In defense of RINO hunting
I had the honor of meeting Pat Toomey at the Pennsylvania Leadership Conference a few weeks ago. He has the conservative vision and principle that so many feckless GOP officials in Washington lack. In a WSJ op-ed today titled “In defense of RINO hunting,” Toomey puts liberal Republicans in his sights, names names, and takes no prisoners
Read the whole thing, but here’s the bottom line:
A Republican majority is only as useful as the policies that majority produces. When those policies look a lot like Democratic ones, the base rightly questions why it should keep Republicans in power. As the party gears up for elections in the fall, it ought to look closely at the losses suffered under a political strategy devoid of principle. Otherwise, it can look forward to a bad case of déjà vu.
Club for Growth should print that paragraph on greeting cards so we can send an avalanche of them to the GOP elite in Washington.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
More CPAC speeches in 20 words
February 11, 2012 06:53 PM by Michelle Malkin
33 CommentsRomney gets Rick-rolled: Santorum sweeps Missouri, Minnesota, and Colorado in 2/7 trifecta
February 7, 2012 07:24 PM by Michelle Malkin
332 CommentsMiddle Class Payroll Tax Cut Extension Comes Courtesy of Mortgage Fees on Home Buyers
February 6, 2012 01:36 PM by Doug Powers
35 CommentsSantorum’s got game
February 6, 2012 10:05 AM by Michelle Malkin
184 CommentsNevada Caucuses Open Thread; Update: Romney Wins
February 4, 2012 04:30 PM by Doug Powers
139 Comments
BlunderMitt: Let Them Eat Food Stamps; Plus: PPP results point to Santorum
February 1, 2012 09:44 AM by Michelle Malkin
122 Comments
Florida Primary Open Thread; Update: Romney Wins
January 31, 2012 07:24 PM by Doug Powers
163 Comments
Fly Them To the Moon. Please.
January 27, 2012 12:32 AM by Michelle Malkin
114 Comments
Categories: GOP
JustOneMinute
» I Guess I'm Still Stuck On StupidRiehl World View
» Whitney Houston: If I should stay I would only be in your wayPatterico
» Rick Santorum and the two playbooksRiehl World View
» Romney's Blood Is Blue, Not ConservativePundit & Pundette
» King Barack vs. the Nonconformists
RHINO hunting…I’m LIKING IT!
Someone get my rifle and safari hat!
Love it!
As i posted on another thread yesterday, I used to like Newt. This is showing his true colors. I’m disappointed in him.
It’s likewise sad that people cannot stick to their principles. Toomey was in public service, maybe he should return to it?
I love this statement…an absolute knockout punch.
“…political strategy devoid of principal”. Is this the new GOP tagline?
The .577 Tyrannosaur – excellent for RhINO hunting!
Seriously, Mr. Toomey is right on the money. The GOP has been sacrificing principles for power – and will end up with neither, unless it changes course.
I wish conservatives had control of both parties in our two party system like the liberals do.
From his lips to these politicians’ ears. There is no need to wonder what went wrong and why the base is not sending in any money. It’s right there in black and white.
When they lose the election and the country is sent into a downward spiral maybe they will see the error of their ways but i doubt it. most of the GOP act as elitest as the liberals.
The truth will set you free … even if it does make you miserable first. Can we get this article posted in the Halls of Congress and maybe at the RNC HQ?
My favorite subject.
This will guarantee that Republicans remain the minority party. Reagan understood this when he said “Thou shall not speak evil of another Republican”. The Senate Republican majority consisted of Chafee, Stowe, and others you call Rinos. Rhode Island and Maine would not elect anyone you would not call a RINO.
When you are to the right even of mainstream Republicans, you are nowhere near main stream America.
Couldn’t agree more with Craig and abstractmind; although I would argue with comment two that Mr Toomey remains in public service as the President of the Club for Growth, ie doing the job that RINO politicians are too partisan to do.
The best line in a long time?? Get over RONALD REGAN. Never happen to me. When we get our PARTY back, they (the RINOs) will know that we in the great unwashed meant it when we said we would vote DEM. i meant it than, and I mean it now!!!
While I agree with the principal and strategy as the baseline, we need to remember that we do want to leave the door open for “purple” Republicans.
Post continues: (weird!)
I do not want to see the Lieberman’s of the Republican party completely run away, as much as it saddened me to see Joe loose the support of his party. I am not saying that they should set the tone of the party as they do today, but we do need to leave the door open!
Where is the middle ground? I do not know…
What I do know is that we have to purge the leadership of the Republican party of the liberals that have taken it over!
CorruptedLamb, Independents vote on principle and not along party lines. We acquired the vote of the so called “Reagan Democrats” because he came forth with well-articulated ideas and remained true to his principles. Conservative ideas work because they seek real solutions. With real solutions, we will get the “purple” Republican vote just as Mr Reagan did.
We can thank GWB that Arlen Specter is in Washington and not Pat Toomey.
Had not the President, and the RNC, flooded PA with money, Pat Toomey would have whupped Arlen in the primary.
Geesh, some of my local precinct’s GOP Young Turks (including the elected State House District Representative) almost beat me up for standing with the Toomey woman when Mr. Toomey was running for US Senate from PA. They insisted at deployed shoulderpoint that I stand away from her and support Senator “Scottish Rite: Not Proven” Arlen Specter like a good party loyalist.
Unfortunately, the gutless wimps have floated to the top echelons of the Republican party (in the same way the radical lefties have taken over the Dems) by way of seniority and “its my turn” thinking.
Their butts will always come before us.
I think it is time to kick some of those butts. Hard.
JBro,
Agreed, what we really need here is something along the lines of the “Contract with America”. A clearly defined set of principals and legislation that frees the American people of the burdens of government. We need to articulate a vision of America that the people can stand behind, but with our current leadership that is impossible. So we get bickering and the presumed candidate for the Republicans telling us to “shut up”!
It’s strange that, ever since the RINO’s got control of the party, they’ve been losing. Even stranger is, they feel they are loosing for being “Too Conservative.” Juan McAmnesty SAID he heard Americans loud and clear. But, his recent performances like speaking to La Raza shows that either he didn’t hear us, or he’s ignoring us.
I hope, though, that after the next election, we can take our party back.
Were the Arlen Specters of the world always so liberal, or did they transform after so many years in DC?
Newt surprises me sometimes as well, as he seems to be a purveyor of the “if you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em” thing.
McCain seems the same way- it’s like there’s something in the water in DC that makes principles go out the window.
“Juan McAmnesty”- tre that’s too funny!
LGM
No, you have it wrong. When you are to the LEFT of main stream conservatives ( ie true conservatives) you are no where near mainstream America. Heck, a collectivist such as yourself should know that.
I’m curious. If people on the far right are nowhere near mainstream…where in the world does that put liberals such as yourself?
I think it would be wrong NOT to point out the problems of one’s own party, and try to correct them. If these people call themselves conservative, and then don’t follow that path, then they most certainly do deserve to be taken to task for not being the conservative they claimed. That’s just being honest with the electorate, and being honest with yourself.
Maybe democrats would do well to try and learn that lesson as well. A little truth goes a long way.
RINO Hunting!!???
We need more conservatives like Newt Gingrich and Arlen Specter in the party to defend conservative values like Global Warming, Comprehensive Immigration Reform, Campaign Finance Reform, and endless hearings on the scourge of steroids in baseball. Oh wait, these things are not conservative at all. I’ve been duped!
We don’t need a laundry list of garbage from Newt, either. A contract with America worked at that moment in time, but Newt has already crafted a new legislator’s wet dream that you can peruse here.
Some items are obvious, but in typical Newt fashion, the list of 2-3 good ideas is teased out to nine. Newt isn’t trying to attack the elephant (GOP metaphor alert!) head-on; he’s trying to consume it one nibble at a time, and all we are left with is the excrement sandwich.
Bon appétit!
On May 8th, 2008 at 9:26 am, TheCorruptedLamb said: “A clearly defined set of principals and legislation that frees the American people of the burdens of government. We need to articulate a vision of America that the people can stand behind”
Mr Newt Gingrich was developing a platform across America that would seek these types of solutions. I believe that he called it American Solutions. It was also the program that kept him from tossing his name in the hat for the Republican nomination. I am currently deployed (again) and have not been following this program; does anyone have any insight how this program is working?
Thank you, Michelle…. I’m smiling today…. we do matter!
On May 8th, 2008 at 8:56 am, PBoilermaker said:
I wish conservatives had control of both parties in our two party system like the liberals do.
Amen brother. The dem party has moved from center left to the far left over the decades. Highjacked by the nut case, ethnic/sexuality/race/gender pandering, socialists. Far from “mainstream” America lgm deludes himself into believing. Likewise, the republicans have moved right of center to left of center over that same time. They have become pandering democrats of 30 years ago. Some of that is due, IMHO, to the MSM calling liberal republicans like bush “extreme right”, which made these maleable idiots believe they actually were too conservative to maintain power (and it did not hurt that a gullible public beleived the same garbage). That would be fine with me if there was actually a party that represented conservatives but there isn’t. Our 2 party system gives us a choice of socialists or liberals. We need a conservative 3rd party to arise. Constitution party? Maybe. I will admit though, some of the things that do hurt the conservatives are hard stances on things like abortion, the religious right, and anti-gay stuff. Frankly, these issues do not matter to me. I simply wnat small gov’t, low taxes, no affirmative action, no hate laws, entitlements limited only to extreme cases, secure borders, no amensty, immigraiton reductions, etc. But hey, that is just me.
When 77-81% of the population want an end to illegal immigration, I’d say the politicians who support it are nowhere near mainstream.
Now get back under your bridge, there are three goats on their way to see you.
lgm
I’ve got a survey (donation request) from the National Republican Congressional Committee on my desk right now. I completed it and added the note that they won’t get one thin dime from me until/unless they purge the RINOs and take a hard stand on issues like illegal immigration and practice some fiscal restraint. I’ll give to Steve Scalise, my local guy who replaced Bobby Jindal, but I don’t want a nickel of my hard earned overtaxed money going to the likes of Voinovich, Snowe, and Cole.
Concerned Citizen said (#31):
Most who are against illegal immigration also are against hard right wing “solutions”, like mass deportation of 13 million illegal immigrants, building a fence or militarizing the border, and even denying social services to illegals.
If you want to work with Democrats to reduce illegal immigration, you could look for things you both support: requiring employers to follow the law (otherwise they would be criminals, as you often say about illegal immigrants).
Enforce minimum wage and workplace safety laws. Sanction employers who knowingly hire illegals (Romney, McCain, ..).
You also might consider extending labor laws to cover farm workers.
Who did the Club for Growth support for the GOP nominee this year?
My state Rep. Cathy McMorris used to send me request forms for donating to the GOP all the time. I sent back just a simple note, fix that damn open border situation or no cash from me. Haven’t heard from her in quite some time. Hmmmmmmm…………
Most people on the right are not in favor of mass deportation because that’s stupid. We know – and it’s working fabulously well in states where it’s being tried right now – that attrition by enforcement, including heavy penalties for hiring illegals, is the best way to get them out. Most of us are in favor of treating our southern border just like Mexico treats theirs. It’s militarized. Nor do they offer benefits to illegals. They, in fact, follow their (much stricter) laws far better than we do.
We’d just like to follow the good example of our neighbors to the south. Borrow a bit from their culture, if you will. Surely liberals understand and support that? /snark
As for working with Democrats… we give them an inch and they ask for another. It’s never over until the illegal wins, and we’re tired of it.
I’ve seen Newt mentioned already this morning. Don’t know about that guy anymore. I really like to see him speak on CSPAN. He does have great ideas. But just this year, he has slid to the left a bit too much for my liking. Whats with those lame a$$ commercials with Billery and Plastic Woman??!!? I think he got hold of some LGM medicine (puff) and his mind melted.
In my best Elmer Fudd voice, “Hush be very very quiet we are going WINO hunting, HEHEHEHEHEHE!”
What does this have to do with politicians not being in touch with the mainstream?
Hey Citizen, never mind him. Its the good weed talkin’ again.
I like rino – tastes like chicken!
rino – chicken. I think I am onto something here.
Soap..
with all the spending they’re talking about, via the other thread…dont you mean that rino tastes like pork?
I’ve sent a message to NFIBs Safe Trust that I’ll not be supporting their national program this year unless they offer an earmark free fund that only goes to those who swear off earmarks.
I’m instead shifting my political $ to Club for Growth because they’ve got it right.
It makes no sense to support Safe Trust or any other so-called conservative political group that doesn’t offer a clear no-earmarks funding option because otherwise, your political dollars cold be wasted fighting itself in primaries where one candidate supports no earmarks and another doesn’t.
Laura C;
I received the same “survey” from the NRCC and Carly Fiorina yesterday. It is nothing more than a BS excuse to ask for money they will mispend. Every “survey” question simply parrots some standard “conservative” talking point that should be assumed as the thinking of a real conservative–should we oppose liberal issues?, should we cut taxes? should we honor family values and life?. Of course we should, but a fence post with half a brain could have provided the answers the survey is expecting and looking for. Nothing in it addresses issues of real importance such as immigration amnesty, drilling in ANWR, cutting spending, opposing the AGW hoax, preserving tax cuts, dealing with Iran and North Korea, supporting Israel, etc, etc, etc. They just want money to support McCain and more of the mealy-mouthed, RINO agenda. I tore the survey up and threw it in the trash–it was an insult to my intelligence just like their patronizing, transparent phone calls trying to scare me about what a disaster Hillary would be. I don’t need them telling me the obvious while asking me to provide financial support for a non-solution.
Exactly… but I wrote all over it and smacked them around a little. I don’t really think it will change anything because they must know – how can they NOT know? – how furious conservatives are, and they don’t care. It just felt good to vent and tell them I’m not going to go along with their game of “the other party’s way worse” anymore.
I don’t. I fill them out, add my own comments to each question, then mail them back. That way they have to pay the postage and processing costs and I get my opinion known (if they ever bother to read them). I do the same thing to the ACLU fundraising letters.
There is only one way conservatives can fix the RINO problem, aim at the bottom of the party in their own district. KNOW who the candidates are on your ballot at the local level, and keep the RINO’s out there. Fail that, and you get RINO’s at the top.
You can’t ignore the little things in your own back yard. If you do, the whole thing will grow up with weeds you don’t want.
Corrected – thanks!
rino tastes like pork – looks like chiken!
Sure thing!
Just got back from lunch, where I had a pulled-rino….err, pork sammich!
Michelle Malkin said:
Hell, why wait? I’ll print a bunch of them up right now and send ‘em off!
Now, that is how a rino gets his revenge and how I feel about a rino being forced upon me!
ROFL, i stand corrected!
Is there anyone conservative enough for you guys. Republicans had six years with both houses and the Pres. and still that was not enough. Nothing got done to get us more energy independent, to secure our borders or the fix budget. Why don’t you start your own party? America is more liberal than you think. It was founded on liberal principles, liberty, freedom and equality. Most Americans still hold these virtues dear. If the founding fathers were conservative, they would have never rebelled or started a new monarchy.
Actually, there are people who are conservative enough. They’ve been listed here several times, but the likes of Duncan Hunter, Tom Tancredo, and Bobby Jindal are just a few.
The assertion that America, at present, is more liberal than we give credit for is a possibility. I’d have to see more information about it, but its possible.
And while you are also correct that americans do in fact hold those freedoms dear, its not true that they are applied all the same way. There are countless examples of that being the case. We can review ad nauseum, but, I’ll save it for now.
But if the founding fathers were so liberal, why do we hold them as conservative?
Just wondering. I’ll sit and watch for a few minutes, and see what happens on the thread
I don’t know that “we” consider them conservative. But if that is the case, two hundred years is long enough for liberal positions to become conservative. I read this site to expose my self to other opinions and I am glad some people have thought out conservative positions rather than knee jerk Republican voices. George Will is someone who I disagree with but respect his arguments. When the names start flying, I tune out. I do like the people you mentioned but they seem few and far between.
you’re correct, sadly. I wish there were more on the field like them. There are, but its not the majority.
Time wise, yes, 200 is a long time for that to the case. I would like to think that the values that they instilled, as far as the Constitution states, would be considered conservative regardless.
This is a discussion that could take up pages of material. I’m not even sure where to start, honestly. I do know that what we call liberal now seeks to undo alot of what our country is based on (open borders, socialized medicine, more government intrusion into our wallets and lives, etc). And that’s something that I, along with a majority of the readers here, do not want to see happen.
#22 – tre: Don’t listen to what McCain says; watch what he does!
#23 – BadIdeaGuy: Specter once was a Democrat, saw that he had a better chance at winning office running as a “Republican,” so switched parties. (BARF!)
#34 – lgm: Care to provide some proof, in the form of link(s) to supporting data, for your assertions about what anyone against illegal immigration wants?
#46 – LauraC: The RNCC likely never sees our snarky retorts to questions, because those solcitations are handled by companies that specialize in fundraising. However, if you consistently send back everything they mail you in their postpaid envelopes, they eventually realize you are costing them money and remove you from their lists.
Soap Box,
Thats funny, you got it exactly right:
rino = chicken.
I think I’m going to the bar tonite and have some rino wings for appetizers!
Bachbone said (#58):
If you were interested, you would google “illegal immigration fence opinion polls” or something like quicker than you could post here. The fact that you instead posted here tells me you’re not interested.
For once, albeit in a strictly limited sense, I find myself in agreement with lgm (I guess I can die now, I’ve seen everything).
“Purist” Republicans (i.e., the ones who call other Republicans not conservative enough for their liking “RINO”s) don’t comprise enough of the Republican Party membership, not to mention the electorate as a whole, to ever create a Congressional majority in their own image.
Even if we assume that:
(1) Republicans comprise 1/3 of the electorate (probably a generous figure nowadays); and
(2) that all such Republicans are Purists;
– the numbers simply aren’t there to vote in a purist majority. You’re going to get your John McCains, Arlen Specters, Gordon Smiths, Chuck Hagels, etc.
That’s why, for example, we could put a 55-45 Republican majority in the Senate back in 2004, and get little if anything done from a purist perspective.
But at least we had a majority, along with the leadership posts and committee charimanships that it entailed:
- No Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House (“The gavel is now in the hands of the children!”).
- No Harry Reid as Senate Majority Leader (“This war is lost!”).
- No having to constantly beat back via presidential veto one donkey resolution after another demanding defeat in Iraq.
- No fun-and-games with rules of procedure and voting (“Yeah we know you won the vote, but we’re gonna re-open it long enough to change that”).
- No Barbara Boxer triumphantly sneering, “Elections have consequences!”
The old Republican Congressional majority was far from ideal, but it beat the hell out of what we’ve got now, didn’t it? And I’d also venture to say that we didn’t lose that majority because it wasn’t “pure” enough, but for other reasons.
So, what’s the Purist Republican answer? Why, the internal equivalent of witch hunts, purge trials and a reign of terror, of course. Yep, that’s sure to attract more people to the Republican camp. And it’s certain to win a majority … of donkeys. A permanent majority, and if we don’t watch out a cloture-proof and veto-proof one as well.
I, for one, do not want to see my party become nothing more than a permanent ideological minority, the result of some bizarre kind of political eugenics that will end up with us standing athwart the legislative railroad tracks crying, “Stop!” — right before the donkey locomotive plows right through us again, and again, and again.
Do we really want to pine for perfection and become politically irrelevant until we go the way of the Federalists, the Whigs and the Know-Nothings? Or is getting some of what we want better than receiving everything we don’t want, courtesy of the donkeys?
Polls as proof!!! BWAAAHHHHAAAA
Your an idiot!
On-my-soap-box said:
The guy was talking about poll numbers. He said 70% of Americans are against illegal immigration. I said yes, but they’re also against deporting all of them. He said prove it, and here we are. You’re calling him an idiot, not me. And he’s a fellow Republican.
Lgm you are a silly little man troll..Get over yourself fugly!!!!
lgm, all I requested was that you provide substance for your assertion(s) (about what illegal immigration opponents want). First, though, you claim to have ESP (“…you’re not interested…”), when unless you’re Kreskin, you have absolutely no idea whether or not, nor what, I’m interested in. Next, you put words into my mouth, “He said 70% of Americans are against illegal immigration.” that I never said.
How many strikes do you want?
You can believe any poll you wish, but polls are notoriously skewed by any number or factors: questions asked and not asked, sampling techniques, statstical analyses, reporting biases, etc.
A SeeBS/NYT (you wouldn’t label them “hard right wing,” would you?) poll reported May 27, 2007 showed that 69% of those polled said people here illegally should be prosecuted and deported. 24% said they should not. More notably, 64% of those calling themselves Democrats said they should be prosecuted and deported. 29% said they should not. Of course, even liberals may not have noticed that “little” fact, because the “unbiased” SeeBS/NYT didn’t report it until the next to last page of the pdf file I found online. Nor did the “unbiased” SeeBS/NYT report until the very last page that in the polled sample, Democrats outnumbered Independents and Republicans, 413 to 391 to 328.
Lest you doubt those “unbiased” numbers, a July 7, 2007 Qualtrics online poll found that, “…68 percent of respondents favor deportation as an answer to illegal immigration…” Sorry, but no statistics were given as to sample size, etc. in that report. But since you have ESP, you can probably devine them for the rest of us and report back, eh?
In short, anyone can come here and say anything. Including you. And me. That’s why Ms. Malkin cites her disclaimer. But if someone calls you, or me, on something we write, don’t get bent out of shape and cite ESP or liberal garbage (I know that’s redundant) and expect to get away with it a la St. Hillary, Messiah Obama or Bridge on the River Kwai McCain.
If your claims are based on valid data, they will stand the light of scrutiny by others. Obama may be correct about us being Bible-thumping, gun-toting, bitter people, but we’re not stupid, too.
I hate to change the subject to the most important story of the day, but I just heard that Eddie Arnold died a few hours ago. I was never a big C&W fan but I grew up in the D.C. area, Uline Arena, Porter Waggoner, Mel Tillis, Roy Clark (whose growing up house is a few blocks from here) Hank Williams and yes, Eddie Arnold. To me it wasn’t C&W music, it was just music – some of the best ever.
I have to go now and weep a little bit.
lgm,
Thank you for providing me with the comedy I need to start my day. Reading your posts and seeing how out of touch you really are brings a smile to my face. With people like you voting it is no wonder people like B Hussein O and Shillary are actually in the running. That America is still a soveriegn nation is truly remarkable. People like you would give up our soveriengty and willingly give up your freedom. I pity you and pray to God that you are looked out for.
An ANALYSIS of the Malkin-Toomey strategy
Toomey would rather spend $1 million to beat a Republican in a primary than to take on ANY Democrat.
Imagine the bills that would be written if Pelosi, Reid and company weren’t RUNNING the House AND Senate.
Malkin is part genius (marketing, new media) and PART BIG-TIME IDIOT (politics, and frankly media savvy).
when it comes to politics, Malkin (and Toomey) believes a solid Republican Party with 40 votes in the Senate is the way to go. This way we can guarantee to have a 100% unified party, all the time, to veto socialist bills. (I prefer before, having 55 votes, designing the bills, getting a lot of them passed, and OCCASIONALLY losing a few when 6 or so Republicans cave for some reason or another).
Regarding media savvy, here is how it works. 1) AP and NY Times journalists write an article about how some Republican broke ranks. 2) Forward article to Malkin or wait until she finds it. 3) Count to 3 and click refresh to see Malkin foaming at the mouth to get said Republican out of Congress. 4) Wait for Pat Toomey to write check to beat said Republican. 4) Repeat.
Go to Club for Growth web site. For some reason they SCORE the Reps and Senators. There are Senators that score 10′s and 0′s by the Club’s standards. Who does Toomey spend his money on– the Democrat that scores a 0 on growth, or the Republican with a 50?
Looks like he got that RINO by the big Horn
Democrats don’t seem to have much interest in it. It helps them to get voters from impoverished immigrants as your party deceives them with promises of stuff like free health care.
All many on your side of the aisle want are votes.
I’m all for that, but I also know that toothless, wimpy, sensitive liberal men are incapable of the necessary confrontations. Maybe if Harry Reid would stop pandering to Islam on the Senate floor, you party may not, waste all of our tax money.
LGM, most of the full-time, are not like liberal city-folks who cower in fear over being called a racist or islamophobe or working over 35 hours a week. These folks aren’t afraid to get their hands dirty, and work and long hours.
They really don’t need the government in their lives. All they want is some advantage over the super-rich. Many of them abhor liberal policies and want the government to stay away!
From a former USDA worker.
Well said, Regulus!
If Malkin took the time she spends ripping Republicans and offset it by ripping on Democrats she might actually get something she wants.
Malkin is a marketing genius, but in politics she is A. Complete. Idiot.
40 PERFECT Senators is not better than 55 Senators. Yeah, you lose a few high profile votes. But with 55 Senators you write the bills.