Nate: Don't Pawn Your Lisa Murkowski Gear Just Yet

[Dgov]

Lunar, the Democratic Party is so smart, that's exactly what has gotten them to where they are today. About to
(1) suffer historic losses
(2) to the most extreme right wing Republican party in living memory
(3) just two years after the most failed Republican President in living memory.

Gee, maybe pushing a leftist agenda on a country that doesn't want it wasn't such a good idea.

[Dgov]

Lunar, the Democratic Party is so smart, that's exactly what has gotten them to where they are today. About to
(1) suffer historic losses
(2) to the most extreme right wing Republican party in living memory
(3) just two years after the most failed Republican President in living memory.

Gee, maybe pushing a leftist agenda on a country that doesn't want it wasn't such a good idea.

What leftist agenda?

The one you guys have been complaining hasn't been liberal enough since 2009. 

[Dgov]

I concur, it's not a matter of some of these people being dumb, it's about them being too radical. If the Republicans expect to remain a viable party, they cannot continue to purge moderates.

Really?  You mean the people who ruined the GOP's image in the early Bush years with their prolific spending and lack of any resemblance of fiscal restraint?  There's a reason that Republicans have a far less favorable opinion of their own party than Democrats do.  People respond well to politicians making responsible choices--take a look at McDonnell and Christie in Virginia and New Jersey to see what nominating stalwart Conservatives did to the GOP.  These people are making the spending cuts that moderates considered to be "too extreme" or "too controversial" and are highly popular in their states for doing so.

So if you think the GOP is going to die by daring embracing Conservatism again, I have to one thing to say.  People support elected officials to make actual policy changes--not to get re-elected.  If the getting tangible fiscal restraint means no return to the "Permanent Republican Majority" of the Bush Years, that's fine by me.

[Dgov]

You're aware that, once elected, "non-establishment" candidates eventually do become "establishment" by become more active in the party, unless they're epic fail like Bunning. I mean, even Rand Paul has been sucking up to McConnell lately.

Maybe you'll find out eventually, if Rick Scott is elected, becomes the face of the Florida GOP, starts to pick proteges...

That's why we need strict term limits, cut pay for all elected officials and keep sessions of government to under half the year. Basically "politician" shouldn't be a job position it should be a service position strictly.

Yes, make sure elected officials never develop experience and create a bunch of part time legislators led around the nose by full time lobbyists. That a great way to give paower "back to the people".

I think a better idea would be to force all legislatures to live in the worst part of every state (like the broken down urban blight places), and spend 3 hours a day tied up in a public place where people can throw rotten tomatoes at them.  That'll weed out the career politicians nicely .

On a more serious note, I think the biggest problem is that the simple act of being elected a legislator is enough of a status symbol for people to want the office simply for the office.  So long as people treat the office as a grand blessing there will always be those who seek it for less than noble purposes.