If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Driving through mass yesterday I was surprised how many faker signs I saw. Big ones too
I used to think this way, but I'm coming around to the opposite view.Still dont understand the logic of voting to make things *worse* for yourself......
Yes, Charlie Baker is an archetype RINO.
Yes, he is only a slender thread away from being (not just a liberal...but) a Massachusetts liberal
Yes, he is an anti-Trump spineless jellyfish of a politician
....BUT....is he worse than the alternative?
I would argue, no, the alternative is worse. Baker fails miserably on many fronts, but he is not the worst possible option and since I am not going to be fleeing this state within the next four years - I will vote for the person who is most likely to do me the least amount of harm
I used to think this way, but I'm coming around to the opposite view.
The problem is that Baker is a Democrat. Not just a RINO or a spineless jellyfish, but a straight-up center-left Democrat. That is not good for MA or for the MA Republican Party and at a certain point he has to face consequences for that.
His campaigning for the bathroom bill and writing a pro-transgender op-ed in an LGBT magazine sealed the deal for me - this guy is doing permanent damage to this state by turning legitimate issues that are up for debate and SHOULD be partisan issues, issues where we need to RESIST, into bipartisan issues of "discrimination".
Tim McD, If the choice was between Patrick or Baker who would you pick?
I understand the sentiment, but I disagree on the *where* you punish him for being faithless (which he is)
The primaries is where you weed out the faithless, the RINOs and the poser frauds - not the general election. There was a challenger in the primary and that challenge fell short.
The general election is where you pick the person who is going to do you least harm - no matter how repugnant you find the candidate. I think that the folks that vote against the candidate that is least likely to inflict harm - whether by voting for a more dangerous candidate or blanking the ticket which is essentially the same thing - are not claiming the moral high ground....they are misdirecting their protest
Work against a RINO in the primaries, vote against the Democrat in the general elections and influence / lobby the RINO post election through contributions to GOAL (local) and NRA (national)
If each election were completely independent of the others, I would agree. But that's not the case. In sports terms, it's not about winning the game or even the series, it's about building up the franchise.
Elections, society, and public discourse are dynamic, not static. What Baker is doing is shifting the Overton Window of what's expected of a Republican in this state. If he wins re-election, it will substantially negatively affect the chances of a more convervative candidate winning in the future.
In the future, a Republican that doesn't full-throatedly support the idea that we should pump a little boy full of cancer causing estrogen, mutilate his genitals, and let him loose in the girls locker room just because he thinks hes a girl, will be branded as a transphobic sexist bigot homophobe that's to the right of Baker.
In sports, sometimes you have rebuilding years where you give up a shot at the title to make moves to ensure the future of the franchise. That's what MA Republicans need.
That’s my thought as welll. If Lively wasn’t so damn far right I think he’d have a chance.Charlie is the lessor of the evils, don't want a democrat and Lively is so far right he is off the page. Just my opinion