Skip to comments.Endangered species alert: 45% of RINOs vanish in a single year
Posted on 11/30/2006 4:11:28 PM PST by dangus
The 2006 election was tragic for conservatives who did lose several key races. But the losses were downright devestating for RINOs (Republicans In Name Only.)
The following is a list of the RINOs, who scored under 60% as graded by the American Conservative Union, and how they fared in the last election:
SENATE: Linc Chafee, RI: defeated. Olympia Snowe, ME: no contest. Sue Collins, ME: re-elected. Mike DeWine, OH: defeated.
HOUSE Christopher Shays, CT: re-elected. Mike Castle, DE: re-elected. Sherwood Boehlert, NY: defeated. Jim Leach, IA: retired. Mark Kirk, IL: re-elected. Nancy Johnson, CT: defeated. Wayne Gilchrest, MD: re-elected. Scott McInnis, CO: previously retired. Jim Ramstad, MN: re-elected. Robert Simmons, CT: defeated. Tim Johnson, IL: re-elected. Jim Gerlach, PA: re-elected. Tom Davis, VA: re-elected. Schwarz, MI: defeated in primary. Charlie Bass, NH: defeated.
It's worse than that, even. Also ousted were Jeb Bradley (ACU score: 60), Mark Foley (63), Mike Sweeney (72), and Clay Shaw (71).
This is not to say that there weren't some painful conservative losses, such as Northup, Hostettler, Sodrel, Chocola, and Taylor. But the losses to the Republican Party struck largely at the "centrist" wing. Where's the media decrying the loss of so-called centrists, like they did in 1994?
Must be the 'thin skin' 'liguini spined' variety of RINO's.
Forgot to mention these RINO's have no horns.
RMSP Elected Members - 2006
** - Not running for re-election/Retired
*** - Re-elected
Sen. Lincoln Chafee, Rhode Island - Lost -
Sen. Norm Coleman, Minnesota **
Sen. Susan Collins, Maine **
Sen. Johnny Isakson, Georgia **
Sen. John McCain, Arizona **
Sen. Gordon Smith, Oregon **
Sen. Olympia Snowe, Maine **
Sen. Arlen Specter, Pennsylvania **
Rep. Charles Bass, New Hampshire - Lost -
Rep. Judy Biggert, Illinois - ***
Rep. Sherwood Boehlert, New York - Lost -
Rep. Mary Bono, California - ***
Rep. Jeb Bradley, New Hampshire - Lost -
Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite, Florida - ***
Rep. Ken Calvert, California - ***
Rep. Dave Camp, Michigan - ***
Rep. Shelley Moore Capito, West Virginia - ***
Rep. Michael Castle, Delaware - ***
Rep. Thomas Davis, III, Virginia - ***
Rep. Charlie Dent, Pennsylvania - ***
Rep. David Dreier, California - ***
Rep. Vernon Ehlers, Michigan - ***
Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen, New Jersey - ***
Rep. Jim Gerlach, Pennsylvania - ***
Rep. Wayne Gilchrest, Maryland - ***
Rep. Paul Gillmor, Ohio - ***
Rep. Kay Granger, Texas - ***
Rep. David Hobson, Ohio - ***
Rep. Nancy Johnson, Connecticut - Lost -
Rep. Timothy Johnson, Illinois - ***
Rep. Sue Kelly, New York - Lost -
Rep. Mark Kirk, Illinois - ***
Rep. Jim Kolbe, Arizona - Lost
Rep. John R. Kuhl, New York - ***
Rep. Ray LaHood, Illinois - ***
Rep. Steven LaTourette, Ohio - ***
Rep. Jim Leach, Iowa - Retired **
Rep. Jerry Lewis, California - ***
Rep. Frank LoBiondo, New Jersey - ***
Rep. Jim McCrery, Louisiana - ***
Rep. Thomas Petri, Wisconsin - ***
Rep. Todd Platts, Pennsylvania - ***
Rep. Jon Porter, Nevada - ***
Rep. Deborah Pryce, Ohio - ***
Rep. Jim Ramstad, Minnesota - ***
Rep. Ralph Regula, Ohio - ***
Rep. Joe Schwarz, Michigan - Lost in primary -
Rep. Christopher Shays, Connecticut - ***
Rep. Robert Simmons, Connecticut - ***
Rep. Michael Turner, Ohio - ***
Rep. Fred Upton, Michigan - ***
Rep. Greg Walden, Oregon - ***
Rep. James Walsh, New York - ***
Rep. Curt Weldon, Pennsylvania - Lost -
Rep. Jerry Weller, Illinois - ***
Rep. Heather Wilson, New Mexico - ***
Gov. Robert Ehrlich, Maryland - Lost -
Gov. Linda Lingle, Hawaii - Re-elected
Gov. George Pataki, New York = Retired ***
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, California - Re-elected
** - Not running for re-election/Retired
*** - Re-elected
The reason why Repubs lost is exactly because of the rino factor.
Exactly -- dorks like McCain were a big part of it all. The Repubs abandoned conservatism and that is why they lost. The Repubs win, when they act like the conservatives they once were --- they lose when they don't. That is why the stinking libs are acting like conservatives now, because they know America is basically not a socialist/leftist country and the voting base is basically conservative.
The Repubs need a major overhaul and a return to core conservative values and issues. Then we will be back in control, and we had better win in 2008.
About 1/3 are Conservative Republicans and another 1/3 are Liberal Democrats. The remaining 1/3 is some combination of RINOs and DINOs. When control of the house changes it is the party who loses its 'INOs that loses control. Fools in the defeated party always want to next time run members of the base. When they do that, they stay in the minority.
There are about 17 or 18 battle ground states. There are about an equal number of liberals and conservatives in a battle ground state. The election outcome is deterimined by the swing voters. Swing voters are not ideological. They sometimes vote for conservatives and sometimes vote for liberals. But they mostly vote for their own kind. That is non ideological 'INOs
The moonbat that ran against Snowe used to be a reporter for the local paper. She would cover our planning board meetings when I was the chair. After reading her articles, I would have to ask myself if I went to the same meeting that she was at. Jean Hay is/was a complete nutjob with one agenda.
A couple of errors in this:
Sherwood Boehlert, NY: defeated.
--->Boehlert retired, replaced with a 'Rat.
Jim Leach, IA: retired.
--->Leach was defeated, replaced with an ultraleft moonbat.
Scott McInnis, CO: previously retired.
--->This is a mistake on the ACU website. The scores listed for McInnis are actually for John Salazar, the 'Rat who replaced him.
The fault is in seeing politics as a spectrum from left to right. There is no-one who wants candidates who take weak and flip-flopping positions on any given issue. Rather, voters have certain issues that they agree with conservatives on, certain issues that they agree with liberals on. Also, there are certain issues that voters would get active about if they were vrought to forefront, issues that voters actually base their votes on, and issues that voters don't care much about.
Voters will support based not on simply how conservative or liberal the candidate is, but on whether the voter believes strongly about an issue, and whether the voter believes that the candidate will act forcefully to fulfill the voter's wishes.
Frequently, Democrats can get elected by faking conservative positions, like Mary Landrieu, Bill Nelson, Bill Clinton, Jim Webb, and Bill Casey. Republicans who adopt liberal positions usually lose however: Issues voters feel liberal out cause them to vote Democrat, not Democrat-Lite Republican. All RINO-ism does is reduce the number of reasons to vote conservative, so that those issues are outweighed by reasons to vote liberal. Worse still, when voters see Republicans abandon their core beliefs in moderate areas, it convinces them that Republicans are the party of big government also, and this breeds voter apathy and cynicism about more conservative candidates.
Good to see ya out and about, Common Tator. :-)
"Oh B.S.! No Rinos, NO DEFEAT! The reason why Repubs lost is exactly because of the rino factor...."
No, the reason republicans lost was because it's quite difficult to pretend to be either a republican or a conservative when you spend taxpayer money like drunken sailors.
Republicans lost because the images of our fellow citizens drowning in sewage while all levels of government failed them are too powerful to forget.
Republicans lost because they have embroiled the country in a war which they apparently are quite content to NOT fight, and to not fight it by the Marquess of Queensbury rules of engagement that brought us the disaster of Vietnam (complete with some of the same cast of characters partly responsible for that deabcle, i.e. Rumsfeld).
Republicans lost because "vote for me or the Terrorists will get you" wears thin on the public when it's repeated 700 times a day for five straight years, wothout anything else of import to break the monotony.
Republican slost because while the economy has "created 5 million new jobs", the majority of those new jobs are at Wal-Mart, Kinney Shoes and Burger King. Those jobs that aren't entry-level-minimum-wage-types are the sort in which a BA and an internship just won't cut it anymore. Taxes may be lower, but wages are falling. Wall Street may be up, but the spectre of massive numbers of foreclosures in on the horizon. Economically, the republicans themselves have done little to protect the American worker, and everything to protect the CEO and the ol' campaign coffer.
Republicans lost because even with a veto-proof majority they caved oin entitlement reform and saddled us with another $100 billion boondoggle that will ensure the Flower Children won't have to pay for the medication to soothe their Chronic Dry Eye, embarssing genital herpes outbreaks or soothe their enlarged prostates later in life. This, incidentally, will be the SINGLE RICHEST GENERATION OF RETIREES IN HUMAN HISTORY.
Republicans lost because those who consider themselves "Conservatives", with all that implies, acted exactly like democrats; free-spending, scandalous, arrogant, larcenous, out-of-touch, and believing the peasants will shut up and take it all from them simply because "the alternative is worse".
There, I hope this helps straighten you out.
That is correct, but the number of "RINOs" can be decreased. What we have to realise is that "RINOs" are in charge of the RNC, most state, and county Republican Party orginizations.
What is the solution?
If we want the Republican Party to return to what it once was, we conservatives need to be in control of the Party at all levels.
The moderates, and liberals who once ran the county party here have been replaced, those of us they called "right wing nut cases," now hold all the offices.
I tried to make clear the fact that I wasn't saying "good riddance." Note my introduction: "The 2006 election was tragic for conservatives who did lose several key races." Even so, I think RINO-ism hurt real conservatives:
* CONRAD BURNS was a solid conservative on most issues, except immigration. Even many liberal sources felt that charges of corruption related to Abramoff resonated especially strongly with Burns because of statements he made which appeared out of touch. A stronger stand on certain conservative issues, like immigration, may have helped him win.
* RICK SANTORUM lost the election when he pulled out every stop to help Arlen Specter defeat Pat Toomey in the 2004 Republican primary. Specter rewarded the hard work of Bush and Santorum by leading a frontal assault against the nomination of "conservative" judges. Pennsylvania voters decided Rick Santorum was simply an empty suit, and not a real conservative, even though I believe this conclusion was tragic.
* GEORGE ALLEN lost his election on sheer incompetence. Slow, unbelievable responses made the "macaca" issue metasticize to dominate the entire race. Webb succeeded in making the general election seem like an open Republican primary election between a racist boob and himself.
I can't really address Talent's loss... I only know that his approval ratings practically never reached 50% his entire term.
"The Dems now think that there negative strategy finally paid off and now any politician (with few exceptions) who wants to have a job will need to follow the polls to try and survive."
Cannot diagree with this, however, I believe there's a second part to this that needs to be looked at very closely:
It's not as if republicans (of all stripes) acted in any sort of repsonsible manner to begin with. On the "Disgust-Meter" we can start with the slimy tactics of Tom DeLay (allegedly rigging re-apportionment to engineer a majority), move on to the criminal arrogance of Trent Lott (the American public has no right to know what we put in a spending bill), and finish with the unmitigated gall of John McCain (Campaign Finance Reform = tenure for elected politicians).
I seriously believe that many felt that with veto-proof majorities in both houses of Congress, the bully pulpit of the White House, and the ability to pack the Supreme Court (gee, that's really worked out well so far, hasn't it?) as if they were invincible. Perhaps even going as far as to believe that with the public distracted by terrorism and "Dancing with the Stars", the President wrapped up in the war, that no one would seriously look at what Congress was doing. If they did, a simple "hey, we're fighting terrorists here, you Commie" should have been enough to shoo serious questioners off.
Pride goeth before the fall, does it not?
Nice cute, clean, mathematically symmetrical theory. Pundits love it. Alas, there is no evidence it's true.
Elections are decided by who gets off their butts and votes and who stays home. No one changes their minds. Sorry to spread heresy among your easy theories.
You're kidding, right?
Conservatives win even in traditional democratic strongholds when they know how to lead, instruct and stay connected with the common people. Reagan did it on a grand scale, but there are hundreds of Brent Schundlers out there who can do it locally. The key is to get them past the party machinery who prefers to choose from within the inbred country club crowd.
Oh, and thanks for the tagline compliment!
This isn't a catastrophe but it's still pretty bad. Primaries are the time to deal with RINOs. Screwing up generals guarantee socialists and/or "blue dogs".
I don't trust the bark or the bite of these dogs.
"Republicans lost because even with a veto-proof majority"
We never had a veto-proof majority. With regards to the Senate, we'd have to have had well past 60 Senators. We haven't had that many since 1909.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.