Redstate

The bigger the margin for Rell, the more likely Shays, Simmons and Johnson will make it over the finish line.

Jodi Rell is a fiscal conservative, but a social liberal,who fits well in Connecticut. She has been running lots of positive, upbeat ads here in CT, with crowds of people in the background cheering "Jodi!", saying that she has lowered taxes and run a budget surplus, which has been added to the state's "rainy-day fund". I haven't seen any ads for her opponent.

New England is a strange place concerning taxes. Voters here tend to send "tax-and-spend" liberals to the U.S. Senate, hoping to bring taxpayer money from other states to New England, yet they avoid overtaxing themselves by voting for fiscally conservative governors (there are GOP governors in CT, RI, MA, and VT, of all places!). New England to the rest of America: We'll tax you, but don't tax us!

But she also signed a bill from the Dem-dominated state legislature authorizing same-sex "civil unions" (=marriage without the name) which angered conservatives here, but probably delighted the New York Times.

She has done a good-enough job here in CT after filling in for the more conservative but scandal-plagued former Governor John Rowland, and should coast to victory. After she rode Rowland's coattails into the Lt. Governor's office last term, hopefully she can offer her coattails to boost GOP turnout for endangered GOP Congressmen Shays and Simmons, although turnout is likely to be more influenced by the Lieberman-Lamont race.

The bad news: Conservatism is hard to sell. The good news is that it works.

I don't disagree with your first point, but I can think of one example offhand where the NY Times endorsed a Republican in a close race. They endorsed Republican Bob Franks over Jon Corzine in the 2000 New Jersey senate race. Corzine won that election by a 51-47 margin.

Three thoughts (ok, call me a cynic)

1. Corzine was comfortably ahead in the polls until the final hours so it didn't appear as if this grand gesture would make the difference.
2. Had they thought Franks might actually get close, I am sure they'd have reconsidered the endorsement.
3. Franks' picture is in the dictionary next to "RINO"

Its not like they actually count the ballots.

With appologies to anyone who still lives in the state, but it certainly seemed that way to me when I was there.

I agree with you to a point Kyle which is why liberals are so exasperated with southern republicans, despite all their elitist training in the "best" colleges in America, they cannot disuade us backwoods rednecks from our conservative ideaology. I have been to 35 or so countries and most major cities on the planet but it doesnt occur to them that some of us simply prefer small town living and different values. However, we must combat pure propaganda when we see it. These are the same people who convinced America we lost the Tet offensive though the enemy suffered some 45,000 dead to a few thousand for the allies. Ted Kennedy said the 1965 immigration bill (yes he's been in the Senate that long) would not result in millions of illegals like the alarmists (us) would have America believe. Well here we are. They wanted a nuclear freeze during the Reagan years to our detriment. It goes on and on. Not everyone is well informed and the democrats are good at screaming. We must innundate the electorate with facts.

Nuclear freeze, affirmative action, comparable worth, industrial
planning, The new math, the world abound with horrible liberal ideas. But I grow weary of trying to educate people.

Unlike Rush Limbaugh and many of my fellow conservatives, I do not think that the common people are smart and "get it" I believe that most people are quite stupid, venal, and avaricious. It is sad that they seem to need constant reminders that Populists, leftists, and demagogues are all going to just rip them off.

"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle

Or maybe the NYT is endorsing her because she's the right person for the job. Look around; people split their votes between national and state races all the time. California is a good example; blue as they come in national elections, but it has had a Republican governor many times, including some guy named Reagan.

Fiscal conservative, social liberal? That's a Republican that even a Democrat can vote for, especially in a state race.

Or maybe the NYT is endorsing her because she's the right person for the job.

You obviously have not been paying attention ...

The New York Times does not endorse Republicans in close races. That's it. The only reason the New York Times is endorsing Rell is because she is so far ahead and DeStefano has no way of catching up.

Case in point, after blasting George Pataki throughout his 2002 re-election campaign, the New York Times turned around and endorsed him when it became apparent that Hugh McCall (the Democrat) simply could not catch up.

California is a good example; blue as they come in national elections, but it has had a Republican governor many times, including some guy named Reagan.

Don't be disingenuous. California was no way near as Blue as it is today when Reagan was Governor, or even President as it is now. Trying to match California then, which regularly voted Republican for President up until the late '80s with the California of today is just plain wrong.

Fiscal conservative, social liberal? That's a Republican that even a Democrat can vote for, especially in a state race.

I see here that you're equating the New York Times with the generic liberal Democrat. Subconsciously you know the New York Times is biased; you just don't think you'd be able to call yourself a "moderate" if you admitted it.

PS: I am writing up a response to your statement that Rick Santorum's fight to save Terri Schiavo's life made him an extremist. Probably post it up tomorrow.

Well, how California voted for president and governor is a matter of record, and the fact is that Californians often split their vote. And, many of the times they voted Republican for president, it also happened to be for a native son (as president or on the ticket as vice president). So, whether it's a Democratic state that often votes Republican locally or a Republican state that often votes Democrat nationally, my point is still that party affliation doesn't necessarily mean much to voters, and in some instances, to the New York Times.

...that the New York Times is not in favor of fiscal restraint. When the New York Times starts lauding fiscal restraint, you know that they have ulterior motives. Like, when a state starts building prisons to take more criminals off the streets, THAT'S when they get all upset about how much the prisons cost.

The NYTimes finds Gov. Rell acceptable, not doubt, but there is equally little doubt that they'd prefer to see the Democrat elected. The Democrat simply doesn't stand a chance, so they decided to not make complete fools of themselves and endorse a candidate that - while they don't really prefer - is at least mildly palatable and is destined to win anyway.

The thesis of my political philosophy is thus: Social liberalism is born of a deficiency of character. Fiscal and economic liberalism are born of a failure of intellect in all cases and sometimes also, in the case of liberals, in an attempt to make up for their deficiency of character.

That's why Nancy Pelosi, who believes that it's okay to slaughter innocent unborn human beings at any time, told Democrats to vote against a budget bill "as an act of worship." The notion is simply absurd.

I think that the GOP strategy for liberal blue states should, in fact, be to nominate candidates who are socially moderate (not liberal, so as to not completely alienate however many social conservatives may actually live in the state) and fiscally and economically conservative (i.e. spending restraint and free market economics) candidates because it's easier to point an electorate towards a smarter economic path than to instill in them the values that should have been cultivated over their collective lifetimes by responsible parents and role models of sound character.