SHOULD CONSERVATIVES FUMIGATE THE BIG TENT TO REMOVE LIBERALS?

I’m a big tent republican.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1821435/posts?page=6245#6245

Here’s an analogy to work with. Take a small box and fill it with some rocks. Then add some rice, filling it to the top. Now take all the same stuff, but in a different order. Put in the rice first, then add the rocks. What you’ll find is that if you put in the big stuff first, the small stuff will fit around it. But if you put in the small stuff first, the big stuff won’t have room. The republican tent is the box. The Big issues are the socon issues, to be put in first. The little issues are things that can be accommodated around the bigger stuff. A candidate who tries to focus on the smaller issues first and leave out the bigger issues has no way of getting all of us into the tent. He splits the party. The candidate who gets the big stuff right and as much of the little stuff that will fit, he can fit more into the tent. We’re often amazed at how much rice can keep fitting in. Rudy Giuliani flunks some of the big issues, and on some of the little issues it looks to me like anyone else’s rice would do just as well. All that remains for us to agree on is which are the bedrock principles and which are not. Why would there be so much invective aimed at rudy from the right? Because there are some bedrock principles that he is leaving out. Bad move. I see rudybot postings all the time saying that they would vote for Hunter, and I see socon postings that say they would not vote for rudy. That’s a BIG indicator of a few bedrock principles that are being left outside the tent in order to let in some rice.

So many people that I know skipped voting here in Georgia because of his support of the bailout.Georgia cant be the only place in the country that this happened.I like conservative candidates, do you?

J. SIMMONS ASKED: Are you actually suggesting that either of those individuals would have come closer to beating Obama than McCain? (referring to Duncan Hunter or Tom Tancredo)

Yes, that is the whole point. First, elections involve a thousand events that take place over a period of a year or more BEFORE election day. Conservative volunteers just don't give two hoots about John McCain. So a Duncant Hunter or Tom Tancredo would have commanded the enthusiasm and the loyalty of those who actually make elections work in the Republican Party. A hundred thousand things would have happened across the nation that did not happen because the conservative base felt (correctly) that McCain was their enemy. They did not lift a finger for McCain.

Second, a Duncan Hunter or Tom Tancredo would have articulated a convincing argument, rather than the rambling, meaningless pablum that we got from McCain. The voters would have heard a persuasive appeal pointing out what Obama's EMPTY "platform" was a farce and "The Emperor had no clothes." McCain spent most of his firepower shooting at other Republicans urging the GOP not to disagree with Obama. (Now, if we are playing "what if?" we have to consider that Hunter and Tancredo DID NOT run good primary campaigns. So if we are imagining that they won the nomination, we have to pretend that they did a much better job in the primary than in fact they did.)

As a result, a Hunter or Tancredo would have shredded Obama's meaningless nonsense and burst his balloon. What happened with the seemingly "invincible" Obama is what happens when 1 football team stays seated on the bleachers and lets the other team run around unopposed, running up the score. A Hunter or Tancredo would have exposed Obama's non-platform and non-agenda as the frauds that they were. Obama would not have had a free hand to run up and down the field unopposed.

Third, a Hunter or Tancredo would have offered the voters a genuine choice. If you want liberalism, your man is Obama. Why the bleep would you ever consider voting for McCain? So if anyone is inclined to vote liberal, they were never going to vote for McCain. But the GOP did not give the voters a real choice. You cannot win an election by offering the voters a cheap imitation of the Democrat. Those who want to vote left will vote for the authentic liberal, the Democrat. The Left won't trust the Republican, and the Right will despise him as a traitor.

there’s the exit sign

The new motto of the formerly grand old party.

CALCOOWGIRL WROTE: What Mr. Davis was about was a smart, fiscally conservative government, that got its job done and saved tax payers money.

I wrote no such thing.

No, unfortunately your impression is false.

No, your post is false -- you may be quoting someone, but not me.

Nice post BTW nobody has done the Damage that Bush and McCain have to the Republican name, then they compound this by running the Candidate most reviled by Conservatives; McCain thereby effectively causing 8-10 million voters to JUST stay home, The same was true in the midterms giving the Rats the house.

Speaking for myself when I hire an Employee it is NOT to do HALF what they are told to do. That is exactly the case with most of these so-called Republicans and this worthless Maverick that the left practically employees full-time.

Until the Party gets back on track and stops this madness we will never have the voting clout again. It is simple numbers you bring in some leftist shill under the cloak of the R and along come two votes in that madness you drive away a dozen or more voters.

Great post, should be required reading on FR.

Refreshing to know that some folks are finally figuring out that it’s been Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dumber from the DEMPUBLICAN party for over 100 years.

I guess Americans are just slow learners.

I think you’ve got a point there. Thank you for the mention. I don’t remember each of Newt’s points, but I do believe small government was in there.

Thanks.

BTW: When our founding principles are heralded as part of a campaign, the campaign is generally quite successful. Unfortunately the RP leadership never seems to realize this.

Furthermore, this sets up a false idea. If you run a pale, watered-down version of a liberal Democrat, you think anyone is going to vote for him? Why? Why not vote for the genuine article, the Democrat? If you run a pale echo of the Democrat, you have not given any incentive for anyone to vote for the Republian. PLUS you have repulsed the conservatives in the district. So you have lost your conservative base but you HAVE NOT gained liberal votes.

There are some districts where there just isn't a conservative base, or what people in other parts of the country would call a conservative base -- or at least there aren't enough real conservatives to get anyone elected. Republicans may run a candidate there who really is an alternative to the Democrat, but their candidate looks like a "pale echo" to conservatives elsewhere in the country.

I guess we'd have to get down to specifics, to who is and who isn't a RINO, who and who is and isn't a real conservative. One problem is that a lot of those Representatives in marginal districts got swept out in the last two elections. If Republicans retake Congress, though, there will probably be more Republicans from less conservative districts -- and therefore, more RINOs -- rather than less.

Liberals demand that conservatives support liberal nominees no matter how many stupid policies the liberal Republican has advocated, no matter how many times the liberal Republican has kicked conservatives in the teeth, no matter how bad a candidate the liberal is.

Conservatives are expected to overlook the "baggage" of liberal GOP nominees. The whole point is that it is a one-way street with the Vichy Republicans. NEVER would a liberal Republican accept the idea that conservatives are uncomfortable with the liberal nominee. But, on the other hand, liberals ALWAYS find some excuse to attack, sabotage, and betray conservative nominees.

You may be right. But it also depends on what you mean by "baggage". I don't hear anybody saying, "How could you not vote for Lincoln Chaffee? How could you just stand by and let the only working blacksmith get thrown out of Congress? And after he went to all the trouble to get born into the right family, too?" So sometimes, even liberals have too much baggage for their supporters to accept.