« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Support your party – even when it’s hard.

[promoted from the diaries by bs]

There’s a theme I notice quite often. It’s not just here, it’s a common in political discussions everywhere. It’s the “My idea/candidate/platform plank/you name it didn’t win my party’s support so I’m going to stay home/switch parties/form a new party for the next election” theme.

This theme is actually counterproductive to whatever cause you were supporting since the end result of your temper tantrum is that the one outcome you least desired was helped by whatever action you took against the party. IE: If you stay home from an election because the Republican party nominated a moderate instead of a conservative, you just helped hand the election to the Democrat who is most likely a socialist.

There are a couple of variations on the theme that are different enough that they deserve separate treatment.

The most obvious and most common is “I don’t like the candidate who won the primary so I’m staying home.” This sounds like a rather mild protest at the party’s expense, but it really is a harm to the party and the over all goals we stand for. There are 2 reasons it’s harmful to our goals. The first is, as stated above, the Democrat is given an easier victory. No matter what you think of moderate Republicans (and I don’t think much of them), having a moderate R in a seat is usually better than having a Democrat in the seat.

So what is it I’m asking you to do? Am I asking you to squelch your principals by voting for someone who doesn’t believe in everything you believe it? No, I don’t want you to put principals aside. What I’m asking you to do is to look at each election as having to pick from the best available candidate. Pick the person who best represents your values in the primary and then realize that the person who wins the Republican primary is likely to be the one who best represents your values in the general.* Even if you, like I, think that moderates often cause more harm to the party than help, consider that they will cause less harm to the COUNTRY than a Democrat. I’ll take country over party every time. So bite your tongue and get out and work for that moderate SOB that won the primary.

The other variation is “I’m going to teach the party a lesson and leave to join a party that more closely matches my views”. This one is a bit different. Since you’re here, I assume you are conservative and you’re thinking of joining the Libertarian Party or the Conservative Party.** I understand that you believe that these parties will support your views better than the Republicans. Nothing is further from the truth! These parties, though they may have platforms that appeal to you, have no chance of ever winning a significant election. They will never be able to implement any of the ideology that appeals to you. Being outside the mainstream parties, they will never be able to even influence the platforms of the Republicans or the Democrats. The only function that they serve is to split the vote. People who would otherwise vote Republican and possibly give financial aid to conservative Republican candidates are instead wasting their votes and their money supporting a lost cause. And like the people who just stay home, this helps the person you’d least like to win the election to be victorious.

Split electorates never win elections. Ross Perot split off a large chunk of people who would have voted for George Bush and Bob Dole handing the elections to Bill Clinton in both cases. Abraham Lincoln would never have been our 16th President if Douglas hadn’t split the Democrat vote away from Breckenridge. And we never would have had our first socialist president, Woodrow Wilson, if Teddy Roosevelt hadn’t thrown a tantrum and formed the Bull Moose party to split the vote away from Taft. It’s better to stay in our party and work from the inside to move it towards a more conservative platform.

One finale argument for supporting your party. If you are unreliable in your support for the party, you will not be taken seriously. The moderates will win by default.

*There are exceptions. When the KKK leader David Duke switched from the Democrats to run as a Republican it was right to vote against him when they pushed him through the primaries. I’m not asking you to have a complete lobotomy after all…

** I think part of rebuilding our grassroots has to include bringing these people back into the fold. While they are relatively small parties on their own, when combined with the conservative movement within our party, we can start winning more elections and move this party away from the moderates.

Get Alerts

COMMENTS

  • nod90

    Conservatives divide and Obama will rule.

    It’s not so much a question of supporting a party as much as one of being realistic about the need for allies. While there are limits, you don’t need to agree with your allies 100% in order to be able to work together.

  • noufa

    A lefty repressing his urge to vote Nader said something that stuck with me:

    Democracy requires compromise. If everyone always voted for the person who best represents their interests, everyone would always vote for themselves.

    • avgamerican

      The only Americans that believed he was a uniter were sheep. Remember liberals are so arrogant they are willing to forfeit freedom in pursuit of their agenda.

      • antisocial

        This is all about ideology. Liberalism(Marxism version) is all about control. Sameness. No class divide. Flatten the field.

        I must stop….

  • Scott Mustian

    I remember the disgust I felt about 13 months ago when I realized that John McCain was going to be my only choice as my next President. While I respected his service and sacrifice to the country, I had to endure 8 years of him poking his finger in the eye of the Republican Party. I felt like the moderates had stolen any choice before the conservatives had a chance to even vote.
    I think part of my disgust was knowing that I was going to eventually have to get over this and actively support McCain.

    Brian is right that we have to work in the party to take it back. The time for unity will come in 2010 but for now I want to hold the current leaders feet to the fire. We have to convince the current moderates in power that the Democrat lite message has been proven to fail. Any current or future Republican leaders who ultimately dream of governing only to expand government needs to be retired or join Arlen Specter in the party where their true beliefs can be realized.

    For example, the support the NRSC and Senator Cornyn gave Governor Crist is like waving a red flag in front of a bull and telling us that “Republican politics as usual” is the message of the day. If they think Florida Republicans want to elect a liberal Republican, let that battle be decided by the voters not by the puppet masters. If Crist is the elected nominee, then all conservatives should want him as the next Senator from Florida but let’s have the debate first.

    There is a hunger for the conservative message and it is time for the party to recognize that. This hunger crosses party identification and is just begging to be addressed.

    • AceInTX
      • tullius_cicero

        I think that it was Einstein who said that one definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over each time expecting a different result. 100 years of doing the same thing over and over leads to the same results. Moderate own the Republican Party. I’m sorry but I have had enough.

        • Brian Hibbert

          I and several other like minded people intend to take it back. I’m asking you to help. This will only be a successful operation if we stick together and stay in the party long enough to retake the controls.

        • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

          That’s my response to the rest of the third-party folks, by the way: we’ve had “bad.” This is “worse.”

          And there’s no such thing as “worst.”

          • tullius_cicero

            And it better be a true conservative. I don’t want any Nixon or Bush big government Republicans. Find another Ronald Reagan or Barry Goldwater and I will do everything that I can to help him/her elected. I want a choice not an echo.

          • mbecker908

            And I’m sure your contribution to Obama’s second term will be noted.

          • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

            on another thread – if I got the wrong impression I apologize or if you changed your mind others must be convinced as we cannot/will-not EVER be able to get CONSERVATIVE control back in DC without having Republican control… there is just NO other Party that is going to achieve the numbers (and so far – in the last decades – they’ve [those other parties] achieved ZERO numbers – the ZERO strategy I call it [alternative parties and sit-it-out]).

            Sit-it-out insures Democrat/Progressives wins.

          • mbecker908

            Hell, I voted for McCain.

            Sitting out is vote for socialism, infanticide and government control of everything.

            Third parties are a joke, and a bad one at that, unless one can come up with some national leadership that stand for something more than electing the Democrat. (I remain in the debt of the Green Party in 2000 for their example.)

            I will note here that I intend to vote for the Democrat who is offered up as a sacrifice against McCain in Arizona in ’10. I’ll also support and give money to the Republican sacrifice who runs against him in the Primary.

            On a national basis, I vote R. Whether I like it or not. And I’ve mostly not liked it.

          • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

            I apologize for my actual misremembering (unlike Pelosi) as I recall you in and around those discussions – as there are a handful, or so, openly advocating (actually, some beating around the bush [yes, partial pun] some lack the honesty to just say it straight-up/out-right) Sit-It-Out or Throw-Vote-Away (with alternative Parties) all I cover with this that I call the ZERO-strategy

          • tullius_cicero

            I’m not voting for any big government Republicans anymore. Period, point blank, no two ways about it.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
          • tullius_cicero
          • mbecker908

            As a really stupid individual with opinions formed in the dark and with idea how the real world works.

            You can leave now. When you grow up come back and try again.

          • tullius_cicero

            Maybe you should try not insulting people and giving the electorate something to vote for rather than imploring them to simplyvote Democrats. I’ll love hearing you scream “socialism!!!” for the next 4 to 8 years. By the way, it should be noted that all of this socialism started under Bush.

          • janis

            are not a member of the Republican Party. As in “and you wonder why YOU are out of power” not WE. So do we mark you down as a Ron Paul kind of guy?

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
          • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

            You don’t need to be yelling at *us* about how crappy the party is right now.

            You need to be yelling at your local GOP group. Fair warning, though: do that and they’re going to look you in the eye and ask you what you’re going to be volunteering for, then. I just did my first meeting of my county’s central committee – one where I was determined to open my ears, shut my mouth, and get a feel for things before I started interfering with them – and I came THIS CLOSE to walking out of there a candidate for local office.

            They are *hungry* for people willing to do things.

          • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

            And we have a difference of opinion on whether completely working within the Party is what is needed (my position) and that of punish-them until them come around by Sit-It-Out or Alternate-Party voting (which I deem the ZERO-strategy based on ANALYSIS not some personal thing against those that advocate it).

            All I ask, and I think others expect too:
            Be honest about what you stand for.
            Who you will vote for (Republican or not)? Simple question!
            That you will be willing to see any Democrat elected over any Republican
            ….. and the trouble those CINOs/PLINOs create (Dem ultra-left control)
            …. and, IMO (and that of others) that strategy gets Democrats elected

          • mbecker908

            Oh really. I guess I gotta go back to school. Silly me. I wasn’t aware that FDR, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter and Clinton were dyed-in-the-wool conservatives. Lord knows I’m no fan of Bush but even “I” wouldn’t go that far. He certainly was no conservative and he certainly did more harm than good, but I’d take him again over Gore or Kerry.

            I don’t wonder for a second why “I’m” out of power. In part it’s because of people like you. You and your ilk fail to understand that the only way to win and consolidate political power is to do it incrementally and do it over time. See Saul Alinski.

            Your panties are in a wad. Go fix them.

          • Scope

            This comment and many others like it show a level of arrogance that can beat Obamas. Because some others don’t share the same opinion and ideas doesn’t make them stupid, nor does it qualify to send them packing. It’s amazing that there is so much talk of “uniting” the party on this thread, only to be told how just dam^ dumb they are, if they express opinions of disenfranchisement and total frustration with the direction of the party. This reminds me of the great leaders of the Republican party going on a “listening tour”, only willing to listen to what they agree with, and the push to move the party to the moderates way of thnking. We’ve been there, and done that, far too many times, for far too many years. Where are we now? because it sure isn’t in the majority.

            Many here hated having McCain as the R presidential choice in 2008, but “did the right thing” and voted for him, or rather against Obama. It was no secret that he would have moved the party towards socialism, just more slowly. Now it seems, from many of the comments here, that we should just keep doing the same thing again, just so we can get anyone with an R after their name elected. Therefore, I see some believe that it’s more about winning, no matter what, than to be the party that has a clear consistent message of ideas that work for all Americans. I personally will vote for someone who I agree with 80-85% of the time, but, if the 20% includes major issues like Big Gov. and spending like the Democrats, I can’t take that pill. If a Republican has bought into the Global Warming, Cap and Trade, let’s help Al Gores new money making scheme, then the R can be perfect on everything else, I will not support, or enable the destruction of the economy, and the country in the end. There are degrees of difference, which seems to have been missed here.

            I know nothing about Crist, I don’t live in Fla., but, I will “listen” to those that do have direct knowledge of where he stands on the issues. For me, when he said he would not endorse any candidate in the presidential race, and then turned around and endorsed McCain, just a few days before the Fla. primary, which catapulted McCain into the lead, well those that believe Crist was a trustworthy endorser got what they deserve. And now, the push here seems to be, if he is the only candidate that can “win” in the Senate primary, get behind him, tell him we forgive him for his prior positions, and well that’s OK, we will beat you on the head if you don’t support the Republican causes in the Senate, even if you have proven to be a “maverick” in not supp[orting the Republican causes as Governor. BTW, what are the Republican causes in the Senate, I’ll be damned if I know. The likes of McCain and his cronies have so dilluted every position that were winning positions for Reagan type Republicans in the past.

            I am surprised that the Tea Parties have not been mentioned. The participants unsurprisingly are not only the Republicans, but, include voters in every party, who recognize that the Government is truly broken, and it goes across party lines. It is astounding to me that some espouse that we all get in line, shut up, and just look for the R’s after the names in the voting booth.

            Somehow it seems to me that in 3 1/2 years from now, with the lack of any backbone or any push back on the current Libs antics by those R’s in the Congress and Senate, including those on the “listening tour” with their message of “we really need to go along, just to get along” push, or “we really are nice people who aren’t argumentative” will no doubt enable Obama, Pelosi and Reid to hand Obama a Chavez type Presidency for the long haul. And some of you want us to support those types, against our better judgement?

            What happened to looking at a candidate’s proven voting record, or what positions they embraced before becoming the candidate, and deciding to support or not support them based on facts, rather than the simple fact that they have an R after their name. Arlen Spector just proved the fallacy of that notion.

          • janis

            And when exactly did freedom become the excuse for murdering the innocent?

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
          • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

            Perhaps this has come across threads or just really goofed because a certain someone (that started this sub-thread) doesn’t know how to properly use Reply-To-This to keep relevant sub-thread discussions linked and more coherent (a tactic of people who cannot get a point across and just goes on to try and establish a new separate sub-thread with the same lame thoughts/arguments hoping others will leave it stand alone)…. Anyway…..

            1. What I’ve caught thus far is that … People are equating this person as supporting Obama’s policies because they are a Sit-It-Out member and allowing Democrats to have obtained and may allow them to keep control — whereby allowing Infanticide, Govt. funding of Abortions, etc…. (a complete PRO-ABORTION, not just choice Infanticide murder is PRO-ABORTION)?

            2. A PRO-ABORTION person is NOT close to the same as a Republican PARTIAL-CHOICER (as I have defined the new term in Red-Dogs, RINOs, CINOs, DINOs, PLINOs, and Blue-Dogs, oh my… The Political Zoo – what/who are they?)….. And that refusing to vote for a Republican (In a GENERAL Election, of course, Primaries are different and we are having trouble getting people to differentiate) – under the original/actual premise of this Diary – who may even be Partial-Choicer over ANY Democrat (who may just be a CINO,or PLINO) and will land up supporting the worst of the Democrats PRO-ABORTION policies.

            As I’ve said in other threads, I think someone that thinks the Sit-It-Out is an okay strategy is an unreasonable strategy and viewpoint/action that just gives (concedes/surrenders to) Democrat Majority (now Super-Majority) and those most extreme policies – I think they are wrong-headed, but I have respect for someone being HONEST enough to say it straight up rather than beat around the bush and hint at it as I’ve seen in other threads….. If you believe in it, say it plain.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            My view:

            1. When a person votes, or chooses not to vote, with the purpose of helping Republican defeat, one is becoming a functional ally of the victor and morally gains some responsibility for the policies of the victor.

            2. As far as I’m concerned if you’re pro-Roe/Casey you’re pro-abort, no matter what party you’re in. That radical extremist position of the court’s allows no compromise from a radically pro-abortion policy, and therefore it is functionally pro-abortion.

            However even if faced with two pro-abort legislative candidates, voting for the Republican will help the pro-life party gain power.

          • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

            that is how I read it…..

            Supporting a Partial-Choicer Republican does indeed help put the Pro-Life Republican Party (see the Platform) in charge over ANY DEMOCRAT that will amount to a PLINO (or CINO too if someone is not a Life-litmus voter) and allowing the Pro-Abortion (that is the Democrat elite, they are NOT just Pro-Choice they support out-right Infanticide) and Uber-Left Party to control Govt.

            I know some will see that title as inflammatory, but that is just OUR OPINION of the situation and the results of how the Sit-It-Out (ZERO-strategy) works.

            The links are for the casual observer that may have just popped into the conversation, of course, as most of us in this discussion have been in those other discussions. ;-)

          • tullius_cicero
          • janis

            marginally pro-infanticide, and your response was to mark you as pro-freedom. You never denied being marginally pro-infanticide.

          • newagegop

            and encourage all that I know to stay home as well if another McCain shows up.

            I voted for Palin and a VP token to conservatives next time won’t cut it.

            I expect a conservative to be the pick in 12′ because the country will want one after Obama, but I’m done with fiscally and socially moderate RINO’s.

            If progressives are going to flush the country just get it over with. Circling the bowl with moderates is just wasting time.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
          • janis

            we are where we are now. The rest of us sacked up and did our civic duty to vote for the candidate who’d do the least harm to our country. Too many more like you “principled” non-voters and we can just start saluting the flag of Venezuela.

          • http://briansimpson.wordpress.com Brian Simpson
          • Brian Hibbert

            Then come back.

          • tullius_cicero

            Neil Stevens decided to label me as marginally pro-infanticide. I don’t know where that came from. I think he is just an idiot. All I have done is to express my views. You all here can take it or live as you will. However, I despise people who seek to label me. I am against the partial birth abortions just like I am against all abortions. However, Neil Stevens decided to act like a child because he doesn’t like my opinions so he decided to label me as “marginally pro-infanticide”. I am a pro freedom conservative. I refuse to defend myself against idiots like Neil. Would you like it if I labeled you or anyone else here a spouse abuser all because I disagreed with your opinion? Should you be required to defend yourself in response to a baseless attack.

            I see now that RedState posters are mostly idiots.

          • mbecker908

            Well, that may or may not be true. However, your departure will certainly raise the average IQ here by at least 20 points, given that you’ve positively demonstrated that yours is well below zero.

          • janis

            And when a new commenter is reduced to it so early in their stay here, we know they don’t have much of a foundation for being here in the first place.

            Take it or “live it”? I believe I’ll live it, thanks.

          • mbecker908

            Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur…

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            Oh well. A moby insulted me. Good.

          • mbecker908

            since I don’t speak for Neil and you’re just a brief, bad memory that will evaporate, but…

            1. By your stated actions – staying home and refusing to support opposition to Obama unless said opposition meets your litmus test – you are supporting and contributing to infanticide and abortion in general.

            2. You, quite obviously from your commentary here, have no understanding of the fundamental concepts of either freedom or of liberty.

            3. You were not attacked. It was simply pointed out by Neil – and a variety of other posters – that your position was foolish to the point of complete stupidity. Your defense is “I’m taking my ball and going home.”

            4. Bye.

          • avgamerican

            Right here in California people are talking of ending the 2/3 majority requirement on budget approval. Inspite of the having the highest taxes in the nation, people are not rising up and kicking the liberals out. The conservative base in California has become smaller than ever. We have no voting power to end this trend. Too many people that call themselves conservative in their personal lives do not vote that way. So we are losing the conservative base.

            The demographics are favoring the dems. Polls on abortion and gay marriage do not correlate with election results. Inspite of this I am as conservative as ever and will continue to vote Republican because there is no alternative. If there are angry at Bush Obama Republicans out there it is hard to digest.

          • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

            I was hoping you’d chime in with all the its okay to Sit-It-Out crowd discussions – when we allow Democrats to get elected by default, they are free to go even further off the deep end AND THEY HAVE (Reid, Pelosi, Obama – they have no shame in their blatant Socialism now) believing they will be able to keep racking up election wins because many Republicans Sit-It-Out if their “First Choice” isn’t the Candidate in/on the General Election ballot. I was finally get a few people to admit they still intend to sit-it-out in the Crist discussion (IF Rubio isn’t the Primary winner) even after all that we know Obama will ram through if we do NOT crack the numbers Democrats have in the House and Senate.

        • mbecker908
  • avgamerican

    It doesn’t make sense that when a republican becomes alienated by the Republican Party he is going to vote for democrats as though that’s a better choice. I felt very unrepresented in this election. I did not want McCain. I would never question the man’s patriotism and loyalty or his commitment on national defense, but he is too moderate on social issues which brings me to this point. The real conservative base is shrinking. Social issues-abortion, homosexual causes are being tossed aside as divisive. The younger generation is embracing these causes and this tilts to the advantage of the dems who abandoned moral causes long ago.

    By the way I voted McCain.

    • skorrent1

      Not true that “The real conservative base is shrinking.” Recent poll quoted in Am Thinker has the fiscons 3/1 over the libs, and the socons up 60/40. To quote just your two socon issues, Gallup has pro-life up over pro-abort, first time in a long time, and gay marriage lost — 70% — of the black vote — In California!!!

      Conservative positions on issues are not losing popularity. They are just being out shouted by the Dems and their “presstitutes.” We need to work harder, that’s all.

      • avgamerican

        How many of those pro-lifers and traditional marriage people in that poll voted for McCain? Its a rhetorical question because it shows most Americans are willing to compromise their values for a pop culture candidate.

        • avgamerican

          Obama in his own words warns of long term unsustainable debt. Unbelieveable

        • mbecker908

          be as good as any other Republican candidate on those simply because it’s a matter of what can reasonably be done. At this point in history, the best that SoCons were going to do, frankly, was with Rudy. He would keep all the then current restrictions on abortion in place, he was OK with DOMA, and he had the best judicial advisory panel on appointments anybody has ever assembled anywhere.

          McCain’s problem is that he doesn’t believe in anything but getting publicity for McCain. He’s not particularly effective on national security issues, he doesn’t have any stellar creds as a fiscon – and being against earmarks doesn’t take one dollar out of the budget. His record on the judiciary absolutely sucks, he’s as bad or worse than Specter.

          The “SoCon’s stayed home” because of McCain is a strawman. If they stayed home it’s because they dumber than a box of rock. And rock is singular because I know two rocks would have been able to figure out that ANYBODY was better than a guy who openly and actively promotes infanticide.

          • redware

            And you have the audacity to attack these people for being dumb?

          • randy streu

            spelling is the hobgoblin of puny minds.

          • mbecker908

            And rock is singular because I know two rocks would have been able to figure out that ANYBODY was better than a guy who openly and actively promotes infanticide.

            And, it’s not these people I’m talking about, it would be “us” since I happen to be a SoCon. I’m just not a “Single Issues Values Voter”. The difference would be that I’ve been around long enough to know that you win the culture war from the bottom up and you do it incrementally. Just like we’ve been losing it.

            It is results that matter, not blather wrapped b*ll sh*t. The modern day version of Huey P Long – Mike Huckabee – garnered support in the primary from people who were more than willing to overlook his horrible record as Governor because he promoted a couple of Constitutional Amendments, the marriage amendment and the Human Life Amendment, neither of which have ANY chance of passing and over which a President has fundamentally no say anyway. Oh, and his most ardent supporters were never able to tell me which version, of the seven that have been introduced into Congress, he supported even though five of them would not significantly restrict abortion without another generation of court battles.

            Are they dumb? Heh. As a box of rock. Or if you prefer, as a small rock in a cheap box.

          • AceInTX

            I supported Huckabee not because I was enthusiastic about him in any way…I did what everyone here wants us to do where Crist vs Rubio, or Gerlach Vs Toomey are concerned…I closed my eyes to his obvious faults because they meant less to me that McCain, or Rudy’s, or Romney’s faults meant…many did the opposite when considering Romney over Huckabee, or McCain over Romney etc

            This is the fly in the soup…we’re always bent out of shape because we’re never given a choice in an election but we get raked over the coals when we pop off about the Party and the NRSC taking away our choices in the primary by swamping our candidates under a tsunami of party cash behind a liberal candidate!

            I’m perplexed beyond description on this and would give anything to hear an answer as to why Conservatives are always blamed for standing their ground when a Liberal/Centrist Republican picks a fight with them!….

          • mbecker908

            You were, at the very least, an honest and honorable supporter. You offered up points in rational argument and actually thought about the argument. And you didn’t lose it, you just got new info and switched sides. I never had a problem with you or your arguments. I had a major problem with a bunch of the Huckbots who were simply Ronbots one step removed and I took personal joy in beating them to a bleeding, slimy pulp.

            And the two guys upthread are simply idiots.

          • AceInTX
      • SteveLA

        skorrent1

        Before you paint CA Red, it’s not. The vote in favor of Prop 8 was as much a vote against judicial activism as it was anything else. There is no great turn back to social conservatism going on in CA, riots in the street over out of control spending.and over taxation…heck yes.

      • AceInTX

        not that those self identifying as conservative is shrinking

    • rbdwiggins

      Nearly two-thirds of the American people are conservative, or lead their lives guided by conservative principles.

      It’s not important “what” they call themselves. They will vote for a principled conservative leader.

      • avgamerican

        See, I can buy that two thirds might be conservative, but a real conservative is not going to vote for Barack Obama. No way no how not ever. So where were they. I would think the fear of a Barack Obama winning the election would catapult all conservatives to the polls to have voted for McCain. Just because someone says they are conservative doesn’t mean they really vote that way.

        • http://theminorityreportblog.com David Hinz

          I would think the fear of a Barack Obama winning the election would catapult all conservatives to the polls to have voted for McCain.

          While that might be enough to propel YOU to the polls, and to propel ME to the polls, an awful lot of people are getting sick and tired of voting “against” someone — they CRAVE someone to vote FOR!

          As long as the leadership counts on fear of the other guy to motivate voters — it is a losing strategy.

          Voters looked at the last eight years’ march toward socialism and weighed McCain v Obama and found the scale too evenly balanced. Oh, I know, YOU and I knew it was heavily weighted to the left with Obama, but they did not see enough of a difference to make it worth the effort.

          And this way, they figure, at least the Republican Party won’t take the blame for the mess — like they have for the past 8 years.

          Was/is that a winning strategy? Obviously not — but neither is taking the party further left…..

    • Brian Hibbert

      I was a Fred Head myself.

      Yes, the real conservative base seems to be shrinking. They’re being led off by the Ross Perot’s, the conservative party, the Libertarian and similar groups. We need to reverse that. We need to stick around long enough to become a power in the party again instead of being the whipping child for the moderates.

      • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

        need I say more? We absolutely MUST have all Republican Primaries CLOSED.

        • mbecker908
          • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

            I want people to have been declared Republicans for some time before qualifying.

          • mbecker908

            voters who are moving into the area can register in less than that.

          • randy streu

            nt.

        • AceInTX
    • AceInTX

      and told us to sit down and shut up…now they’re engaged in a full scale retreat on fiscal conservatism and we’re still not supposed to protest!

      • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

        I want people to push for Conservativeness loudly, yet still be able to come together later…. or we all Lose and just hand it to the Democrats (as much as we will not like middle-ground settling that will happen at times)… beats the Ultra-Left position we’ll get for certain…. Alot of Conservative 527′s are out there… the one has an add here at RS to support Toomey….. Alot popped up to push against Obama in 08 Elections despite (because) McCain being unwilling to do so….. If all our monies go to the Conservative 527′s and Conservative Candidates directly over the Party or the NRSC etc…. it will be saying something… as well as our continued voices to fight locally (grass-roots) ground-up for Conservative control of the Party….. Can change it from/with SOME outside resources/entities but not being completely outside…. IMO of course ;-)

  • avgamerican

    I have posted this quote many times and I’ll repeat it here again as it describes perfectly are culture’s condition:

    “Repeat the lie often enough and soon the people will begin to believe it.”–
    Joseph Goebbels, Hitler’s Propaganda Chief

  • nod90

    …is a great example of the danger of splitting the vote. Without the Green Party, Gore would have won that contest easily.

  • http://xmmlbchat.blogspot.com katesmith

    The crime of global warming/cap and trade and the desire to make us subservient to 30 million illegal aliens aren’t mentioned in the publicity about ‘moderates’ vs conservatives. McCain was/is an aggressive supporter of both. They are life and death issues and could have been stopped by any republican with a conscience. Soros/Obama could be stopped if the GOP united on these 2 issues. I don’t see any sign they want to stop Obama. Whether or not I stay home is the last thing on my mind at this point.

    • Brian Hibbert

      We can’t leave it to the party leaders alone. They’ll just keep on trying to elect moderates. Every time a Republican loses they think they have to move closer to the Dems. They are wrong, but they won’t believe it. When the party starts winning again, they’ll quit trying to be Dem Lite.

      YOU and I have to take the party back and control the issues. WE have to become a big enough piece of the party that we have influence again. The only way we can do that is to stick with the party and become it’s backbone.

      • AceInTX

        But we still need to shake the tree and try and get the leadership to see the damage they have wrought over the last 4 years by running away from social issues and that it can only get worse if the abandon fiscal conservatism!…

        • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

          I openly/freely/honestly admitted that in regard to the whole Crist/Rubio situation…..

          Being Conflicted — being frustrated by the Republican Party situation, struggling at times with the HOPE we can/will get it straightened out eventually through Fighting WITHIN the Party while at times thinking the heck with it I’ll go elsewhere yet really knowing deep down that going elsewhere won’t get anything accomplished anything either….

          Frustration….. Conflicted……

          and did you see above (or is it below?!?!) (here) how I found one of your “frustration” comments that helped clear things up for me on the where and why you are coming from.

  • redware

    it’s the GOP’s.And perhaps a better analogy here is the kid who gets chosen last when picking teams on the playground.It has become increasingly clear that the National leadership of the GOP values moderates like Crist and their ilk a lot more than principled conservatives.Well if you don’t want us to play,we won’t.It is also clear where the “brilliant” strategy of those on this blog like JLenardDetroit,and mbecker is heading-the irrelevancy of conservatives within the GOP,and the election of more moderates to aid and abet in the socialist agenda of the Democrat party.What amazes me is that they spend far too much time excoriating principled conservatives for trying to advance their agenda than they do attacking moderates who attempt to destroy the influence of conservatives in the party.People who choose to follow their conscience when exercising or choosing not to exercise their vote should not be painted by the broad brush of ignorance these vaunted strategists so often wield on this site.The invectives “dumb” and “ignorant” are thrown around on this site far too frequently by those whose arrogance will only further alienate those of us without whom you cannot win.So keep playing your game-it’s your ball.But please understand that the more moderates you elect,the more irrelevant you become-and pretty soon you will be left standing around playing with(oh I want to go there,but I won’t)…!I have come to the realization that this blog is a Republican first,conservative second blog and it has every right to be just that.Personally,that is not what I am looking for and have decided to leave this site.I do not possess the hubris to think I will be missed.But I am confident that should your stratetgy succeed and I am left standing on the sidelines, the GOP will sorely miss me and the rest of those principled conservatives whom you have abandoned.

    • Brian Hibbert

      If the kid gives up, he’ll never play again and will most likely either turn to drugs or crime or both and come to a bad end.

      If the kid decides to prove them wrong, he goes home, gets better and takes over the team.. (Michael Jordan got cut from his HS basketball team.).

      I won’t call you ignorant. I will call you misguided.

      The liberals didn’t take over this country by taking their ball and going home. They took it over by sticking with their party even when they hated many of the things it did. When they DO take their votes away from their party’s general election and give it to the greens, we win. It’s one reason I support the green party. It’s also the reason I want the Libertarian and Conservative parties to become even less relevant than they are. Split electorates never win anything and are responsible for the person they least want getting into office. Always. Everywhere.

      And in case you weren’t paying attention, I’m not advocating for more moderates. I’m advocating STRONGLY for defeating them in the primaries, but after the primaries, all factions within the party have to come together. It’s the only way we can stop Obama and friends.

  • http://theminorityreportblog.com David Hinz

    is the straight party ticket — which we have in Michigan and I find disgusting. Voting for party over principle is an abdication of your responsibility as a voter.

    In the last election, there were a couple of local officials [Republicans] who I knew to be less than worthless — corrupt is the word that best comes to mind. But the Republican Party chose to continue to run them, and so I exercised my right as a voter and withheld that vote.

    In 2006 we had a squishy moderate that the state party backed — but we wanted a conservative. Against the party we were able to primary the squish, and in November the conservative won.

    Whether locally, statewide, or nationally, there will always be candidates who simply do not deserve to be elected. When presented with, “you MUST vote for our rascal, because the other side’s rascal is much worse,” the voter can either submit to tyranny and vote for the lesser of two evils — or exercise his right to vote for neither.

    Apparently, here, that is considered heresy. That is a shame…

    • Brian Hibbert

      I specifically mentioned David Duke in my post, but I’d expand that to include any person who is obviously corrupt or obviously bad for the country. We don’t need those people no matter how bad the Democrat is.

      But what I am saying is that this party needs conservatives to be loyal to the party, just as we needed Specter, Snowe and Collings to be loyal to the caucus in the porkulous vote. Sometimes we have to consider the greater good. When it comes to the general election, a squishy R is almost always better than anyone with a D. Third party votes and non-votes are a default vote for the D and the D wins.

      What you are saying happened in 2006 is what I’m advocating more of. Primary the squishes. But if the squish manages to beat our guy. Vote for him (unless he’s a crook or a KKK member). We’ll get him in the next primary.

      • http://theminorityreportblog.com David Hinz

        we [you and I] are not really so far apart on this — the problem just keeps coming back to the leadership.

        The battle in 2006 was uphill because the party was behind the squish — why? Because he was the incumbent and they did not want to take a chance of putting a choice before the voters based upon ideas.

        If the party stayed completely out of primaries, and allowed the voters to decide who they wanted to take into November, I suspect there would be a whole lot less resentment.

        • Brian Hibbert

          But should and does are separate things….

          Since they (mostly the NRSC) are supporting squishes, we’re stuck with up hill battles. It’s a fact of life. But if we can get Toomey and maybe Rubio into the Senate, that can change.

          • http://theminorityreportblog.com David Hinz

            as Erick Erickson leads the fight against the RNSC cr*p we fight the party to the death to GET Rubio and Toomey as candidates.

            While the leadership does its level best to hand the elections over to the Democrats….

            [sigh]

      • http://theminorityreportblog.com David Hinz

        a lot of misunderstanding here has taken place based upon a personal attack taking one single sentence out of a long dissertation of principle [strangely enough a leftist tactic] that has turned the whole discussion of my views into a third-party movement v party unity type of cr*p.

        • JadedByPolitics

          my statement that NOT IN A MILLION YEARS behind a posting of what the Florida GOP was attempting to do to a FINE, GOOD, CONSERVATIVE man in the primaries should have made people on this site ANGRY but oh no it’s me and my approach to the Republican party and you and your approach to the Republican party that became the problem….I said many a post ago but the lemmings who would just follow the party off the ledge when we are NOT EVEN in a general says more about their principles then it says about mine!

          You see when Card Check, Illegal Immigration, Cap & Trade pass with Republicans like Crist, McCain, the two trolls from ME and are heralded in the press as a “bi-partisan” effort thereby seducing the American public into feeling that it’s the best that could be done I will know I have done the best I could to NEGATE those liberals with R’s after their names and will sleep quite comfortably wrapped in the my principles.

          • http://theminorityreportblog.com David Hinz

            when they start getting staid and proper people like JadedByPolitics angry, there is something wrong! :-)

          • Scope

            it’s for the greater good! Who’s greater good is the question.

          • Brian Hibbert

            I’m angry too. I didn’t even realize how angry I was until I was telling the party guy at the breakfast yesterday how I agreed with his party unity speech. I told him that the national party is driving the base away by supporting Crist over Rubio and trying to find someone (anyone) to oppose Toomey.

            I don’t like what they’re doing and will fight them in the primary. After the primary, keep in mind that we do need party unity to win.

          • http://www.the41stvote.org rcov092

            In the General. But I will kick and screwam and call out anyone trying to limit my rights to participate in slecting the candidate that we, the BASE thinks best represents our values.

            Charlie Crist is a Blue Dog Democrat at best that will vote for Obama’sHealth Care and Crap & Tax. If he is to win the Primary, he is going to have to write in his blood his committment to defeating these programs if they are nt passed this year and to roll them back if they are.

          • Brian Hibbert

            Or at least what I intended it to be about.

            Fight in the primary. Pull together in general. The primary season is for internecine battles. The general is for combining forces to defeat a common enemy.

      • janis

        so many others in the primaries, Brian? Way too often in this party, when the squish gets in, he stays in until he either dies or finally goes Dem.

  • paint_it_red

    It seems the message here is that even if a candidate does not uphold conservative principles to an admirable degree, we should support them if they have an (R) because that is what is good for the party. But that didn’t work with Chafee or Specter or Jeffords or Bloomberg or Schwarzenegger. Snowe, Collins, and others willing to compromise key values/platforms of the party are considered by some to be a means to an end, and as the original post notes, better than socialist.

    But if you go down this road too often, your message is always muddled, your base is disenfranchised, and far less people are willing to donate if the party leadership gives that money to people they disagree with. The Dems took 12 years out of power to figure this out. How long will we take?

    I believe if you put principles first, the numbers will follow. If you put numbers first, you lose it all. The South and Midwest followed the former model successfully. The Northeast and West Coast followed the latter and have been virtually obliterated by the Dems.

  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    as this Diary floats off into the RS Archives about whether or not we will choose to be Red-Dogs…

    Wait, there’s a name for R’s that vote outside the Party…. RINO, isn’t it? How the RINOvirus is contageous

    I’m just putting the size 16 shoes out on the floor, and waiting to see who puts them on and parades around in them ;-) lol (or tries to pick them up and throw them at me, remember that No He SHOEdint Have) :P

    You might be a RINO if….

    If you talk about Conservative values and how the Republican Party has lost its way and threaten to vote with someone else if the Caucus doesn?t do exactly what you want?.

    Soon Contrariness and Blather will ensue? It has to, because those that are
    would be Republicans yet willing to cross the Party-lines to vote other than their own Party (wait, doesn?t that sound familiar – oh yeah, that makes them a RINO) have to rationalize how it is okay for them to RINO in an Election while it is NOT okay for a Republican in DC to RINO in/on a vote ? because it really isn?t okay for EITHER!

    Is that straight-forward as a equivalence for everyone? RINOs in DC vote outside the Party, RINOs across America cross the Party-line in the voting booth. We want our elected Republicans to be Red-Dogs (loyal) and Brian (in this Diary) is asking the same of you/us to be Red-Dogs and vote with the Party.

    When I say RINOs in DC cannot be tolerated I get an amen chorus, but if I just SUGGEST that RINOism at the ballot box is an INEFFECTIVE STRATEGY – wow, look out!

    Perhaps I should have softened this by using humor?. like a Foxworthy joke?.
    You might be a RINO if?.. you vote Alternate-Party against your Republican candidates and allow Democrats to have their way ;-) lol

    Before someone decides to begin with the BUT IT’S DIFFERENT…. Own it, admit it, that it fits the same definition of RINO.

    I’d started this thought elsewhere in the thread and another Diary (Moe’s: Those complaining about RINOs, but it really related to the point of this Diary the most and I wanted the thought represented here-in for that reason.

  • pilgrim

    If every American followed this advice from 1788 to the present, then there ought to be a Federalist Party and an Anti-Federalist Party. Stuff happens, and we adapt to it. One thing that I will add is that Americans have not wanted to have multiple parties like they have in other parts of the world. For most of our history it is a two-party political system. The two parties have not been the same two parties from beginning to present.

  • dave_in_atl

    If you support your party “no matter what they do” they have no incentive to do the “right thing.”

    I think there are circumstances where letting the “enemy” win provides your side with a long term benefit. This is rare, but it shouldn’t be discounted. Saying my party right or wrong is stupid though. You never get improvements that way.

  • Justin_Case

    Social conservatives view abortion as the most important issue facing this country. I’m sure that you know some of them.

    To vote for a pro-choice Republican for the good of the party is to ignore the greatest evil in this country.

    The greatest power in the universe is God. If this country is going to ignore His Will, for the sake of politics, then we will ultimately get what we deserve. Whether or not the country is controlled by Democrats will be irrelevant.

  • Brian Hibbert

    And that was over an issue that could no longer be ignored or compromised… slavery.

    The result was that most of the Whigs, a few free soil Democrats, and a host of other splinter parties joined together to become Republicans instead.

    Yes stuff happens, but realistically, unless we change the constitution to a proportional vote system, we are going to have the Republicans and the Democrats as the 2 major parties for the foreseeable future. Other parties will serve only to split the vote and have no significant effect on policy.

    If conservatives abandon this party, the Republican party will never win a majority again and the Democrats will give us a permanent socialist state. And even if the Republicans DO win, the people elected won’t be much different than the socialists. We as conservatives have only 1 hope. Fight our battles in the primaries, but stick with the party if our candidates don’t win the primaries.

    Reagan understood this. The way to get conservative ideology back on top is to work from within!

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    The southerners took their ball and went home. It didn’t go well for their cause.

  • Brian Hibbert

    I’m not saying to abandon your principles. I’m saying that you must pick your battles including deciding WHEN to fight. The time to fight on party ideology is the primary.

    A Republican who is pro-choice is at least unlikely to support government funding of abortions. Voting for someone in a different party will assist in the Democrat victory. The Democrat is very likely to support government funding of the practice. Even on this issue, you must make the best choice from among those actually on the ballot. Remember that withholding your vote or making a protest vote for someone who can’t win is like 1/2 a vote for the person you would least like to win.

  • http://impudent.blognation.us/blog kyle8

    You see we have been following your advice since the last year of the Reagan administration when many of us were wary of GHW Bush.

    Well we were right to be wary. He was an ineffectual president who raised taxes and pushed through statest nonsense like the quota bill, the unnecessary acid rain bill, and the employees with disabilities act or as I like to call it the full employment for trial lawyers act. He was a disaster, though not as big a disaster as his son.

    And as for the horrible creeps in the senate like Jeffords and Specter, well as Dr. Phil would say “How’s that working out for ya”

    What we really need to do is ONLY support people who are at least more conservative than they are liberal.

    And I don’t mean just sitting out if a liberal wins the primaries, I mean going out and voting against his sorry ass.

    Why? because liberals with an R by there name are absolute poison to our party. Just like that giant liberal Austrian sausage in the state house in Sacramento. We can’t even place the blame for the California meltdown on the democrats because of that idiot.

    Whenever the waters are muddied, and there is no clear mark of difference between us and the Gotterdammercrats, WE LOSE, and the nation loses.

  • avgamerican

    I missed your comment before I posted mine. You hit it right on the head. The moral causes are the real issue. We are in a culture war. The problems of a failing a economy are only a symptom of the immoral culture. The tax and over spend government is caused when the government tries to compensate for all the problems caused by an immoral society. So it’s a chain reaction. If we can change the dialogue and force the discussion here we will become even more divisive because the truth hurts and people refuse to accept it. Sadly, I am skeptical the Republican Party will fully commit to this dialogue because they recognize that the younger post modernist generation is embracing this culture.The dems abandoned moral principles along time ago because they know this post modernist culture tilts in favor of a moral relative platform.

  • Mike gamecock DeVine

    extreme moral decadence that can only lead to our nation’s destruction.

  • Deskpilot

    For lack of a better example, we lost a few voters over Gov Palins MISREPORTED action on her belief in Creationionism v. evolution.
    Sarah Palin, in her role as a individual citizen/parent believes in Creationism over evolution. Governor Palin, however, wisely chose to provide only an OPINION on the matter, suggesting that a discussion on Creationism ought to be allowed as part of the discourse in a classroom. Gov. Palin made no political move to made Creationism a mandatory policy. She spent no tax-dollars to express that opion, but appraently, every leftist went bat(blank) over “Palin Favers Creationism” and firestromed her inspite of the truth. (Normal for MSM)
    If an otherwise acceptable candidate waspersonally pro-choice, but never did anything in their political career to support it(i.e. legislation, litmus testing a judge, condemning pro-lifers, etc.), I would certainly support them.
    If they reaised a local tax in direct support of an issue, many a public works project, and them has the stones to enable that tax to be rescinded upon satisfaction of that obligation/project, I would certainly support them.
    If as an lower office holder, a candidate worked under a principle similar to the Hippocratic Oath of “Do No Harm,” but occasionally stood up in the face of the vocal majority to do what was right, in spite of the fallout, I would certainly support them.
    Another, often overlooked consideration, is our intuitive “Gut Check.” What, on a instinctual level, do you feel for the candidate.
    A candidate for office, OUR EMPLOYEE, whom we choose to hire, must be the best representation of our collective values on a variety of issues.Each issue, and their history on that issue must be factored, and understood in its context, not soundbite, into the recipe of our vote.
    My candidate of choice in the primary with best the most like me, hoever, the overall choice deserves our support. Hold your nose if you must to vote for a moderate R, but it is still better that the alternative.
    I know more thatn a few people who got caught up on the O wha are now sufferring from buyers remorse. I don’t have it, and I’m the better for it. Even though my nose is just starting to work after six months,

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    The faithless always have excuses.

    I’m sure Arlen Specter, Jim Jeffords, Bob Smith, and Linc Chafee agree with you though on sending a message.

  • Brian Hibbert

    But outside of that, you change things within the party by:
    1. Donating to the candidates and causes within the party that best fit your principles Like it or not, it is money that makes most policy decisions.
    2. Working in the primaries for the candidates that best fit your principles. Again, things will change most when conservatives actually win elections. The first step is winning the primary.
    3. Supporting the party when your preferred candidates lose. How did you feel when Specter flipped? I’ll bet your reaction was “Good riddance, he was only with us 40% of the time anyway.” That’s the same reaction you’ll get to any threats to abandon the party. Party loyalty is not the only factor in makign changes, but it does count.

    If you want improvements, work within the party!

  • Scope

    and I just can’t do Tweedles in an election, it doesn’t make me an Obama or Liberal supporter, or for abortions at any stage, or for anything remotely Democrat or Liberal. If we just keep supporting the “supposed” lesser of two evils, we can only expect that the “lesser” will soon enough become the “worst” of the evils, when he drinks from the cup of Government power, and now has the ability to push and vote for a Democrat Lite aganda, that they were not against in their moderation.

  • Mike gamecock DeVine

    The leftists seized control from the JFK-Humphrey defense hawks and surrendered in Vietnam in 1975; appeased the USSR under Carter; supported communists in Nicaragua in the 80s and bushlied in the 2000s.

    Reagan conservatives in 1980 seized control from the Rockefeller, country clubber tax collectors for the welfare state.

  • kweiss01

    Well said. It drove me nuts when friends of mine refused to vote because McCain was too big government (vs. Obama?!).

    However, at what point do we say “enough” and try to bring the party back to its conservative roots? Maybe it’s time the party sit up and realize it can’t win without conservatives. and shouldn’t count on our votes when it’s heading in the opposite direction. The “big tent” that Reagan built was founded on liberty, conservative social values, and small government. We’ve wandered from all those points over the last eight years, (in my opinion), trying to become a sort of “Democrat-lite” party. The “anything goes” tent just doesn’t seem to work – there’s no longer a strong philosphy to ground ourselves on, and I don’t think that’s how one win’s elections either.

    I guess what I’m asking is, how do we demand accountability from our Republican representatives without throwing the country to the Democrats?

  • pilgrim

    The South had been solidly D for decades until the Republicans nominated Goldwater. They South went for the American independent candidate in 1968 and back to the Ds in 1976. Reagan got them back with the Rs, and so much so that they are still solid R today. Reagan did not just work from within national Republican circles to get conservatives. He brought that South who supported Goldwater back to the Republican Party.

  • IJB

    Both Canada and Japan had major parties collapse within the past 20 years. The Liberal Party in the U.K. aas kaput by 1940, less than a century ago.

    The problem with diaries like this one is that it assumes that just because something has happened in 150 years means it will *never* happen, and that’s just false.

    The fact is if a party gets to the point where it’s not representing a significant portion of the electorate (or, conversely, if a significant portion of the electorate is simply unrepresented at the time), a party will collapse, and nothing will stop it from happening.

    Is the GOP close to that point?… Honestly, I feel it’s starting to get there. If you look at the Senate GOP… well, I don’t know who their constituency is, because it’s sure not voters!

    The good news is things look much better for the GOP at the level of the House, (most of) their Governorships, and (some of) their State Legislatures.

    Let’s face it – since 1998 the GOP has been seriously off-track. The way I figure it, they’ve got less than 2 years to get it together.

    But if the national leadership does something really stupid like go along with Obama on nationalizing health care, or Cap & Trade, or Card Check, then I think the base will revolt, and the Party will collapse.

    It’s happened before. And, at some point, it *will* happen again, to either the GOP or the Democrats. It’s not a question of “if”, but “when”.

  • AceInTX

    If conservatives abandon this party, the Republican party will never win a majority again and the Democrats will give us a permanent socialist state. And even if the Republicans DO win, the people elected won?t be much different than the socialists. We as conservatives have only 1 hope. Fight our battles in the primaries, but stick with the party if our candidates don?t win the primaries.

    Again…the current uprising is over the Party interfering in the primaries taking away our only chance to influence anything! Saying WE need to support OUR guys in the primaries and support the nominee in the general means nothing since the moderates who control this party from the top down won’t let US pick OUR nominees without spending OUR money to stop US from doing anything but what THEY want!

  • Right Reason

    Today is not the culmination of history; it is a part of it. Sure, the last party split was the Whigs, but that doesn’t mean that we are destined for the Democratic and Republican parties forever. And if you think that abandonement of conservative principles isn’t as big an issue for us as slavery was to those who left the Whigs, you’re dangerously mistaken.

    I’m not saying we’re there yet, and I still think that working within the party, at this point, is the more effective way to go, but you party first guys had better lay off the “where you gonna go?” talk.

    The GOP keeps us interested by being a vehicle to further our conservative goals. Their current “moderate” path is a losing one. They’ve now lost the White House, are one vote shy of having virtually no power in the Senate and have a 79 vote disadvantage in the House. They are getting close to no longer being able to further our goals. If we can’t get what we want with the GOP, what’s the difference if we’re out?

  • Brian Hibbert

    Gamecock, that is exactly what I am advocating!

    The only way we can seize control of this party is by stay IN the party. Reagan didn’t get control by threatening to leave. He got control by building up the conservative base within the party. That’s what we MUST do again.

  • AceInTX

    Split electorates never win elections. Ross Perot split off a large chunk of people who would have voted for George Bush and Bob Dole handing the elections to Bill Clinton in both cases. Abraham Lincoln would never have been our 16th President if Douglas hadn?t split the Democrat vote away from Breckenridge. And we never would have had our first socialist president, Woodrow Wilson, if Teddy Roosevelt hadn?t thrown a tantrum and formed the Bull Moose party to split the vote away from Taft. It?s better to stay in our party and work from the inside to move it towards a more conservative platform.

    I’ve never advocated a Perot type party taking votes away…but I fear it…and see a movement building toward it. I’m not sure what the rest of you are hearing in the world beyond the beltway right now…but I’m hearing a lot about it in my neck of the woods. It’s why I asked what everyone thinks about the possibility.

    As for the rest of it, you make good points and I agree with you when the General election is concerned. But that’s not the issue that has caused such a kerfuffle the last couple days…it’s the attitude from the higher levels of the party that “we know what’s best, and we’re going to decide who is going to win the primary and the base of the party can go fly a kite. I’s like to hear your suggestion on how we deal with that…because I want to work constructively to end the practice of the party throwing it’s weight behind the most liberal candidates open primaries.

    The other thing I would quibble with is this:

    It?s the ?My idea/candidate/platform plank/you name it didn?t win my party?s support so I?m going to stay home/switch parties/form a new party for the next election? theme.

    It’s an oversimplification of the issue and it’s counter productive to throw it out there as a motive for those who have a problem voting for one candidate or another.

    It’s infuriating to have people ascribing childish motives to you when you have legitimate reasons for your objections. The prime examples are the objections Conservatives have raised about Specter, Snowe, Collins, etc which are dismissed as objections based on a single issue raised by children having a tantrum. those that throw that epithet out there get to tell everyone what motivates me and my thinking when they have no way of knowing my thinking and could care less since they won’t listen to what I’m saying I believe in the first place. The fight right now from Conservatives isn’t about a single issue.

    Fo instance…for year the dig on principled conservatives has been that we oppose someone based on abortion as if that were the only issue we have a problem with…but look at things today…abortion and social issues aren’t even being discussed. Specter, Snowe and Collins are in trouble for straying from the reservation on fiscal issues. everyone knows they’re anti SoCon, so every time we get on them about their pro big government big spending heresies, we get beat about the head about being intolerant about their pro gay marriage, pro abortion positions…Crist is the most recent example of this because everyone on the other side keeps saying they’d rather have an 80% conservative anyday over a Democrat…as if Crist is with us eighty percent of the time. He’s socially liberal and fiscally liberal as well…so why would we support him and why would we not object to the party preemptively making him the Nominee for the Senate before the Primary voters have had a chance to decide.

    Finally, I agree it’s counter productive to stay home in certain circumstances but there are more and more conservatives who are inclined to do just that…and my question is this…if it’s wrong, (and I believe it is wrong in most instances), for them to stay home because they can’t vote FOR a candidate in good conscience…why isn’t it wrong for the local, state, and national party to continually force candidates on them that they can’t vote for in good conscience without giving them a say in the matter to begin with? Who is more at fault?

  • Justin_Case

    In answer to your comment title, I say, “yes” and cite Ronald Reagan as an example. Furthermore, Arlen Specter won his first term as Senator in 1980.

    I was listening to Allen Keyes commenting this week on Hannity’s show on how Democrats never fail to stand for issues favoring abortion and gay marriage – without worrying about fallout from within their party.

    In that same vein, his question is why should Republicans worry about standing on principles.

    Our party should place nothing above principles.

  • AceInTX

    The time to fight on party ideology is the primary.

    The Party is preempting us in the primary fights by taking sides against conservatives!

  • Scope

    I understand your strong advocacy for supporting Republican candidates, but really, has it come down to supporting someone because he won’t fund the practice of abortion from the Federal Government, but the Democrat always will? I was under the impression by comments here, and with others I have talked with, that the Social issues, in particular abortion, should be avoided, because “we can’t do anything about it anyway.” To elect moderate Republicans, particularly socially moderate Republicans, makes that statement very correct. We will never be able to do anything about it!

    From how I am reading your comment, you are saying that as long as the Fed’s don’t put money into providing for “abortions”, then the practice is acceptable. If anyone has character, and I think it is important in any elected person, then why would you not look unkindly on that person, and know that they may make other morally repugnent decisions as well? Or, are moral arguments passee and un-Republican?

  • Brian Hibbert

    But you have to realize that conservatives can’t win without the party. There really is no other viable option. When we lose people to splinter parties, our faction becomes even weaker and becomes more ignored.

    The way to win and move this party back in our direction is to bring conservatives back, and take the party control back from the moderates. We can only do that from WITHIN the party. Let’s fight the battles, but the time for battling is in the primaries. The time to demand accountability is during the primary season. Demand accountability, by giving your dollars to those candidates that exemplify conservative principles. After the primary, we MUST stick with the party in order to build more support.

    If you abandon the party in the general, all you will do is give a further set back to our cause.

  • Brian Hibbert

    But the only way we can make that statement true is by running the party. The only way we can run the party is by sticking with it.

  • Justin_Case

    My prediction is that Obama will be done in by his own party. We are beginning to see this right now regarding Gitmo and the tribunals.

    This is exactly what happened to Jimmy Carter.

    What the Republicans need to understand is if they do not present a clear alternative, as Reagan did, they will have a hard time winning.

    So let’s not water down our convictions for the sake of winning when it will not be necessary.

    I’m touring Alaska right now, and may not be able to continue this dialogue. I will check back with you when possible.

    Until then, keep your chin up.

  • Brian Hibbert

    That system allows the small parties to have some power and helps encourage the formation of multiple splinter groups.

    We have a winner take all system. With the winner take all system, there can only be 2 major parties. There may be splinter parties, but they have no significant power and can only act as foils to the 2 big ones.

    The formation of the Republican party and it’s jump to the top occurred due to some rather unique circumstances that are unlikely to occur again any time soon. I admit that it is possible that the Republican party can disintegrate and be replaced by the Constitution Party or Libertarian Party as the major conservative voice, but I think it’s unlikely.

    A more likely scenario is that conservatives will abandon the party to the Democrat lite faction and guarantee that the Democrats will control the country for the foreseeable future. This diary is a plea to not let that happen. More specifically, this diary is a plea to stick with the party so we can take control of the party back.

  • AceInTX

    But if the national leadership does something really stupid like go along with Obama on nationalizing health care, or Cap & Trade, or Card Check, then I think the base will revolt, and the Party will collapse

    .

    Bipartisan Health Consensus Emerges!
    GOP Seeks “Common Ground” on Health
    With Bipartisanship, Health Care Reform is Possible

  • IJB

    They both have elections based on winner-take-all districts. (Japan has some weird hybrid system that I don’t know the details about, or understand!)

    Yes, they’re both parliamentary systems, which does explain the 3rd and 4th parties in both countries, but Reps are still elected on a by-district basis, which makes them much more comparable to our system.

    (Italy, which also had a major party (the Christian Democrats) implode within the last 20 years is, I believe, a fully Proportional Representation (P.R.) system, which is why I didn’t mention them.)

    Anyway, the point still holds – one of the two parties in the U.S. *will* collapse eventually, it’s just a question of “when?” (and “what caused it?”).

    And, FTR, I don’t think the Republicans imploding will lead to the ascendancy of ether the LP or the Constitution Party – both are truly “minor parties” in every sense of the word: a much more likely scenario is an entirely new party (probably called the Federalist Party or the New Federalist Party or something…) forming in its place, a la the Republican-for-Whig switch.

  • AceInTX

    This is my fear…The last time we had a third party run we had Bill Clinton got elected and re-elected….What was the driving force behind United We Stand America’s existence?… Fiscal irresponsibility…why did it come about?…because most of the voters couldn’t see the difference between the Republican Party and the Dems on fiscal issues and fiscal responsibility.

    Republicans came storming back in 1994 running on being the party of fiscal discipline, anti gun control and the socially responsible party and promptly lost in 1996 when Bob Dole ran away from all those issues.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    It was pretty dang messy.

  • Common_Cents

    I’ll support the party and work for real positive change but I will not enable the party to continue its mistakes.

    People aren’t necessarily leaving the party as the party is leaving its people.

    If the party doesn’t change its ways, more and more people will think the ship is beyond saving and jump. Don’t blame the people.

    The party should be responsible with regard to its members, not the other way around.

  • Brian Hibbert

    I agree that we must have a clear alternative to Obama when the time comes. To do that, we have to have control of the party. To get back control of the party, we have to stick with it. Even when we don’t much care for the candidates.

  • AceInTX

    We have to present an alternative ala Reagan…not a pale pastel ala Dole…each had dramatically different results didn’t it?

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister
  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
  • AceInTX
  • Brian Hibbert
  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    I think people just aren’t used to seeing this side of it argued with the vehemence that the send-a-message people argue.

    I’m an oddity I expect because I used to be a send-a-message person and used to argue it energetically. :-)

  • Brian Hibbert

    You aren’t the only one making such statements, just the one that most concerns me.

    And I honestly sympathize and agree with your basic complaints. It’s just your solution to the problem that I think is wrong. I want to change this party’s direction, but I can’t do it if all the other conservatives stay home or worse leave the party permanently. Doing those things is giving control over to the moderates and worse yet giving elections to the Democrats.

    I’m not so much interested in laying blame for the current situation as I am interested in fixing it. The only way we can fix it is if we stick together and stay IN the party.

  • Brian Hibbert

    To use your analogy, if we all stick around to bail water out of the ship, it’ll stay afloat long enough to repair it. If too many people jump overboard there is no hope.

  • Mike gamecock DeVine
  • http://impudent.blognation.us/blog kyle8

    by giving people something to vote for, not vote against.

  • http://impudent.blognation.us/blog kyle8

    we will never ever ever ever ever and I mean EVER forget anyone who goes along with that deal.

    And any argument like “well I went along with it to make it better” is not going to cut any ice.

    ARE YOU LISTENING REPUBLICAN LAWMAKERS?

  • Common_Cents

    The party should be loyal to its members as customers, not unlike a business delivering a good product/service to customers. Your product/service declines, the customers may go elsewhere. I don’t believe much in customer loyalty to party for loyalty sake. It should be what have you done for me lately?

  • AceInTX

    we’re all bailing and the ships officers are busy blowing more holes in the bat around us!

    Make them stop and the talk of staying home will stop!

  • AceInTX

    I’m saying it’s happening…or about to happen…it’s happened before as well…in 1992 and 1996…Perot threw the election to Clinton because people had had enough of the Democrats spending like drunken sailors while the Republicans made half-hearted protests while riding along an passing out the pork right along side the Dems…

    Your right about the results of leaving or staying home…but that won’t change the fact that many will do just that…and whose more to blame? and why am I being accused of trying to encourage people to leave or stay home when all I’m doing is pointing out the danger and asking what we do if things continue the way they’re going?

  • AceInTX

    I can?t do it if all the other conservatives stay home or worse leave the party permanently. Doing those things is giving control over to the moderates and worse yet giving elections to the Democrats.

    I’m in their fighting…am I throwing the odd threat to stay home around? sometimes in a fit of emotion…but more often than not I’m pointing to the people who ARE being alienated and ARE leaving. 2008 is a prime example…Obabma got no more votes than Kerry…but McCain didn’t inspire his base to turn out the way Bush did….my question is this…is it the fault of those who weren’t inspired…or the fault of the standard bearer who not only didn’t inspire us…but went out of his way to demoralize us?

    Its like war…troops get demoralized…and they lose battles because they don’t push themselves to go that extra mile…to charge that tallest hill…or to take that last bullet on the way to victory…that’s the first step in leadership in these type of fights…it’s to inspire, to instill your troops with confidence…never mind going out of your way to demoralize your own troops and to call them idiots and fools for believing in the cause you are at war to defend! and it’s darn sure not to ride in on your white horse and shoot the officers who ARE inspiring the troops in the midst of battle…

    That last is what I see happening now and want it to stop…you tell me how to do that…and we’ll go off to work together whistling happily along the way!

  • AceInTX
  • Brian Hibbert

    We’ve been abandoning the party for Bob Barr, for Ross Perot, for whatever candidate the Libertarians or Conservative party or….. oh not all of us, but enough that it make a difference.

    We’ve been doing FAR too much “protest voting” and all it’s accomplished is to move the party farther to the left. We have to WIN elections to do anything.

    It’s time to take the party back and the only way we can do that is by becoming the strength of the party.

  • http://beaglescout.wordpress.com LJ “Beaglescout” Miller

    You need to join your local Republican committee. Every conservative on RS should join their local party committee, whether it’s a precinct committee or a county committee. Start attending the next meeting. In time you will make your way on.

  • florida_conservative

    We can’t let Democrats vote in Republican primaries. That’s how we end up with so many moderate Republicans in the general elections. I also don’t think the majority of conservatives in the Republican party want to leave the party. It does seem, however, that the national party doesn’t want us. Look at how quickly they jumped behind Charlie Crist. The only other candidate that has announced is Marco Rubio and the party is trying to knock him out before it even starts. Bottom line, Conservative Republicans win. As long as the national party keeps trying to dilute that, Republicans will lose. If the choice is between a Democrat and a cheap imitation, most people will go with the real thing.

  • kweiss01

    And I agree, to an extent, that extent being the way the system favors the incumbent. Without an Arlen Spectre-style implosion, good luck in getting the voters to know or care about what they’re congressional rep is doing. I don’t mean to sound bitter – I see this as a real problem. Most congressmen are insulated, with their votes being dutifully recorded in the books and then buried on some back page in a newspaper few have the time to read.

    Still, taking back congress in the primaries can be done, but what would help in this would be some leadership from the top. The Republicans are still flailing about, trying to stand for everything and as a result they stand for nothing (yet).

  • gekster
  • Brian Hibbert

    But how do you intend to do that if we don’t stay in the party?

  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    which is why I’m still waiting on the WHY FOR in Crist/Rubio 12 points [with links] rather than the he isn’t Crist…. How will we present Rubio to General Election voters and expect them to vote for him over a Generic Democrat candidate (all we can speculate with at this point).

    The Contract [Contract with America (original, a part 2?)] isn’t invalid, we have to admit many Republicans lost their way but that those core values are still in the Republican Platform and that we, more than ever, now need to revisit those ideals and focus on getting those things accomplished we hadn’t —

    Workable Presidential Line Item Veto that will pass SCOTUS or drafting Constitutional Amendment and start the process toward getting it accomplished. Had we done that a decade ago we might be close to it now and the focus would not have disappeared about Fiscal Responsibility……

    Spending Cuts A…Z ….. remember that one!?!?! How about that actually happen NOW!!!!!

    etc…..

    The whole point of a RED-DOG (from: Red-Dogs, RINOs, CINOs, DINOs, PLINOs, and Blue-Dogs, oh my… The Political Zoo – what/who are they?) is that they WOULD/DO support the Party during the tough times when a RINO (Snow,Collins,disreSpecter) jump on the tough votes – remember more Democrats voted with us in the House (that was the Bi-Partisanship, against the Stimulus) our 3 Senators left the MORE Bi-Partisan position to side with the Democrat position.

    BUT/HOWEVER…. the go along “position” was the “Let’s Spend” like Democrats position at one point too…. we don’t really want people to “go along” with that as a “Party” position again. I expect my Republican Rep’s to go against the Party when the question is to go against the Platform as they did on spending and Government growth rather than “Limited Govt.”

  • kweiss01

    I’d imagine that most of the folks who take the time to read RedState understand the stakes well enough to vote Republican, even when they perceive that vote to be the” least worst” choice.

    The rest of the folks, however, who are too busy taking the kids to soccer, getting a meal on the table, and making sure the homework gets done, don’t have time to do the research and read blogs like RedState. People need to see a party that’s articulating a vision beyond wanting to get elected.

  • antisocial

    Sometimes it can get frustrating…. Where does it stop? I think people like McCain think we are stupid because despite being opposed to the moderate policies we still end up supporting him. We do need to ensure the politicians understand that they can’t ignore us. That’s the lesson that needs to be taught.

    But the alternatives are worse.

    Couple of months ago there was a great diary (don’t have the link) titled something like “get local”. Get local and take control of the party.

    I am changing my earlier stance. Accuse me of flip-flop :-)

  • Brian Hibbert

    I was at the Tazewell County Illinois Republican breakfast this morning. The featured speaker was Steve Shearer, Con. Aaron Schock’s chief of staff. Part of his speech was about party unity. Basically, that we should expect all of our candidates in the primaries to sign a pledge to support whoever wins. He went on to list multiple races where:
    1. Losers immediately supported the party victor (including giving what was left of their campaign funds) leading to a party victory.
    2. Several examples where Republicans were too divided to support the winner causing them to lose the race. (He said Blago was a victor partly due to such in fighting. I think it had as much to do with George Ryan, but he’s at least partly right).

    After the speech I told him that I completely agreed with his party unity speech, but that the actions of the national party have caused a lot of the problems. I specifically told him about the NRSC and their treatment of Rubio and Toomey. I know he’s on the NRCC side of things, but maybe he’ll give some feedback…..

    I still think that in spite of the actions of the NRSC, we need to keep the party together in the general elections. It’s the only way to stop the rampant socialism.

  • ColdWarrior

    Please, folks, if you’re not yet a precinct committeeman (“PC”), read The Committeeman Project diary and the other posts I and others have made about becoming a precinct committeeman. (Broken record alert — I’ve posted about this a lot here so stop reading if you don’t want to relive it!)

    I live in AZ. You’d think it’s a “conservative stronghold.” It’s not. There’s a fifty-fifty split in the party ranks, and all the monied interests seem to be the “Chamber of Commerce” McCain-supporting moderates. They want cheap labor (ergo, open borders and amnesty) and don’t want to “offend” anyone on the social conservative issues (same sex “marriage,” abortion) and they don’t really care if the little people get forced into socialized medicine because they’ll figure out a way around the system and they don’t really think hard about anything. Case in point: John McCain.

    Why no conservative majority in the Party ranks? Seems a lot have left and never came back and those that should join don’t know how to do so or why it’s important. Many want to “do something” but don’t know what to do. I’ve met a lot of these people where conservatives gather, both online and in person.

    But if we can change the party ranks by getting all these conservative Republicans who “sit home” and complain about “the Republican Party,” and the ones that aren’t fed up and want to “do something” but don’t know what to do, to actually join the Party as PCs, then we conservatives can vote in new leadership and grill the moderate candidates in the run up to the primary election on their moderate stances and then influence the outcome of the primary elections. If you’re not “in” the Party as an elected precinct committeeman, you don’t get to vote for the leadership or impact the Party Platform. You don’t get as many opportunities to grill the primary candidates. And you have a greater chance of having contact with voters in your precinct and influecing their votes in the primary. Being a registered Republican allows you to vote in the Republican primary, but you don’t get to vote for the Party leadership or what it espouses in the Platform.

    I don’t know what it’s like in other states, but in my legislative district, no. 17, that encompasses north Tempe and south Scottsdale and AZ State Univ., ONLY ONE THIRD of the PC slots are filled, and the same percentage applies for all of Maricopa County. So we’ve got over 4,000 vacancies in Maricopa County. Knowing that this spring the outcomes of both the AZ Party chairmanship race and the Maricopa County Party chairmanship race were decided by fewer than twenty votes, with solid conservatives winning both races, you can see that conservatives hang on here by their fingernails in terms of PC votes. Had the moderate candidates won, they’d now be advocating raising taxes in AZ rather than cutting spending to fix our budget shortfall and they’d be espousing ways to “work with” Obama on every unconstitutional thing he’s trying to ram through Congress.

    There is lots to do. But ought we not focus first on changing the Republcian Party from within? As a priority item, should this not be at the top of your list? Want to make a real difference in the Republican Party? Then get into the game and off the sidelines and JOIN IT.

    Here’s some info I sent to the President of the Phoenix chapter of Coalition for a Conservative Majority last week after I attended their montly meeting in an effort to recruit precinct committeemen, which contains links to posts here at Redstate about The Committeman Project and a post by me about how I recruited PCs at the Phoenix Tea Party on April 15:

    >>>>>

    I realize I?m preaching to the choir, but:

    If we want to change the country, we have to change the outcome of the elections.

    To change the outcome of the elections, we have to change the caliber of the Republican Party candidates.

    So that those candidates are not an echo of the Democrat candidate for the voter, but a real alternative. A conservative alternative.

    To change the caliber of the candidates, we have to change the outcome of the Republican primary elections.

    To change the outcome of the Republican primary elections, we have to have more conservative Republican precinct committeemen influencing the amount of support the conservative candidates receive and, hence, the number of votes they receive.

    I?m attaching the flyer I used at the Phoenix Tea Party and which I handed out last night. I will be handing them out on Wed. at the Obama protest that will held at Tempe Marketplace. Are you aware of it?

    Here is a link to a discussion of The Committeeman Project at Redstate.com. Lot?s of good people at Redstate.com, but it?s mostly an echo chamber with little real action by the contributors (at least that?s how I perceive it).

    http://www.redstate.com/martin_a_knight/2009/05/05/the-committeeman-project/

    And here?s a link explaining what I did at the Phoenix Tea Party with video of my sign (and my son).

    http://www.redstate.com/hawksruleva/2009/04/15/after-the-tea-party-whats-next/#comment-6

    <<<<<

    And here’s what Erick Erickson posted about the issue:

    http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/04/30/at-play-in-the-field-of-tea-parties/

    Thank you.

    I am only one. But I am a Republican Party Precinct Committeeman.

    P.S. For those of you here who already are PCs, thank you.

  • Brian Hibbert
  • AceInTX
  • Brian Hibbert

    I wrote one, Martin A. Knight has written several better ones.

    This diary is part of the same process. We need to take control of this party. Getting active in the local party is part of that. Sticking with the party is another part. Getting conservative candidates past the moderates in the primaries is another.

  • Leopard1996

    I am not a big social conservative. I don’t like abortion as a practice, but I believe that decision is between the woman and her God or conscience, and we shouldn’t pull the outright ban, however, I also don’t want our govenment (us) paying for abortions when it is just an elective surgery of convienece. But I will vote for the pro life candidate as long as that prolife candidate also believes in small govenment, individual freedom, and kick our enemies in the ass when needed, what I won’t do is vote for a pro life candidate, who also wants to spend like an idiot, but spend on what he/she feels is right. I don’t think the republicans have had the 66% for me personally, but everytime thus far what they did have was better than the 0% the democrats offered.

    I maybe buying into the MSM garbage a little bit, but sometimes it seems that someone who is pro-life, but weak on the small govenment front gets more traction than say a Guliani, who other than being pro-choice seemed to have the other two parts of the stool for conservatism pretty strongly.

  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    they STILL should not be voted for because they have proven over and over to just be CINOs and PLINOs (Red-Dogs, RINOs, CINOs, DINOs, PLINOs, and Blue-Dogs, oh my… The Political Zoo – what/who are they?)….. Ever since Clinton pulled his “I’m a New (DLC) Democrat” garbage they have co-opted some Conservative issues to get elected and rule as Leftists (CINOs)….. Given that, I’d vote for a 40% Republican over a 70% (CINO) Democrat.

  • avgamerican

    think otherwise.

  • Brian Hibbert

    But your reaction is all too often acted upon. I said you were the one who most concerned me because I’ve seen your posts and I know you are part of the base. And when such ideas are repeated often enough people begin to think it’s the right thing to do.

    One of the problems is that the more elections we lose, the more the leaders think that the people want the Democrat ideas. That leads to more squishy candidates and more lost elections. It’s a vicious circle and they don’t seem to understand that we can’t out Democrat the Democrats.

    I know that we’re the favorite targets for the moderates to blame. I also know that we like to blame them.. Frankly, if we want to start winning again, we’ll have to put that attitude behind us and start working together (even if we have to take some more abuse for a while).

  • 1stRichard

    Ok, I can hold my nose because the R brand is too socialist but I am really fed up with doing so, it stinks and this needs to change. The belief that conservatives, liberations and including most moderates are some how ?splintering? from the Republican Party is totally false. It is the Republican Party that is ?splintering? from us. Big choice Socialism fast or Socialism slow, that is simply is a one party system. Look at it this way, the Republican Party is playing in their sandbox and no longer in their own. Democrats have the home field advantage and the Republican Party can not possibly win there. I am fed up with picking one liberal over another and people that keep telling me to do so. Regrettably we only have a one party system and unfortunately all we can do for now is pick the lesser two evils. Heck, you darn near have me convinced to write in Mickey Mouse next time I have to vote.

    I think changing the Republican Party is good but right now I don?t see how. I go to all these Republican Party meeting and voice my opinion but when I look behind me there is no one there. For all that we are about to lose I would expect to see thousands but they are not there. I am out there helping organize a tea party and so much more but I am not seeing the boots on the ground we need. It seems ?We the People? and ?freedom is not free? has become more of a clich? than a call to arms. It can not be said enough, you know the term ?use it or lose it?, well we had better start using it because we are coming real close to losing it all. This is a boots on the ground fight and a do or die reality, not a virtual reality. The real fight is out there and not in here.

  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    Don’t know how it would be possible to miss all the “I’m more than happy to sit out the election” banter here (for one) or here (for another) all the countless discussion of it in November passing on McCain (hence Obama).

  • Brian Hibbert

    But we can’t change it if we don’t win elections. We can’t change it if the party leadership thinks it’s losing elections because we’re too far right. The more elections we lose, the more the party leadership will push us away.

    The Tea Party movement has gotten the attention of SOME of them. Now WE have to show party support and guide it back to conservatism.

    WE understand that we lost the last election “because the party lost it’s way”. That’s a slogan many party leaders have stated. We have to prove to them that it’s true.

    NOW is the time for a conservative resurgence to start within the party. I say start because it will take time and work on all our part. We have to get local. We have to get active. We have to do the grunt work of the party and raise local funds, find local candidates (the farm team), raise more money for conservative candidates than the squishes can raise for theirs, etc.
    And we have to become rock solid within the party in order to be taken seriously.

  • redware

    Living in South Carolina I am proud to say we have possibly the most conservative member of the Senate in Jim DeMint.I worked hard to get him nominated and elected and will do so again when he is up for re-election.I am not proud of the other Republican senator we have-Lindsay Grahamnesty.I worked hard to defeat him in the primary,and then refused to vote for him in the general.Due to the specific circumstances of the race(a conservative Republican won the Democrat primary)I cast my first vote ever for a Democrat.I have been a lifelong Republican(active YAF member in the late 60′s to give you an idea of just how long)and have supported Republican presidential nominees in every election from 1956 on(I remember standing on my front lawn as an 8 yr. old singing that little ditty about “Eisenhower’s got the power” and “Stevenson’s a jerk”.I reference this information to validate my Republican “bona fides”.That said,2008 was the last time I will support a Republican moderate in any race.

    I came home from the polling place that day and felt I needed a shower.I thought i was doing my part to stop the disaster of an Obama administration.We lost.And there was another unintended disaster that took place-the enablement of the Republican left.One would have thought that after the debacle of a campaign run by John McCain,the abandonment of the party by so many of its faithful conservative supporters,and the horrific manifestations of what happens to the party when it runs leftward,we would have seen a return to the core principles upon which we win.But no-the national leadership is firmly in the grips of moderates who know that most conservatives will back them no matter what.By supporting these moderates in the general election we enable RINO behavior,and send a message to the leadersip that we are willing to be used and abused.Michael Steele feels free to take pot shots at conservatives,and John Cornyn blatantly advertises unprincipled political “hackery” that best describes the national leadership of the GOP today.

    Clearly we are engaged in a battle for the heart and soul of the party we have embraced as the best hope for advancing our conservative agenda.We are losing.We are losing because of the Chamberlains of the cause who still cling to the hope that one day the GOP will miraculously come to its senses.We must be bold in this battle,engaged in precinct level politics,and willing to use our leverage to force the GOP back to the right.If that means letting moderates fail,so be it.I recognize that we will be called stupid by some,and blamed for the election of Democrats more liberal than the moderates we refused to support.But we have tried it your way and the result is always the same-our consevative agenda suffers,and so does the nation.I will enable no more.I will stay in my party and fight to bring it back to where it belongs.But I will no longer be used by those who misguidedly believe that the election of moderates actually advances our conservative agenda.

  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    all those protest votes or Sit-It-Out amounts to a ZERO-strategy in that it puts zero Conservatives in via to methods and amounts to many, many, many, more than zero in complete (not just a %) opposite of our ideals.

  • Scope

    including the fact that I felt the need for a shower after voting against Obama. I promised myself I would never do that again, as you stated we just enable the unprincipled moderates to continue their move leftward, and they are the ones with the microphone.

  • AceInTX
  • 1stRichard

    ?But we can?t change it if we don?t win elections.? But we can?t win elections it if we can?t change. But we need involvement if we want to change. But we can?t have involvement it if we don?t see something start to change. But we can?t change it if we don?t win elections. But, the more elections we lose, the more the party leadership will push us away. But, if the Republican Party thinks the left turn they are making is wining elections?

    Heck what a mess, ?WE have to show party support and guide it back to conservatism?. What more do we need to do, we could have had a lynch mob or how about some tar and feathers? The few of us that are protesting are so fed up with these RINOs I think we may see something drastic real soon. Participation may grow a bit more but not to the numbers needed to make a change. If you were run over by a bus would you stand there and take it again? Clearly this ?support and guide? is questionable.

  • JadedByPolitics

    BECAUSE THEY DON’T SUPPORT YOU!!!!!!

    http://townhall.com/columnists/JillianBandes/2009/05/15/gops_fierce_florida_fight

    “In Florida?s GOP, Republican Party of Florida Chairman Jim Greer, a friend of Crist?s, tried to invoke the rule to ruin Rubio?s chances before he ever got off the ground.

    ?Rule 11 was a procedural matter that was logical because of the already official support that Charlie Crist has received, from the majority leader to the Senatorial Committee that has all the resources,? Greer told the St. Petersburg Times blog.

    Rule 11 allows the national party to pool its resources on a single candidate, and was designed to prevent ?crazies? from entering into an election. If a candidate who would seriously damage the GOP were to gain momentum in Florida, party insiders would be able to procedurally disqualify him.

    If Rule 11 was used against Rubio, he wouldn?t receive any of the cash necessary to fund his campaign. ”

    Because the party apparatus will not allow a primary battle to let WE THE PEOPLE decide who should run against the Democrat in the general! So you say WE should support them? I say NOT IN A MILLION YEARS!

  • http://beaglescout.wordpress.com LJ “Beaglescout” Miller

    We can’t wait for a socialist foreign multi-billionaire who wants to make money by breaking the American dollar to bankroll our candidates. If we (and those who agree with us but have been turned off since Reagan) are the majority, and I believe we are, then we who are still committed must get involved in precinct level politics and we must recruit fellow thinkers to get involved too, whether they are involved now or not.

  • ocleverone

    Drill this example down to the local level and you have the overall problem.

    It’s not that voters don’t value core principles, it’s not that we cannot field multitude of candidates or figure out where we stand on issues. The problem is that the party apparatus many times tries to silence issues for its own agenda. That agenda usually being the “reward your buddy” system.

    I loathe seeing procedural shenanigans ursurp the flow of free speech or debate that could persuade the committee (or any other group) to choose which candidate (or issue) they would like.

  • mbecker908

    IMABHO, there’s nothing wrong with that rule. It’s just the individual administering it that we don’t like. Take back the party mechanism from the bottom up and we get to define the rules. Play to win, not to make friends.

    So you don’t want to support them in a million years. Your alternatives would be exactly what? Getting together with Hinz and starting a turd third party?

  • Brian Hibbert

    But this time, I think we’ll have to be.

    Yes, the party is using procedures to get the guy the leadership wants. And we should fight against such actions in the primaries. But in order to stop this nonsense, we have to get OUR people in power.

    We’ll have to maintain party unity in the general in order to so that.

  • AceInTX

    So…where are all of you…support the conservative in the primaries but back the nominee in the General folks on Rule 11? and why are we expected to act in good faith with people who would pull an asinine stunt like that?

  • Leopard1996

    I probably would never vote for the dem, unless the dem made the republican look like a total socialist. However, the current crop of what was showing as republican, thanks to spending, did not offer a difference, so if the dem can take a few issues off the table, like 2nd amendment, pro-life/pro-choice, and state they will be responsible, why would anyone have voted for the republican in the last two elections especially when the average voter had no more knowledge of the issues that could fill a thimble.

    That said, I can see through the smoke screens, but it seems the average voter could not.

  • bs

    The “take it back from the bottom up” idea is EXACTLY what we need to be doing. This was Brian’s point, and this is the primary message to be captured here.

  • JadedByPolitics

    The point is USURP the Party appartus and go straight to the conservative whether that person needs to run Independent or whatever party they choose to run under…..this STUPID, INANE, CORRUPT piece of backroom dealing is beyond reproach and that they thought they could just exclude someone from running on the Republican ticket really just shows they don’t have much confidence in their MODERATE candidate now do they!

    Perhaps if you didn’t just jump to conclusions you might not look quite as stupid as you did with the comment about Hinz!

  • AceInTX

    let the people decide…don’t creeze out you base to protect the crony class for Pete’s sake.

    Just who decides who is a nutbag that shouldn’t get party support…or who should have party money used to support his opponent?

    the alternative you suggest is a straw men and nothing more…and I think I can say on jaded’s behalf that her point is that the Moderate and Liberal wing of this party has the ball and they make the rules that ensure they’re never challenged and can’t be defeated…I here everyone say to work within the party and fight for your candidate in the primaries if you want to change thing…and then you see crap like this that just proves the approach suggested is a fool’s errand because the Party will tilt the game board if you get close to defeating them!

  • ocleverone

    The party apparatus chooses what or whom will be on the agenda with very little regard to its members. There is the leadership and the rest work the phones.

  • mbecker908

    The “problem” isn’t the rules or the apparatus. It’s the people who enforce the rules and run the apparatus. If there were hard core conservatives enforcing said rules and shutting Crist out of the process we wouldn’t be – or at least we shouldn’t be – complaining.

    So, I come back to my original question. What’s your solution?

  • tullius_cicero

    What value is there in supporting a pary who’s only comittment to conservatives is that they promise to give them less of what they don’t want. The Republican Establishment isn’t stupid. They no that they don’t have to embrace conservatism because there exists a voting block who will vote for them simply because they aren’t as bad as the alternative.

    I know that there are many people out there like Rush who advocate for conservatives to take over the Republican Party. My question is how long do we have to fight in order to finally take over the Party? Conservatives and liberals have been fighting over the direction of the Republican Party for around the last 100 years. Back in 1912 it was William Taft (conservative) versus Teddy Roosevelt (liberal). In the 30s and 40s it was Thomas Dewey (liberal) versus Robert Taft (conservative). In 1952, the Eastern Establishment recruited Eisenhower (liberal/moderate) to oppose Robert Taft for the Republican nomination. We had Goldwater (conservative) versus Rockefeller (liberal) in 1964. In 1976 we had Reagan (conservative) versus Ford (liberal/moderate). Now in 2009, conservative leaders are advocating that we redouble our efforts to take over the Republican Party. My question is, do you want to spend the next 100 years attempting to make the Republican Party a conservative party?

    How long must conservatives fight liberals within the Republican Party?

  • Achance

    http://www.redstate.com/achance/2008/11/22/2012-think-january-2009/

    Nothing has changed my mind.

  • ocleverone

    I have a dent in my id about how we zig and zag to achieve the goals of nomination. Present your platform to the membership and let me decide. Give me your record, your ideas and your plans and let me choose whether or not I will vote for you.

    I am very active in the Republican party. I know what the consequences are if I sit it out at any level. That being said, don’t insult me or my intelligence by using procedure to bodycheck someone who wants to run. Let the rank and file decide who is to run, let the membership hear the platforms, let them take ownership in their choices.

    I just got off the phone with our county Chair. I support her a thousand percent on most issues, she has done an excellent job of revitalizing our committee here. That being said, I also talked to her about the “heir apparent” that the behind the scenes powers have selected to replace her when she steps down. (She will be running for a Supervisor position and she will win.) I told her that I wasn’t happy that he was preselected and that I thought he was a giant asshat. But primarily, I was disappointed that it is the apparatus choosing who leads, not the membership.

    With the exception of our current chair, the behind the scene powers (that do this all the time) have a dismal track record of who they support in the leadership positions within the committee chosing RINO after RINO for the past 10 years.

    I want the committee aparatus to give more of an ownership stake to the rank and file membership.

  • AceInTX
  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    Still in the ‘getting my bearings’ stage, but I figure that I have *some* time before the 2010 elections.

  • AceInTX

    First off, in your post as to whether Crist WOULD win in a general, your best point is:

    1. Has (proven he can win) WON State-wide Elections already (AG/Gov)

    That’s the best thing he has going for him as far as I’m concerned but it also poses a problem because no one has to guess what his record is. His public record as a state wide politician can be a double edged sword. his support is described as a mile wide and an inch deep and he’ll likely turn off Conservative voters in the north of the state. I would say, though this isn’t quantifiable, that he won statewide because he rode Jeb’s coat tails into office not so much because of his liberal policies. More on that below.

    There isn’t much more to be said about that because Rubio brings nothing to the table to compare…He’s extremely popular in his district from what I can tell and well received in party circles state wide. His biggest plus is what I believe will be the dynamic going into the 2010 elections.

    As I see it, the 2010 elections will be a referendum on Obama and an over reaching Democrat machine that has been working overtime spending every penny they can get their hands on and printing more. The effects of having an annual deficit that is triple the highest deficit in American History will be taking hold by then and the stagflation that comes from printing money with nothing to back it will start taking hold as well. The price of everything in this country will be tripled by that time and business will be crippled from the tax increase, both those passed between now and then…along with the Bush tax cuts that will expire then.

    People are going to be looking for an alternative. Rubio is a credible alternative to that type of government. Crist is not…period.

    The Dems will run a Democrat that will attack him for supporting the porkulous bill and act conservative to get elected while Crist will be stomping his feet and blaming the party for not being inclusive enough and surrendering to the extreme right wing…blah blah blah.

    I’m not a big fan of Dick Morris but he said something profound in my mind recently to the effect that if Obama’s policies failth the voters will be looking for contrast to him and his policies…if his policies are successful, then there will be nothing Republicans can do and will lose no matter who runs….what we need right now is fighters who will take the message of Fiscal responsibility, traditional values and a strong national defense and sell them as an alternative to what the Democrats are offering…Crist isn’t that guy…he’s the very symbol of appeasement with the Democrats not a contrast. Rubio is a contrast.

    The negatives to Crist isn’t limited to the cigarette tax either. You keep saying that’s all we have against him which simply isn’t true and your ignoring our repeated attempts to explain to you his support for the three quarters of a trillion dollar stimulus bill is a huge negative shows an element of intelectual dishonesty or inability to grasp simple facts…I can guarantee you the Democrats will be merciless and shameless in beating him about the head on the issue.

    Finally,

    1. Our Sit-It-Out army here at RS cost him more votes than he makes up in Independents (that he needs to build on top of any CORE Republicans)

    This is foolishness pure and simple…first off…we’re not saying stay home…we’re saying conservatives will stay home like the did in 2006 and 2008…it’s a fact whether you want to acknowledge it or not…and all the stomping and name calling and temper tantrums in the world won’t change that simple fact….and the other problem with that statement is the assumption that nominating an Arlen Specter in FL will attract independents to our cause…which it hasn’t in the past…and won’t now. In fact we didn’t even hold out moderate republicans in 2008 as evidenced by Collin Powell and Christophe Buckley

    Rubio is conservative. Democrats have been winning by acting conservative…Crist is a liberal and brags about it…what more does one need to say?

  • avgamerican

    The real conservative base has grown smaller with the pop culture. They are embracing tolerance for everything accept traditional values. Those that claim most people are conservative forget that although most are conservative they are willing to vote for pop culture candidates. They are willing to allow government interference into public schools and many other radical things.

  • Brian Hibbert

    The party is moving away from conservative ideology because we are losing elections. We are losing elections because people don’t support the party.

    The only way to fix this party is to get busy and make it work! Become a precinct committeeman. Knock doors, find candidates in your neighborhood for all the little jobs that no one wants to run for, support the local candidates. FIND THE CONSERVATIVES and get them to advance. Especially the younger crowd. We need a farm team. that shares our views that can win elections.

    How long must we fight liberals within the party? Well, it doesn’t stop. Once we win, we’ll have to keep working to hold the party.

  • AceInTX

    We can?t let Democrats vote in Republican primaries.

    We can’t let the Party keep pushing liberal Republicans in primaries against us without some consequence. If you haven’t joined Erick’s Not One Penny More to the NRSC you need to!

  • AceInTX

    That’s the issue here…if Crist wants to oppose Rubio in the Primaries…fine…let’s duke it out…support our candidate and let the best man win…If you want to support Crist for whatever reason leads you to believe in him…great…support him with your own money and try to convince others that he’s the right man for the job…

    Where the line is crossed is when the Party decides to jump in and support Crist with my money, against my will, before there is even a debate, or a single campaign add run, or a single stump speech given in the race! That’s what’s so Galling in this…and then you take the Party Supporting Specter from the start over Toomey and when Toomey looks like he’s going to win and Specter jumps to the Dems…Toomey is supposed to step aside for a Ridge or Gerlach to run against the new enemy that the party used to support against our will…

    I mean…COME ON!!!!...

  • AceInTX

    and they will take their ball and go home again won’t they…and they don’t need anyone to encourage them to do so…they just won’t go along with a leadership that doesn’t think they have to acknowledge them and are entitled to their support no matter what.

    You’ve accused my of advocating something that I have not…and almost got me banned when what I’ve been saying is that it is happening under our noses….Perot won two elections for the Democrats because the Republicans refused to deal with an out of control fiscally liberal Democrat Congress and it will happen again…The Tea parties are an indication of the outrage huge numbers of people in this country…and I have no doubt…unless we grab the bull by the horns and stop acting like Democrats there will be another Perot type movement do it again.

    please don’t accuse me of advocating such which I’m not…I’m sounding alarm bells pure and simple…If I’m destined to be banned, let it be for something I actually did and not because someone says I meant something that I did not!

  • AceInTX

    and they choose one party over the other based on that voice and what they want to say…I’m working inside the Republican Party at the precinct, District and State level to get it to represent what it says it represents…but many don’t have the time or desire to do that.

    The cold simple fact however is if the party doesn’t give it’s natural constituents a voice…they are less inclined to go the extra mile to help it win….we can’t keep doing what we did in 06 or 08…or we will lose…and I don’t want that…and I don’t want to win and do the wrong thing which is even worse.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    They thought they could bully the Whig party. Split it and make something new. So they got the American party instead.

    They thought they could bully the American party. Split it and make something new.

    Too bad the other side just went and made the Repubilcan party instead, telling the Southerners to pound sand.

    If elements of the right try this tantrum approach, it will be no more successful than the pro-slavery tantrums were.

  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    so you say you won’t/don’t openly advocate Sit-It-Out or Alternate-Party but it seems you revel in the prediction it is a certainly. It just sometimes gives the impression (granted, perhaps we sometimes misread it) that you are more than happy to have your prophecy self-fulfilled by this nuance. That you are willing to see people sit it out as long as you’re not advocating it (still seems to be excusing/allowing it away from the scope of this Diary trying to get loyalty to be a 2-way street and beyond a staring-contest to see who will blink first), is a nuanced position we also just don’t agree with…. That Democrat wins will bring about the Conservative resurgence eventually or somewhere else through another Party. While many of us are trying to say we must work harder within the Party and support it in General Elections despite our disliking the outcomes of the Primaries.

    Many see not heartily encouraging people to work within the Party still as the same as – if not encouraging, but allowing with little resistance because it fulfills your analysis of what will be – excusing/allowing it… I don’t see a “I think people are going to leave regardless, BUT WANT THEM TO FIGHT WITHIN THE PARTY…. Not that you may not have said there somewhere, just that I haven’t seen it that plain and all these posts the last few days way short of that.

    Now that I finally think it has been stated plainly and clearly enough (sorry it too so long, but I am certainly not the only one that has been reading you to be pro Sit-It-Out or Alternate-Party) — I still think it’s a fine dancing line but — I’ll respect you for the position.

    I don’t have to agree with you to respect you and/or your point.

  • tullius_cicero

    There is nothing wrong in admitting defeat. We are going to get big government and high taxes no matter who is elected.

  • tullius_cicero

    Liberalism leads to disastrous consequences. If it is going to happen, I prefer for the other side to get blamed for it.

  • AceInTX

    But your reaction is all too often acted upon. I said you were the one who most concerned me because I?ve seen your posts and I know you are part of the base. And when such ideas are repeated often enough people begin to think it?s the right thing to do.

    And staying home is cutting off your nose to spite yourself. And far too many have employed that tactic…but on the other hand…for the record it’s not my reaction because I’ve said over and over again that I’m not leaving the party…I’m working to change it and warn everyone that others are reacting that way and will continue to do so….

    I also agree 100% with this:

    One of the problems is that the more elections we lose, the more the leaders think that the people want the Democrat ideas. That leads to more squishy candidates and more lost elections. It?s a vicious circle and they don?t seem to understand that we can?t out Democrat the Democrats.

    buy leaving or not voting…that is the effect…and it doesn’t help…but on the other hand…how do you convince those wanting to stay home that the part won’t read their slavish votes as an affirmation of their wrong thinking that promoting squishes is the way to win?

    That’s the horns of the dilemma that we currently find ourselves on and I’d like to find a way to solve the canundrum!

  • tullius_cicero

    When did I mention anything about contributing to Obama? Oh yeah, it’s the old “if you don’t vote for my guy then it is equivalent to voting for the other guy” canard. Whatever. I get sociallism and big government from both Republicans and Democrats. Even if one side promises to give you less socialism than the other, we are still headed for socialism. I have accepted this so I find no need to worry about which of the two candidates that I don’t like that I should vote for.

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    After you apologize to all the people here whose time you’ve already wasted, of course.

    Next post.

  • mbecker908

    and you’re simply not bright enough to figure out how to use the “REPLY TO THIS” button, I’ll respond.

    You’re obviously also not bright enough to be able to discern the difference between a “bad deal” (which would be McCain or any other “moderate”) and a “freaking disaster” which is Obama. The BoyPresident™ will likely turn out to be the best President in the history of The Republic in terms of getting his agenda turned into law and ensuring the continued growth of the ShadowGovernment™ that is NGOs like ACORN that are funded by us. You’re stupidity will, in fact, keep him in office. And certainly after two terms of Obama there will never again be an opportunity to reduce the size or the scope of government. If you think sitting on your arse and waiting for a “true conservative” to come riding out of the sunset to save us is a good plan, you hold the modern record for stupidity. As the case in point, kindly note just how many of the New Deal programs or the Great Society programs have been overturned.

  • Scott Mustian
  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    I’ve gone on and on and on about CINOs (see: Red-Dogs, RINOs, CINOs, DINOs, PLINOs, and Blue-Dogs, oh my… The Political Zoo – what/who are they?) and how a vote for a Democrat, ANY DEMOCRAT, is a vote for an all out advancement of the Progressive agenda despite their campaign rhetoric — so their co-opting of some Conservative values has to be countered with the FACT that they are just CINOs and the Blue-Dogs (MYTH) just support the Progressive Party leadership because they are beholden to them for re-election and Committee seats.

    as for the Sit-It-Outs … you said you’re not advocating it…. go back and read it and you will see that SOME are indeed OPENLY advocating Sit-It-Out. One or two FINALLY had the gumption to get around and say it plain rather than dance around it. I can RESPECT the person for honesty if they say it straight, not if they just keep beating around it. Sit-It-Out or Alternative-Party voting is a ZERO-strategy and just provides for Democrats Majority (now Super-Majority).

    So you NEVER advocate you or anyone to Sit-It-Out (GENERAL Election) despite who the Republican choice is?!?!? (some still won’t answer that straight and I’d like to see you answer it – especially since LOYALTY and voting Republican is the focus/topic of this Diary) And anyone considering not voting for Crist when he is the General Election candidate (not that I’ll be happy about, but I’m thinking he will be UNLESS we come up with a bigger name recognition Conservative in FL) I urge them to see that whole Crist/Rubio 12 points [with links] discussion.

  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    The Democrat/Liberal/Progressive agenda – after these last 2 elections and what is currently going on in DC there is NO excuse for them to ever fall for that (I’m a new Democrat, like Clinton pulled) EVER again…… A vote for a Democrat, ANY DEMOCRAT, is a vote for Majority of Pelosi,Reid,Obama style Progressive agenda – PERIOD!!! If someone cannot vote for the Republican for whatever reason they must insist, it is best they throw-their vote away to an alternative-party rather than the Democrat for the reasons stated above (although that ZERO-strategy does NOT accomplish anything but help Democrats get elected), at least they won’t be giving a DIRECT vote to Democrats (just still aiding-and-comforting their cause by not voting for viable alternative that, at worst, will sometimes oppose the Progressive cause)….

  • mbecker908

    And don’t pick a fight you don’t have the firepower to win.

    I didn’t miss the point of what you said, any more than I’ve missed the point of what a couple of other posters (not here) have said and then beaten them silly when they tried to defend the indefensible.

    As far as my “comment” about Hinz, David is a very talented writer when he puts his mind to it. When he gets off on his “third party” kick, he’s got his head firmly and completely planted in his arse.

    What you said, minus the bloviating about rules, was this…

    Because the party apparatus will not allow a primary battle to let WE THE PEOPLE decide who should run against the Democrat in the general! So you say WE should support them? I say NOT IN A MILLION YEARS!

    You said exactly nothing about USURP the Party appartus or anything else in that incomprehensible sentence above. All you did was get pissy and throw down some kind of an undefined gauntlet. I asked what you thought we should do – you know (or maybe you don’t) like a specific action or two. I wasn’t trying to pick on you, I’m much more direct when I do that. Like now. Perhaps a reference to Moe’s latest front page effort would have been a good place for you to start.

  • JadedByPolitics

    the party man there will of course be no money for either the NRSC or the RNC or directly to Crist…..my money will go to Rubio if he decides to run as an Independent….that is how NEVER in a million years for the Crist choice! the same will hold true in the PA race should they find someone to run against Toomey….what I am saying is the party apparatus has lost its COLLECTIVE mind and are acting like the Democrat party within our own party. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH because at some point it has to be! that point is NOW….WE did not lose the last two elections cycles because we were too Conservative WE lost because the Party was to LIBERAL!

    I have already redditted and dugg Moe’s FP and I know who my locals are and I know my committemen here in VA I know my area’s state Senator and I have been to meetings I AM DOING the legwork necessary to ensure that Conservatism is RESPECTED and given DUE deference too that WE DO NOT GO LEFT!!!!

    So let me reiterate that I will NEVER in a MILLION years SUPPORT the party apparatus NOR their choices when they USURP the RIGHT of We The People! I will NOT be a lemming and follow the plan THEY set up! I have never been a follower I am a leader and I intend vis a vis my involvement locally to lead!

  • http://theminorityreportblog.com David Hinz

    and a handful of others seem determined to keep dragging my name into discussions I am not a part of: this is all I have to say:

    [Disgusting picture redacted. And blam ? NS]

  • mbecker908

    So let me reiterate that I will NEVER in a MILLION years SUPPORT the party apparatus NOR their choices when they USURP the RIGHT of We The People! I will NOT be a lemming and follow the plan THEY set up! I have never been a follower I am a leader and I intend vis a vis my involvement locally to lead!

    Please define this in more or less single syllable terms. For instance, are you advocating a third party if the Republican Party apparatus doesn’t conform to your particular litmus test? Are you simply suggesting not donating to the National / State Party organizations and instead, giving directly to particular candidates?

    You say you’re doing stuff, and I say good for you (no snark there). But I still can’t make heads or tails out of what your bottom line is if, as it appears you’re referring to, you “don’t get your way”.

  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    As Brian says below, I too, am rarely on the other side of Jaded but am (and reluctantly so) on this one….. What the Sit-It-Outers (in depth Sit-It-Out discussion) and Alternate-Party folks amount to is a ZERO-strategy IMO and is just not a workable STRATEGY at ever accomplishing anything. It is just a difference of opinion. For me it is a discussion of EFFECTIVE vs. INEFFECTIVE STRATEGY to reclaim a Majority or the CONSERVATIVE agenda has ZERO opportunity of getting anywhere. It is not ALL ONE ISSUE to/for me, if you view it as all-or-nothing, that is fine – we disagree – but you know the results of your choice relegates the Conservative Party (Republicans, even though, yes, there are some less than committed – even opponents to – a Conservative agenda in the Party — but all in the other Party amount to a complete opposition to a Conservative agenda even the CINOs and PLINOs)

    While we advocate for CONSERVATIVE candidates whenever/where-ever possible in Primaries (BE THEY MUST BE VIABLE, and this is the part we get ATTACKED (saying in general some do/have, NOT SAYING YOU JADED, just that you lost your sense of humor in one of our exchanges) over if we differentiate that to/for the General Election discussions) that we are just willing to DISCUSS the less-than-optimal choice is the point of contention.

    Now if you’d prefer I get “defensive” and get aggressive and personal, I can do that, but we of course should not be stooping to that.

    Fine, Sit-It-Out or go Alternate-Party (ZERO-strategy) I can/do respect that Opinion and the conviction for that position/POV when the person advocating it is honest and straight up about it (as you just were). I can respect that. You have stated it plainly, whereas some others mince words over it. I respectfully disagree and thankful that it seems to be the minority opinion here at RS.

  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    the question/premise of this Diary is simple….. You will not Sit-It-Out (any election) thank you for clarifying (I will go back and re-read why you were responding against those of us saying about the same of this diary and Moe’s FPer over the Sit-It-Outers in the other diaries)…. Will you vote Alternate-Party (also part of the ZERO-strategy) or vote for the/ANY Republican (Red-Dog Party loyalty).

  • JadedByPolitics

    I will be donating and supporting the Conservative candidate if he or she chooses to run as an Independent ie: Joe Lieberman….I would rather have a Conservative I in the the Senate than a moderate (liberal) Republican! and yes that same person will be getting my donations as well! I don’t need my way I need the Conservative way that is AGAIN for the party aparatus to get the HELL OUT OF THE WAY and allow the process to pan out WITHOUT their involvement! These tools are destoying the party for power and excluding the very process that makes our Country the best in the world that We The People get to decide NOT the 168 committemen and women in the RNC.

    If they cannot or will not STOP they will be irrelevent and WE will subvert them at every step from the local GOP to the RNC….I personally believe it will take just 10 years to get the reigns of power from the liberal Republicans in the party to Conservatives!

  • JadedByPolitics

    you misunderstood as well I would suggest you read what I wrote and see that the bottom line is the Republican Party of Florida and the larger NRSC and by default the RNC had decided to make a man a Conservative man crazy with their rule 11 that is the final straw in the hypocrisy of the Party itself. The larger majority of Republicans are Conservative they are NOT McCain/Specter liberals and that the Party continue’s to SHOVE these people down our collective throats has now boiled over. SHAMEFUL and DISGUSTING that is what that particular rule in Florida is but that it was to be used against a good man is really just the light shining on a bunch of roaches who are controlling this party and that is to much…..it was one action to many from these tools!

    I again state that I support Conservative and will continue to do so but I will not sit idly by and allow good men to be destroyed by those calling themselves Republicans….they are DESTROYING our party….Toomey was the first light now Rubio is the FLOODLIGHT!

  • http://www.erickerickson.org Erick Erickson

    But if there are any more pictures like that put up by you, I’ll turn you off myself. Neil made the right call.

    You were certainly dragged into the discussion, but I think MBecker’s point is wholly accurate.

  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    as he knows, deep down, he aids/comforts Democrats by his position/actions of the ZERO-strategy…. And yes, let him continue to post as he destroys his own positions with his comments.

  • JadedByPolitics

    runs Independent? he isn’t nor would I nor would any of us….because like Joe Lieberman they will still caucus with the Republicans! so this whole it MUST be Republican or nothing is bogus….there are other means and it is possible for a Conservative to run and beat the Republican as an Independent!

    I think JLenard you are jumping the shark to crazytown and really getting a little full of yourself with this either or and demeaning people in the process…we are not all lemmings! and I think that the McCain debacle was proof of that….as disgusted as we were we sucked it up and got behind him. These insults will NOT work to get more people to your way of thinking as a matter of fact it is quite a TURNOFF!

    That you would intimate that any of us would want a Democrat in power is disingenuousand insulting. We are working within our means locally and nationally and doing what we can to fire up a disillusioned base and to smack them around with your holier than thou attitude is beyond the pale!

    We have some time to try and subvert the party appartus however I am sure there are those liberals in the party that just love someone like yourself who would let them continue on as if nothing is wrong because people like you will rollover and sheepishly follow them to the cliff and jump down. If we do not make a move and hold them to account and shine the light on them and make them change or get the hell out of the way then we too are sheep!

  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    and this is NOT just about you or something personal… it is about those who agree or disagree with it being okay to Sit-It-Out IN THE GENERAL ELECTION!

    We have all agreed that we want to support the Conservative candidates in Primaries (with some exceptions if deemed they CANNOT win a General)… I advocate, as you, giving DIRECTLY to Conservative 527′s rather than Party apparatus (for BOTH Primary and General election fights). It is when we discuss the GENERAL ELECTION options that some seem to get evasive.

    In ANY/EVERY GENERAL ELECTION where WE are not able to get a better (Conservative) candidate in place to run against a Democrat –
    Will you vote for the Republican?
    It boils down to this Diary being that simple. It is a YES or a NO! Sit-It-Out or Alternate-Party candidate vote IS NOT a vote to return the Conservative Republican Party Platform to a position to be enacted.

    We didn’t like McCain, but we voted for him or we didn’t…. is it so much to expect anyone to have the GUMPTION to be honest about whether they did or not and that they will vote Republican in the future or not.

  • JadedByPolitics

    Who is the decider of whether they can win in the general the RNC? NRSC, you? who? I think if you look back on some of the McCain threads after he was chosen WE were unhappy but we SUCKED it up and got behind him! but it will be a hard slog to get to that point again….WE are going to FIGHT THEM tooth and nail to get our candidates to be the general election candidate but again NO MONEY from me personally when/if the liberal moderate gets the nod! The party can give their choice the dough! and really is it to much ask that you cut some slack to those who are po’d at the fact that the NRSC is inserting itself into two possible Conservative gets for US, PA and Florida before the people of those fine states get a say!

    Conservatism will win and win big in 2010 if the tools in the National party will just get OUT OF THE WAY!

  • AceInTX
  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    that is fine if you feel it will get somewhere, as it as proven Zero thus far and IMO won’t in forever to come.

    We at least now know where you stand…. You will cast a vote for an Alternate-Party, and that IN OUR (not just my) opinion is aiding/comforting Democrats by putting/keeping them in the majority.

    Sorry you seem to have to take it personally all of a sudden, it is difficult being on the minority side of the opinion, as I was/am in saying Crist is probably the best of the (given all CURRENT) choices to insure a Winning GENERAL Election (some seem stuck on not being able to differentiate between Primary and General, IMO) opportunity. People can disagree with me, that is fine, I am concerned about having the Conservative Republican Party elected to Majority status… We differ on Strategy to get Conservative ideals in a position where they carry the POWER to do anything about it.

  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    I think most read it as intended and don’t take it so personally….. if one decides to put the ill-fitting shoe on and parade around in it – then it is up to the readers to decide. If the word “touchy” other than in the respect that it is an emotion that we can all be guilty of when having a bad-day is an insult, then okay, I guess I am guilty of 1 such occurrence and in another diary went out of my way to joke about TONE to maintain respectful discussion while others IMO try to impose a RSPC through intimidation – that is NOT me as I go out of my way to STATE PLAINLY I respect differing opinions and that those differing opinions should be aired…. I leave it to others to decide. The Crist discussions have some of my fellow Conservatives, IMO, carrying grudges now across threads. My discussion and points are all about EFFECTIVE STRATEGY and having people be honest about their positions not dance/dodge as I’m seeing some do.

    You have now made it clear and plain you will abandon the Party when the General Election candidate is not your own and have an Alternative-party choice. FINE…. I, and the POINT of this whole Diary, think it is a recipe for continued losses for the Conservative overall cause… and that is all…..

  • mbecker908

    how the Green Party effected the 2000 election before you start drawing lines in the sand with a backhoe.

    Please check out the success rate for Independents in “national” elections. They do pretty well if they have been a major party incumbent for a long time prior to becoming an “I”. Otherwise, turd third parties get creamed. Oh, and the winner always seems to be the candidate who is most unlike the “I”. See Algore and Nader.

    JLD isn’t intimate that any of us would want a Democrat in power he’s saying, as am I, as will anybody else who has a clue about national elective politics, that even narrow support for a third party will throw the election to the least desirable candidate.

    And, JLD is absolutely right about the particular individual who’s actions he’s addressing. For whatever reason, he’s totally out of bounds on the subject which I find to be a real shame because he does great work on other things.

  • JadedByPolitics

    many like me as there are like YOU! You keep working on getting those Specters elected and I will work on getting those Rubio’s elected!

    You made it personal when you called into question the commitment of those on this thread to getting people elected who are Democrats….you and you alone have called their heart and their personally held principals into question. You and your OUR think you know best and I hold that me and my WE will win the day!

    Good day sir!

  • randy streu

    Who the hell cares if he fills a seat in the Senate? How is he any better than having a Dem there?

    I say it is those who vote Crist over the Conservative in the Primary who are aiding and abetting.

  • JadedByPolitics

  • SteveLA

    randy

    I don’t follow Fla politics so I have no basis for considering your comment, but what in your view makes Crist “worthless”?

    Is there some issue or set of issues that he’s wrong on?

  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    you took it above that it seems….. IMO, your strategy only helps to get Democrats elected …. sorry that I am the only one willing to say it STRAIGHT and in plain language like that…. I call it a ZERO-strategy based on the analysis at that link of what the strategy has, and IMO will continue to offer the Conservative cause…..

    I want everyone to continue to push for Conservatives in Primaries BUT I will make SOME exceptions… again, sorry it is so upsetting that I am willingly and openly and honestly stating that plainly……When/Where we find viable Conservative candidates for the Primaries I am with you…. but because I’m not with you in that instance or willing to cast a vote for an alternate party you want to try and portray me as against Conservatism somehow.. I reject that and I have greater faith in my fellow Conservatives to know and see the difference – and view ALL of this in relation to overall effective strategy discussion… Nothing more…..

    I will NOT support anyone BUT Toomey in the PA race (and have wanted disreSpecter challenged for some time, wanted Toomey to overthrow him in the last Primary)…. as I view each and every race on its own merits… Get me a better more viable candidate in FL and I’ll change my position….

    This Diary is about strategy to get Republicans in power so as to allow the Conservatives in the party to exert the Conservative agenda…. A STRATEGY DISCUSSION… nothing more…. and certainly nothing personal….. accusing me of it is another ineffective strategy/tactic I expect others will look past in considering my points…..

  • JadedByPolitics

    ..

  • http://www.the41stvote.org rcov092

    at best a Blue Dog Democrat.

  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    I posited the same conundrum in the Crist/Rubio 12 points [with links] discussion – and if we as Conservatives engage in this STARING CONTEST to see which is going to blink first…. IMO… WE ALL/BOTH LOSE!!! and I think, you can state for yourself, part of the whole point of this Diary is that we cannot expect Republican Party loyalty to Conservatism if we as Conservatives show no loyalty to the Party… It is a 2 way street (one of the 12 points)…..

  • AceInTX

    The party is moving away from conservative ideology because we are losing elections. We are losing elections because people don?t support the party.

    We’re not losing because we’ve tried conservative ideology and why you would even suggest that is beyond me! the last time we tried running on a purely conservative message we won…2004 and the day after the election the papers were full of stories about how Republican “Centrists” had formed groups in the House and Senate to take back the party from the extreme right wing and protect the country from the dangerous rightward lurch of the Republican Party…of course this was going on while Rahm Emanuel is being touted for his strategy and plan for the Democrat Party to win back values voters since they were so soundly defeated by the huge turnout of values voters in that election…

    We didn’t lose in 2006 because we were too conservative…and we didn’t loose in 2008 because we were too conservative…period!

  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    I put forth Crist/Rubio 12 points [with links] (since it has some links, I’m not going to try and recreate it all with cut/paste) … and I hear the sound of Paint drying in regard to specific response (with notable exception of Ace that finally did respond to 2 of the 12 and why he thinks Rubio can win a GENERAL election – I just happen to disagree with his analysis, but I respect him for his honesty and straight-forwardness for at least finally putting forth something beyond the “…. but this goes to 11….”** [meaning, but he's conservative, for those* that may not get the Spinal Tap ref] argument).

    *phew, I almost forgot to take my own advice on ‘word-choice’ and said “If you” rather than “for those” which incorrectly would make it a potentially misread personal comment rather than objective and in general statement.

    **The same has to go for Crist supporters and the NRSC – they have to have something (Strategy wise) beyond “… but he will win…. ” as to why we should be supporting him!!!!

  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    One State’s representation in DC greatly (now more than ever) how the Federal Govt. enslaves the others! Each Election has grave consequences and National Strategies (and what any one of us see as either effective or ineffective) are clashing (this Diary gives great deference to that fact) with everyones desires for people to BUTT OUT of their Local Politics.

    Don’t believe all Elections are National… ASK A.C.O.R.N. or just think about them and re-examine the thought(s).

  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    I put forth Crist/Rubio 12 points [with links] and only one has bothered to attempt to address any (2 of 12) of them or the question why Rubio is electable (when I went over why Crist would be probable win – numerated points again – to which again only 1 responded). I have heard the “Crist to raise taxes ON WORKING FAMILIES” line yet no response as to what those Taxes are Crist and taxes [includes press-links] if it isn’t the Cig-Tax (not saying I’d be happy about it, but these days it seems to be a non-starter to/for most voters) discussed there-in.

    As I said elsewhere…. “but he’s Conservative” (about Crist’s opponent) coupled with $5 will get us Starbucks but will it get us a GENERAL Election victory. The biggest point in Rubios favor is the expected 2010 Obama-backlash, which is NOT assured but we certainly expect/hope it will occur to at least some degree – but we are not allowed to ask if that is enough!?!?

  • JadedByPolitics

    http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/news_hispanicaffairs/2009/05/immigration-reform-group-likes-crist-but-whats-his-stand.html

    Illegal Immigration

    http://www.miamiherald.com/486/story/901859.html

    787 Billion dollar stimula

    http://www.sptimes.com/2006/08/18/State/Crist_s_stance_on_abo.shtml

    Abortion, why he is almost Obamaesque

    http://weblogs.sun-sentinel.com/news/politics/dcblog/2009/05/crist_about_to_break_one_antit.html

    Taxes and here he is Clintonesque….he keeps making these pledges that he won’t tax and oh by God he seems unable to keep them but that’s ok because he has an R after his name right?

    Those are some pretty unprincipled stances on the things important to Conservatives….but hey he has an R after his name so it’s all good right?

  • mbecker908

    Gee.

  • Streiff

    check your email.

  • JadedByPolitics

    misunderstood and you two do not make an everybody no matter what your ego tells you!

  • AceInTX

    you can’t inspire any group of troops or people no matter how well trained and disciplined by telling them they need to fight just because we want you to fight and don’t worry about what cause we are fighting for because when you get right down to it…we think the enemy is right after all and we just want to fight for our own glory and further our own power.

    As for the Whig, American, (Know Nothing Party) Republican Dynamic…The know nothing Party was only one aspect and ideology that led to the demise of the Whigs…The know nothing party was built up mostly of Protestants concerned about immigration and the worry that the influx of Roman Catholics into the country would lead to the Pope having political control of America as he had had in Europe during the dark ages…The American, or know nothing party didn’t last mainly because of the split between free soil northerners and pro slavery southerners within it’s ranks.

    From American Experience: Political Party Timeline

    Political Party Timeline: 1836-1864

    The political party system entered an era of change when the issues surrounding slavery took center stage. Fears were spurred by the threat of slavery — or of abolition — in new territories; the influx of immigrants; the rise of industry; and the perpetual conflict over states’ rights. These concerns drove many Americans to seek different political alliances. New parties sprung up, representing the nation’s widely differing opinions. Some of these parties were short-lived, since they represented such narrow interests. Amid this turmoil, the Republican Party was born… and the Whig Party disappeared.

    1836

    Whigs: Henry Clay

    Henry ClayThe Whig Party formed out of the National Republican Party, the leaders of which were John Quincy Adams and Henry Clay. They were nationalists, supported internal improvements and moral reforms, and desired gradual westward expansion in congruence with economic growth and modernization. The Whigs were based in New England and New York, mostly made up of Northern middle-class people, market-oriented farmers, and native-born skilled workers. In 1836, the Whigs factioned off, but generally united against Jackson’s policies of the last eight years. They especially disliked Martin Van Buren, Jackson’s hand-chosen successor.

    Democrats: Martin Van Buren
    Martin Van BurenThe Democrats were the successors of Jeffersonian democracy. They favored localism and freedom from modern institutions such as banks, factories, and reform movements. They had a commitment to states’ rights, a limited government, and an agrarian ideal. They believed in westward expansion by the acquisition of new territories. They were made up of Northern artisans who felt threatened by industry; farmers hurt by tariffs; immigrants who desired to keep their own traditions; and Southerners and Westerners in favor of land acquisition. In 1836 they threw their support behind Andrew Jackson’s successor, Martin Van Buren.

    1840

    Whigs: William Henry Harrison
    W.H. HarrisonIn 1840 the Whig Party ran a “Log Cabin and Hard Cider” campaign in which they presented their presidential candidate, William Henry Harrison, a Virginia aristocrat, as a simple man and hero of the people. The Whigs believed in a “loose construction” of the Constitution which included supporting big government with a national bank and the congressional regulation of the expansion of slavery.

    Democrats: Martin Van Buren
    The Democrats upheld a platform which endorsed “strict construction” of the Constitution in 1840. They opposed the government’s interference with the spread of slavery, the existence of a national bank, and the federal funding of internal improvements.

    Liberty Party: James C. Birney
    James C. BirneyThe Liberty Party was the political outgrowth of the growing anti-slavery movement. It had been born in 1839, when the movement factionalized into conservative and radical parts. The radicals followed William Lloyd Garrison, who demanded the immediate ending of slavery, denounced the U.S. Constitution, and allowed female activists into the movement. The conservatives formed the Liberty Party and sought to end slavery gradually through traditional, political channels.

    1844

    Whigs: Henry Clay
    The Whigs were unanimous in their nomination of Henry Clay for the presidency, standing on the same platform as previous elections.

    Democrats: James K. Polk
    James PolkDemocrats desired the annexation of Texas and the complete control of Oregon Territory, then shared with England as well. They nominated James K. Polk, who was a Southerner and sure to favor westward expansion.

    Liberty Party: James C. Birney
    Again nominating James C. Birney, the Liberty Party continued to stand on an anti-slavery platform, including several planks for equal rights and the elimination of racial discrimination in the North.

    1848

    Whigs: Zachary Taylor
    Zachary TaylorThe Whigs were split by the annexation from the Mexican War. They attempted to offset this damage by declaring no platform at all and nominating Zachary Taylor, a man who up until 1848 had had very little to do with politics.

    Democrats: Lewis Cass
    Lewis CassThe Democrats were also split by the Mexican War annexation. Southern and Western Democrats allied along a moderate platform to extend slavery, not going far enough for many slaveholding Southerners, who desired a firmer assurance of slavery’s expansion.

    Free Soil Party: Martin Van Buren
    The Free Soil Party absorbed men from the Liberty Party who had nowhere else to go; “Conscience,” or anti-slavery, Whigs; and “Barnburner” Democrats, whose anti-black prejudices allied them with anti-slavery men.

    1852

    Whigs: Winfield Scott
    Winfield ScottWhigs were dedicated to the enforcement of the provisions of the Compromise of 1850, which included the admission of California as a free state and a stricter fugitive slave law. They condemned further agitation of the slavery issue and saw the Compromise of 1850 as the solution. Yet they did not come out as vehemently pro-slavery, and some Southern Whigs deserted the party to join the Democrats.

    Democrats: Franklin Pierce
    Franklin PierceDemocrats also supported the provisions of the Compromise of 1850 and united along pro-slavery lines.

    Free Soil Party: John P. Hale
    John P. HaleFree Soilers were the only political group to officially denounce the Compromise of 1850. They demanded the repeal of the Fugitive Slave Law and opposed the further admission of slave states.

    1856

    Republicans: John C. Fremont
    John C. FremontThe Republican Party grew out of resistance to the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854, which overrode the Missouri Compromise and allowed slavery to spread into Western territory by popular sovereignty. “Anti-Nebraska” men included anti-slavery Whigs, Democrats, Free Soilers, reformers, and abolitionists.

    American Party: Millard Fillmore
    Millard FillmoreThe unprecedented rate of immigration at mid-century, particularly from Catholic Ireland, caused many nativists to fear foreign invasion. They organized into a secret order known as the “Know-Nothings” or the “Order of the Star Spangled Banner” and then politicized themselves in 1856 as the American Party. It was made up of mostly ex-Whigs who were anti-Catholic, anti-immigrant, and desired to lengthen the naturalization period, allow only citizens to vote, and only native-born citizens to hold office.

    Democrats: James Buchanan
    James BuchananDemocrats again united along a pro-slavery platform, endorsing states’ rights, the Fugitive Slave Law, and popular sovereignty in the territories.

    1860

    Republicans: Abraham Lincoln
    Abraham LincolnThe Republican Party absorbed anti-slavery Whigs and most Know-Nothings. It became more moderate in its stance on the exclusion of slavery and denounced John Brown’s raid. The platform endorsed a protective tariff, the Homestead Act, and internal improvements.

    Constitutional Union Party: John Bell
    John BellThe Constitutional Union Party was the anti-extremist party, absorbing Southern Whigs who didn’t want to vote Democratic and Northern Whigs who felt the Republicans were too radical. They united in order to block a Republican victory.

    Democrats: Stephen Douglas and John C. Breckenridge
    Stephen Douglas and John C. BreckenridgeThe Democratic Party split completely along sectional lines. Southern Democrats walked out of the Democratic National Convention, which nominated Stephen A. Douglas on a popular sovereignty platform, to name their own candidate, John C. Breckenridge, on a slave code ticket.

    1864

    Republican/National Union Party: Abraham Lincoln
    In the midst of the Civil War, the Republican Party asked that the country continue to fight according to Lincoln’s war measures. The party demanded an unconditional surrender and supported a constitutional amendment to end slavery.

    Democrats: George McClellan
    George McClellanThe Democrats were split along “war” and “peace” factions, but managed to unite behind George McClellan in the 1864 election. With a “Union first, then peace” platform, the Democrats appeased both those who desired to defeat the Confederacy at all costs as well as those who favored negotiation and compromise.

    My contention would be that the demise of the Whigs occurred because of it’s absolute refusal to deal with the majority opinion of it’s constituents conserving slavery. There were several abolitionist parties that sprang up and had some measured success while the Whigs and the Constitutional Union Party who played the part of the Rockefeller wing of the Republican Party today. The Whigs died because they ignored their constituents and tried to go along to get along with the pro slavery Democrat party and failed miserably in the attempt…

    Again, let me stipulate I’m not calling for anyone to leave the Republican Party or join any third party movement…I’m simply pointing to what I see as history repeating itself!

    And for the life of me…I don’t understand why the Conservative majority of this party is subjected to so much ridicule for standing their ground and fighting for what the believe in when they are being attacked by the unprincipled compromises in the Rockefeller wing when the Rockefeller is always given a pass for being the ones to constantly pick the ideological fights to begin with!

    maybe you can explain that Neil…I consider you a friend…but I just don’t get you sometimes when it comes to this.

  • mbecker908

    post here whose egos get in their way, in a big and destructive way. They will launch into a poorly framed argument in a really loud and overbearing way, get their head handed to them when they discover they don’t have the “fact thingys” on their side and then they haul out the misdirection and arm waving. At that point I either get bored and move on or, if I’m having a bad day and looking for something insignificant and helpless to torture (and I don’t own a waterboard), I’ll go in for the wound. Never for the kill, that’s HBunny’s job, I prefer listening to the wailing of the wounded and watching them limp off into the sunset to see if they can find their dignity.

    Oh well.

  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    I?m in their fighting?am I throwing the odd threat to stay home around? sometimes in a fit of emotion?

    from here

    You certainly don’t have to throw an occasional one of those in on my account, but I wish you would ;-)

    If i would have seen an occasional comment like that I would not have so easily been able to reach the conclusion that you were PRO Sit-It-Outer or Alternative-Party …. that is neither of our faults, of course, there is much that goes unseen by the majority of RS readers. We are not and cannot be here all the time and see everything…. I often repeat myself in Comments across threads… because some will not have known I ever said it (especially the Conservatives first in primaries, but may be some exceptions) and make a comment on a particular point and some lack the context if I don’t say (repeat) the other relevant statement…. Even if we do see something, we cannot remember everything everyone said when we did read them. We get to know some personalities here and who they are because we see them often, but most people we will never know their background and remember their positions and/or where they are coming from. It just is NOT reasonable in these environments. It is easy to forget these things (especially for non-IT folks who haven’t dealt with it for decades) and why I did the respect Diary. We can all use occasional reminders. EVEN ME!

  • AceInTX

    so you say you won?t/don?t openly advocate Sit-It-Out or Alternate-Party but it seems you revel in the prediction it is a certainly.

    First of all…I don’t advocate it…Second of all I don’t revel in what I see as an increasing likelihood. I’m a student of history and my take is this…if it’s happened in the past because of a certain set of circumstances it will happen again if the circumstances that led to an event line up at some point in the future…it’s that simple…it doesn’t make me happy…nor excite me in any way…it saddens and infuriates me because it doesn’t have to happen except for the fact that the leadership in OUR party and some here seem hell bent on creating the circumstances that have led to declining voter rolls for the party and Perot type runs in the past.

    Secondly, you insist on sticking to the false dichotomy of A=B when A infact is caused by D * E….

    Many see not heartily encouraging people to work within the Party still as the same as – if not encouraging, but allowing with little resistance because it fulfills your analysis of what will be – excusing/allowing it

    I’m in no way “not heartily encouraging people to work within the party..I’m not at all comfortable with people staying home…or leaving in disgust…. I’m working within the party to prevent it…and part of that work is pointing people to the sad fact of what is happening and has happened over the lat two elections…It’s what I’m so busy screaming about…

    I honest to GOD don’t see what’s hard to understand about the axiom of “If you always do what you’ve always done, you’ll always get what you’ve always got.”

    Since you have all the brains apparently…why don’t you tell me how you get someone enthusiastic about a candidate or a party and get them to go door to door in the rain sleet and snow to knock on doors when they don’t believe there is a dime’s worth of difference between the Republican you want them to campaign for and the Democrat the Republican is running against?

  • AceInTX

    Temporary Precinct chair in two different precincts in the last three elections, a District Convention Delegate for the last 3 elections and credentials committeeman in 2004, and a state convention delegate in 2004.

    But to hear people tell it…all I want to do is get everyone to leave in a fit of temper because I’m too lazy or stupid to do anything else!

  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    so I catch h— for agreeing with you a time or two ;-) lol … so cool it :P

    /END SARCASM

    someone can suggest I’m “on the road to crazytown” all they like or mock my Userid despite me not mentioning their name once – as long as I’m NOT having a bad-day (we’re all entitled to them on occasion) I’m just gonna let it slide….. I do not and am not taking this personally, and my many attempts to back it down from that are met with more slaps….. but once it gets animated it seems to spread to those even going out of our way to keep it respectful (Be respectful, or be banned – as it says by the comment box and I committed this whole Diary [via this link] to that notion). I even joke to lighten the mood, and I get viciousness just because I want a simple straight answer to a simple straight-forward question… It gets frustrating for all of us….. If you believe it, state it plainly – is that too much to ask? If everyone seems confused by someones comments, is ALL the readers fault or the writers fault? as you pointed out (but used a dig) elsewhere….. I will be reluctant to bother to come to their defense (as I have in the past elsewhere).

  • AceInTX

  • mbecker908

    a jerk. But you might not have thought of that one. I will go on record as saying I don’t think so (except when you disagree with MEEEE), but hey…

    Stating things plainly is not a talent held by some posters (and I have no specific person or persons in mind).

  • mbecker908

    Even now.

  • http://www.the41stvote.org rcov092

    we desperatley need to replace Arlen Specter?

  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    For those BLIND to see we are messing with each other let me state it plain and simple – RELAX, we are ribbing each other.

    Regards from NoMoTown (Liberals, looking to do for America what they’ve done for (read: TO) Detroit and Michigan.

    A Liberal/Democrat having heard Facts/Truth:

  • mbecker908

    It’s not an asinine stunt, it’s a blackletter rule of the Party. If I was the Party Chairman I’d sure as hell use it against Crist if I could figure a way to do it (and I’m pretty sure I could).

    And “good faith”? Come on Ace this is politics not tiddly winks. You’re sounding like the “other” Texan.

    And, now for the important stuff, what happened to the sheep with the mini gun?

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    There may be a majority of self-described conservatives in this party (but may be not, I don’t know), but I guarantee you they’re not all actually conservatives in philosophy and temperament.

    If we had a majority we’d win every primary.

    We don’t.

    Which means ‘sending a message’ by any action against the party is guaranteed to do nothing but set back your cause and probably humiliate you as well.

  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    if you like… I don’t know that I’ll get around to doing so….

    It does get lost in the rhetoric, his willingness to talk up his willingness to get his hands on Porkulus money does NOT equate to Raising Taxes, EVEN THOUGH we do all know Taxes will have to be raised at some point to cover it…. So the only issue regarding Taxes IS the Cig-Tax and they want to dismiss completely the recent Property Tax relief (which has lost some gusto since the Housing prices CORRECTION [correction caused by unnatural Govt meddling by Democrats over the ongoing CRA related strategy they put in place] we are calling a Bubble). I’m all for FACTS being put forth and people making up their own minds on it rather than attempting to distort it – that’s what Democrats do and I don’t like to see Conservatives stooping to it.

  • ocleverone

    but I wanted to answer you.

    Moe’s diary really got me to thinking. It is up to us to find more of us and get them involved in the nuts and bolts.

    I guess it would be a recruit, cultivate and lead type of scenario.

    All I know is the Republican old saying (around here at least) of “I do my speaking in the voting booth” has given way to a confuzzled party structure. We really need to get more people involved.

  • JadedByPolitics

    talking about it

    http://am1280thepatriot.townhall.com/columnists/StarParker/2009/05/11/republicans_need_washingtons,_not_specters

    “A new Wall Street Journal/NBC poll shows 42 percent self-identifying as Democrats compared to 31 percent as Republicans. But the same poll shows 35 percent identifying as conservatives compared to 24 percent as liberals. ”

    so while only 31 percent identify as R’s 35 percent identify as Conservative and I suspect that number will grow by 2010 – 2012.

  • AceInTX

    and no one holds 100% conservative views…I’m convinced of that….I part ways with conservatives to some extent on free trade so in that you definitely have a point…

    However…we’re not talking about 100% in this instance are we….Crist is socially liberal and fiscally liberal. The only reason I see to support him and the reason the party bosses are behind him is because got an R after his name and money in his account!

    We’re talking about a party leadership who demands fealty from us while it spits in our faces

  • mbecker908

    The only “lap dog” reference in my world is Franz Prince of Dogness, and I’m his.

    I really could not care less what you or anybody else – outside of the bride of 28 years as of yesterday, my sons and FPoD – thinks about me. All I know is that you’re showing up at a gun fight where others have the equivalent of 155 howitzers and you have a broken stick.

    I’m dropping this thread now. Because I’m frankly tired of your completely irrational attempts at making points you can’t define. There are some people I’m willing to dedicate a few days to beating down because of their idiotic arguments. You’re not one of them.

    Nitey, nite.

  • mbecker908

    to research it. I live in Arizona and I know virtually nothing about FL politics or politicians. It’s frankly not worth the effort to me to do the research. Thanks for the offer though.

    As far as the “tax” issue is concerned, I’m totally ignorant about FL, and with respect to the Porkulus $$, I’m pretty well tuned to give Govs a pass on that. The key for me would be what they use the $$ for. If it’s for infrastructure projects, I’m good with that. If they use it for any form of payroll, I’m not.

  • mbecker908

    There’s gotta be a prize for that. Somewhere.

  • mbecker908

    Probably not. It’s apparently never been used and won’t be used this time. The point is to find the weak link and pressure the crap out of them. Note that it isn’t a fools errand because while the Party certainly tried to tilt the board, they backed off. (That’s a nice way to say they freaking failed, but see, I’m backing it down.)

    Whining and squalling about how unfair it is is simply a stupid waste of time. Oh, and doing the “It’s my ball bunny” thing and threatening to go away or stay home is no way to build a power base, especially when your current quotient on power is zero.

    The Party is what it is for right now and it won’t likely change much by ’10. We have to deal with that, we have no other rational choice. A third party is truly the fools errand in the game so the choices are make the best out of what we’ve got to play with and work up a plan to take over the party hierarchy in “X” years or stay home and whine.

  • http://www.the41stvote.org rcov092

    funny, I did not see that in Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals. As applied by Greer andd Crist, it surely qualifies as from Alinsky.

  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit
  • AceInTX

    but this kind of thing is worthy of Castor and Stallin….

    and you could use that rule on anyone you want and that would make you just as wrong…the point here is that we’ve got a minority of this party controlling and going against the will of the majority of us and using despotic tactics to keep the majority of us at bay. Their cowards and chicken shXXs for using the tactic and they deserve to receive the same loyalty from us that they’ve given to us!

  • AceInTX
  • AceInTX

    maybe the whining and hall raising we’re doing is what got them to back off?…Just sayin!

  • AceInTX
  • AceInTX
  • mbecker908

    Neither would the notes that Jaded has shown below, although I haven’t studied the links.

    I’m pretty much willing to take the general opinion of him as probable fact. The point to me, however, is that the good folks in FL are the ones who will have to make that pick and frankly, I’ve got my own axe to grind in the Arizona primary next year.

    My whole issue with this thread is the “take my ball and go home bunny”.

  • SteveLA

    Ace

    So when and if other Governors take the Porkulous Bill money, say the governor of Alaska, what will you say then?

  • AceInTX

    If i would have seen an occasional comment like that I would not have so easily been able to reach the conclusion that you were PRO Sit-It-Outer

    But I not so much when I’ve had time to cool off…my issues right now stem from the fact that I’m not being allowed to cool down by the crap weasels that are insistent on sticking a thumb in my eye!

  • mbecker908

    Especially since the arguments here against it have, for the most part, been infantile and the woman who voted against using Rule 11 seemed, at least from the one note I read, to be a pretty rational supporter of Crist. She reportedly said something to the effect that “hey, the process is supposed to include a primary and I think it should”.

    Don’t get me wrong, I don’t have a problem arguing against the use of the Rule. But I would like to see a rational argument not just stuff thrown against a wall to see if will stick, which was the tenor and quality of the argument that got dissembled here today.

  • http://www.the41stvote.org rcov092

    The only thing that stopped him is that Sharon Day has some integrity and was unwilling to deprive the voters of considering a LEGITiMATE Republican Conservative.

    Greer apparently had the buy in of Paul Senft. Unfortunately for Greeg, it requires the unanimous consent of all the state comiittee.

    Cynical and arrogant!

  • mbecker908
  • AceInTX

    breaking into the cliques is key…and it’s nearly impossible for a conservative because you can’t break into a next level clique because the next level are moderates and or liberals!

  • AceInTX
  • AceInTX

    or act like it’s an issue…on top of it all I don’t think it’s very encouraging to pounce on those who are discouraged and disenfranchised enough to consider taking their ball and going home.

  • mbecker908

    And yes, it’s fact. There are two kinds of people. One kind is discouraged and disfranchised but rational enough to recognize that staying home or moving to a “pure” third party that has no chance of winning – or even making a reasonable/rational statement – is not just bad strategy, it empowers the the worst possible people.

    The other kind are simply stupid and enjoy making noise.

    Kind one you can work with. Kind two are flotsam in the sea of life.

  • randy streu

    nt

  • http://www.the41stvote.org rcov092

    drinks the Man Made Global Warming coool-aid (no I did not misspell).

  • Brian Hibbert

    I see that my word could be interpreted in a way to suggest that I meant the conservatives were causing the elections loss. That wasn’t what I meant so I’ll try again…..

    The party is losing elections and Democrats are winning.
    This makes the leadership think that voters want more moderates and they find more Dem Lite candidates.
    This makes conservatives want to stay home or make a protest vote.
    This makes us lose more elections and the leadership thinks we need to move more to the left and become Dem Lite.
    This makes conservatives disgusted and they abandon the party completely.
    This makes us lose more elections……

    It’s a vicious circle and we need to do something to break it.

    I’m not blaming the problem on conservative candidates. There weren’t many and most of those won. I’m blaming the problem on the party not winning elections. The party leadership is taking the normal human reaction of imitating what they see as success. Unfortunately, they don’t seem to understand that if people are going to vote for a Democrat, they’ll vote for the one with the D after their name.

    Again, we have to help the party win elections in order to reverse the trend towards having the Dems be the socialist party and the Republicans becoming the progressive’s party. And we’ve getting too close to that situation for my liking,

    This party can be saved and the trend can be reversed, but we have to stick around in order to make it happen.

  • Mike gamecock DeVine

    I won’t dismiss out of hand that “normal” means stupid, but I don’t believe that.

    When we lose elections to democrats running to the right, I would think the normal human reaction would be to notice that fact. That they would notice that our moderates lost! That they would recall that we won majorities when we ran to the right and that the way to keep majorities is to govern from the right.

  • Mike gamecock DeVine
  • Brian Hibbert

    The Democrats realized that the only way they could win in SOME districts was to run people who at least claimed to be conservative. Many even ran more conservative campaigns than their Republican opponents. It doesn’t mean they’ll actually be allowed to vote conservative in congress, but that’s how they won.

    Some of the Republican leadership (NRSC in particular) seems to have misinterpreted these Democrat victories to mean that we need to be more like the Democrats to win everywhere…. I honestly think they believe that only moderates can win.

  • http://theminorityreportblog.com David Hinz

    we need candidates who “talk” about being conservative without actually sullying themselves by “being conservative.”

    We could invent a new slogan — how does “Compassionate Conservative” sound to you? Useful? It suggests that we really care about people, without abandoning the ever expanding federal Leviathan that the voters have come to expect out of their elected leaders.

    Oh sure, by doing this we might anger a small handful of voters — who really don’t count for much anyways — and we might, I’ll admit, be advancing the agenda of Teddy Kennedy and Barack Obama — but what the heck, we get people elected with an R after their name — and in the long run, isn’t that all that really matters?

  • Mike gamecock DeVine

    needs to be replaced.

    We have a huge leftist in the white house that is presiding over a worsening recession that will provide as fertile an environment for conservatives next year in an off year election that historically favors the out of power party even when there is no recession. Yet, our leadership fears Obama so much they use up most of the TV talking time praising Obama before lightly criticizing the “democrat” policies.

    If true conservatives can’t win next year with unemployment over 10%, probable inflation high, and anemic gdp, then we can never win.

    The dems have re-gained power by default in a nation whose history has been dominated by that party.

    We win by leading, not finger in the air listening.

    But what is most pathetic is that we can’t even hear the true message of the wet finger.

    The leadership needs to be led by We the People conservatives and that means that need to HEAR us and CHANGE, or be defeated in primaries.

  • Mike gamecock DeVine

    things done in America thru one of the parties, and I am certainly not averse to backing moderate candidates by necessity in certain areas in the general election. I am for that. But for the GOP fundraising/congressional orgs to back candidates in primaries, esp those that are so moderate as Crist against true conservatives, and esp in a state that is 50/50 purple at worst, is just stupid.

    I am for re-taking the GOP, not a third party. That day could come, but for me it would be a long way off, but I can’t help but better understand those that think the GOP is close to lost when they see the past 4 years of congressional repubs; that they learned nothing from their 2006-2009 listenings and that they still seem more concerned about keeping their gerrymandered safe minority seats consumed by Nixon-like fear of Teddy and McGovern and a lack of courage to take on Obama.

  • JadedByPolitics

    is their total inability to recognize that “moderates” or as I am now calling them straight up liberals are the losers in elections not Conservatives…..that D’s ran Conservatives to win shows that Conservatism CAN WIN….but the tools at the top will never believe their lying eyes!

    So the point to this whole exercise is to retake the Grand Old Party from within and get rid of alot of the idiots at the top….Erick has written extensively on the problems and people within the party and there is hope that if Steele retains the money ( they actually tried to take the money away for the 1st time from a black man) that he can make some of the changes of the whole stinking thinking that is going on in the Party…..I am excited that so many want to change things in their states, locally. I said it up thread I believe within 10 years there will be enough of the grassroots in place having learned the finer points to be higher up in the organization and be controlling the direction of the party.

    That is not to say that Republicans will be in the wilderness for that long because the truth is 2010 should show HUGE increases even if the Republicans were to do nothing but sit on their hands and whistle…..so their involvment in primaries is not a neccesity they need be engaging in. WE battle those tools today and the D’ s in 2010!

  • Mike gamecock DeVine

    for a long enough time, We the People noticed that they weren’t acting out their talk. Likewise, the failed liberal policies of the dems will bring their chickens home to roost in 2006, and given we almost can’t lose, why not actually run as Reagan conservatives again and win and this time, BE conservatives and stay in power.

    Of course, the solution I seek is for a more prosperous and free America. I know the Dems cannot be the vehicle given they are the home of the left.

    The only short term solution would be to take over the existing other party with some history of being taken over by conservatives and enacting successful conservative policies.

    It may be that the GOP (see America) is too far gone for the GOP to be fixed and that only a long term solution after much suffering is possible.

    I could eventually be persuaded of that, but if I were, I would drop out of politics and concentrate solely on Christian evangelism.

    I

  • Mike gamecock DeVine

    After Daffy Duck, Bugs Bunny is my favorite actor, and I heard that you found a dead rabbit so bloodied that it could not be recognized. Coincidentally, I have not seen Bugs of late and don’t know if it is wabbit season. We await the DNA tests.

  • JadedByPolitics

    is McCain there is not a dime’s worth of difference between them he is a LIIBERAL and in Florida where Conservatives can still win that the NRSC decided to throw their weight behind him in a primary is the reason they NEED to be made irrelevent!

  • Brian Hibbert

    We have to make this party win again so we can make it work again. In order to do that, we have to stick around and show party unity long enough to take the controls back from the moderates.

  • AceInTX

    The Childlike leadership that needs more listening and learning needs to be replaced…..We win by leading, not finger in the air listening.

    But what is most pathetic is that we can?t even hear the true message of the wet finger.

    The leadership needs to be led by We the People conservatives and that means that need to HEAR us and CHANGE, or be defeated in primaries.

  • http://theminorityreportblog.com David Hinz

    between surgeries, the Dawg took control of my computer and offed a bunny with a ball.

    All h— broke loose and, so the Dawg tells me, we were unable for a short while to sign on.

    The Dawg tells me that a couple of posters have decided to make it personal — with deliberate provocative posts and links calling me out every time they post their “thoughts.”

    As for me, I look at the value of said posters — and shrug. I have done my best to ignore them – but you know how stalkers can be — as you had a couple of your own.

    I do apologize to Erick for the Dawg — in his position he should not be forced to separate the children from their play-do.

    later brother

  • Brian Hibbert

    The house Republicans seem to be much more conservative and seem to understand how to fight the Dems. If we could get the Senate to come in line, things would be better.

    And I really think the majority of the problem and the majority of the people irritating the base are associated with the NRSC rather than other parts of the party. I’ve joined Erick’s pledge to not support them as long as they keep meddling in the primaries. And I talked to a house member’s cheif of staff yesterday and ask him to pass along the idea that party unity really does work both ways.

    Those who are in Florida need to contact Rubio’s campaign and see how they can help him beat Crist. They’ll need a real grass root effort and if his supporters are active, they can win. Those of us outside Florida can also help. I’m going to send half* of my next month’s political contribution budget to Rubio and half to Toomey (it ain’t much, but every little bit helps). But in the General, if Rubio loses, they’ll need to buckle down and vote for Crist. We shouldn’t give up the seat to the Dems even if it means putting a squish in place.

    *Or maybe a third, there are some local candidates I want to support too. Or maybe I’ll increase my budget next month if I can convince my wife….

  • Mike gamecock DeVine
  • http://theminorityreportblog.com David Hinz

    are closer to their constituents. There are some great House Republicans — just not enough of them…

    And we lost too many of them in the last two elections by trying to be moderates — running moderates — and allowing Dems to creep to the right of our candidates [in their rhetoric if not in fact].

    Dems [in most districts] get elected by pretending they are not who they really are. Republicans get elected by standing on their principles. Republicans lose when they forget those principles.

  • Mike gamecock DeVine
  • JadedByPolitics

    the left ran “conservatives” people like Schuler etc. WE ran “moderates” actual liberals hell we didn’t even try to lie about the liberalism and so now we are fortunate to have a VERY Conservative Congress with a mash up in the Senate! Congressional races should be a slamdunk if WE run Conservatives….the Senate would be too but we see that the NRSC is insistent on running a liberal in 2 states thus far! they just have not found their liberal in PA yet but I am sure they will.

    It is so obvious to us lay people out there which means that those in the NRSC or other National parties have been in place to long and need a shake-up. If we had failed so miserably out our jobs we would be out of a job but like all politics the WORST your performance the higher you go! It is a twilight zone!

  • http://theminorityreportblog.com David Hinz

    2008 was a year when people were simply tired of President George W Bush — even his supporters were counting down the days — and the Republican Party presented no compelling reason to vote Republican.

    Good conservatives, as well as squishy moderates, were swept out of power all over the country — because people were looking for Hopey-Changy.

    The building backlash in 2010 could be a 1994 type reversal — as people look at what is happening in Washington and decide to “throw the bums out.”

    The problem with that is, the Republican Party does not seem to want to win.

  • Brian Hibbert

    I also think the NRSC strategy of running moderates and liberals as Republicans is a losing strategy. I’m just trying to say that we need to fight our battles in the primaries, but must come together in the general elections in order to stop the bleeding.

    We can’t get control of the party if we abandon it.

    We can’t wait for the country to just get so disgusted with Obama that they move back to us. We have to work to move them our way and we have to get people in place to make things happen when the electorate does swing back our way.

  • penguin2

    Maybe it is wishful thinking for me, Jaded, but I’m actually a little more hopeful these days and like your last paragraph above. I’d like to share a personal story if you please.

    Last weekend and this weekend, I was out of town, attending two college graduations. I have twin boys, one graduated from Radford University, Radford, Va.(western part of state), and the other from George Mason University, Fairfax, Va. (northern Virginia).

    The Radford graduation had Gov. Tim Kaine as commencement speaker. Interestingly, he only received polite, but muted applause from the crowd. Obama’s name was not mentioned at all during the entire ceremony.

    The George Mason graduation had Steven Case (founder of AOL) as speaker. He told Obama’s life story. There was enthusiastic response from the student body, polite applause from the guests. When a student speaker spoke of how “this was the most inspiring election we ever had,” the crowd response was definitely tepid, although a specific, smaller group of students was enthusiastic.

    I know this is anecdotal and I am looking for positive signs, anything to sense a change in the winds, but maybe there is something happening here.

  • mbecker908

    that he actively worked with Obama to get it done (apparently)…

  • AceInTX
  • SteveLA

    mbecker

    The problem is that when ordinary people in a state, in a Congressional district what ever see slop being ladled into the Hog trough, they want some too. Woe be the political who says NO.

    Don’t take that as a defense of what Crist did or did not do when it comes to Porkulus, but the reality is that when it comes to Pork, people back home like it, and woe be the politician who claims that pork is not Kosher so we don’t any. It’s stupidity at it’s highest, but nobody that I have ever read has claimed that John Q. Public is a rocket scientist when it comes to Pork.

    The same sort of argument is going on in Alaska right now, and it remains to be seen what Governor Palin does when it comes to Obama Pork, and how the Alaska legislature will act if she says no on Obama pork.

  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    and the Contrariness and Blather ensues…. It has to, because those that would be Republicans yet are willing to cross the Party-lines to vote other than their own Party (wait, doesn’t that sound familiar – oh yeah, that makes them a RINO) have to rationalize how it is okay for them to RINO in an Election while it is NOT okay for a Republican in DC to RINO — because it really isn’t okay for EITHER!

    Perhaps I should have softened this by using humor…. like a Foxworthy joke….
    You might be a RINO if….. you vote Alternate-Party against your Republican candidates and allow Democrats to have their way ;-) lol

  • AceInTX

    it’s simply stupid to antagonize them by continuing to do what we’ve done the last two elections.

    And before you ask me what we should do if the Lib/Mod/Centrist wing decides to vote for the Democrats let me put that argument to bed by pointing out that we did what Powell, Buckley Jr. and others said we should in 2008 and the voted for the Dem anyway!

  • AceInTX

    The largest voting block for McGoo were the most conservative out there. No one is talking about Conservatives voting third party or for the Democrat…it’s the demoralization and disinclination to go the extra mile because they’ve gotten the back of the party’s hand that’s a problem.

    And again…let me pound this home…we did what Powell, Buckley, Brooks, Gergan and the moderate crowd said we should do and they didn’t vote with us anyway…that’s the issue…we’re getting threatened with the BLAM stick for advocating something that none of us have advocated….while the other side are the one’s going out and voting for the opposition!

  • AceInTX
  • AceInTX

    they’re idiots because they are agreeing to federal funds and the federal control that comes with is…

    but that’s not the main issue here and I’ll steer it back to that. For months we’ve been beaten about the head that we need to run blue candidates in blue states…but here we have a moderately red state trending blue who is likely to swing red nest year whith the Dem’s over reaching…and the NRSC, Florida Republican Party and maybe the RNC not only backing a bluest of blue Republican but attempting to use arcane rules to torpedo and destroy his conservative opponent before a primary has even begun!

    Party loyalty is a two way street…and the double standard is glaring but some here want to ignore the 800 pound gorilla in the tent and blame Conservatives exclusively for the divisiveness as if we don’t have a point!

  • AceInTX

    As bad as McCain are..>Crist and Specter are so much worse so as to take your breath away!

  • Leopard1996

    And I can’t wait until the 2010 elecitons, here in what I think is OH – CD1 represented by Driehaus who knocked off Chabot this past election. I will be very vocal in not supporting him and pointing out everytime he tries to state a conservative stance that he supported Pelosi and Obama from the jump. Which if enough of that gets out, the more rural areas of the distict will be enough to overwhelm the city of Cincinnati, and some of the neighborhoods around Cincinnati, that blindly supported Obama no matter what.