Interesting philosophical discussions can emanate from this, especially should she win.
I would guess the most likely outcome is that she ensures Miller loses, rather than she wins (which might well be a satisfying outcome to her), but one would hope there's something aside from hurt pride and boundless ambition lurking in her run - such as some serious analysis (not just the urging of her personal bubble-space occupants) that indicates she actually can win.
If she does win, and pulls a plurality of the nominal Republican voters, what does it say about the primary system (which I think is seriously bent, if not broken - and it's the fault of both the parties and the electorate)?
If she does win, I'm sure the Republicans, unless they've somehow managed to pull of a miracle in Senate seats will welcome her back into the caucus, for practical reasons - but should they? Or should she, Sanders, and Lieberman form a third, tiny caucus? Oh, I know that's just being silly.



And I have a hunch that if she takes the bronze, we'll hear the *thud* all the way over here...
The good Doc John, the Armorer, gives a good diagnosis of the primary system. He says of the primary system, "(Which I think is seriously bent, if not broken - and it's the fault of both the parties and the electorate?") Let me just ask the guys a question, "How would you feel if the Good Doc John gave you the very same diagnosis?" OUCH, THAT HURTS, ENUFF ALREADY!
It is strange, we hear many times about the 'right' or the 'left', to me, this is just talking about a right hand or left hand threads to screw them into the ground.
There are views she should gracefully bow out having lost and there are views she should fight on. If large numbers write in but not enough to win will that hand the democrats the win despite having a lower vote than would normally be required?
That's what she is claiming now, too. She doesn't understand that the majority of active Republican voters in Alaska don't believe her or agree with her. All we can do now is work harder to make sure she doesn't act as a spoiler.
I send money to good conservative candidates regardless of their state, but not a dime to the RNCC or RNSC or RNC which will waste it on the non-conservative candidates.
I want to take back te Republican Party, but if unsuccessful will abandon it.
The squishy moderate Republicans have done nearly as much damage to our country as the liberal Democrats and I will not tolerate it.
BTW, Al Gore's Hot AIr Scam, the Chicago Carbon Exchange, is just about DOA. The Euros did a hostile takeover and fired half the employees "as a cost-saving measure" with more firings to come.
Carbon credits are now ten cents a ton -- Al Baby was betting on Cap 'n' Tax passing, which would have pushed them to over $35 per ton. I hope he and Obie took a bath on it.
I think that's just for the day. ;)
Murkowski should back off, as splitting the vote is likely to hand victory to the D's. It's her petty vanity at work right now, she's not thinking of the big picture - getting a majority in Congress is the prize.
Now, if you want to argue that the primary systems are broken, you get no argument from me. I'd go so far as to agree that the 2-party system is broken. But taking our toys and going home just cedes the field to the guys playing it for all it's worth, so play we shall - and it better be for the win.
From Instapundit the other day, quoting a reader regarding the selfish attitudes of "establishment" Republicans like Murkowski who are losing to TEA Party Movement candidates.