There's a lot of talk out there by many republicans, especially those up for re-election, as to whether or not they are actually supporting the candidate that their convention selected as their party's presidential standard bearer. What's behind their inability to make a solid decision, aside from too many years in the federal legislature? Are they struggling with the candidate's position on issues? Is it because their candidate is running a gutter campaign? Maybe it's because they find his personal lifestyle and inability to delineate actual plans to address issues make him totally unfit for the office.

In many cases, they can't make a clear decision and voice their position on Drumpf due to their personal down ballot standing in their own state. The article that I am posting the link to explains several candidate's Wishy-washy attitude towards Drumpf. It's pretty long, but informative. Here's an excerpt about my senator who is up for re-election and his inability to clearly voice his position on the Drumpf candidacy:


Pennsylvania Sen. Pat Toomey: Like all endangered Senate Republicans, Toomey has struggled with Trump this entire cycle. But the way he has responded to the Manhattan mogul’s near-constant provocations has been unique. While McCain went for anonymity (I support the nominee) and Ayotte split hairs (I’m voting for Trump but not endorsing him) Toomey played the open-minded agnostic.

“As I have said repeatedly, I have not endorsed Donald Trump,” Toomey told reporters at an August press conference. “There are things that he has said, a number of things he has said and done, that give me great pause and I have significant concerns about, so I remain in a mode of waiting to be persuaded. I’ve not made a final decision on what I’m going to do. Hillary Clinton is completely unacceptable to me.”

For months, Toomey’s indecision was at least somewhat believable; as he put it in an April op-ed, “Like many Pennsylvanians, I’m not pleased with the two choices we have.” But you can only believe that a person is “waiting to be persuaded” if you believe that something — anything — could persuade him one way or the other. Otherwise, he’s not waiting — he’s running out the clock.

Toomey’s response to the Trump tape — a tipping point for dozens of other Republicans — finally makes it obvious that this is exactly what he’s trying to do: hoping that, by remaining agnostic all the way through Nov. 8, he can quietly glide past his Democratic challenger, Katie McGinty, without angering the GOP base or alienating the moderate suburban voters who tend to decide Pennsylvania’s elections.

“I am not endorsing him,” Toomey said Tuesday during a brief interview with reporters — “and I remain unpersuaded.”

The same day, the Philadelphia Inquirer tried to call Toomey’s bluff.

“This late in the game, should we just presume he’s never going to take a stand on Trump?” the paper asked in an editorial piece, then answered its own question: “’You shouldn’t make a presumption one way or the other,’ Toomey replied.”

On the stump, McGinty likes to tell Toomey to “man up.” Her campaign calls him “’Fraidy-Pat.”

They may have a point.



So, Toomey is unable to clearly state his position because he's juggling the impact on his own personal political future. Just the kind of person I want representing me in the legislature.

The article also infers that all these legislators find serious flaws in their party's presidential candidate and don't believe he is qualified to be in the Oval Office. That makes me question that, if Drumpf can't even lead his own party, how the heck can I expect him to lead the nation?

Here's the link to the article . . . If you have the time, I think it's worth the read:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/down-ticket-20-the-ten-most-and-least-principled-republican-responses-to-trump-213403179.html

Last edited by Rongone (10/14/2016 7:30 am)