If he’d gotten his way, we’d have squishes Bennett and Crist instead of conservatives Lee and Rubio.

Why IN keeps him is beyond explanation.

We only have one challenger to Dick Lugar right now, and he is a well-respected and formidable conservative – our State Treasurer, Richard Mourdock.

So, PLEASE donate to Richard Mourdock at http://www.richardmourdock.com

Let’s beat Lugar – he’s basically a Dem on many issues anyway!

that Mitch Daniels would turn to on foreign policy?!!!

Ur either with us or ‘agin us.

That’s why O’Donnell and Angle were perfectly good candidates. It’s not about reading a teleprompter anymore.

d(^_^)b
http://libertyatstake.blogspot.com/
“Because the Only Good Progressive is a Failed Progressive”

Are you really claiming that the primary winner is always the candidate best positioned to have the best result possible in the general election? That’s patently absurd. Of course Mike Castle would do a lot better than Christine O’Donnell in the general election – the electorate is much different (it’s larger and moderate/centrist/independent/low-info voters come into play) and the scrutiny is higher, which highlights the candidates flaws. For instances, I still believe Reagan would have beaten Carter in ’76.

So yeah, your thesis doesn’t make any sense and it’s a poor refutation of Lugar’s claim – you’re duped into his trick of making every “tea party” candidate one and the same (not a novel mistake around here, see the endorsment of O’Donnell because she decided to babble some Tea Party sounding lines). The right point of attack here is to simply state that Mourdock, unlike Angle or O’Donnell, is a good candidate who has a good chance of winning the general election.

He wasn’t a bad candidate. Unfortunately, he wasn’t the candidate with the better chance to beat Bennet, so a relatively unknown Senator (we called him “Senator Who?”) that never saw a spending bill that he didn’t like was reelected in an election cycle that favored Republicans.

He comes off as a real elitist. he needs to get the boot.

Angle won a plurality of the votes at 40%. That means that 60% voted against her. There were two other strong conservative candidates (Lowden and Tarkanian) that could have done better in the general election and did not have the baggage that Angle did.

Also while Castle lost the GOP primary, he would have done much better attracting crossover votes from independents and Dems. Of course, we would be in only very, very mildly better shape. As you point out he probably would not have voted to repeal Obamacare and he would have been a constant threat to switch parties.

Mourdock has won state-wide office, indicating some state-wide appeal, name recognition, and campaign infrastructure.

As one of the county chairmen that endorsed Richard Mourdock over Dick Lugar, I can’t say that I’m surprised by this email (which I likewise received).
 
This sort of “listen to your betters” communication is par for the course for Lugar lately. There’s a haughty arrogance and condescension that seems to be the prerequisite of that campaign ever since there were even whisperings that Mourdock might run (and there were grumblings against Lugar for many years long before that).
 
But what struck me about the email was not so much that he called Mourdock supporters and his own party’s county chairmen “dupes.” What struck me was the paragraph near the end (which Leon didn’t quote) where Lugar threatened to run as an independent, basically telling Mourdock supporters and party leaders that they should “rally” to him, and saying that he would run without them (presumably outside of the Republican Party as an independent) if they did not do so.

I’ve never seen a campaign email like this before. “Support me, or I’ll run and win without you.” That’s a whole new level of arrogance. In fact, arrogant doesn’t begin to cover it.
 
I also don’t buy for one second the Lugar argument that Mourdock is unelectable. He led the Republican ticket in Indiana in 2010. In fact, he got more votes in Joe Donnelly’s district (the likely Democratic Senate nominee) than Donnelly got.

of being told that WE have to compromise and change…that WE have to “reach out” and be more inclusive. NEVER are the Dems lectured to do ANY of this.

I’m sick and tired of the Washington Post and the MSM selecting OUR candidates.

And BTW, I always thought that Luger looks exactly like Quark the Feringi on Star Trek Deep Space Nine.

“it’s ridiculous to claim that the GOP would have done better if it had nominated the candidates who were routed by the aforementioned bad candidates in the primary.”

You seriously have no realistic grasp on how primaries work if that’s the case. Of course the voters in the Republican primary are going to be more conservative and thus prefer a more conservative candidate. That doesn’t at all mean that one of the losers of the primary wouldn’t be able to court the middle of the masses in a general election.

Lugar is upset because the Tea Party did not support him. The Tea Party found that he was not their cup of tea.

state and national, be closed to those who are not registered members of that particular party.

In our state, there are more so-called ‘unenrolled’ voters who like to create mischief by voting in the primaries for opponents they would like to face their preferred candidates.

As long as I’m in my ‘would like to see’ mode, I’d like to see a national primary day replace the current process of just a few states being allowed to select our final candidates. That is OUTMODED and needs to disappear!