We have a Republican president now who was BELOVED of religious conservatives especially--and most of what you read about him here is hate for him.
Before him, his father--no conservative he.
Before him RWR--the epitome of conservatism as we know it now.
Before him, Richard Nixon--anyone who thinks he was a conservative doesn't know the meaning of the word.
So why will one non-conservative again mean "the end of conservatism" in this party? Are we THAT weak that we can't argue the issues and make the case for our conservative values? We don't get our way, so we stomp off, tossing the election (and who knows how many more) to the democrats?
How will this benefit the conservative movement?
You forgot Jerry Ford. We survived him too.
Because I think that now more than ever, conservatives are getting terminally fed up with the old bait and switch routine that the Republicans have gotten away with for the past thirty years.
First of all, none of the examples you have given come close to the liberalism of Rudy. Rudy has been extreme left on this primary conservative issues:
1. Abortion (Strongly in favor of Partial-Birth Abortion)
2. Gay-Rights
3. 2nd Amendment rights
3. Illegal Aliens
Secondly, conservatives, by and large, are a principled lot. Not Pragmatic, and not compromising.
If he is nominated Hillary will use his past as a battering ram and the result will be all those currently uninformed strongly conservative voters will run from him.
And finally, for those of us unwilling to sacrifice our morals and our principles, we will not be “stomping off” as you so incorrectly characterize it, we will be voting our conscience and our principles. Something you seem to willing to compromise on.
We The People are and own the GOP. We must throw the RINO pirateers overboard.
This is a result of Tom Delay's policy of solidly defining the two parties...it's a divide and conquerer strategy that both sides of the isle are perpetuating on the Republic. It was never meant to be this way.
The big lie is that Hillary is a moderate and that Rudy is a conservative. The powers that be (see out of control government)want to move the sheeple further to the left in the monarchy.
We have got to find ways to reach those across the isle (bypass the media political arm) or we will continue to be ruled. That way is not to become a member of the other isle by proxy like Rudy has.
Rudy's election, to me, will signify that we have surrendered.
“So why will one non-conservative again mean ‘the end of conservatism’ in this party?”
Your reply was addressed to me, but you’re apparently quoting someone else. I don’t think I’ve said any “non-conservative” would necessarily mean the end of conservatism in the party.
“Are we THAT weak that we can’t argue the issues and make the case for our conservative values?”
Most of us aren’t.
“We don’t get our way, so we stomp off, tossing the election (and who knows how many more) to the democrats?”
I’d probably walk with dignity to a more conservative candidate and leave the outcome of the election in God’s hands.
“How will this benefit the conservative movement?”
There are many possibilities. Maybe it would cause moderate Republicans to help us nominate a conservative in 2012.
Whatever my issues with President Bush, (amnesty, RoP, Israel, etc.) I’d STILL vote for him over Kerry or AlGore. Hell, I’d still vote for him over Rudy.
President Bush is, however, as far Left as I’m gonna go. Rudy is waaaaaay more liberal than President Bush.