The Problems That Come With What's Considered "Electability"

Not to rip open old Mike Castle/Christine O'Donnell wounds and rub salt in them. This does not concern them. Well, just a little to help set up some context.

It is more along the lines of declaring a certain candidate unelectable and focusing on the one that is 'electable'. A rift that I think will be forming here in Virginia with the primary between Jamie Ratdke and George Allen.

More often than not, the 'electable' candidate is the one who sells out conservative interests for votes. Mike Castle is the easy pick to demonstrate this example. Many of the issues that matter, he would vote against. Cap and Trade. Abortion. Illegal Immigration (I'm going with my gut on this one because I can't remember for sure but I think it's a safe bet). Is there any indication in this guy's past to show that he would vote the right way when it would come to something like repealing the incandescent light bulb ban? No. But yet I was told to shut up, get in line and be happy that a "Republican" might win.

How is electing a quish of a Republican like Mike Castle going to turn back the wheels of an ever increasing federal state?

The same thing is happening in Virginia. Jamie Ratdke is running for Senate, same with George Allen.

People are saying that Ratdke is unelectable right out. One such person is my friend Beth (not a strawman. Or strawwoman). Ratdke is to the right of Allen but people say she's unlectable.

Let the primary do it's job and see who wins then.

I'm not blind to the fact that we need a lot more Republicans elected to the Senate to undo anything of importance but if more Scott Browns are elected who do vote for crap like the Frank/Dodd Regulatory bill, what's the use? Someone said this in the comments over at Spade's shack (can't remember where) but it went something like: Need enough Republicans to win the House. Need enough Republicans to win the Senate. Need enough Republicans to win a veto proof Congress and to win the Presidency. And to keep that way they can't do anything controversial.

Conventional thinking like that does not repeal light bulb bans.

Short of a Great Communicator emerging, I don't see the answer.