Skip to comments.It's Do or Die Time for Conservatives and Libertarians. Time to Unite Behind One Candidate.
Posted on 03/02/2012 11:34:11 AM PST by libertarian neocon
It's time to stop dilly-dallying. Super Tuesday is upon us and with that, the nomination race could be all but over unless conservatives and libertarians finally unite behind one candidate, a candidate who can beat both Romney AND Obama. That candidate needs to be Newt.
Among the not-Romney's he is the only one who can unite the party. Economic conservatives like him because he balanced the budget and reformed welfare. Defense hawks like him because he is the most hawkish of the lot. Social conservatives, when they can get past his personal life, like him for his strong record on issues like abortion. And libertarians, like the Libertarian Party's nominee in 2008, Bob Barr, like him because he is economically libertarian and not over the top on social issues.
Can anyone honestly say the same thing about Santorum? He goes out of his way to attack individual freedom and libertarianism and completely blew his chance to be the nominee by focusing on social issues instead of the economy (probably because his economic policy record isn't really that great). Who attacks prenatal diagnostics? Or the idea of contraception? Or says he wants to vomit over a rather non-controversial (and somewhat revered) JFK speech? He has proven himself to be quite a bit more gaffe prone and offensive than Newt, despite the fact that people thought he was a "safer" option. Even I was offended by some of the stuff he said and I am a Pro-Life registered Republican. It's really not surprising that his support is crumbling like it is. See the latest tracking data from Gallup (Santorum's popularity is in dark green, Romney's is black [matches his soul], Newt's is orange and Ron Paul's is light green):
Santorum is just not ready for prime time. He is simply too divisive, offending gays, women, parents, protestants and libertarians (in total about 80-90% of the electorate). Unfortunately, he retains enough support to possibly give Romney a majority of the states on Super Tuesday. His conservative backers need to wake up quickly, bite the bullet and go with Newt. As the brilliant Thomas Sowell wrote:
Newt Gingrich is the only candidate still in the field who can clearly take on Barack Obama in one-on-one debate and cut through the Obama rhetoric and mystique with hard facts and plain logic.
Nor is this just a matter of having a gift of gab. Gingrich has a far deeper grasp of both the policies and the politics than the other Republican candidates.
Can anyone really argue with that?
I think Ron Paul supporters (the historically Republican ones, not the liberals who are just visiting the GOP for this election in order to support Paul) need to wake up as well. They are not furthering libertarianism at all by supporting Paul any more. He's made his point and has shown that he is a force to be reckoned with but supporting Paul on Tuesday just increases the chances that the most statist candidate, Mitt Romney, is nominated. Do you really want to be responsible for nominating the only Governor, Republican or Democrat, to enact a socialist universal healthcare system in their states? Newt isn't a libertarian but he is the man who did the most to wound the leviathan in the last 30 years. Why not vote for him and give this country a chance? It clearly won't with either Romney or Obama.
Finally, Newt is simply the most electable candidate in the race right now. As I mentioned earlier, he can unite the party, has a great grasp of both politics and logic and can actually explain conservatism in a way that others can understand and agree with. Santorum and Paul are both to extreme to get almost any independents over into the fold.
Sure he has baggage but I think most of it will go away. Freddie Mac? Let's see Obama bring that up when he received over $126,000 in bribes, err I mean donations, from Fannie and Freddie while he was in or seeking office (he was the #2 largest recipient in Congress, #1 was the notoriously corrupt Chris Dodd). Nancy Pelosi? Let's see Obama make an issue out of that one or Newt's opposition to cramming down the Ryan plan.
It's time for believers in small government and personal liberty to unite behind Newt, otherwise we will once again have a Nixon vs. McGovern sort of choice in the fall. And the stakes are just too high this election for that.
The only thing that matters is what conservatives want.
Don’t leave out the enviromentalists. They love him for his strong support for the endangered species act and the fight against global warming.
‘The only thing that matters is what conservatives want.”
Conservatives should want Newt, the only Reagan conservative in the race.
Santorum is just not ready for prime time. He is simply too divisive, offending gays,
Any politician that is willing to offend sodomites gets at least a second look from me.
Don’t leave out the potential lunar colonists too.
What are you smokin’? Rasmussen shows Santorum trailing Obama by two points, Romney by six, and Gingrich out of sight in the rear-view mirror.
Wow brilliant post, good job my FRriend. These gullable casual republicans that aren’t as informed as us conservatives are going to doom us all. I pray Newt gets back up in the polls, it will be so exciting seeing him go against obama. GO NEWT!!
Conservatives do want Newt, your effort to make him seem more liberal won’t stop that.
You implied that Newt is not as conservative as Santorum in some important ways.
I hope that Newt is more socially conservative than Santorum and more effective at it, that is what I am counting on.
Sorry, the first line is from the article. I just haven’t figured out how to italicise..
Look, I agree with you, but if the polls are to be believed (and I haven’t seen any reason why they shouldn’t) Santorum is holding on to enough support to beat Gingrich everywhere but Georgia.
Santorum may be on the way down, but unless his slide accelerates, he won’t be low enough by Tuesday. Like I said, I am a huge Newt supporter, but I’m trying to be realistic.
I will happily listen to reasons I am wrong.
“Conservatives do want Newt, your effort to make him seem more liberal wont stop that.”
I wasnt trying to make Newt out to be more liberal. I just think he basically agrees with this quote from Reagan:
“If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberalsif we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.”
“Now, I cant say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals. The strongest man on the block will run the neighborhood. We have government to insure that we dont each one of us have to carry a club to defend ourselves. But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are travelling the same path.”
Newt is socially conservative. But there is a big difference between opposing abortion and lecturing about the dangers of contraception.
“Any politician that is willing to offend sodomites gets at least a second look from me.”
If it were just gays, I dont think it would be a problem. But he has offended parents, women, protestants and libertarians.
He wants us to unite behind Newt, when failing to unite behind Santorum cost us MI.
This is completely backwards. Arguing we should unite behind Newt will guarantee a Romney landslide.
Perhaps that’s the goal?
How is providing contraception a legitimate function of the federal government?
How is forcing private employers to provide contraceptive coverage a legitimate application of the constitution? Don’t libertarians believe that the constitution protects the free exercise of religion?
How is forcing anyone to buy anything a legitimate function of the federal government? Is contraception your only concern?
I am sick and tired of “compassionate” soft spoken so called conservatives. This country cannot survive another one. I want the meanest SOB that can be found, that is not afriad of what will be said about him/her, and will take the fight to the enemy(communists).... this small l libertarian backs newt....
He’s more offensive to protestants than Newt getting his first two marriages anulled because they were protestant?
If libertarians wish to unite with conservatives behind a candidate who is conservative socially and militarily as well as fiscally then I am for that.
Social issues are non-negotiable however, and will not be on the back burner.
“How is providing contraception a legitimate function of the federal government?”
“How is forcing private employers to provide contraceptive coverage a legitimate application of the constitution? Dont libertarians believe that the constitution protects the free exercise of religion?”
I wasn’t slamming Santorum’s attack on Obama’s contraception plan, but his statement that he would use the Presidency to combat contraception in general (including purely private use). He basically took an issue we all could agree on, people shouldnt have to pay for other peoples contraception, especially if it violates religious doctrine, into something that pitted social conservatives against everyone else.
Notice how quickly the narrative turned from Obama being oppressive to Santorum trying to turn back the clock.
“I wasnt slamming Santorums attack on Obamas contraception plan, but his statement that he would use the Presidency to combat contraception in general.”
Evidence for this statement?
“Notice how quickly the narrative turned from Obama being oppressive to Santorum trying to turn back the clock.”
Indeed - that’s the narrative you’re advancing.
Gee, where would you guys be without that single 1975 quote that candidate Reagan made when being interviewed by libertarians, for a libertarian publication to a purely libertarian audience.
Reagan was a social conservative, in that very article he defended gambling laws and restrictions and slapped the libertarian party.
Libertarians are leftist fifth columnists trying to destroy conservatism while hanging on to conservative economics.
Newt’s last stand is Georgia. If he doesn’t make a major statement there by trouncing all others and picking off at least one or two other states on Super Tuesday, he’s a done deal.
Just more gop/e bullsh*t.
Doesn’t that come after the Primary?
“Evidence for this statement?”
Obviously, it only took a few posts for you to see that won’t be happening.
LOL. All this does is ignite more trouble for both candidates other than Romney.
“What are you smokin? Rasmussen shows Santorum trailing Obama by two points, Romney by six, and Gingrich out of sight in the rear-view mirror.”
THIS POLL IS BEFORE NEWT TEARS OBAMA APART IN THREE PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES. I CAN’T WAIT TO SEE THE DEBATES, AND I BET NEWT CAN’T WAIT TO LAND PUNCHES ON HIM EITHER. HE PROBABLY HAS A SMIRK ON HIS FACE THROUGHOUT THE DEBATE (” GOTCHA!”)
“Reagan was a social conservative, in that very article he defended gambling laws and restrictions and slapped the libertarian party.”
Reagan was a social conservative but think back to his 8 years, what was his focus? Economics and foreign policy. Other than “just say no” its hard to remember anything he did for social conservatism. Which I think is how Newt would govern as well.
“Libertarians are leftist fifth columnists trying to destroy conservatism while hanging on to conservative economics.”
Leftist 5th columnists? Libertarians believe in small government and individual liberty. How is that leftist by any stretch of the imagination?
Newt’s in third place. If he wants to get the nomination he’s going to have to figure out a strategy that doesn’t involve the people that are ahead of him giving up.
From your source:
In particular, he said he would get rid of any idea that you have to have abortion coverage or contraceptive coverage as a government policy.
That’s it. Exactly what you said you support - you said you support Santorum eliminating any mandate for contraception.
“Newts last stand is Georgia. If he doesnt make a major statement there by trouncing all others and picking off at least one or two other states on Super Tuesday, hes a done deal.”
I agree. He can’t go 1-9 on Super Tuesday and be a viable candidate. Unfortunately, if Romney goes 9-1, Santorum is finished too and then we are SOL.
“Obviously, it only took a few posts for you to see that wont be happening.”
Who knows, it just has to happen on the margin. But anyway, if you look at the Gallup polls, at no point in this primary season did any candidate have less than 64% of GOP voters against them. Kinda telling isn’t it?
If you support the platform of the libertarian party for instance, then you would be a raving leftist.
As it is, you are already pushing liberalism here with your anti-social conservative theme.
Now you know you weren’t supposed to make sense. LOL
Romney is the most libertarian candidate on social issues, and his family is traditionally the most libertarian in regards to the military and foreign affairs.
Why isn’t Romney your man, or have you been deceived by his feint to the right since 2006?
“Romney is the most libertarian candidate on social issues, and his family is traditionally the most libertarian in regards to the military and foreign affairs.”
Anyone who pushes through an individual mandate in their state and defends it to this day, is not a libertarian. Nor do they have any regard for individual liberty. If you arent allowed to say “no I dont want to buy that product”, what cant the government tell you to do?
He is the antithesis of libertarianism on economic policy, and as James Carville said “it’s the economy, stupid”
Romney does embrace the left on your other issues though.
He says that he will kill Romney care, since he is the most liberal, on the other issues, you really should consider him as a good libertarian, as least of these three candidates, two of them are Christians, and they will probably try to fight for conservatism.
“Romney does embrace the left on your other issues though.”
“He says that he will kill Romney care, since he is the most liberal, on the other issues, you really should consider him as a good libertarian,”
I am a libertarian that believes in a strong defense (seeing 9/11 from my office window and not the TV does that to you) so I dont often vote Libertarian. I am also pro-Life. Murder isn’t a choice. I think the last time I voted Libertarian was in 1996 when Bob Dole was the GOP nominee and I voted for Harry Browne. I think there are quite a few libertarians in the GOP who are in the same boat as me.
“He says that he will kill Romney care,”
Sorry forgot to respond to this in my last reply. Anyway, Obama said he was a centrist in 2008 so I think it is much better to look at someone’s record rather than his positioning for a campaign. Romney’s record is terrible http://libertarian-neocon.blogspot.com/2011/12/romneys-terrible-record.html
So some libertarians aren’t very libertarian.
“So some libertarians arent very libertarian.”
Libertarianism is a belief in individual liberty up to the point of infringing on someone else’s. Let me know how believing in a strong defense with a volunteer army and defending babies from their own murder violates that.
Nothing represents the libertarians as well as their own party, I will use their party platform to define the real world position of libertarianism in American politics.
Not each individual’s private cherry picked definition who is claiming to be a libertarian.
90% of libertarians are outside the Libertarian party. There is a good reason for this.
Then they are not true libertarians, I assume that some like Noam Chomsky and Bill Maher want to work from within the Democrat party, while some want to work within the GOP as fifth columnists and move it to the left, but generally a true libertarian would adhere to the libertarian principles as they are written into political reality, within the libertarian party platform.
The Libertarian Party platform is all “gay” rights, pro-porn, pro-legalizing ALL drugs, prostitution, and I’m sure I’m missing something else.
It’s peurile libertine claptrap utopianism that if put into practice would lead quickly to anarchy, chaos and usher in real jack booted thugism in short order.
Any politician that is willing to offend sodomites gets at least a second look from me.
***Then you’ll like my tagline
“Then they are not true libertarians,”
Considering libertarianism is about individual freedom, conformity to some group’s platform isn’t required.
“The Libertarian Party platform is all gay rights, pro-porn, pro-legalizing ALL drugs, prostitution, and Im sure Im missing something else.”
You might think its okay for the government to tell you which consenting adults you are allowed to sleep with or which plants you can ingest but that is how we got to the situation we are now where the government is telling us which products to buy and that we have to buy contraception.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.