Everyone knows by now that Clint Didier, despite having made it very clear during the primary season that he would support the GOP nominee, whomever it might be (and knowing that it could very well be Dino Rossi), has withheld his endorsement from said nominee. Rather than getting wholeheartedly behind Rossi, Didier chose to enumerate three conditions upon which his endorsment would be based.
I understand the issues involved are important to Didier – heck, they’re important to me! – but I think he may be failing to see the forest for the trees. (I wanted to use some really clever football lingo there, but, yeah. I don’t know anything about football.) So let me clear things up for Clint a bit and tell him everything he needs to know about Dino Rossi in order to feel good about an endorsement.
Here it is in a nutshell:
He’s not Patty Murray.
Yes, it really is that simple. Sure, we’d all prefer to vote for a candidate who shares all of our views and excites us with fiery rhetoric, but in the absence of that, we have to act like adults and ask ourselves, “What’s better? Something or nothing?”
Thank you! Amen and Ditto!
Exactly! It really is that simple.
Here’s your football analogy: Can’t see the end zone for the center’s back-side.
I am not sure if you made that simple enough for Clint. Perhaps you could use pictures?
You’d think he and his hardliners would be able to parse that out for themselves, but so far, not so much.
Pretty sure they’re the same ones that refused to participate in the 2008 election on purity principles. That worked.
I didn’t expect Clint Didier to cry “I’m going to take my ball and go home” when a call didn’t go the way he expected.
Right on! Bravo, Paula!
Yes, it is that simple. My dad voted for Didier and is now glad he has the chance to vote for Rossi, ANYONE but Patty.
Certainly you’ve summed it all up in a single sentence: “He’s not Patty Murray!” And if we can elect a candidate, ANY candidate that isn’t Patty Murray, who may take us to the exact same place by a slower route, as has been the indiputable track record of Rossi’s behavior and associates, and, in the process, ruin the “Republican” brand in the public’s eye (thus creating a pendulum effect, where we swing back and forth between a slow approach to full socialism and a fast approach to full socialism, never actually reducing government) making the eventual destruction of the Republic, national bankruptcy and the loss of all our freedom inevitable and inescapable, well, WHY WOULDN’T WE WANT TO DO THAT?
And so what’s your solution? Patty Murray vs Dino Rossi is the choice we have to work with. Would it be better to continue on the fast road?
I think it’s rather important to put the brake on unbridled growth as much as we can, while continuing to work for a climate that would be conducive to electing ever more conservative candidates.