Posted on 06/19/2005 6:13:28 PM PDT by Tall_Texan
I just so happen to already be a member of the Constitution Party.
"...Ms. Rice is another weak opportunist; Pro-Abortion, anti-Bible, moderate with no obvious commitment to limited Constitutional government... ."
Are you serious?
2% of the base wil vote for Clinton in protest. 2% of the base will vote for a 3d party candidate in protest. 50% of the base will stay home. The GOP candidates for Senate, Congress and local offices will be the losers. The last election proved that turnout is important.
I think if you get a real 3d party candidate who has a pro-constitution free enterprise program, GOP candidates will endorse him and if anything, you will get a positive impact on the legislative races.
The good news is that the only kind of third party candidate who is likely to have an impact would be a serious well funded person with a strong national agenda that has broad appeal.
I don't think that is very difficult to do--the borders are clearly an opportunity issue; so is the budget. The American people clearly recognize that it was not white little old ladies that ran airplanes into the WTC towers on September 11--a clear understandable definition of the enemy and a policy to defend America is another opportunity issue.
The two parties do not want to address any of these issues directly. We have reached the point where there are a number of issues the mainstream parties won't talk about because the parties are in agreement and the American people are on the other side. So there is a real opportunity for a third party candidate.
I don't see a Republican candidate who is able to take any of these issues to the people.
On the other hand, most of the posters here have their heads in the sand--Mrs. Clinton is ahead because she is taking positions on national issues that more than 50% of the voters agree with. So when you line her up against wets like Ms. Rice or the lady about whom this topic got started, Sen. Hutchinson, Mrs. Clinton is going to win going away.
I'm 62. I voted 3d party every time except 2 GOP guys for Pres. I worked hard for most 3d party candidates. Last time out, the LP purposely chose the weakest of its 3 options. The Constitution Party chose a weak option. If they wanted to win, those 2 parties would merge. But both are controlled by masochists. (If the Constitution Party is pro-life, why do its members commit suicide? If Alan Keyes is pro-life, why did he commit suicide in Illinois?)
We have reached the point where there are a number of issues the mainstream parties won't talk about because the parties are in agreement and the American people are on the other side.
The major parties avoid many issues, not because they agree... but because they are afraid of those third rails. Seniors who have been Republican all their lives and won't be affected by SS change turn on Bush because he touches the 3d rail of Social Security.
Immigration is such a 3d rail. Many of us far right Republicans including libertarians like me, and social conservatives, and evangelilcal abolitionist Republicans are pro-immigration. Others on the right are anti (illegal) immigration. The Dem party is also divided on the issue.
In neither party are the divisions liberal-conservative. They have a unique dynamic. Lies and irrational logic are prevalent among the high profile spokespeople on both sides of immigration. Most politicians see no way to win on that issue. To take one side or the other associates them with the lies and irrationality that will destroy them.
You may have an unusual point of view on the subject of immigration--and to be fair, the subject is not immigration, it is border control.
An overwhelming majority of the American people poll firmly on the position that we should close the borders--and kick illegals out; control non-citizens who live here for more than a week or two. Certainly not let them vote or burden the rest of us with health care and public service expenses with no contribution to the cost.
From Mrs. Clinton's point of view that is not an unmitigated positive even though she has a poll structured position in line with the majority--because Conservatives are more likely to be on this position than liberals.
The point of this discussion as far as Mrs. Clinton is concerned is that she is rapidly appropriating the mainstream Conservative position on a number of these issues. What she would do if elected is a legitimate question. But she has effectively transformed her public political agenda into the middle of the road with several dips into clear Conservative positions that have great political appeal.
I don't like her any better than the rest of you. But at least at this point, the Republican candidate universe consists of a bunch of wets. Mrs. Clinton is going to get more votes than any of the wets.
My sense of Illinois (city, burbs, downstate) is that if you asked Republicans open ended questions:
In choosing a presidential candiate, what are your top 3 conerns?
10% of Republicans side with you on "border control".
25% of Republicans are strongly pro-immigration like me.
65% of Republicans are focused on other issues and immigration is way down their list.
Corruption is by far the #1 issue... but that may be unique to Illinois.
Education is perpetually a top issue .... although nobody agrees on the solution.
Life, Gays, Guns, War on terrorism, taxes, over-regulation would place high.
There are several types of pro-immigrant Republicans.
Libertarians like Eric Dondero and me.
Compassionate conservatives like the GOP leader in my Schaumburg Twp suburb St Rep Paul Froehlich.
Abolitionist Republicans who overlap compassionate conservatives but also include some non-conservatives and some who are dogmatic and not compassionate.
Mercantilists (in the Adam Smith sense) who are motivated by cheap labor for business.
Karl Rove wannabes who think it is part of a play for the Hispanic vote.
The point about pulled threads is interesting--I didn't know they were doing that. The national polls do not support your view--the easiest hot button to hit is border control.
Among other things, I think most real conservatives who have thought about the issues ought to come down to a form of modified isolationism--if we can get back to the free enterprise system; limit government interference in daily life and restore constitutional limitations on the federal government; and get the education system working; all without interference from either enemies making war on us or from international organizations that want to dictate how we should live, the country will be fine--we will be able to buy all the energy we need in the open marketplace. If we don't, the country will not survive in its present form.
Among other things, we have trouble doing that with the burden of the illegals.
I doubt that the usual poll respondent thinks it through that far but there is widespread recognition that there is an enormous burden to the illegals; and significant national security risk. So it is a hot button issue.
If Tancredo were better qualified, he would win the nomination on that platform--he might win it even with limited capabilities to act as President.
On an intellectual analysis basis, it should be noted that in the next month or so, the birth rate in Mexico drops below the replacement rate. So an end is in sight and probably fairly quickly. The politicians are not sophisticated enough to understand the ultimate end game if the rules do not change. So the politics of the issue are easy to access for both Tancredo and Mrs. Clinton.
The Robinsons are fine, committed Constitutional government Americans. I am unsure whether they believe the Republican party is the only way or even a possible way to achieve restoration of the Republic--it would be good if the Republicans could find another Ronald Reagan but I don't see one on the horizon and for the most part, most of the serious candidates I do see are wets. I am going to vote against all wet Republican candidates in the future--I am not alone.
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.