Posted on 03/18/2016 8:43:24 AM PDT by Brookhaven
One of the mysteries of the 2016 election cycle is why so many conservatives are rejecting the true conservative in the race and going with a loud mouthed New Yorker. Even southern Evangelicals, the most conservative of the conservative, voted in the main for loud mouthed New Yorker.
Why has the word conservative become powerless to motivate Republican voters? The image below should provide a clue.
Doctrinaire: a person who tries to apply some doctrine or theory without sufficient regard for practical considerations; an impractical theorist.Most of the Republican candidates, pundits, and "keepers of the Reagan flame" who claim the mantle of real conservative are in fact doctrinaire conservatives. They have fallen so in love with a theory, that they don't see the real world consequences of putting that theory in practice.
Yes! A truly objective assessment all of us pissed off Americans out here in drive by America align with. Glorious hallelujah! /s
The same true conservatism that aligns with Glenn Beck, Neil Bush and contemplating joining forces with Go8 Marco to defeat this brash interloper. Hail Hosanna! We are delivered to the promised land of total amnesty just around that corner.
“Voters want, and need, problem solvers, not theorist.”
Thus the reason why lots of people on the right are in revolt against talk radio and media sites.
25 years of talk and complaining.....absolutely nothing to show for it, except very rich talkers and complainers.
Ping! Ping! Ping! Torpedo in the water.
I was put off by that also, until I actually read the article.
The GOP has hijacked the word.
It now means open borders and abandoning the rule of law.
Fraudulently documented foreigners come before the citizens.
As soon as the takers exceed 50% of the voting population, game over. We become slaves to the takers. That means that we will also become takers if we want to survive.
Nailed it.
The Dogmatic at NR, Town Hall, Red State and the rest of the “Conservative” media sneer at the realist as being “nihlistic towards DC and the GOP”.
It is not Nihilism, it Realism. Since 1988 Conservatives have faithfully pledges their treasure and time to the GOP. Despite elections successes in 1988, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2002, 2004, 2010 and 2014 what have Conservative gotten from the GOP?
Prosperity? Nope worse economy since 1979.
Reduction in Government-nope as expensive, corrupt, incompetent, intrusive and bigger then ever
Supreme Court? Nope as far left as it has ever been.
A Nation secure? Nope at risk in a dangerous world. Military broken, exhausted and overextended.
A respect for rule of law and the Constitution? Nope. Government, and society, is more lawless then it has ever been.
A healthy growing vibrant society? Nope stagnant, or in decline, everywhere in every way.
So, it not Nihilism, it Realism. It is a realistic assessment that doing the same thing again this year electorally is going to continue this decline and degradation from DC.You can only overcome inertia in any system with force. So we need to force DC out of it denigrate path onto a new path
BINGO! We have a winner!
I don’t think there is such a thing as a “true” anything in Washington.
It is all deals on top of deals and program on top of program. Every single person there has long since lost sight of anything true, so long ago that they have no memory of it.
That said, I think the best of the lot is Ted Cruz. When he forced the Republicans to vote for the debt increase, instead of letting them pretend to vote against it, that was impressive.
Too many Republican politicians have played the Conservative Card during election cycles, only to forget how they won until the next election.
It is similar to the Republicans who play the Reagan Card, as if invoking Reagan allows them to be perceived as being more conservative or reaganesque, only to forget how they won until the next election.
‘Conservative’ and ‘Reagan’ have become litmus words. If a pol doesn’t use them, the politician is not perceived as a real Republican. If a pol does use them, somehow that is supposed to move him/her closer to being elected or reelected. Then, after they get elected, they can forget how they won until the next election.
Most current politicians can neither define ‘conservativism’ nor ‘Reaganism’. But they can sure place those two cards.
That's a simple question, but the author farbles all over it. "Conservative" is a powerless word in US politics because just about every politician that claims this label is lying - or at least doesn't remotely mean what the voters hear when the word is uttered.
Real conservatives, like Milton Friedman, argue that you cannot have both open borders AND a large welfare state. The corporatists have figured out that they can profit from open borders while the middle class mostly pays for the welfare state. Populists, like their liberal cousins, do not know the difference between corporatism and being a conservative.
Every election cycle it never fails as Republicans brand themselves as “Reagan” conservatives only to become McConnell Sellouts or Boehner, now Ryan Puppets once they get to DC. I cringe now when I hear any Republican politician invoke the name of Reagan and label themselves as conservatives when I know they’re full of it.
So many GOPe call themselves Conservatives. They advocate for big government, crony capitalist and globalist agendas
I keep coming back to Paul in the Bible, where he is talking about the law vs. the spirit, and how the law kills, but the Spirit gives life. The letter of conservatism has been killing us for years because it lacked the spirit of conservatism, which is that THE PEOPLE RULE.
This is THE most important “coservative” principle. All others derive from this. Right now, “conservatism” is not serving the people. The donors, the GOPe, the “conservatism definers” like Krauthammer, Jonah Goldberg, NRO, Shapiro and the rest have COMPLETELY ignored the American people for whom conservatism is supposed to work. They have done this policy by policy, sometimes for good reasons, but always ultimately ignoring the people who sent them there.
Exactly: Think Rob Portman.
And don’t forget Lindsay Graham...
I understand that.
I am not going to blow sunshine up you and tell you that Ted Cruz is perfect. I think he is much better than most, however.
It may be a failure of imagination on my part, but I just don't see how you can guess what would happen during the Presidency of Trump I. With Cruz, I pretty much know what I would get, and what I would get is actually pretty good.
Absent Trump, people would see Cruz and a transformational candidate, and the best to come along in a long, long time.
But nobody sees much of anything else with Donald Trump in the room.
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.