It is their own fault if they don't get my vote. They must run someone I can support. Period. No compromise. I've done that schtick before and it got us Caligula beating McLame. I ain't going down that road again. Get it?
“It is their own fault if they don’t get my vote. They must run someone I can support. Period. No compromise. I’ve done that schtick before and it got us Caligula beating McLame. I ain’t going down that road again. Get it?”
I do not get it except in very exceptional situations such as the clown Dan Maes in Colorado. In almost all situations, a vote for a third party candidate is a vote for the rat. Third party candidates may have cost Republicans control of the state legislatur and a senate seat. In most cases, the Republican candidate is reasonably conservative such as Ken Buck in Colorado.
We need to make a pact with third parties. It is insanity to lose elections because of third party candidates.
As long as a vote for a Republican is a vote for continued non-constitutional government, such a vote won't be cast by me.
The author doesn't get the point. Conservative third-party candidates siphoning off votes from Republicans isn't a sign of support for progressive Democrats, it's a sign of digust with a Republican party that has forsaken conservatism and constitutionalism. For most of my life Republicans have been merely a progressive-lite party, which is entirely unacceptable. If the Republicans would have taken principled stands all along, they may have been soundly rejected for a while (nb: Goldwater), but I assume everyone here knows that progressive policies are guaranteed to fail. Early failure of progressive policies would have been far preferable than waiting until 2010, when the guaranteed failures are now far more expensive to fix.
Carter, Clinton, and Obama are all great examples of the intolerance the electorate has for progressive governance. They have the advantage of having the media on their side and the electorate having a short memory and being gullible. Republicans who value media approval (as if they'll ever get it) more than electorate approval, and who value ego satisfaction more than constitutional principles are not worthy of anyone's vote.
Any so-called conservative who casts a vote for a progressive Republican is merely enabling progressivism and helping to undermine our constitution.
“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.”
— John Quincy Adams —
or maybe its just what your agenda calls for....
Hey retard, guess what? Most all of the Republicans who lost last night by less than the margin set by third party candidates (Libertarians, Constitution, etc.) were conservatives. Yet, idiots like you voted against these conservatives because you're too ill-informed to stop acting on emotion, and start actually evaluating the dynamics of the candidates and their races.
Thanks a lot, morons.
We must ALWAYS do everything within out power to stop a Democrat!!!
“Message to the republicans: IF YOU WANT MY VOTE YOU MUST RUN A CONSERVATIVE. I WILL NEVER, NO NEVER VOT FOR A RINO AGAIN.”
Message to “Libertarians” and “Constitutionalists” - quit letting RINOS be the most active “Conservatives” in the GOP, from your local district up.
Instead, JOIN the GOP and become the most active GOPers, from the local district up. Instead of defeating nominal Conservatives from the GOP, by siphoning off their votes, you will help put more “Libertarians” and “Constitutionalists” INTO the GOP. Instead of being on the outside, YOUR person will be on the inside (a party with some possibility of shaping government policy) where YOUR person would have some chance to influence things.
“Libertarians” and “Constitutionalists” need to recognize that what they think is impossible - building their own influential base in the GOP, is NOT impossible because it is exactly what “social conservatives” began to do in the Goldwater era and built on in the Reagan era.
Are Conservatives who do not necessarily consider themselves “Libertarian” or “Constitutionalists” going to be in disagreement with a “Libertarian” or a “Constitutionalist”, or their positions. I am sure that will happen, on occasion. I am also sure that it will not happen most of the time, but would happen most of the time with the Dims.
An ally is not someone who is in pure agreement with you every time; just a lot more frequently than your real enemies. Libertarians and Constitutionalists could do a whole lot better - more influential in REAL terms (in other words: “in office”) working from the ground up to build their own “caucus” within the GOP than they have been doing outside of it.