elected, then we have to wait for the next primary to correct the mistakes. But, you don't correct the mistake by making an even bigger mistake and electing the opposstion by default, because you feel angry at the current crop of republican representatives or the president.

And, what happened in 1994 is probably never going to happen again. If democrats get control again, then expect them to do whatever it takes, including illegal means, to keep that power.

[AntiGovernment]

Yes, there are primaries. But 51% of the party can select someone who is completely unacceptable to 49% of the party, splitting the party. I want the GOP to nominate someone who is acceptable to 90% of the party.

[Mia T]

you don't correct the mistake by making an even bigger mistake and electing the opposstion by default, because you feel angry at the current crop of republican representatives or the president.

bump

In the end, we've got to rid DC of the professional politician.