Jeffrey Lord at The American Spectator hits one out of the park with his “The Ruling Class hits Christine O’Donnell.” Okay, I’ll admit it. Even John Doe sometimes worries that the better conservative Republicans can’t win in the liberal states and that maybe the more liberal RINOs should be elected. “Better 60 Lindsay Grahams than 40 Jim DeMints” RINOs want you to believe. But the statement begins with a false, unstated premise: that RINOs can win where conservatives cannot. That false premise ignores the fact that when given a choice between a Democrat and a fake-Democrat, voters will more often choose the real Democrat. Mr. Lord points out in this lengthy quote from his must read article, conservatives can win:
“As a Pennsylvanian, it is well-remembered here that liberal Republicans insisted in 1976 that Reagan was an extremist and the GOP had to go with President Castle — er — Ford. So the argument carried the day. And Ford not only lost the election itself he couldn’t even carry Pennsylvania. By 1980, voters got the drift. Not only was Reagan nominated over Bush, he carried 44 states in 1980 and 49 states in 1984 — including Pennsylvania both times. Bush, by the way, ran on Reagan’s coattails in 1988 and carried the state. In 1992, fully on his own after four years in the White House himself, he lost both the election and — yes — Pennsylvania.”
“Just last year, hearing the news that liberal Republican Arlen Specter had defected to the Democrats because the Christine O’Donnell of Pennsylvania — Pat Toomey — was clobbering him in GOP primary polls, South Carolina’s Senator Lindsey Graham took to the cameras to lecture conservatives that they had wronged Specter and Toomey couldn’t win. Why? Because in Pennsylvania we supposedly only elect GOP liberals. Toomey, as this is written, is leading liberal Democrat Joe Sestak by ten points.”
“The argument — used to justify nominating all manner of moderate Republicans at the presidential and state level from Specter on back to Reagan — is bogus. Conservatives can and have won elections in the Northeast. But more to the point: what if they lose? Is this election about having a Ruling Class candidate and member of the fraternity who’s a “good guy” (or girl) who immediately sets about continuing to build what Goldwater once described as “The Dime Store New Deal”? Or is it about moving the philosophical ball down the field as Goldwater and Buckley did, the latter who could easily have been described as an “itinerant conservative commentator and activist” to use the description applied to O’Donnell. Indeed, if conservatives had a nickel for every time Buckley was dismissed by the Ruling Class as a “conservative gadfly,” we would all be surviving Obamanomics in style.”
Bingo. The good old boys at The Wall Street Journal and at NRO are sticking by their good old boy RINO Mike Castle. Some are perhaps forgetting that conservatives can and do win elections–when they are true conservatives such as Reagan–not wannabes such as George Bush or John McCain, or worse, RINOs.
“Conservatives” out-number liberals. We just have to start acting like it, and not conceding victory without even trying to the liberals. If a conservative cannot win in this political environment, then they probably can’t win ever. But I think good ones can, and the polls seem to be on my side.
Addendum: No, Jim Garaghty, your stupid support for Mike Castle does not automatically make you one of “the ruling class.” Some stupid decision are just based on pure stupidity. Why do you think they call them “useful idiots?”