Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 48

Thread: Mike Castle Won't Endorse Christine O'Donnell

  1. #1
    Educating the Ignorant
    zimmer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:20 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    14,419
    Blog Entries
    12

    Mike Castle Won't Endorse Christine O'Donnell

    Republican Rep. Mike Castle of Delaware will not endorse Republican Senate nominee Christine O'Donnell, the Tea Party-backed candidate who beat him in the GOP primary, CBS News has confirmed.

    Mike Castle Won't Endorse Christine O'Donnell - Political Hotsheet - CBS News
    A few points:

    1. Scores another goal on his own team.
    2. So much for ahhhh... being a Big-Tent Republican.
    3. Sore loser. Politics is a rough sport; he's proven himself to be a whiny pussy.

    Good riddance.

    As an aside: I notice CBS and others like to say she is "Tea Party-backed"... which is fine. I only wish they would write their stories about Obama (and Dems) with Alinsky-Styled, ACLU-backed, ACORN-backed, Rev. Wright mentored etc.

    .
    Last edited by zimmer; 09-16-10 at 06:53 AM.
    The Clintons are what happens...
    when you have NO MORAL COMPASS.

  2. #2
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,281

    Re: Mike Castle Won't Endorse Christine O'Donnell

    He doesn't play well with others.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  3. #3
    Sage
    samsmart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,316
    Blog Entries
    37

    Re: Mike Castle Won't Endorse Christine O'Donnell

    Quote Originally Posted by zimmer View Post
    A few points:

    1. Scores another goal on his own team.
    2. So much for ahhhh... being a Big-Tent Republican.
    3. Sore loser. Politics is a rough sport; he's proven himself to be a whiny pussy.

    Good riddance.

    As an aside: I notice CBS and others like to say she is "Tea Party-backed"... which is fine. I only wish they would write their stories about Obama (and Dems) with Alinsky-Styled, ACLU-backed, ACORN-backed, Rev. Wright mentored etc.

    .
    I don't know why this is a big deal. After all, they don't share political views. That's why the primary was so heated, after all - Castle is more socially liberal than O'Donnell is. So why should a politician who doesn't share political views with a candidate be forced to endorse a candidate?

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ft. Campbell, KY
    Last Seen
    12-31-14 @ 08:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    12,177

    Re: Mike Castle Won't Endorse Christine O'Donnell

    Quote Originally Posted by samsmart View Post
    I don't know why this is a big deal. After all, they don't share political views. That's why the primary was so heated, after all - Castle is more socially liberal than O'Donnell is. So why should a politician who doesn't share political views with a candidate be forced to endorse a candidate?
    Because the party is supposed to trump individual beliefs :/

  5. #5
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,281

    Re: Mike Castle Won't Endorse Christine O'Donnell

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    Because the party is supposed to trump individual beliefs :/
    Exactly what the founders were afraid of.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  6. #6
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,967

    Re: Mike Castle Won't Endorse Christine O'Donnell

    I don't have any huge problem with it. I am kind of interested to see what the view is of those that sat there in the primary threads chastising Republican voters and republican supporters of this for choosing to take an action that would essentially help the other side win. Because what he's doing is actively taking action that will help the other side. I'm just curious to see if they'll have equal condemnation for him.

    To me its much like the race in NY. One, it shows the voters they may've made a good choice when the guy turns around and refuses to support the candidate that the people nominated. If he doesn't agree with that person politically and thus won't support them, then why should the people who nominated that person have supported the other guy in the first place? The New York one was even more telling because when faced between the democrat and republican the former GOP candidate sided with supporting the democrat, and yet people were SHOCKED that people would dare consider that person a RINO.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ft. Campbell, KY
    Last Seen
    12-31-14 @ 08:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    12,177

    Re: Mike Castle Won't Endorse Christine O'Donnell

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    I don't have any huge problem with it. I am kind of interested to see what the view is of those that sat there in the primary threads chastising Republican voters and republican supporters of this for choosing to take an action that would essentially help the other side win. Because what he's doing is actively taking action that will help the other side. I'm just curious to see if they'll have equal condemnation for him.
    Interesting question, makes me think because I was one of those people. I suppose you could argue that the purpose of being a member of a political party is mutual support amongst members, even if they were once competing. But at the same time we could use your arguement about personal beliefs being held higher than a desire to win. We've all seen democrats and republicans both support or refuse to support people they clearly disagreed with. So since there's no standard or rule, although there's certainly a expectation, in both parties to support the individual who defeats you, I guess its up to Castle himself. Luckily for Castle he seems to be generally on the side of the Republican party in not really supporting O'Donnell, if the Republican party were fully supporting O'Donnell than he probably would be encouraged/threatned with the possibility of lack of party support, similar to O'Donnell's situation now, in any of his future campaigns.

    I suppose if I was in his place I would refuse to support her as well, since the pragmatic solution for him personally is to not support her. But if I was the leadership of the Republican party, and I was supporting O'Donnell, I'm be pushing Castle hard to support her for the betterment of the party. However since he doesnt seem to be getting forced by his party bosses, or money handlers, to support her he really has no motivation to do so, and neither would I in his situation. But then again if he had a real interest in seeing any Republican win, then he would have that motivation, although he's probably pretty bitter.

  8. #8
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,967

    Re: Mike Castle Won't Endorse Christine O'Donnell

    Exactly Wiseone.

    I don't think there's any reason he should HAVE to.

    But if you're going to condemn the consevative voters of Delaware for "essentially voting for the Democrat" or "not being pragmatic regarding the best way to get their views passed", then one would have to condemn Castle. Not putting his support behind O'Donnell hurts her chances of beating the democrat. Not helping her beat the candidate makes it less likely for Castles views to be passed.

    You speak of various reasons why it'd be okay for Castle to not endorse her, and I agree whole heartedly with you on those. I just don't see it as being something where someone can support Castle doing this while condemning the people of Delaware for the election results.

  9. #9
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    11-28-17 @ 04:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,690

    Re: Mike Castle Won't Endorse Christine O'Donnell

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    I don't have any huge problem with it. I am kind of interested to see what the view is of those that sat there in the primary threads chastising Republican voters and republican supporters of this for choosing to take an action that would essentially help the other side win. Because what he's doing is actively taking action that will help the other side. I'm just curious to see if they'll have equal condemnation for him.

    To me its much like the race in NY. One, it shows the voters they may've made a good choice when the guy turns around and refuses to support the candidate that the people nominated. If he doesn't agree with that person politically and thus won't support them, then why should the people who nominated that person have supported the other guy in the first place? The New York one was even more telling because when faced between the democrat and republican the former GOP candidate sided with supporting the democrat, and yet people were SHOCKED that people would dare consider that person a RINO.
    My guess is that such a situation can easily backfire in an environment characterized by strong public disaffection with the current state of affairs. For example, the winning candidates who have been riding an anti-Establishment message could easily argue that the response of their defeated rivals proves that those candidates lacked any high-minded desire to serve the public. Instead, they sought office largely to preserve a status quo that the voters increasingly dislike.

    In that narrative, rather than seeking to advance the public welfare, those defeated candidates were cynically seeking the Republican nomination as a vehicle to fulfill their own quest for political power at the expense of the voters' needs, desires and interests. They could argue, the lack of gracious post-election response by their defeated opponents, even implicit support of the political Opposition, finally unmasks their true motivations and that those motivations had very little to do with public service. As a result, the winning candidates could actually paint the losing candidates into an example of precisely what many perceive is wrong with American politics today: political leaders putting their interests ahead of those of the people, political leaders readily sacrificing principle in a selfish pursuit of their own power, and political leaders casting aside the public's desires to try to perpetuate a system that they have leveraged for personal advantage over many years while incumbents, etc.
    Last edited by donsutherland1; 09-16-10 at 10:17 AM.

  10. #10
    Sage
    Dezaad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Last Seen
    06-28-15 @ 10:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    5,058
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Mike Castle Won't Endorse Christine O'Donnell

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    I don't have any huge problem with it. I am kind of interested to see what the view is of those that sat there in the primary threads chastising Republican voters and republican supporters of this for choosing to take an action that would essentially help the other side win. Because what he's doing is actively taking action that will help the other side. I'm just curious to see if they'll have equal condemnation for him.

    To me its much like the race in NY. One, it shows the voters they may've made a good choice when the guy turns around and refuses to support the candidate that the people nominated. If he doesn't agree with that person politically and thus won't support them, then why should the people who nominated that person have supported the other guy in the first place? The New York one was even more telling because when faced between the democrat and republican the former GOP candidate sided with supporting the democrat, and yet people were SHOCKED that people would dare consider that person a RINO.
    Maybe he simply thinks she's crazy.
    You can never be safe from a government that can keep you completely safe from each other and the world. You must choose.

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •