Quote Originally Posted by Justin View Post
Look, I understand that politics is expensive, and that there may very well be tactical reasons for not wasting the time, money, and effort to run a Republican or Libertarian contender in a heavily left-leaning district.

But...

I find it ridiculous that the GOP in this state doesn't see fit to at least put up some token resistance in those areas, if for no other reason than to put the Dem candidates at least a little bit on the defensive, and to force them to have to waste some of their resources on running at least a minimal campaign.
Why is this the responsibility of the GOP? Why not the Libertarian Party? Or some other party?

There are districts here and around the country where the dems, or the republicans, don't stand a chance of winning, even against more than a "token" opponent. That's why people like DeGette, Pelosi, Schumer and others don't have to campaign. It's also why republicans in certain places like districts in OK and ID and a few other places don't really have to campaign against democrats...even when there is a dem opponent. And the last thing democrats worry about is wasting resources, especially in heavily democrat districts that are easily defended. They don't care about no stinkin' resources.