Posted on 10/02/2007 9:45:47 PM PDT by Coleus
I think it is a mistake to think that social conservatives will all do the same thing or that there is some monolithic leader that speaks for all of us. There are:
1) some who have become discouraged by 12 years of GOP cowardice on social conservative issues when they’ve had the chance to govern. They may sit ‘08 out if there’s no candidate to their liking.
2) some who are satisfied with what Republicans have done as “the best they could get” and will support their nominee without reservation.
3) some who are mad and want a party more responsive to their wishes. Those would be the ones most likely to bolt to a third party.
If a pro-abortion, pro-homosexual candidate like Giuliani is the nominee, I think you’ll see some fall into all three camps. The question is how many will go to each. I honestly think that’s why Giuliani cannot win the nomination because too many Republicans will see what a liability he will be to a large segment of the the base who will either stay home or vote third-party.
There is a third party called the Constitution Party already in place for those ready to bolt. The social conservative wing need not invent a third party because one already exists.
I’m pretty sure I can hold my nose and support Romney or Thompson though I have misgivings about each. I’m sure I would never support McCain (not for social issues but his general treachery). Giuliani will probably put me in the unsupportable column the more he fleshes out his social agenda but I’m not ready to say yet that I’d never support him. Those who believe conservatives staying home/voting third party is an empty threat should think again. Many will stay but many will bolt - too many for the GOP to win the general election.
So are you trying to sell me on the short term t-bill or the sub prime mortgage note here ?
Why vote for someone who doesn’t have a chance in hell of winning?
The short version is because I’m not fearful of conviction . What I do is alienate myself from the people who are the rah rah my guy types . As far as I am concerned Mr. Rudder , a vote for the so - called status quo as you put it is a wasted vote .
“Should I vote for the “good ol’ boy” Republicans around here that are actually just Republicans so they can get votes? “
No, you work for the people that will best represent you. If you want representation *and* influence in the State Capitol and Washington, you’d better make sure that good Republicans are running by getting involved at the grass roots level. And sticking to them, pushing them to remain good Republicans.
Look at what we did in our State Rep district: oust the RINO incumbent, a woman who barely veiled her pro-abortion leanings and never saw a big government money/ campaign finance reform plan she didn’t like.
The kicker is getting good men and women to run in the first place - unfortunately that takes big money from the beginning to convince the candidate and to get the momentum going. Our new Rep won the primary by 50 votes out of over 20,000 votes total, largely by getting the home schoolers and fundamental Christians behind him: going door to door, winning votes. But he was able to start because of a backer with big money.
Find that good Republican and help him or her raise money.
There will be a 1 point margin of error.
Kind of what the “Pass The Last Judgement/Get Into Heaven” ratio is going to look like, I ‘spose.
Like the (”one issue”) question of “Slavery” in our own American History?
If you believe in that sort of thing.
You gotta be impressed by the sheer audacity.
LLS
Right. Other than the Holocaust, the Third Reich was a marvelous success. /sarcasm off/
From all indications, yes.
It would be great for Hillary ,I would Rather talk with Rudy and encourage him to support our values ,try talking to President Hildabeast Christians! Sometimes the evangelicals seem suicidal to me ,if you want to get thrown to the lions again ,go ahead and run your third party candidate. But when that happens dont come on this site and start crying when the Supreme court is packed with Ruth Bader Ginbergs and Gays are running your churches and the day children are born they are given Heather has two mommies to take home.
Instead of Rush Limbaugh we get recordings of Hillary telling us what we need to do to be good Comrades
Maybe just maybe it would send a message to the republican big wigs that politics as usual (rino actions like the amnesty b.s.) are not acceptable to conservatives.
Maybe if that message wasn’t received it then may be time to start a new true conservative party. One touting less govt. against illegal immigrration, against abortion.
Or you can continue to vote for rino rats that have made the republican party a joke.
These asses like bloomberg and rudy run as repubs only because they can’t get enough support from dems to win. So they use the republican party to get into office then act like dems.
Yeah, let’s continue doing that.
And your third party beliefs will never come to fruition, because there are never enough third party voters to make it happen. I know several people who voted for Ross Perot, who are really sorry they went for the third party. You can of course say what you want.... but your vote for a third party candidate is definitely wasted.....it is a spoiler for electing a major candidate with other views similar to your own.
How about we nominate Ross Perot? It worked so well the first time we should try it again.
LLS
” Should I vote for the “good ol’ boy” Republicans around here that are actually just Republicans so they can get votes?”
When you have NO FREEDOMS left... you will have your answer.
LLS
Bingo!!!
LLS
The other seventy-some percent either support one of the other candidates for whatever reason, or have not chosen who they support yet. I'm not sure of how many of those are what some people derisively refer to as "social conservatives" that have passionate beliefs about certain social issues & will pound the pavement, make phone calls, put up signs, give out bumper stickers, etc - in support of a candidate that they believe will protect these certain issues.
Now here's my point - if a certain percent will not vote for Rudy for his stances on these issues - AND - if a certain percentage will vote for whoever is the nominee - THEN DO THE MATH!
Get behind a nominee that satisfies the "socons" and the Rudy supporters will vote for them - right? I mean - it will not be a vote for Hillary - right? This nominee will also get the "socon" vote - right? More votes for THIS candidate - right? Is this making any sense to some of you?????????????
If a certain percentage are just going to vote for the party - and another percentage are going to vote for the candidate - then you get more votes for the party - with the candidate that satisfies the candidate voters - then when you have a candidate that doesn't satisfy them.
You Rudy supporters - do you agree with this?
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.