Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: OneWingedShark

Yes, I remember. My point is that there isn’t a lack of conservative candidates. I don’t understand why conservatives don’t control the RNC, and why it’s so hard to unite around one candidate. I need to study some more, I guess.


73 posted on 01/19/2014 9:18:16 PM PST by RPTMS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies ]


To: RPTMS
Yes, I remember. My point is that there isn’t a lack of conservative candidates. I don’t understand why conservatives don’t control the RNC, and why it’s so hard to unite around one candidate. I need to study some more, I guess.

Part of it is, as I mentioned before, the RNC is not about to allow anyone they cannot control win — that is, in itself, a huge disadvantage.

Another thing is that there are different things that "conservatives" find unacceptable:
As an example; let's look at my stances:

  1. I believe the War on Drugs is a contraconstitutional operation and usurpation of power.
    (Would the loss of the we must continue with the War on Drugs demographic be acceptable for people who look ay 'electability'? I don't know.)
  2. For abortion, too: that Roe v. Wade was the overstepping of the USSC into matters rightly belonging to the States.
    (This would certainly drop me out of favor with some pro-life people; even though I believe abortion is murder and shouldn't be allowed, even in the cases of rape and incest. [Why kill the child for the sins of his parents?])
  3. Immigration; my hard-line policy would probably earn me a lot of infamy in the press… it'd probably be considered too extreme by most of the Republicans on the national stage.
  4. I would likely make a LOT of enemies by endeavoring to shut down government agencies that are not either directly commissioned by the Constitution, or that are not fulfilling an act directly authorized by the Constitution. (e.g. stripping the Secret Service of its protection duties and having them concentrate on counterfeiting.)
  5. I would also make a lot of enemies by prosecuting the actors of Fast & Furious to the full extent of every law those agencies [DEA, FBI, ICE, and BATFE] were involved in breaking (Treason, treaties, firearm-smuggling, state-sponsored terrorism, multiple conspiracy-laws, etc).
  6. Enacting the same treatment to the NSA would, no doubt, cause some to complain about me "weakening our defenses" — but I would do it anyway; they are not above the law.
So, in the end, would I be an 'electable' candidate?
Probably not; I'd probably make too many enemies and "rock the boat" too much, disturbing the comfort of our ruling caste.
74 posted on 01/19/2014 10:12:21 PM PST by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson