I'm just pointing out the conundrum: The Republican party can insist on ideological purity and live in the wilderness, or it can embrace its liberal members (from districts where conservatives can't win) and maintain its political power.
Like BOR says, tell me where I'm going wrong here.
I understand.
My apologies for being, Mmmmm, brusque with you.
There's [a] method to my madness, though. :^)
"The Republican party can insist on ideological purity and live in the wilderness, or it can embrace its liberal members (from districts where conservatives can't win) and maintain its political power."
Only for the faithful majority to be bushwhacked later by the Liberal-Socialists who've hijacked America's Democrat Party?
Liberal-Socialists working in full cooperation & conjunction with ABCNBCCBSCNNMSNBC/LA-NYSlimes, WA Compost, Atlanta Urinal & Constipation, US Snooze etc ad infinitum ad naseum??
RINOs are used, people *like* Shays, to undermine the "conservative" cause, ala our duly elected President & indirectly insoding all those loyal, who support him.
No thanks, druby.
I think the electorate deserves Liberal-Socialists who are Liberal-Socialist and "Conservatives" who are conservatives.
When/if we allow, *permit* "hybrids" we're asking for trouble and coincidentally just this week the conservatives are getting a bellyfull of what happens when this happens.
Yes my friend, it truly *is* a "conundrum".
But it's important all conservatives thoroughly understand it's a conundrum fashioned for us, not by us.
We as conservative voters have a say & when we abdicate that privilege is when conundrums are *born*.
Any political conundrum disappears when our elected representatives present a unified face in these strange, convoluted times what-with the America hating Liberal-Socialists & their quisling media being what it *is*.
You & I can disagree, but not our elected conservative reps who're supposed to be working together, toward the same goals and not calling for the resignation of a man whose been more loyal to our POTUS and those of us who voted for him than any other single individual.
If Shays' district doesn't like him as a loyal conservative, too bad.
We'll get by & be better for it.
Let the people of CT elect a Liberal-Socialist & get the "real" thing & be done with it.
"We get the government we deserve"
It's true druby, we really do.
IF Shays said what he did only to get elected, then that'd make him a panderer *&* a liar.
Wouldn't it?
"Like BOR says, tell me where I'm going wrong here."
You're not "wrong", per se.
Just haven't looked at the "Big" Picture", I'd suspect.
Not yet, but you will.
After you've been beaten-up enough times.
So tell me, do you agree with Shays?
...think Rumsfeld should resign?