Longest-serving GOP senator loses primary fight to Tea Party backed candidate, giving a blow to the - Polidicks

[QUOTE]Indianapolis (CNN) -- The Senate's longest-serving Republican became the latest casualty of the struggle between the GOP's conservatives and moderates as a tea party-backed challenger beat Indiana Sen. Dick Lugar in Tuesday's primary. [B]Lugar conceded the race about an hour after the polls closed Tuesday evening, telling supporters that he congratulated State Treasurer Richard Mourdock on "a hard-fought race."[/B] Mourdock will face Democrat Joe Donnelly in November in a contest the nonpartisan Cook Political Report calls safely Republican. "I want to see a Republican in the White House. I want to see my friend Mitch McConnell have a Republican majority in the Senate," Lugar said. "I hope that Richard Mourdock prevails in November so he can contribute to that Republican majority." [B]Lugar was first elected in 1976 and had sought a seventh term. But with more than 85,000 votes counted statewide, Mourdock was leading Lugar 64%-36%, state election returns show.[/B] The 80-year-old Lugar is the former chairman and current ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and is widely regarded as a leading voice on international affairs, particularly on nuclear proliferation. But he drew the ire of the tea party and other conservatives who criticized him as a lukewarm conservative, for voting for the 2008 bank bailout and for supporting President Barack Obama's Supreme Court nominees. [B]That record drew him into one of the nastiest and most expensive congressional races in the nation -- one Democrats gleefully called a "tea party war." Tea party activists and other conservatives threw their support behind Mourdock, who led Lugar by 10 percentage points in pre-election polling.[/B] Lugar's campaign accused Mourdock of running a highly negative campaign funded primarily by special interest groups outside the state and of "bullying" Indiana voters. Mourdock's campaign painted Lugar as as an unreliable conservative and highlighted the fact that Lugar has not lived in Indiana since 1977. As voters trooped to the polls, Lugar told CNN that he was one of the bright spots in a body many see dimly. "The public as a whole may be unhappy with one party or the other, but they're very unhappy with the Congress as a whole for their inability to make decisions," Lugar said. "I'm a person who makes sure we do get on with it, that there is progress, and with personal vigor I argue with people. "I try to persuade people, I try to get votes on issues, and I hope to continue to do that," he said. On Friday, Lugar called his opponent "unqualified to handle the complex situations in our world today." He warned the state's GOP voters, "Do not elect an unqualified person to serve in the Senate if you anticipate that you're serious about jobs and the security of our country and, as a matter of fact, cutting spending and the budget." But in a final ad released Friday, Mourdock said Lugar "has spent thousands of dollars telling you things about me that he knows are not true." "He thinks this campaign's about me, but it's not. It's not about him either. It's about America's future," Mourdock added. Lugar told CNN on Tuesday he knew "that we had a campaign from the beginning," but believed his conservative credentials were strong. "Whenever the president has called for me to come to the White House for consultation, either by myself or with others, I have come," Lugar said. "He has not frequently taken my advice, but I give it as an American. I think it's very important that the president hear the point of view of foreign policy that I've studied, and believe it's very important." But he noted that he had 100% ratings from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers and the National Federation of Independent Businesses. The fight pitted moderate Republicans against the more conservative wing of the party. Arizona Sen. John McCain, the party's last presidential nominee, endorsed Lugar, while McCain running mate Sarah Palin came out for Mourdock. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee billed the contest a "tea party war" and decried what it called "the cannibalization of Dick Lugar" in a statement issued Monday. Super PACS spent $4.6 million to exacerbate the fight, with outside groups spending nearly $3 million to support Mourdock. The conservative Club for Growth has spent nearly $1.5 million attacking Lugar in support of Mourdock; tea party sponsor FreedomWorks' super PAC has spent $646,000, and the National Rifle Association's NRA of America Political Victory Fund has spent $525,000, according to estimates from the Federal Election Commission and figures from the Campaign Media Analysis Group. Super PACs supporting Lugar or opposing Mourdock have spent $1.8 million on the race.[/QUOTE] Source: [url]http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/08/politics/indiana-republican-primary/index.html?hpt=hp_t1[/url]

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCWdCKPtnYE[/media] I can imagine poor old Lugar sitting around with a bottle of whiskey, listening to this song while softly weeping in his living room.

Who came up with the idea to call it "Tea Party"? I don't really know what the party represents or believes but their name alone prevents me from taking them seriously.

[QUOTE=TheSaladMan;35883235]Who came up with the idea to call it "Tea Party"? I don't really know what the party represents or believes but their name alone prevents me from taking them seriously.[/QUOTE] It was in reference to the Boston Tea Party because the movement was originally anti-spending/anti-big government. But has long since been taken over slowly by mainstream conservatives and so it's sadly expanding into issues such as gay marriage and such. So now there's a mixture of the original "anti-spending" Tea Party-ers and the new "mainstream conservatives" slowly ebbing in. I think the only thing that's been consistent through out the time of their existence has been "get out the old, get in fresh faces" with Congress.

[QUOTE=TheSaladMan;35883235]Who came up with the idea to call it "Tea Party"? I don't really know what the party represents or believes but their name alone prevents me from taking them seriously.[/QUOTE] Because it refers to the Boston Tea Party, unfortunately nobody involved knew what the Boston Tea Party was actually about.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;35883253]It was in reference to the Boston Tea Party because the movement was originally anti-spending/anti-big government. But has long since been taken over slowly by mainstream conservatives and so it's sadly expanding into issues such as gay marriage and such. So now there's a mixture of the original "anti-spending" Tea Party-ers and the new "mainstream conservatives" slowly ebbing in. I think the only thing that's been consistent through out the time of their existence has been "get out the old, get in fresh faces" with Congress.[/QUOTE] Thanks for clearing that up for me. Now I stongly dislike the party with good reasoning.

Incoming speculators who swear that all because one debate won by a third party forebodes the change of American politics as we know it. 200+ years strong, still a 2 party system. Don't think a little recession is going to massively change our government.

[QUOTE=Mr. Sun;35883298]Incoming speculators who swear that all because one debate won by a third party forebodes the change of American politics as we know it. 200+ years strong, still a 2 party system. Don't think a little recession is going to massively change our government.[/QUOTE] We weren't always a 2 party system. That mostly began after the war between the states, and even after that there's been blips of 3rd parties coming up for a challenge.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;35883479]We weren't always a 2 party system. That mostly began after the war between the states, and even after that there's been blips of 3rd parties coming up for a challenge.[/QUOTE] I fucking hate the two party system. It treats everything like there's only two possible predetermined viewpoints to everything.

[QUOTE=Snake7;35883553]I fucking hate the two party system. It treats everything like there's only two possible predetermined viewpoints to everything.[/QUOTE] I completely agree, I am sick of only having two valid candidates to vote for.

[QUOTE=_Kent_;35883584]I completely agree, I am sick of only having two valid candidates to vote for.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Snake7;35883553]I fucking hate the two party system. It treats everything like there's only two possible predetermined viewpoints to everything.[/QUOTE] Whether you like them or not, the Libertarian Party is making big noise this year and may get their nominee to official presidential debates this fall. Though it may not be your party of choice, it's at least a sign that the two party system is weakened at least a little.

[QUOTE=Mr. Sun;35883298]Incoming speculators who swear that all because one debate won by a third party forebodes the change of American politics as we know it. 200+ years strong, still a 2 party system. Don't think a little recession is going to massively change our government.[/QUOTE] The Tea Party isn't a 3rd party anyways. It's a wing of the Republican Party.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;35883683]Whether you like them or not, the Libertarian Party is making big noise this year and may get their nominee to official presidential debates this fall. Though it may not be your party of choice, it's at least a sign that the two party system is weakened at least a little.[/QUOTE] As you said there have been blips of 3rd parties challenging. It will fade once everyone starts seeing things going well again, because people have short memories. [editline]9th May 2012[/editline] which is a terrible thing even for someone who thinks Libertarianism is out of touch with reality

[QUOTE=Snake7;35883553]I fucking hate the two party system. It treats everything like there's only two possible predetermined viewpoints to everything.[/QUOTE] Even worse, it negates any real deliberation in the house or senate.

[IMG]http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m3rff3zkwd1r31m95o1_500.png[/IMG] "bipartisanship"

[QUOTE=TheDecryptor;35883269]Because it refers to the Boston Tea Party, unfortunately nobody involved knew what the Boston Tea Party was actually about.[/QUOTE] The Tea in Tea Party is also supposed to be an acronym for "Taxed Enough Already"

Going for a seventh term? Damn, put a limit on the number of terms a senator, congressmen, etc can have.

[QUOTE=LtKyle2;35892383]Going for a seventh term? Damn, put a limit on the number of terms a senator, congressmen, etc can have.[/QUOTE] If they're good at doing their job there should be no reason to not let them continue doing it.

[QUOTE=Hidole555;35892407]If they're good at doing their job there should be no reason to not let them continue doing it.[/QUOTE] Same could be said about the president.

[QUOTE=Van-man;35892423]Same could be said about the president.[/QUOTE] Exactly. Which is why I'll never understand why that amendment was put in after FDR. He was a prime example of why the number of elections you can win shouldn't be limited, not the opposite.

[QUOTE=Hidole555;35892407]If they're good at doing their job there should be no reason to not let them continue doing it.[/QUOTE] Yeah but then you get shithead senators who abuse the system and do nothing but campaign to get re-elected next term instead of actually doing their job.

[QUOTE=Snake7;35883553]I fucking hate the two party system. It treats everything like there's only two possible predetermined viewpoints to everything.[/QUOTE] Not only that, but you've got two monolithic and corrupt political institutions in charge of the entire political system.

[QUOTE=Wealth + Taste;35892574]Yeah but then you get shithead senators who abuse the system and do nothing but campaign to get re-elected next term instead of actually doing their job.[/QUOTE] If the public is full of morons who can't identify a fallacy and figure out which man actually has a plan then that's their punishment. Would you have Bernie Sanders, one of the greatest Congressman we have right now, have a limit slapped on him so he can be replaced by some newbie partisan fuck?

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;35883253]It was in reference to the Boston Tea Party because the movement was originally anti-spending/anti-big government. But has long since been taken over slowly by mainstream conservatives and so it's sadly expanding into issues such as gay marriage and such. So now there's a mixture of the original "anti-spending" Tea Party-ers and the new "mainstream conservatives" slowly ebbing in. I think the only thing that's been consistent through out the time of their existence has been "get out the old, get in fresh faces" with Congress.[/QUOTE] Because when you have no points against a group, say they're being corrupted BY TEH CORPORASHUNZ!1

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;35883683]Whether you like them or not, the Libertarian Party is making big noise this year and may get their nominee to official presidential debates this fall. Though it may not be your party of choice, it's at least a sign that the two party system is weakened at least a little.[/QUOTE] And with our system of election.. They are gonna just die off again. When they lose, the people will decide to compromise and run to republican and democrat.

[QUOTE=Strongbad;35894601]Because when you have no points against a group, say they're being corrupted BY TEH CORPORASHUNZ!1[/QUOTE]Uhh, what? That wasn't anywhere in his post, at all. Did you forget how to read the English language or something? Now it is a legitimate point though that they have been commandeered by corporate interest groups, but not one that he raised.

[QUOTE=Hidole555;35892801]If the public is full of morons who can't identify a fallacy and figure out which man actually has a plan then that's their punishment. Would you have Bernie Sanders, one of the greatest Congressman we have right now, have a limit slapped on him so he can be replaced by some newbie partisan fuck?[/QUOTE] The best option would to have 1 term of 6 years max. That way, no matter what happens, Congressmen can focus on getting their jobs done and getting their ideas on the floor without worrying about being re-elected.