Conservatives: Sitting Out 2008 Is the Height of Idiocy by Ben Shapiro

Family Security Matters ^ | 14 February 2008 | Ben Shapiro

[K-oneTexas]

Published: February 14, 2008

Conservatives: Sitting Out 2008 Is the Height of Idiocy

Ben Shapiro

 

The conservative base isn't fond of Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. They disagree with him on a wide variety of issues, and they feel insulted by McCain's ardent desire to please those across the political aisle.

           

But conservatives are fools if they stay home in November.

           

There's plenty to question about John McCain, but there's one thing conservatives can't question: McCain is better than Hillary Clinton. He's better than Barack Obama. And it's not close.

           

McCain is a hard-line proponent of victory in Iraq. He has pledged to lower taxes. He has always fought governmental corruption, even if that has led him to absurd extremes like campaign finance reform. He is a strong pro-life voter. He says he will veto any bill that has any earmarks. In 2006, McCain received a 65% rating from the American Conservative Union, which measures whether members of Congress are in line with conservatives on major issues. In 2005, his score was 80%.

           

Here are Hillary Clinton's scores in those same two years: 8% and 12%. Obama scored 8% both years.

           

It's simply unthinkable to equate McCain's record with either Clinton's or Obama's. McCain is a left-leaning Republican, which means he ranks in the upper half of the Senate in terms of political conservatism. National Journal, by contrast, ranked Clinton the 16th most liberal senator in the Senate in 2007. Obama was No. 1.

           

Despite the vast difference between McCain and his Democratic opponents, many conservatives are threatening to boycott the 2008 election. They argue that the Republican Party has abandoned conservatism, and that in order to reclaim the Party, the GOP may have to go through the purifying ritual of cataclysmic electoral defeat.

           

This is historically ignorant. Intraparty squabbles are constant with regard to choosing presidential candidates. Parties do not move toward a particular ideological group because of electoral defeat – they move toward a particular ideological group because that group is most motivated to back a single candidate. Ronald Reagan was a rising force in the Republican Party before Gerald Ford lost to Jimmy Carter -- he almost wrested the nomination from Ford in 1976. The Democratic Party's recent move to the left has not been a reaction to their electoral defeats in 2000 and 2004 – after all, Al Gore and John Kerry were certainly quite liberal. The problem with the conservative movement in 2008 wasn't the movement -- it was the lack of a candidate. And sending the GOP to ringing defeat in 2008 won't push the Party back to the right unless there's a candidate to rally around.

           

If conservatives think they can rally around a challenger in 2012 and oust an incumbent Democrat, they should think again. Conceding the White House in 2008 could easily mean an eight-year term for either Hillary or Obama – and such an eight-year term would wreak havoc on a country already overburdened by taxes and under assault from Islamic terrorism.

           

The proposed conservative boycott of the GOP in 2008 also demonstrates a massive misunderstanding of the GOP's role. The GOP isn't constructed to nominate conservative candidates. It is constructed to win. It's the conservative base's responsibility to nominate conservative candidates. In 2008, the conservative base failed. That isn't the GOP's fault. Punishing the GOP fruitlessly punishes an organization that isn't to blame.

           

Conservatives must recognize that the choice in 2008 is between John McCain and Clinton or Obama. It isn't about McCain vs. Romney or McCain vs. Huckabee anymore. And if McCain wins, that doesn't preclude conservatives from rallying around a more conservative candidate next time. Dooming the country to at least four years of Democratic incompetence and appeasement won't solve conservatives' problem.

# #

FamilySecurityMatters.org contributing editor Ben Shapiro is a graduate of UCLA and Harvard Law School. He is also the author of the recently published "Porn Generation: How Social Liberalism Is Corrupting Our Future" as well as the national best seller "Brainwashed: How Universities Indoctrinate America's Youth." He practices law in Los Angeles.

[84rules]

It's the conservative base's responsibility to nominate conservative candidates. In 2008, the conservative base failed.

This is the over-riding fact that the anti-McCain people seem to completely ignore. The "conservative base" was conspicuously absent from the voting booths on Super Tuesday and from the campaigns leading up to Iowa and New Hampshire. That is not the fault of the GOP. It is the fault of all those voters who chose not to vote or not to campaign for conservative candidates like Tom Tancredo, Duncan Hunter and Tommy Thompson.

The GOP didn't abandon the conservatives. The conservatives failed to make their voices heard.

John McCain will get my vote because thanks to the apathy of the GOP voters, he is the best choice we have right now.

[wita]

Hmmm.... difficult... difficult.

Only for those who just can’t see the difference in the candidates, the parties, and the platforms.

[johnthebaptistmoore]

I see a repeat of ‘96 where it actually doesn’t matter who the final GOP Presidential candidate is in ‘08. I see the Democrats winning BIG at every political level on November 4 and the U.S. truly becoming a third world “hellhole” for the long-term because of all of their political power on the left. How are conservatives truly supposed to succeed in stopping this momentum on both the Democratic and leftist side prior to November 4?

[bennowens]

I am not sitting home on election day...I am a precinct judge! So I will be there...all day! I still doubt if I can force my right hand to vote for McCain. I am working on it but I still may not be able to force my body to overrule my brain.

[PSYCHO-FREEP]

Can you imagine the Moderates and RINO’s or outright Liberals that he would seat in his cabinet?

Forget a Conservative VP. He would not want our side of the party that close to what he is preparing to do to this country.

No way, no how. But never fret. He has NO chance of winning anyway, especially after the Viet Vets against McCain get through with him. The media will unleash the coup de gras in due time to get their savior Obama elected.

[Centurion2000]

But conservatives are fools if they stay home in November.

And the RNC and GOP loses for not staying where they should have been instead of drifting left.

I will NEVER vote for little McManiac.

[beckysueb]

The thing is everyone that lets the Dems win because they don’t like McCain (I don’t either) know what they are in for.

I don't think they do know. Otherwise they wouldn't force that future on their children. We will have the jihadists here under Obama. They can't wait for him to get elected. They say they are going to come here when he gets elected. They think he is one of them.

[Exton1]

Yes McLain can be worse. I am sick and tired of holding my nose when I vote. If America has been so corrupted that we have no choice and will give in to any leftest offering presents, than in may be worth it to bring it all down and start building a new. We are headed for a cliff, McLain will take us there at 50, Hillary at 70, and Obamma at 90.

[beckysueb]

Maybe they don’t think they should have to court and pamper people for their vote. People need a dose of reality sometimes. Look at all the posts where people have stated clearly and politely the reasons for not staying home. Everyone hasn’t been insulting.

[farmer18th]

That's the point. Anne Coulter: "there's a Democrat behind doors 1, 2, and 3."

Why would a thinking person even consider voting for a guy who wants to shut down the First Amendment 60 days before an election. What's next? Maybe we should consider Fidel Castro for the next election cycle?

[beckysueb]

Well, I’m glad you won’t be voting for Obama.

[beckysueb]

I don’t want my children and grandchildren murdered by jihadist thugs and besides I don’t have another 200 years to build it back.

[Centurion2000]

Too bad you'll also be screwing our military and America's security.

You want to blame someone, blame McCain and the RINOS. As far as america's security, maybe we're going to have to lose a city or two before we figure out that this isn't little league play nice rules.

[demshateGod]

I like what Rush said. He compared the “evangelicals” of the RINO party to the blacks of the Rat party. After years of being promised they’d fix the problems we see in our country, we see they’ve failed to deliver.

The blacks might still dutifully vote for Rats but I’m not going to do the same for RINO’s. I’m not voting for evil men because they make promises to help fix problems, when they really just make the problems worse. I don’t think my position is stupid. I just don’t think Ben Shapiro, who ever that is, understands principal.

[PSYCHO-FREEP]

You forget the power of the American free spirit. The Democrats will teach the public a lesson in voodoo economics they will never forget for generations to come.

It will be like the Carter years ten-fold. Don’t forget that Clinton had the Internet phenomenon and economic explosion that Reaganomics stimulated. The Media gave the Democrats all the credit for that economy.

But, that was then, this is NOW. Things are not so rosy these days. A Democrat controlled government will be an utter economic disaster without the strength of the private sector to carry the burden. That simply no longer will be there to make the Democrats or a Republican administration look good.

On the contrary, what ever party is in charge in the next several years will get the blame. It’s much better that they (Democrats) get the blame instead of the GOP. And Conservatives won’t get the blame for supporting a RINO this time around either.

So fear not!

[beckysueb]

Absolutely. This is a fact and could be the worst thing of all and under Clinton or Obama, there is no doubt, IT WILL HAPPEN! With a majority in the house and senate, it will sail right through. This is one of the things the left has been salivating to get done.

[ElectricStrawberry]

What I want is for a conservative 3rd party type so that there will be a large % of normally GOP voters that jump ship......thusly sending the message for the 2012 cycle.

That % of normally GOP voters that goes to a specific 3rd party will be remembered just like the 19% that went for Perot. I don’t know if write-ins send the same message......but if there’s not a conservative-like 3rd party.....I’ll write-in as well.

[EternalVigilance]

Though we are striving mightily to send our manufacturing base overseas, Americans still know how to build cars. We know how to build houses. We know how to build lots of things. And I seriously doubt that if Americans find themselves in a situation in which none of the current parties represent the American creed, we have forgotten how to build a new political party.

[CodeToad]

or Billary.

[MortMan]

I’m sorry, but you’re wrong, FRiend. As a vet myself, I understand the difference between strategic and tactical decisions, and I can see that the tactical decision to support McCain is a strategic blunder.

Yours is just another variation of the “the other guy/gal is worse” arguments, and it is unpersuasive in light of the actual record of McCain. McCain has already ceded the military tribunals for Gitmo prisoners, where national security secrets may be able to be kept secret without freeing dangerous illegal combatants. Instead, he wants to move these pukes to Leavenworth (where I live, by the way) and grant them free and open civil trials under the rights guaranteed to American citizens by the US Constitution.

He derides waterboarding as “torture”, and proclaims that he can stand a little abridgement of the first amendment for “clean government”.

You can disagree with someone’s principles and their stand to support them, but the insidious attempts to shame someone into abandoning their principles is truly the definition of chutzpah.