DeWine's biggest asset always was that the Democrats would have to actually nominate a candidate to run against him. If the law allowed them to run "a Democrat to be named later," he would lose badly.

They strong-armed antiwar Iraq vet Paul Hackett into staying out of the race to make things easier for Brown. The strange thing is that Brown's position on Iraq is virtually the same as Hackett's, but Hackett is probably to the right of Brown on most other issues.

When you are to the left of moonbat hero like Hackett, you need to be careful not to fall off the edge . . .

I'm not so sure that (and wouldn't be surprised if) DeWine doesn't become the Ohio conservatives' sacrificial lamb. He may bear the brunt of their ire and lose enough votes (he has little support) to get beat by an unknown leftist just to teach the RINOs a lesson. If it were Voinovich running this certainly would be the case.

Senator Dewine's race with Sherod Brown demonstrates the problem facing conservatives like me. Although Mike is pro life he is one of the gang of 14 and voted for the Senate Immigration bill both in committee and on the floor. These positions make me want to stay home but... Sherod Brown as my Senattor? not if I can help it. Senator Metzenbaum was sufficient embarrasement for Ohio in my lifetime. Brown would be worse. It is a tough but clear choice.

There's the rub.

Brown makes Metzenbaum look like a moderate.

Those who think they can "teach RINOs a lesson" by electing a moonbat will only "teach" them that they might as well ignore conservatives as undependable allies, and seek more support from the middle.

Conservatives have been "sending a message" for years. Buchanan sent several; Howard Phillips sends them all the time. Do these "conservatives" have a greater or lesser voice in the Republican Party as a result of the "messages" they sent?

;-)

Adjoran said:

Those who think they can "teach RINOs a lesson" by electing a moonbat will only "teach" them that they might as well ignore conservatives as undependable allies, and seek more support from the middle.

You said the same thing in the Murtha thread. Now, considering that the GOP is pretty much ignoring us anyway (particularly on fiscal and border security issues), why bother to vote at all?

Allies are allies because they share common interests or goals. When they stop sharing those interests or goals, then they stop being allies. Just ask Harry Truman or Joseph Stalin.

As a Texan, I can't vote in Ohio either way, but I would like to see ALL Senate RINO's defeated..... (McCain, Snowe, Chaffee, Graham, Hagel, DeWine, Susan Collins) EXCEPT for the very bad alternatives.

Sherrod Brown is the "skunk at the picnic" that will probably see "Whinny" DeWine re-elected.

I think all people who don't want to vote for their friendly neighborhood RINO should write in "Charlie Brown". And let the government spend all elections night counting write-in votes.

I will have trouble voting for Dewine, but I won't vote for Brown. Charlie Brown if he would not show up, would do less damage as a Senator than either one of these candidates.

I grew up in Ohio, my mother a legal secretary in the Dayton area...Mike DeWine was a weasel then, and sadly most are not aware at just how RADICALLY RIGHT WING he really is. My mother shared a story with us one night about Mike DeWine because she was so livid and upset with him that day. The long and the short of it, was the Mike DeWine had stated he wanted to be the first person to see a woman sentenced to death for getting and abortion....now, I admit this is heresay, and since my mother is passed away, have no way of proving it, but since that dinner conversation so many years ago, I've always felt that Mike DeWine was FAR TO EXTREME to fairly represent ALL OF HIS VOTERS, which is what his job is supposed to be.