Posted on 11/08/2006 8:08:12 AM PST by Matchett-PI
So maybe the silver lining of this is that the Republicans will realize that they need to reign in their big-government ideals and drunken-sailor spending spree, and stop pissing on the Bill of Rights, in order to win back those swing votes for the next election.
I just hope the Dims don't do too much damage in the meantime.
Why quiet? They have just as much right to their views as anyone else.
Okay, Ren, how has this election fixed that?
The Constitution IS the big picture. The GOP seems to have forgotten that. Or does doubling the size of government somehow now fit under the definition of "conservative"?
In theory I check out as being most of the way to being a libertarian, and I'll happily start voting for libertarian candidates the day after we have runoff elections in America and I am guaranteed that I'm not electing demokkkrats by voting for libertarians. As for now, I am voting against demokkkrats, i.e. for whoever has the statistically best shot at preventing a demokkkrat from holding the public office in question. Usually that's a republican.
Amen Brother.
Libertatrian, yet. Stiff-necked stupid, no.
And I suggested they didn't where, exactly?
Steempy! You EEDIOT! You just have to stop wizzing on the electric fence.
At one time I thought I could easily align myself with the Libertarians being that I agreed in the limited government concept. That was before I realized they were rabidly pro-abortion, for legalization of all drugs, which would be the ruin of so many and although the military is one of the branched that they do feel is necessarily part of the governent they apparantly don't believe it should EVER be used. That and of course that 95% of their candidates are total nutjobs.
yet = yes
If Bush had not done prescription drug entitlement, would he have lost the independent/libertarian vote last night? Not as many, I think. (Oooh, but just think of all the Democratic votes he picked up by creating a new entitlement).
Like it or not, there is a percentage of people in this country who don't want larger government. Period. They will vote against the party that expands government. Last night, at least some GOP (talking state house candidates here, especially, but, could probably apply to those verrrrry close Senate races) candidates lost b/c LP candidates took a few hundred votes. In a different era, those votes would have gone GOP.
Obviously there are many, many other factors at play in this country of 300 million people. But...in at least some races, the GOP lost b/c it was deemed by independent libertarians to be the party of big government.
The libertarians don't compromise when they get 80% of what they want.
It was obviously the fault of all those who voted...the pout and sit at home crowd can hardly be blamed...it's all about them.
Interesting point.... I find myself often agreeing with Libertarian ideology. This is like the elections in both '92 and '96, where Ross Perot took away votes from the Republican candidate and we ended up having 8 years of Clinton. If 20% of the electorate defines themselves as Libertarian, it seems they (the party) are filling a void where the Republicans have abandoned their core (read: Reaganesque) values.
Good point.
"becoming quiet" means essentially swallowing one's opinions - which is NOT the point of having them in the first place.
Please remind me when they were offered 80% - my memory must be going Alzheimer, I'm afraid.
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.