Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Tea Party Upstart Mourdock Defeats Longtime Indiana Sen. Lugar
LATimes ^ | May 08, 2012

Posted on 05/08/2012 5:29:23 PM PDT by Steelfish

Tea Party Upstart Mourdock Defeats Longtime Indiana Sen. Lugar

By Kim Geiger May 8, 2012 Richard Mourdock has defeated longtime Sen. Richard G. Lugar of Indiana in the Republican primary, according to an Associated Press projection, ending the career of one of the Senate’s most pragmatic politicians and casting a cloud over GOP efforts to win control of the chamber.

Mourdock, state treasurer in Indiana, campaigned as a conservative alternative to Lugar. He became a darling of the tea party movement after he began a legal challenge to the terms of the Obama administration’s bailout of Chrysler.

Mourdock was endorsed by Sarah Palin and Rep. Michele Bachmann, and Lugar had the backing of the party establishment, including Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).

Mourdock will face Democratic Rep. Joe Donnelly, a three-term congressman from the South Bend area, this fall. The matchup is the preferred outcome for Democrats, who view Lugar’s ouster as an opportunity to pick up a longtime Republican seat.

"Richard Mourdock is this year's Ken Buck," said Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Executive Director Guy Cecil. Buck was a tea-party-backed Republican who upset the establishment favorite in the GOP primary in Colorado in 2010, only to lose in November. "Tonight's results make the Indiana Senate race a toss-up."

(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Front Page News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Indiana
KEYWORDS: donttreadonme; elections; iloveit; indiana; lugar; mourdock; richardmourdock; rino; rinofreeamerica; teaparty; teapartyrebellion
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-182 last
To: TBP
The Establishment did that in at least three or four races in 2010. They’re the reason the GOP doesn’t control the Senate. They lost on purpose.

Well, maybe it's time for you to stop sobbing like a heartbroken schoolgirl, strap on a set, and join the fight for liberty.

151 posted on 05/09/2012 6:43:44 AM PDT by rogue yam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: TBP
I'm sure the GOPe can find a way around it.

If Americans were nothing but contemptible little defeatist worms there would be no America.

Everything that this nation is was secured by people who fought instead of sniveling.

152 posted on 05/09/2012 6:48:49 AM PDT by rogue yam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: MichaelCorleone
How d’ya like them apples, GOPe?

Exactly. Conservatism had a great day yesterday and yet some FReepers want to sit around crying about how all is lost.

153 posted on 05/09/2012 6:50:55 AM PDT by rogue yam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

great news!


154 posted on 05/09/2012 6:52:41 AM PDT by jag.drafting
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rogue yam
The abortion issue is just one of many covered under the rubric of "social conservatism" ~ the right of free speech, assembly, the press, to own property without the government selling it to richer people without our permission, to be tried in court (and not in an EPA office), and so on ~ these are all big name social conservative issues.

The TEA Party has several factions. Some but not all of them are anti-social Conservatism.

Just like to say, we were here first while you guys were screwing around with the Democrats, or the equally dredful "moderate republicans".

It's long overdue for you to get with the picture and lay off the anti-social conservative stuff. We are not your enemy although you seem to think you should be ours.

155 posted on 05/09/2012 6:56:16 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: StAnDeliver
I don't see American Crossroads, er, Rove douchebagging Mourdock (which is not to say he didn't do that in Delaware and Nevada).

Not to mention Colorado and Alaska, among others.

He and his pals will certainly try to do it in Indiana. I'd be surprised if they don't have back channel contact with Donnelly, as we all know they did with Coons.

156 posted on 05/09/2012 6:56:58 AM PDT by TBP (Obama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD
Lugar is a great pragmatist and will endorse Mourdock...The GOPe and conservatives are one big happy family.

"I found out what party loyalty means. It means the conservatives have to support the liberals, but never the other way around." -- Seantor Richard Schweiker (R-Pa), returning from the 1976 Republican National Convention in Kansas City.

Sadly, it's still true.

157 posted on 05/09/2012 7:03:51 AM PDT by TBP (Obama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD
Lugar is a great pragmatist and will endorse Mourdock...The GOPe and conservatives are one big happy family.

"I found out what party loyalty means. It means the conservatives have to support the liberals, but never the other way around." -- Senator Richard Schweiker (R-Pa), returning from the 1976 Republican National Convention in Kansas City.

Sadly, it's still true.

158 posted on 05/09/2012 7:04:03 AM PDT by TBP (Obama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: nutmeg
Supposedly the democRATs are "salivating" over the chance to run against Mourdock...

Briar patch politics.

159 posted on 05/09/2012 7:07:20 AM PDT by TBP (Obama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: rogue yam; muawiyah; tcrlaf; StAnDeliver; Waryone
111 posted on Tue May 08 2012 21:53:55 GMT-0500 (Central Daylight Time) by muawiyah: “That's been a real shame in this. The TEAParty crowd have this bias against traditional and social Conservatives.Time for them to purge their leadership of false leaders perhaps? Maybe OVERDUE!”

132 posted on Wed May 09 2012 01:03:39 GMT-0500 (Central Daylight Time) by rogue yam: “You fail to understand the tea party. The tea party movement is centered on the understanding that massive deficits, excessive taxation and regulation, and cronyism will cause America's economy to collapse. Social conservatives who are wise will be glad for the tea party movement and will help pitch a big tent in the near term while seeking converts to the social conservative cause over the medium term. Foolish social conservatives with no wisdom and no game will demand that the tea party movement be anti-abortion and anti-gay from the start and in this way weaken and divide it. Obama, the leftists in general, and Satan are counting on the short-sighted social conservatives to save them from the tea party movement.”

135 posted on Wed May 09 2012 01:26:35 GMT-0500 (Central Daylight Time) by Waryone: “Both the democrats and the RINOs would love to kill off both the social conservatives and the TEA party. For all their talk about social conservatives being a problem, given what has happened all around tonight, I’d say those marxists and socialists are not having very much success.”

All of you raise **REALLY** important points.

I understand coalition politics. None of the three legs of the conservative stool — social, economic or national defense conservatives — have enough voters in many districts and most states to win elections on their own. If we don't get to 50 percent, we lose to a Democrat who in most cases will be worse than even the worst Republican candidate.

That means I have no problem supporting someone who is a political conservative whose primary interest is economics or the military but doesn't profess to be born again, provided, as muawiyah points out, that they're not pro-abortion. After all, punishing evildoers is one of the key tasks of civil government under Romans 13, and abortion is murder, plain and simple.

However, is it too much to ask that people who are not social issues conservatives refrain from attacking the Judeo-Christian principles on which this country was founded, or ridiculing the faith commitments of religious believers?

I cut my teeth in conservative politics long before I was converted to evangelical Christianity. I understand both sides of the fence on this, and things are much better today in the Republican Party for evangelicals and conservative Roman Catholics than they were in the 1980s.

The problem is it needs to be a two-way street.

I'm willing to support someone like Newt Gingrich if he's the best candidate (or in his case, was the best candidate left after others pulled out). After all, there's no doubt Gingrich is a historian and understands the roots of Western civilization. He wasn't my first choice, but he was **WAY** better than what we've got now.

Are people who don't share social conservative positions willing to support avowed evangelical Protestants or conservative Roman Catholics who are generally conservative on economic or national defense issues but maybe not perfect? Or do they expect us to stay at the back of the bus, waiting for some future date at which it will be the “right time” for our concerns about moral collapse to be addressed?

Coalitions can and do work, but they work only when the coalition partners understand that compromises can't be one-sided.

160 posted on 05/09/2012 7:13:54 AM PDT by darrellmaurina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: KansasGirl

Write in?


161 posted on 05/09/2012 7:25:13 AM PDT by TBP (Obama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: darrellmaurina

Nice to see the Tea Party hitting their stride again after failing to coalesce around a viable conservative presidential candidate. The only way Romney would have been defeated is if a concensus conservative candidate had been identified early in the process and was able to attract the funds necessary to take on the GOP-e’s favoured son. Unfortunately, all of the conservative crop this year were flawed. Cain would have won if the harassment issue hadn’t kneecapped him. Perry would have won if he hadn’t shot himself in the foot with the immigration issue (and proven to be so weak in the debates). Santorum would have won if he had shown some fire in his belly earlier in the campaign, instead of being every conservative’s second choice. Gingrich would have won if his conservative message hadn’t been mixed with bizarre attacks on Paul Ryan’s budget and his mixed messages on immigration. Michelle Bachmann is the only one I don’t think had a legitimate shot, as the media’s misogynistic attacks on conservative women (hello Sarah Palin, Christine O’Donnell, Sharon Angle).

I think the success at the State nomination level and failure on the national level, says more about the increased scrutiny candidates get at the national level and how difficult it is to find a candidate who is a combination of charisma, experience, good character, consistency in their conservative values. At the state level the charisma issue is much less important and candidates don’t have to deal with as many issues as a presidential candidate. The Tea Party will have learned a valuable lesson from 2012 and can now focus on repeating its 2010 success in the Senate and House races.


162 posted on 05/09/2012 7:33:10 AM PDT by littleharbour
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.

Maybe. We did it with Bennett, I hope we can with Hatch, too.


163 posted on 05/09/2012 7:36:46 AM PDT by Excuse_My_Bellicosity (Liberalism is a social disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

The Place for Conservatives

Liberals do not want liberty for anyone. They would rather dictate what we do, what we buy, where we go and when, and what we can do while there. Please donate.
The Republic you save may be your own.


164 posted on 05/09/2012 8:25:00 AM PDT by RedMDer (https://support.woundedwarriorproject.org/default.aspx?tsid=93)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
You are babbling. Let me help you help yourself.

The abortion issue is just one of many covered under the rubric of "social conservatism" ~ the right of free speech, assembly, the press, to own property without the government selling it to richer people without our permission, to be tried in court (and not in an EPA office), and so on ~ these are all big name social conservative issues.

The TEA Party has several factions. Some but not all of them are anti-social Conservatism.

This is idiotic garbage. Nobody considers "the right of free speech, assembly, the press, to own property without the government selling it to richer people without our permission, to be tried in court (and not in an EPA office), and so on" to be social issues. Nobody. And no tea party group opposes any of this. You post crazy stupid nonsense.

Just like to say, we were here first while you guys were screwing around with the Democrats, or the equally dredful "moderate republicans".

This makes no sense at all. Who are you talking to and what are you trying to say?

It's long overdue for you to get with the picture and lay off the anti-social conservative stuff. We are not your enemy although you seem to think you should be ours.

Being arrogant and obnoxious is not your real problem here. Your problem is that your post makes no sense. You need to stop, take a few deep breaths, stop making wild accusations and jumping to insane conclusions, and just state your opinions directly and plainly in a way that normal people can understand.

165 posted on 05/09/2012 8:31:26 AM PDT by rogue yam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

But the MSM told me the Tea Party was “out of steam”.....

What is that faint whistling sound I am hearing that is getting louder.....?


166 posted on 05/09/2012 8:34:56 AM PDT by GraceG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: darrellmaurina
That means I have no problem supporting someone who is a political conservative whose primary interest is economics or the military but doesn't profess to be born again, provided, as muawiyah points out, that they're not pro-abortion. After all, punishing evildoers is one of the key tasks of civil government under Romans 13, and abortion is murder, plain and simple.

However, is it too much to ask that people who are not social issues conservatives refrain from attacking the Judeo-Christian principles on which this country was founded, or ridiculing the faith commitments of religious believers?

You believe abortion is murder. Others do not. The problem we have with respect to abortion is not that there are differing opinions regarding it. The problem we have is Roe v. Wade, which was nine justices deciding for everyone that abortion must be legal everywhere regardless of what the people think or the founders intended.

The solution to judicial activism is the Constitution, not the Bible.

If we can organize a strong majority of Americans behind the principle of fidelity to the Constitution as ratified, then specific social issues such as abortion, gay marriage, euthanasia, etc. can be resolved through the legislative process at the state level as the Constitution intends.

167 posted on 05/09/2012 8:43:50 AM PDT by rogue yam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: rogue yam

A TEA Party affiliation and structure is actually QUITE RECENT. Social Conservatives have been fighting all the battles for decades ~ you’all started with a TV show. I remember watching the guy melt down.


168 posted on 05/09/2012 9:47:18 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: TBP

“This is GREAT news — but you do realize, of course, that the Republican Establishment will do everything in their power to make sure this seat goes Democrat. They did that in 2010 and in races before that.”

The irony of this fact is that when Conservatives talk about doing the SAME THING in response to being handed Romney as a candidate, Conservatives are traitors. Try starting a thread that talks about NOT VOTING for Romney, but voting GOP down ticket and you’ll get all kinds of histrionics about how it will ‘destroy the republic’.

When establishment Republicans used dollars we donate in order to ELECT DEMOCRATS in races where Conservatives beat the Republican, well that’s just hard-ball politics.

Peggy Noonan was crying in the paper last week about keeping Lugar because he could work across the aisle.

Peggy, its not a compromise when one side does all the giving. Conservatives have been the battered wife in its relationship with the GOP, and with Democrats, for the last 30 years. At one point, if you are the abuser, you are going to wake up with the abused stratling your body and pointing a gun in your face.

It’s funny, being shot at that range is a relatively quiet experience. You are dead before your ears can send the information to your brain. When the shot came for Lugar, he’d been redistricted, he may or may not have still had a house in Indiana, and he actually forgot how to run in a primary. He had so taken his Dukedom for granted that he never even bothered with the pleasantries any more.

It was a good scam for both Lugar and Hatch while it lasted. When you are in for 35 years, you aren’t serving anybody but yourself at that point. He’ll take that fat-ass pension and his platinum-plated medical plan with him into his 90’s, I would think. Peggy’s going to shake her head and cry a little.

The 80’s are over, Peggy. Wake up and look at what we are passing on to our kids and tell me a 35 year veteran of the Senate shouldn’t answer for some of it?


169 posted on 05/09/2012 11:26:49 AM PDT by RinaseaofDs (Does beheading qualify as 'breaking my back', in the Jeffersonian sense of the expression?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: hoosiermama; muawiyah; TMA62

Thanks for your very interesting posts re: Mourdock vs Donnelly in the November election. Encouraging information!


170 posted on 05/09/2012 11:44:58 AM PDT by nutmeg (Rest in peace, and thank you, Andrew Breitbart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: Venturer

You can pretty well bet Lugar will vote with the Democrats in the Senate, that is if they ever take a vote, for the time he has left in the Senate.


171 posted on 05/09/2012 12:18:08 PM PDT by Maryhere ("HE comes to rule the earth")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

You have absolutely no idea of what you speak (or write) with respect to Libertarians. Without voters who are generally ideologically libertarian, the Republican Party would be nearly indistinguishable from the Democrats and have no chance of winning any national election.


172 posted on 05/09/2012 2:17:53 PM PDT by rashley (Rashley)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: RinaseaofDs

I am borrowing your post:) you are right on


173 posted on 05/09/2012 2:34:32 PM PDT by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: mikrofon
You might say a Lugie was just ex-Specterated....

Pure genius. Deserves a repost!

174 posted on 05/09/2012 3:19:44 PM PDT by America_Right (Why can't anyone tell me why Ron Paul is crazy?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1

Take it. It’s yours.


175 posted on 05/09/2012 3:21:39 PM PDT by RinaseaofDs (Does beheading qualify as 'breaking my back', in the Jeffersonian sense of the expression?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: rashley

You sure got that wrong.


176 posted on 05/09/2012 4:49:53 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: RinaseaofDs

Thanks:) I posted it on facebook to a Noonan fan


177 posted on 05/09/2012 4:51:13 PM PDT by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: rashley
BTW, you missed my point ~ it was aimed at those running for office as Republicans but who are actually Libertarians (many of whom participate in Libertarian party activities).

Because you missed the point you addressed the concerns of voters.

Let me put it this way ~ same answer I give the gays. The public disapproves of gays running as Republicans so they vote against the whole ticket when that happens (SEE: 2006). The Republican public disapproves of Libertarians running as Reublicans, so they just don't vote for you ~ which may explain why there are so few of them running as Republicans ~ word does get around.

However, like gays their votes are welcome and so are their campaign donations. So, keep it up guys. You can trust us (if not those other guys).

Give til it hurts and vote early and often!

178 posted on 05/09/2012 4:56:39 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: rogue yam

“If we can organize a strong majority of Americans behind the principle of fidelity to the Constitution as ratified, then specific social issues such as abortion, gay marriage, euthanasia, etc. can be resolved through the legislative process at the state level as the Constitution intends.”

I agree with that. And that is one big contribution the tea party has made to the entire conservative movement—a focus on the Constitution, enumerated powers, and the separation of powers between the Federal and State government. Only fools could study the Constitution and believe that the federal government has any role in abortion, education, health care, homosexual rights, marijuana use and many other issues. The states had and have the ‘police power’ to handle, or not handle, those issues on a governmental level.

I’m very comfortable in the tea party and social conservative evangelical wings of the party. In fact, most tea partiers I know (and I know a lot) are both. And both wings of the coalition should be comfortable opposing a leviathan federal government bent on spending us into bankruptcy and imposing the morality of left-wing elitists as a uniform national morality on all of the states and the people thereof. Even the most libertarian of our colleagues should understand that there is a huge difference between having the federal government impose a nationwide abortion law (Roe) and a nationwide sodomy law (Lawrence) and to use federal taxpayer dollars to subsidize abortion, on the one hand, and having a state make abortions legal, on the other hand.


179 posted on 05/09/2012 11:54:57 PM PDT by ModelBreaker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

Interesting statistic from Tuesday.

In Indiana:
Richard Mourdock 403,268 60.6%
Richard Lugar 262,388 39.4

In West Virginia:
BARACK OBAMA 76,510 57.27%
KEITH JUDD 57,081 42.73%
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/08/keith-judd-texas-inmate-g_n_1501761.html


180 posted on 05/10/2012 1:24:01 AM PDT by y2gordo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ModelBreaker

The one guy who got this right in 2008 was Rudy Giuliani.

He said we can have the GOP be a big tent with respect to social issues and draw in all fiscal conservatives through originalism and federalism. Appoint strict constructionist judges and devolve power out to the states through federalism and it no longer matters what the personal opinions of the President are.

Unfortunately this reasoning fell on deaf ears here at FR and among conservatives in general. So instead of Rudy we nominated Juan McCain, a man who I hold in far lower regard based on ideological grounds than I do Mitt Romney. And further McCain had no lead in his pencil and he threw the election to the Kenyan Kommunist, and now we have bankruptcy, unilateral disarmament and surrender, abortion aplenty, and the gay. Great result, that!

Mitch Daniels spoke of a “truce” on social issues but that is the wrong approach. Social conservatives rightly see this as them being asked to drop their social conservative agenda in an effort to draw in more libertarian types who are asked to drop nothing. Rather than a truce it is more of an agreed-upon strategy. Originalism and federalism.

We can do this.


181 posted on 05/10/2012 7:21:00 AM PDT by rogue yam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: RinaseaofDs
Great post.
I saw you page and I feel the same way.
182 posted on 05/11/2012 8:13:46 AM PDT by StormEye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-182 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson