Yes, helping our state make a hard left instead sounds like a great plan. And once these things shift, it's so easy to get incumbents out. Brilliant philosophy

Tea Party said:

---

TAMUallen said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

TAMUallen said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

TAMUallen said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

OldArmy71 said:

---

Quote:

---

I'm just going to abstain in the general if Cornyn wins the runoff and there isn't a third party option, but I'll never vote for a Dem.

---

Abstaining is voting for Talarico.

---

Show me the math how Talarico's vote total goes up if a person abstains.

Cornyn is not entitled to a conservatives vote just because he has an R next to his name. He lost any chance at that priviledge due to his own non-conservative tenure.

---

My privilege will be defeating Talarico in any way possible. First step is ensuring Paxton is his opponent. If I lose that, I'm not stopping the objective of defeating Talarico

---

And I respect your position on defeating Talarico. I don't want him winning either. But I'd rather Talarico lose in a close race vs Cornyn without my vote rather than Cornyn win in a landslide with my vote. I hope there are more that think like me but unfortunately I think the a significant portion of the right has given up on pursuing conservative ideology and instead prefers slow suicide with RINO's because they aren't D's.

The people that vote Cornyn in the runoff have their poor vote validated if Cornyn wins by a lot, and I want no part in enabling the masses to continue making poor voting choices.

There is a small chance that the idiot masses could learn their lesson if their candidate barely wins with low turnout. And that's a risk I'm willing to take because I firmly believe that D's and conservatives are politically incompatible and pretending the continueing of the usual Team R vs Team D is a fools errand in the long run.

---

I do not like Cornyn. I do not like RINOs. I will not enable the potential win of a Senator that's a far left democrat fake Christian

It's just that simple. That's a losing game to play by making a potential Democrat win easier (if it ends up regretfully being a Cornyn Talarico race)

---

Do you have a line you will draw where you won't vote for a R in the general?

What if McCain was alive and running in Cornyn's place?
Or Lindsey Graham? Or Crenshaw, or whoever you can think of that is your least favorite R past or present?

Hopefully you at least have a line where you can put policy over party, otherwise what is the point of politics if your "team" is automatically awarded your vote regardless of the quality of candidate or how idiotic the masses are in choosing the primary winner?

I don't think an overwhelming majority of D's have a line, which proves my point that we are incompatible and pretending to play that game with them with the same GOP party that has proven time and time again that it will not fight for us is a fools errand. The GOP needs new blood if you want to win that game.

---

I dont have an allegiance to a party.

I am doing my part by voting Paxton and supporting the removal of RINOs

If I'm in the position of RINO or a much worse Democrat... my vote goes to the RINO due to that being the better of the two undesired outcomes.

Not that hard to figure out. The time to take a stand was before candidates were locked in, not after.

---

Great response, but my question about do you have a line sounds like you don't have one at all regarding voting R no matter what. If Fetterman switched parties and claimed to be an R, and the GOP welcomed him for whatever reason, and he somehow was eligible to run in Cornyn's place, you are saying you would vote for Fetterman in the general because he has an R by his name?

I'm hoping you would say no. And my point is that any sane person would have a line where they would not choose party over policy, and my line is to the right of Cornyn. That is fine if your line is to the left of him (I admit I'd rather Cornyn win rather than Talarico). But I won't vote for him because I believe it enables the same "R no matter what" nonsense that enables the GOP to continue drifting left because they know they have supporters that will blindly support them.

---

My ideal candidate that matches my beliefs perfectly will never exist. I vote for the best candidate possible, not the letter next to a name. I'm not abstaining from a vote, then thinking that I'm showing a party a lesson by making it easier for the worst outcome to happen.

End of discussion. I will not be replying any more on this subject.

Exactly. Every single election I have ever voted in was a matter of "which of these individuals' policies most closely align to mine?" Talarico vs either of these guys is the no-brainer of no-brainers. We are at the edge of a massive free-fall and have to keep Dems out of office. Every Senate vote is absolutely critical, and if they get the Presidency in 2028 and have both chambers in their pocket (with the help of a Texas Senator for that entire term), some things are going to change that will never be unwound. Ever.

https://www.instagram.com/p/DYXr7ico7U2/?igsh=MTc0Z2swcmFvdDl0dw==

250k is Texas, killing another student at a track meet on video. NGO's at work

Let's also talk practicality. Paxton in his one man led Texas AG shop has a lot of power to get **** done. In the Senate, he's just going to be another dude voting almost entirely (if not exactly) how Cornyn would. It's not the same game. I'm a huge Cruz fan, but let's be honest, what's he meaningfully getting done there other than holding the line against Dems just like either of these other two would?

There never is a perfect, or even exceptional candidate and only a fool would wait for one before voting. I don't know why you think that's relevant to the discussion.

I understand your thought promise of voting for the best candidate but It's amazing that any conservative would vote for a Fetterman type in the general rather than stopping to look around and wonder how we got here and how can we fix this.

You dont have to respond but hopefully you at least think a little further into the future and beyond this single vote because Cornyn types and the people that vote for them in the primary are either ok, apathetic, or ignorant that it's causing us to go off the cliff.

You fix it in the primary. Maybe you should cut some bigger checks and campaign harder for your guy to make that happen if your principles are so sound and strong. What you don't do is shoot your d*** off in the general by helping grease the path for the Dems to take that seat for 6 years and very possibly beyond. Again, we are on the precipice of some absolutely destructive changes that will never be unwound. On the flipside, for all the talk, this runoff is between two guys who are going to vote the same

DannyDuberstein said:

---

Ag87H2O said:

---

The only way Talarico wins is if Republicans stay home and don't vote on November . Regardless of whether Paxton or Cornyn wins, Republicans need to hold this seat. If for no other reason, it is critical for maintaining leadership and control of the committee chairmans.

We should all be able to agree on this.

---

This. I really don't understand the mindset to just stay home and let Dems take the seat. It's moronic. It is not noble. It is pure stupidity.

---

DannyDuberstein said:

---

You fix it in the primary. Maybe you should cut some bigger checks and campaign harder for your guy to make that happen if your principles are so sound and strong. What you don't do is shoot your d*** off in the general

---

And when those bigger checks and harder campaigning fail and your peers still leave you with Beto lite vs the worst R you can think of in the general, you still expect pulling the lever for the worst R to be a logical choice?

You won't start to wonder why your peers made such a dumb choice in the primary and whether you going along with these types of choices is a viable long term?

Because people going along with these types of choices is how you enable slow suicide via ignorant masses rather than taking risks in the hopes of a better long term solution via cultural engagement.

I don't think this Louisiana election plays any part in Trumps decision on when/who to endorse. When has he ever been concerned about noise?

Letting the Dem take office is greasing the path to suicide. Again, it isn't noble. It is far more destructive and it is pure idiocy.

DannyDuberstein said:

---

Letting the Dem take office is greasing the path to suicide. Again, it isn't noble. It is far more destructive and it is pure idiocy.

---

Then we damn sure better primary the POS dem running as a Republican.

Science Denier said:

---

DannyDuberstein said:

---

Letting the Dem take office is greasing the path to suicide. Again, it isn't noble. It is far more destructive and it is pure idiocy.

---

Then we damn sure better primary the POS dem running as a Republican.

---

And that primary loser NEEDS to be Cornholio! He's already proven he'll vote with Dems when Repubs need him most.

I think the only way Talarico can win this seat is if the Dems have somehow figured out how to cheat massively in the state of Texas. I don't think they'll be able to do that.

Science Denier said:

---

DannyDuberstein said:

---

Letting the Dem take office is greasing the path to suicide. Again, it isn't noble. It is far more destructive and it is pure idiocy.

---

Then we damn sure better primary the POS dem running as a Republican.

---

I get that this is the cutesy way to paint Cornyn, but he has consistently confirmed every Trump appointment and voted with him. It's a dumb argument compared to the actual Dem. Some of yall feel so strongly but I don't hear much of you doing anything about it

I voted Paxton and will again before you paint me as some Cornyn fanboy. But I'm also not an idiot

Ag87H2O said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Ag CPA said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

agwrestler said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

Cornyn is a colossal piece of ***** I'll vote against him again!

---

Ill vote for the Dem if.....

---

I can't think of a single IF scenario that would make me vote for a Dem.

I'm just going to abstain in the general if Cornyn wins the runoff and there isn't a third party option, but I'll never vote for a Dem.

---

Won't judge; I'm not going to vote for Paxton if he makes the general. Besides, if he needs my vote to win he probably deserves to lose.

---

Well, then, if Talarico wins over Paxton, we fully expect you to be quiet about the Talarico 6 year (at least) term as Senator. Since you helped to elect him...no complaining when you could have done something to prevent it.

---

Same can be said for Cornyn supporters.

I've said repeatedly I would vote for the Republican candidate.

---

I'm not a Cornyn supporter.

I want the Republican to win.

If a better candidate than Paxton was available, I would be rooting for them.

Cornyn, unfortunately, has a better chance of beating Talarico than Paxton does.

Tea Party said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Ag87H2O said:

---

The only way Talarico wins is if Republicans stay home and don't vote on November . Regardless of whether Paxton or Cornyn wins, Republicans need to hold this seat. If for no other reason, it is critical for maintaining leadership and control of the committee chairmans.

We should all be able to agree on this.

---

Well, we have a number of purportedly conservative people on here that have stated they won't vote if Paxton or Cornyn depending on which one they support in the primary...

So...that already shows that Talarico will do better no matter what, because Republican voters like to shoot themselves in the dick over "principle"...and the Democrats HAVE no principles..

---

What a dumb comparison. Yes, D's have no principles but to say the right must stoop to that level of no principles is a fools game.

If the choice is Dem vs Dem lite in Cornyn, then the obvious answer is to abstain or vote third party. With the reasoning being that the idiot voters that chose Cornyn in the runoff still have not learned their lesson after all the proof that he's not conservative and certainly not in it for his constituents. Enabling that poor voting just exacerbates the problem later.

If the choice is Dem vs new low risk in Paxton, then the obvious answer is to roll the dice on the new blood.

Saying they are the same is nonsensical unless your only goal is party over policy, which is the exact thinking that the Dem's and establishment GOP want you to fall for.

---

That's the obvious answer if you want Talarico to win. Fewer votes for the Republican candidate is exactly what the Dems want.

Talarico gets you 0% of what you want.

Cornyn gets you 75%.

And you'd rather shoot yourself in the dick and get Talarico just to teach "idiot voters" a lesson...

You'll really teach 'em good when you help hand a Texas Senate spot to the Dems for 6 years by staying home in November. Couching Cornyn and Talarico as Dem vs Dem Lite is one of the dumbest things i've ever seen posted on this board which says a lot.

Cornyn says some dumb **** at times, but he falls in line. I love Cruz but he hasn't been any more impactful.

Tea Party said:

---

OldArmy71 said:

---

Quote:

---

I'm just going to abstain in the general if Cornyn wins the runoff and there isn't a third party option, but I'll never vote for a Dem.

---

Abstaining is voting for Talarico.

---

Show me the math how Talarico's vote total goes up if a person abstains.

Cornyn is not entitled to a conservatives vote just because he has an R next to his name. He lost any chance at that priviledge due to his own non-conservative tenure.

---

Fewer votes for the Republican candidate helps the Dem candidate...

If the Republican ordinarily gets 1000 votes to win, but 200 normally Republican voters abstain or vote 3rd party, the Republican only gets 800 votes - so the Dem who ordinarily gets 820 votes and loses, now wins...

Math isn't hard...

TAMUallen said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

TAMUallen said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

OldArmy71 said:

---

Quote:

---

I'm just going to abstain in the general if Cornyn wins the runoff and there isn't a third party option, but I'll never vote for a Dem.

---

Abstaining is voting for Talarico.

---

Show me the math how Talarico's vote total goes up if a person abstains.

Cornyn is not entitled to a conservatives vote just because he has an R next to his name. He lost any chance at that priviledge due to his own non-conservative tenure.

---

My privilege will be defeating Talarico in any way possible. First step is ensuring Paxton is his opponent. If I lose that, I'm not stopping the objective of defeating Talarico

---

And I respect your position on defeating Talarico. I don't want him winning either. But I'd rather Talarico lose in a close race vs Cornyn without my vote rather than Cornyn win in a landslide with my vote. I hope there are more that think like me but unfortunately I think the a significant portion of the right has given up on pursuing conservative ideology and instead prefers slow suicide with RINO's because they aren't D's.

The people that vote Cornyn in the runoff have their poor vote validated if Cornyn wins by a lot, and I want no part in enabling the masses to continue making poor voting choices.

There is a small chance that the idiot masses could learn their lesson if their candidate barely wins with low turnout. And that's a risk I'm willing to take because I firmly believe that D's and conservatives are politically incompatible and pretending the continueing of the usual Team R vs Team D is a fools errand in the long run.

---

I do not like Cornyn. I do not like RINOs. I will not enable the potential win of a Senator that's a far left democrat fake Christian

It's just that simple. That's a losing game to play by making a potential Democrat win easier (if it ends up regretfully being a Cornyn Talarico race)

---

I want to WIN, not make a principled statement against a candidate that is not as good as I'd like (but is still much better than the other one)...

Principled statements are great on a bulletin board but they suck in the voting booth...

Ag with kids said:

---

Ag87H2O said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Ag CPA said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

agwrestler said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

Cornyn is a colossal piece of ***** I'll vote against him again!

---

Ill vote for the Dem if.....

---

I can't think of a single IF scenario that would make me vote for a Dem.

I'm just going to abstain in the general if Cornyn wins the runoff and there isn't a third party option, but I'll never vote for a Dem.

---

Won't judge; I'm not going to vote for Paxton if he makes the general. Besides, if he needs my vote to win he probably deserves to lose.

---

Well, then, if Talarico wins over Paxton, we fully expect you to be quiet about the Talarico 6 year (at least) term as Senator. Since you helped to elect him...no complaining when you could have done something to prevent it.

---

Same can be said for Cornyn supporters.

I've said repeatedly I would vote for the Republican candidate.

---

I'm not a Cornyn supporter.

I want the Republican to win.

If a better candidate than Paxton was available, I would be rooting for them.

Cornyn, unfortunately, has a better chance of beating Talarico than Paxton does.

---

I do not agree with Cornyn having a better chance even if previous polls had shown as such. I question the setup of the polls and accuracy

https://polymarket.com/politics/texas-senate

Paxton leading Cornyn 63-38 currently
Winning senate R to D 53-47

I think either would beat Talarico unless a solid number of the Paxton/Cornyn loser supporters throw a temper tantrum. That's the risk, and quite frankly, they both seem to have their share of dummies supporting them so I can't rule it out. Talarico can make it close enough for it to get dicey

DannyDuberstein said:

---

I think either would beat Talarico unless a solid number of the Paxton/Cornyn loser supporters throw a temper tantrum. That's the risk, and quite frankly, they both seem to have their share of dummies supporting them so I can't rule it out. Talarico can make it close enough for it to get dicey

---

Once we get into ads against Talarico he's going to sink like a stone. There arent 6 genders, God isn't non-binary, and senate candidates don't have hidden never seen girlfriends who are their "rock".

I hope so, but there are a lot of dummies out there. But yes, I would hope enough of them come to their senses about what a a horrendously stupid decision it would be to stay home or even worse vote for him.

DannyDuberstein said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

DannyDuberstein said:

---

Letting the Dem take office is greasing the path to suicide. Again, it isn't noble. It is far more destructive and it is pure idiocy.

---

Then we damn sure better primary the POS dem running as a Republican.

---

I get that this is the cutesy way to paint Cornyn, but he has consistently confirmed every Trump appointment and voted with him. It's a dumb argument compared to the actual Dem. Some of yall feel so strongly but I don't hear much of you doing anything about it

I voted Paxton and will again before you paint me as some Cornyn fanboy. But I'm also not an idiot

---

Cornyn went behind the scenes to do damage to conservatives. Over and over and over. When he failed, he did vote correctly. But he killed many conservative deals before they got started.

Ted Cruz, Trump, and most recently the save act. There are other examples.

Dude is a lib that knows he can't get elected as a lib in this state so he runs as a Republican.

Why do you think the Dems always went after Cruz's seat? Not that Cornyn couldn't be primaried. We see that right now. Nope. They don't want to touch their lib candidate that is in office.

For the record I've never sat out a vote. And I won't if Cornyn wins. But I'm going to fight like hell to see that he loses the promise. And I don't care how much the Bushes and their cronies get pissed. Maybe they will create another Lincoln project just for Texas.

Tea Party said:

---

TAMUallen said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

TAMUallen said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

OldArmy71 said:

---

Quote:

---

I'm just going to abstain in the general if Cornyn wins the runoff and there isn't a third party option, but I'll never vote for a Dem.

---

Abstaining is voting for Talarico.

---

Show me the math how Talarico's vote total goes up if a person abstains.

Cornyn is not entitled to a conservatives vote just because he has an R next to his name. He lost any chance at that priviledge due to his own non-conservative tenure.

---

My privilege will be defeating Talarico in any way possible. First step is ensuring Paxton is his opponent. If I lose that, I'm not stopping the objective of defeating Talarico

---

And I respect your position on defeating Talarico. I don't want him winning either. But I'd rather Talarico lose in a close race vs Cornyn without my vote rather than Cornyn win in a landslide with my vote. I hope there are more that think like me but unfortunately I think the a significant portion of the right has given up on pursuing conservative ideology and instead prefers slow suicide with RINO's because they aren't D's.

The people that vote Cornyn in the runoff have their poor vote validated if Cornyn wins by a lot, and I want no part in enabling the masses to continue making poor voting choices.

There is a small chance that the idiot masses could learn their lesson if their candidate barely wins with low turnout. And that's a risk I'm willing to take because I firmly believe that D's and conservatives are politically incompatible and pretending the continueing of the usual Team R vs Team D is a fools errand in the long run.

---

I do not like Cornyn. I do not like RINOs. I will not enable the potential win of a Senator that's a far left democrat fake Christian

It's just that simple. That's a losing game to play by making a potential Democrat win easier (if it ends up regretfully being a Cornyn Talarico race)

---

Do you have a line you will draw where you won't vote for a R in the general?

What if McCain was alive and running in Cornyn's place?
Or Lindsey Graham? Or Crenshaw, or whoever you can think of that is your least favorite R past or present?

Hopefully you at least have a line where you can put policy over party, otherwise what is the point of politics if your "team" is automatically awarded your vote regardless of the quality of candidate or how idiotic the masses are in choosing the primary winner?

I don't think an overwhelming majority of D's have a line, which is why I believe D's and conservatives are incompatible and pretending to play that game with them with the same GOP party that has proven time and time again that it will not fight for us is a fools errand. The GOP needs new blood if you want to win that game.

---

I would vote for any of those over Talarico.

Because I live here in reality world and realize that getting 75% of what I want is damn sure better than fighting a quixotic battle and ending up with 0% of what I want.

Yes, they are less than optimal - but they are better than the alternative.

Tea Party said:

---

mavsfan4ever said:

---

So by abstaining I guess you are half voting for talarico? It's a definite positive for talarico if you abstain (he will need one less vote to win). You are acting like it's a net neutral.

Quit being dense.

---

If it's this easy for you to say, then show your work. There is zero mathematical scenario that shows abstaining is going to increase talarico's vote total, by one or half or any other fraction.

His odds could go up, but only if you assume that RINO's should automatically be awarded a conservatives vote. Same question to you, what if instead of Cornyn your least favorite R is running vs Beto lite? Do you still pull the lever for them and kick the can down the road or do you finally realize that we have bigger societal and political issues than this single vote if that is the choice the idiot masses go for in the primary?

---

Talarico's vote total doesn't go up. BUT, the amount of votes he needs to beat his opponent goes down...making it easier for him to win.

We all get it. You're going to stand firm on your principles. Just realize that doing so is helpful for the Democrats.

The time to stand on your principles is the primary - to get the better, more conservative candidate. But, in the general, it's the time to be pragmatic.

Ag with kids said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

OldArmy71 said:

---

Quote:

---

I'm just going to abstain in the general if Cornyn wins the runoff and there isn't a third party option, but I'll never vote for a Dem.

---

Abstaining is voting for Talarico.

---

Show me the math how Talarico's vote total goes up if a person abstains.

Cornyn is not entitled to a conservatives vote just because he has an R next to his name. He lost any chance at that priviledge due to his own non-conservative tenure.

---

Fewer votes for the Republican candidate helps the Dem candidate...

If the Republican ordinarily gets 1000 votes to win, but 200 normally Republican voters abstain or vote 3rd party, the Republican only gets 800 votes - so the Dem who ordinarily gets 820 votes and loses, now wins...

Math isn't hard...

---

Thanks for showing that you did not comprehend the question about how abstaining increases Beto lite's vote total, which is what another poster and several other Cornyn fanboys have gone along with. I've addressed how the odds change but that was not what the other poster said and not a single person has clarified that they were wrong and agreed how I said the odds could change. Nor acknowledged how RINO's somehow should automatically be awarded a conservatives vote. In which case, why bother voting if we could just register for a party and let our team leaders just automatically get our votes regardless of the garbage candidate they put forward?

Edit to add that you finally acknowledged that I have been correct in Talarico's vote total won't go up due to abstaining. And I acknowledged the odds changing from the gate, but that didnt sink in with anyone for whatever reason. I don't know why it took so long for someone to finally acknowledge it, but glad to see it was understood.

Excuse me for not being willing to be a "team player" that just falls in line for a party and politician that clearly has shown he is not an advocate of conservativism or his constituents. You do you though in advocating for slow suicide with Cornyn because you are afraid of Talarico. Talarico has a snow balls chance in hell in winning in Texas, and if there truly is any fear that someone like him could win in TEXAS, then we have bigger issues and all your teeth knashing about this election is incredibly misdirected. This election is but a tip of the iceberg and putting all your cares into it while ignoring the underlying problem is the epitome of kicking the can down the road and missing the forest for the trees.

Paxton will win the general easily.
Cornyn will win the general easily.
Choose the one that isn't a guaranteed RINO in the primary and if the idiot masses choose the guaranteed RINO, then don't complain when other people don't want to support the slow suicide with their vote.

Tea Party said:

---

mavsfan4ever said:

---

Are you dumb? It's easy math. If talarico gets x votes and republicans get x-1 (bc you abstained), then he needs less votes to win.

I'm done responding bc you are either trolling or are so dumb that you don't understand elementary math.

---

Please, read the post that claimed " Abstaining is voting for Talarico."

Here's the link since you clearly have not comprehended anything said in response.

Once you've read that, please show your work how Talarico's vote total goes UP when a person abstains. That was the claim. Had he said Talarico's ODDS go up, then I could agree with that if people think RINO's are somehow automatically worthy of a conservatives vote.

---

JFC...

Are you going to die on the hill of semantics?

With every long-winded post, he proves the simple one-word description I've used for these folks

Tea Party said:

---

TAMUallen said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

TAMUallen said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

TAMUallen said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

OldArmy71 said:

---

Quote:

---

I'm just going to abstain in the general if Cornyn wins the runoff and there isn't a third party option, but I'll never vote for a Dem.

---

Abstaining is voting for Talarico.

---

Show me the math how Talarico's vote total goes up if a person abstains.

Cornyn is not entitled to a conservatives vote just because he has an R next to his name. He lost any chance at that priviledge due to his own non-conservative tenure.

---

My privilege will be defeating Talarico in any way possible. First step is ensuring Paxton is his opponent. If I lose that, I'm not stopping the objective of defeating Talarico

---

And I respect your position on defeating Talarico. I don't want him winning either. But I'd rather Talarico lose in a close race vs Cornyn without my vote rather than Cornyn win in a landslide with my vote. I hope there are more that think like me but unfortunately I think the a significant portion of the right has given up on pursuing conservative ideology and instead prefers slow suicide with RINO's because they aren't D's.

The people that vote Cornyn in the runoff have their poor vote validated if Cornyn wins by a lot, and I want no part in enabling the masses to continue making poor voting choices.

There is a small chance that the idiot masses could learn their lesson if their candidate barely wins with low turnout. And that's a risk I'm willing to take because I firmly believe that D's and conservatives are politically incompatible and pretending the continueing of the usual Team R vs Team D is a fools errand in the long run.

---

I do not like Cornyn. I do not like RINOs. I will not enable the potential win of a Senator that's a far left democrat fake Christian

It's just that simple. That's a losing game to play by making a potential Democrat win easier (if it ends up regretfully being a Cornyn Talarico race)

---

Do you have a line you will draw where you won't vote for a R in the general?

What if McCain was alive and running in Cornyn's place?
Or Lindsey Graham? Or Crenshaw, or whoever you can think of that is your least favorite R past or present?

Hopefully you at least have a line where you can put policy over party, otherwise what is the point of politics if your "team" is automatically awarded your vote regardless of the quality of candidate or how idiotic the masses are in choosing the primary winner?

I don't think an overwhelming majority of D's have a line, which proves my point that we are incompatible and pretending to play that game with them with the same GOP party that has proven time and time again that it will not fight for us is a fools errand. The GOP needs new blood if you want to win that game.

---

I dont have an allegiance to a party.

I am doing my part by voting Paxton and supporting the removal of RINOs

If I'm in the position of RINO or a much worse Democrat... my vote goes to the RINO due to that being the better of the two undesired outcomes.

Not that hard to figure out. The time to take a stand was before candidates were locked in, not after.

---

Great response, but my question about do you have a line sounds like you don't have one at all regarding voting R no matter what. If Fetterman switched parties and claimed to be an R, and the GOP welcomed him for whatever reason, and he somehow was eligible to run in Cornyn's place, you are saying you would vote for Fetterman in the general because he has an R by his name?

I'm hoping you would say no. And my point is that any sane person would have a line where they would not choose party over policy, and my line is to the right of Cornyn. That is fine if your line is to the left of him (I admit I'd rather Cornyn win rather than Talarico). But I won't vote for him because I believe it enables the same "R no matter what" nonsense that enables the GOP to continue drifting left because they know they have supporters that will blindly support them.

---

What is amusing is that if you, and other absolutists like you, cause the Republican vote to drop enough to allow a Talarico win, your line is WAY far left of his...

Tea Party said:

---

There never is a perfect, or even exceptional candidate and only a fool would wait for one before voting. I don't know why you think that's relevant to the discussion.

I understand your thought promise of voting for the best candidate but It's amazing that any conservative would vote for a Fetterman type in the general rather than stopping to look around and wonder how we got here and how can we fix this.

You dont have to respond but hopefully you at least think a little further into the future and beyond this single vote because Cornyn types and the people that vote for them in the primary are either ok, apathetic, or ignorant that it's causing us to go off the cliff.

---

Go look at Cornyn's votes vs Fetterman...

They are not alike. Cornyn votes mostly right. Fetterman votes mostly left.

Ag with kids said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

TAMUallen said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

TAMUallen said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

TAMUallen said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

OldArmy71 said:

---

Quote:

---

I'm just going to abstain in the general if Cornyn wins the runoff and there isn't a third party option, but I'll never vote for a Dem.

---

Abstaining is voting for Talarico.

---

Show me the math how Talarico's vote total goes up if a person abstains.

Cornyn is not entitled to a conservatives vote just because he has an R next to his name. He lost any chance at that priviledge due to his own non-conservative tenure.

---

My privilege will be defeating Talarico in any way possible. First step is ensuring Paxton is his opponent. If I lose that, I'm not stopping the objective of defeating Talarico

---

And I respect your position on defeating Talarico. I don't want him winning either. But I'd rather Talarico lose in a close race vs Cornyn without my vote rather than Cornyn win in a landslide with my vote. I hope there are more that think like me but unfortunately I think the a significant portion of the right has given up on pursuing conservative ideology and instead prefers slow suicide with RINO's because they aren't D's.

The people that vote Cornyn in the runoff have their poor vote validated if Cornyn wins by a lot, and I want no part in enabling the masses to continue making poor voting choices.

There is a small chance that the idiot masses could learn their lesson if their candidate barely wins with low turnout. And that's a risk I'm willing to take because I firmly believe that D's and conservatives are politically incompatible and pretending the continueing of the usual Team R vs Team D is a fools errand in the long run.

---

I do not like Cornyn. I do not like RINOs. I will not enable the potential win of a Senator that's a far left democrat fake Christian

It's just that simple. That's a losing game to play by making a potential Democrat win easier (if it ends up regretfully being a Cornyn Talarico race)

---

Do you have a line you will draw where you won't vote for a R in the general?

What if McCain was alive and running in Cornyn's place?
Or Lindsey Graham? Or Crenshaw, or whoever you can think of that is your least favorite R past or present?

Hopefully you at least have a line where you can put policy over party, otherwise what is the point of politics if your "team" is automatically awarded your vote regardless of the quality of candidate or how idiotic the masses are in choosing the primary winner?

I don't think an overwhelming majority of D's have a line, which proves my point that we are incompatible and pretending to play that game with them with the same GOP party that has proven time and time again that it will not fight for us is a fools errand. The GOP needs new blood if you want to win that game.

---

I dont have an allegiance to a party.

I am doing my part by voting Paxton and supporting the removal of RINOs

If I'm in the position of RINO or a much worse Democrat... my vote goes to the RINO due to that being the better of the two undesired outcomes.

Not that hard to figure out. The time to take a stand was before candidates were locked in, not after.

---

Great response, but my question about do you have a line sounds like you don't have one at all regarding voting R no matter what. If Fetterman switched parties and claimed to be an R, and the GOP welcomed him for whatever reason, and he somehow was eligible to run in Cornyn's place, you are saying you would vote for Fetterman in the general because he has an R by his name?

I'm hoping you would say no. And my point is that any sane person would have a line where they would not choose party over policy, and my line is to the right of Cornyn. That is fine if your line is to the left of him (I admit I'd rather Cornyn win rather than Talarico). But I won't vote for him because I believe it enables the same "R no matter what" nonsense that enables the GOP to continue drifting left because they know they have supporters that will blindly support them.

---

What is amusing is that if you, and other absolutists like you, cause the Republican vote to drop enough to allow a Talarico win, your line is WAY far left of his...

---

Again, not comprehending the discussion.... How is not voting for someone to the left of what I consider worthy of a vote somehow meaning that my line of what is acceptable suddenly to the left? You are either misunderstanding the discussion or are lying, but I'm assuming it's a simple misunderstanding.

And the one person earlier that has responded about where their line is has stated if Fetterman was the R nominee they would vote for Fetterman in the general over Talarico bcause he is better than Talarico. I gave an easy layup since they clearly are different, but they still said they would vote for a Fetterman type in the general. That is incomprehensible to me that a supposed conservative would vote for the ultimate RINO rather than stop and wonder how we got here and how can we fix it.

Tea Party!

Youre not breaking out some master political thought.

Nothing is that easy and it doesn't work like you're wishing it would. We all understand your hypothetical thinking on this but it is quite pointless and extremely useless in THIS situation