Skip to comments.Sarah Palin: Third party is ‘a possibility’ if GOP forgets its conservative platform
Posted on 08/30/2012 5:07:45 AM PDT by IbJensen
TAMPA, August 29, 2012, (LifeSiteNews.com) Sarah Palin has said a third party may emerge if the Republican Partys leaders abandon conservative principles.
Asked if the GOPs increasing fractiousness may lead to a new party taking its place, Palin replied, If history is an indication it is a possibility if the Republicans dont remember what the planks in the platform represent.
Look what happened in the mid-1800s. The Whig Party went away and the Republican Party surfaced, because the electorate got sick and tired of the party fighting for power and not doing the will of the people, Palin said on Fox News.
Palins words echo those made by the founder of a conservative third party, Howard Phillips of the Constitution Party.
The Republican Party is going to go the way of the Whigs in the 1850s, said Phillips, who served as the first presidential candidate of what was then known as the U.S. Taxpayers Party, in his 1992 acceptance speech. It will die the death of a double-minded man who talks one way but lives in conflict with that which he professes to believe.
Phillips, who headed the Office of Economic Opportunity during the Nixon administration, frequently likened the modern GOPs refusal to take a definitive stand protecting all unborn children to the Whig Partys refusal to oppose slavery a dodge that led to its implosion and the birth of the Republican Party.
The Constitution Party platform opposes abortion under all circumstances.
The former Alaska governor has in the past bypassed a liberal Republican in favor of a more conservative, third party challenger. In 2009, Palin endorsed Conservative Party nominee Doug Hoffman over pro-choice Republican Dede Scozzafava for a congressional race in New York.
Click like if you want to end abortion!
Democratic operatives also claimed Palin supported Pat Buchanans third party presidential candidacy in 2000, because she wore a Buchanan button as she welcomed him during a visit to Wasilla. In fact, she served on Steve Forbes campaign that year.
However, in 1995 and 2000 Palins husband, Todd, registered as a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, which has endorsed the Constitution Party presidential candidate since 1996.
Palin is not alone in her ominous message to the Republican elite. Phyllis Schlafly said House Speaker John Boehner was making a mistake when he said Ive never read a party platform, then specifically noted his exceptions to protecting some classes of the unborn. Its a very grassroots document that I think the politicians ought to listen to, she said.
A number of other Republicans - including former Congressman Tom Tancredo, Alan Keyes, and U.S. Senator Bob Smith - have cast their lots with the Constitution Party since 2000, only to leave shortly afterwards. The partys 2012 presidential candidate is former Republican Congressman Virgil Goode of Virginia.
Palin, the Republican partys 2008 vice presidential nominee, was not publicly invited to speak at the Republican National Convention. John McCain will address the convention tonight.
Sarah means that after we get Obuma out, we need to remind the Rinos that the Republican Party started out as a 3rd party because the Whigs were behaving just like the GOP Rinos are now. Stick with us people. First Obama has to go, then the RINOS.
Is that what she means?
CONSERVATIVES must vote for candidates that
spout CONSERVATIVE ISSUES in each election.
Agreed! If we actually get Obama out of office, without incident, then come 2016 its time to run Romney and the rest of the Rep-E off the reservation. 3rd party is the only way to go.
You are right. I am fully in sympathy with the Tea Party, but if anyone or anything puts me in a position of deciding between a November loss or the current GOP nominee... my Tea Party sympathy will be temporarily suspended (not abandoned) THAT battle can be resumed at any time!
I am NOT going to let the MSM or Liberal liars force THEIR game on me.... not ever.
America comes before party.
America needs EVERYONE this time around... it is in the best interests of every single voter in this country to get a demonstrated, anti-American loser OUT OF THE WH!!
I would sincerely hope so.
There’s no place for ‘moderates’ (they straddle the centerline and stand for nothing) and ‘progressives’ (just another term for socialist/communists)in a freedom loving nation.
So I guess the establishment Whigs were WINOs?
I’m looking forward to a Conservative Party and the Republican party is not it.Hopefully the Tea Party can convert itself into an actual political party that can put the Republcan’s out to pasture.
I’m tired of playing this game of voting for the Republican or the Democrat and coming out with the same LOUSEY result.
agreed, moderates are the wishy washy lets work with each other and go to each others elitist cocktail party.
If a party comes along and is socially conservative as well as fiscal then I;m all in.
No more appeasing the homostapo, no more tax funded of killing babies ot start with, tell the homosexuals you will not be getting special rights.
Fed up of this crap of appeasment by our side, they stay silent even most talk radio never mention conservative social issues.
I’m done with the cowards on our side, whether it be some on talk radio to the GOP, to the wishy washy moderates to even some who are libertarians who try and install their views onto this party.
Third parties most often are comprised of the defeated.
IMO the only way a third party can work is to round up lots of money, more money than we’ll need with access to more, plenty of major-name true Conservative leadership, and recruit sufficient party operative experience of Conservative values. The new party could then lift off on schedule, and stay aloft.
It ain’t gonna work comprised of the defeated. The Left has been working on this for a long time. They want Conservatives to be defeated, and to start their own party of irrelevance. As usual they didn’t do due diligence, and believe they can herd us into that corral of irrelevance, but if we do as above we can turn the herd around, and run over the Leftist b-stards making them irrelevant.
If we are going to do this in time for 2016 we have to get started, and win. There is already a base to start with, so we better use it before they manage to make it irrelevant with their many bags of tricks.
Let's see... Our nominee for POTUS is a bigger government, government healthcare, anti-RKBA, pro-abortion RINO... All of our Party leaders seem to be castigating and fighting against the TEA Party adherents trying to right this course.
I don't know how much further astray we could go. The GOP is only "conservative" in comparison to the outright Socialism being peddled by the DNC nutcases.
Established 3rd Parties have parts of the answers, but have long histories of DOING IT WRONG by putting up their own mish-mash of unelectable weirdo's.
We need a real TEA Party with a slate of real pro-limited government/pro-Constitution/borders-language-culture types.
Agreed. See my post at #10. I think we are on the same track.
We'd need something that would tempt today's TEA Party backed conservative GOP types to abandon a sinking ship. Most of them would already have at a history of successful campaigns.
Folks exactly like Sarah, Rand Paul, Scott Walker, etc...
Here’s the party platform of the party that get’s my vote:
In fiscal year 2013 the Federal Government will spend 1 penny less than is spent in FY2012.
But that’s too radical. I’m demand perfection. I’m going to ruin this country. I’m not a grown up. I need to put on big boy pants.
Coming from a loyal party gal who has gone so far as to campaign for Captain Queeg, the party brass had better take note.
Personally I think a Tea Party-GOP split is inevitable (with the latter going the way of the Whigs). But first we have to ditch Obama in order to have the breathing space.
Because Romney's crowd got that wrong the other day and began creating rules that would dictate to the state affiliates regarding how they select their own delegates to the national convention, it's probably January 22, 2013 where we need to start focusing our energies on setting up a NEW RNC ~ which you can call whatever you want ~ but it will have rules for affiliation that whould exclude RINOs from serving as officers or staff of the national committee!
I think this should attract a sufficient number of state Republican committees to affiliate with it ~ instead of the RNC ~ (or maybe even IN addition to the RNC) ~ that we should be able to run our own candidates for President by 2016.
With proper filters in place we could probably accept affiliations from non-Republican parties in a number of states.
Now, the other problem. We have some states out there with moribund state Republican parties. They need help. The NEW national committee could help them the same way the RNC used to help Republicans in Southern States ~ set up a state party committee with which active county and district committees can affiliate. The inactive groups (usually made up of 4 or 5 locals who never campaign) could be REJECTED by the new state committee for affiliation.
The end result would be the same as having a third-party, but it would come about in a way compatible with American political realities.
First, the federal system creates opportunities for political parties at the state level. We have well more than 100 different parties there ~ most calling themselves Republican or Democrat (although their papers of incorporation frequently have additional stuff, best known the Democrat's FARMER LABOR append in the Upper Midwest)
If you wanted but 3 political parties in this country you'd probably have to crush 115 of them, at least, out of existence ~ and nobody would be happy.
So, we aren't talking 3 parties, we are talking "leadership teams", or National Committees, then State Committees.
Secondly the American use of single member districts limits party diversity within each single member district. You must have 50%+1 vote to win. Consequently, over time, you end up with 2 parties who seem to strive for a win just barely beyond 51%. If a party gets too large a share they will suffer defections of factions who see a better deal possible with the other large party.
This gives rise to the shape of the electorate ~ it's a bi-modal saddle, not at all a "normal curve" or "Bell Curve". There's no broad middle either ~ just two polls, with a thin fringe around each. Those who seek votes in that fringe usually wander away from their own party's primary base of voters AND LOSE BIG TIME!
The USA as a whole is a single member district. Then, each state constitutes a single member district. Finally, each congessional district, county, township, city, etc. is almost invariably a single member district. Exceptions in the past were Indiana and South Carolina who used multi-member districts, albeit in quite different ways.
Then we have factions within the parties. These can be faith based, economic, social class, occupation, or geographic (or other categories that are meaningful in a given single member district).
Back to the point, the national committee is where the Presidential candidates are going to be chosen ~ and if the party is big enough and complex enough and popular enough there may also exist elaborate primaries and caucuses at the state level, or even further down the political food chains.
So, how do we work this out? Well, we already know the ruling clique doesn't care for several of the major Republican party factions, and history has shown ruling cliques always become narrower in their outlook as they nestle into the safe havens of government institutions. That means it's not likely you will see a Romney regime open up to the Conservatives any more than the Obama regime has opened up to us ~ or even to Republicans (in a multifaction sense).
At the same time it's unlikely we can simply vote in enough new state committee delegates to the RNC to make a difference. However, without involving ourselves in meaningless semantic battles with that crowd we can create a new National Committee and invite the State parties to select and send representatives.
If we do this AFTER Romney has actually made his appointments to the 900 or so jobs he has available we will have a whole big bunch ~ a huge bunch ~ a GINORMOUS bunch of distruntled potential federal appointive office holders who will be glad to join in the effort!
I will leave it to the Youts' among us to get going with this ~ but I'll be happy to kibitz and kvetch as it is done ~ hoping all the while to be able to provide some positive guidance to them.
“...We’d need something that would tempt today’s TEA Party backed conservative GOP types to abandon a sinking ship..”
So I needed to reword the last paragraph of my post #10?
Different paths, same end. ;-)
And I don’t think she would ever put her FEET up on that desk!
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.