Posted on 03/07/2007 6:57:43 PM PST by Bob J
I have diligently watched the rise in size and influence of conservative websites, including Free Republic, over the last 7-8 years. I have been shocked and concerned over the drop in traffic at the most popular ones over the last year or so. There was good growth up until 2006 but since then there has been a steady downtrend that would crash any other market.
Anyone have any ideas as to what is happening? I'm out of explanations. The deficiencies in alexa.com are noted, but even if the numbers aren't accurate you're still comparing off numbers to off numbers so the decline is consistent.
It's happened before...in '76 and in '94 we saw resurgences...it's high time for another one.
Probably so.
But . . . GOD COULD raise him much higher . . . if enough worked and prayed enough.
Ding-ding-ding, winner!!! I've also noticed some nasty people who are allowed to violate the "personal attacks" rule with abandon, while others get banned for a minor offense.
Wonderful post, Guenevere. Your assessment is accurate in my view and comprehensive. A bit more respect for the site owner and moderators is in order around here. They do an awesome job.
Many of us came here with absolutely zero HTML skills and slowly acquired them, so we can post photos and graphics, format text, etc. It is generous of the site owners to allow this much individual blogging on their website.
If posters would give more attention to issues and less to personalities, maybe we could actually become a leader in the conservative movement again.
The fact that Vietnam veteran Jim Robinson is imminently en route to Washington DC to defend the memorial to his RVN brothers and to support currently deployed troops and their mission SHOULD BE an inspiration to FReepers to grow up a bit and dispense with some of the nastier, divisive posting that has been going on recently.
As I stated earlier on the thread, the big problem is EGO. Everyone take a swallow. We are going to need conservative UNITY.
At least we can all agree on 2nd Amendment rights.... right?
The coalition is built on the common ground of 'smaller govt, strong on defense, etc'.
Political conservatives will vote for pro-life candidates, as long as we believe they'll be political conservatives. We've proven that. But now, the socials are saying they *won't* vote for pro-choice candidates, no matter what.
If the Socials have now decided that their social views are more important that that core commonality, then they are the ones ending the coalition.
I WILL miss my friend "Common Tator". He left for the same reasons. There are also many others who have e-mailed me with their same intentions. I encouraged them to stay, but they chose not to.
The coalition was built around political issues. If the socials now insist that their social beliefs be a part of the deal, then they're ending the coalition.
I don't believe ya'll can win a referrendum on abortion. But that's just my guess, of course.
Sweet ol' PaulaB falls into that camp too. Miss her! :o(
You just illustrated how this Forum USED to be. Most posts here reflected, in much the same way, the nature of how you so eloquently stated the situation we are currently faced with.
;^)
The coalition is built on the common ground of 'smaller govt, strong on defense, etc'.
Yes and nearly all Soc-cons desire that as well. With Rudy it's one sided. The soc-cons get none of their important issues addressed. To make a coalition work, both sides need to give. Giuliani isn't a coalition candidate. Since there are others who could make everyone happy, supporting Rudy can only be taken as an act against the coalition.
Well ..... thank you!
Then Rudy should be acceptable to all, exept on the 'abortion' issue. Gun control there's a likelyhood he won't do anything, and on the borders he's no worse (or better) than GW.
The war/defense, of course, he'd likely be excellent with.
I think opposing Rudy in the primaries is great, fine, no problem. But when I hear socials threatening to bolt the coalition because of abortion and gays . . . let's just say that's outside the agreement we have that keeps us all together. Many people who believe in the conservative use of federal power do *not* share their social views.
With all due respect, we didn't have any problem expecting them to accept our choice over the last 20 years. Why is it we expect them to never get anything EVER?
The 'important issues' the coalition was built on were the political issues of smaller govt, more local control, strong on defense. Rudy is solid on those issues.
The problem is that the Socials now insist on injecting social issues into coalition. They're changing the contract.
The problem is that the Socials now insist on injecting social issues into coalition. They're changing the contract.
Most of the socials were brought into the coalition by Reagan's pro-life position. Before the Republicans accepted the socials, the GOP was wandering in the wilderness. Now, it seems they want to go back.
The dam broke long ago and there is little any sitting President can do about it, when over 60% of the population now are in favor abortion.
Yoour 60% figure is about right, but that is how many people think that abortion should be restricted.
As for illegals, Rudy refused to even enforce existing anti-illegal laws in NYC, again, a loser.
The war on terror. What, exactly makes Rudy qualified, except for having handed the Saudis their check back? What is his military experience? (Bedford-Styvesant (sp?) does not count.) What time has he had with the folks at the Pentagon, and how much experience does he have in international affairs? Again, he talks well, but that is a far cry from being qualified to be Commander in Chief..
He is batting 0 for 3 so far--and frankly, there are those who do far better.
Sure he has name recognition, he was Mayor in the largest city in the US, he is going to have that. But frankly, I do not think he will do well outside of the Northeast, especially with his positions on the issues.
Those of us who have been here for a long time can tell just by the activity on the latest post page and by the number of posts on various threads. When you hit an "active" thread and find most of the posts saying things like "Did too!" and "Nuh uh, did not" then you recognize the problem.
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.