Tracinski v. Peikoff

Tracinski: "The Democratic plan, if it is enacted, would deliver America into a period of retreat, humiliation, and uncertainty that we haven't seen since the end of the Vietnam War--while giving our enemies a glorious victory that would be seen as a historical vindication of the Islamist cause."

Peikoff: "...the Republicans stand for religion, particularly evangelical Christianity, and are taking ambitious strides to give it political power." ... "The most urgent political task now is to topple the Republicans from power, if possible in the House and the Senate. This entails voting consistently Democratic, even if the opponent is a 'good' Republican."

They both see us as horribly endangered by proponents of a religion. But Tracinski is more worried about totalitarian Islamicism, and Peikoff is more worried about theocratic Christianity.

As for me... Our two-party system doesn't make for ideological purity within the parties. Nor do party-members in Congress consistently follow their party line. So I think it often makes sense to look at the particular individuals who are running, and try to weigh their pluses and minuses.

The party line
Is not mine.