[maxxoccupancy]

What does everyone think? Should we be a division of the Republican Party, or a separate caucus with its own platform, candidates, and conventions?

[mysto]

I've got my beeber set to stune...

The kitties wait patiently for the ZOT...

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Looks like the establishment Republicans are piling on!

[Carry_Okie]

I'm all for it, unless they endorse a third party and elect Hillary!

[john330]

When I first looked into the RLC it was because I was a life long Republican who developed a libertarian view. I remember at one time the RLC saying it was made up of libertarians who saw the Republican party as the best tool for spreading their philosophy, and for seeing it enacted. I agree with this.

The third party route is a sure fire route to political obscurity. Within the GOP is the best route for these principles to be spread. The important thing is the spread of the principles, but the need for majorities to accomplish an agenda makes alliances with a major party necessary.

A third party would ensure the win of our opponents and the shelving of our agenda. If you are willing to shelve the agenda to claim the moral high-ground then go ahead, but don't be surprised when you get nothing done.

[A CA Guy]

I think if you want change, you try to make it in the Republican primaries, then after the result of the primary, it's time to vote Republican and not to split up the conservative vote.

[A CA Guy]

I think it is best to make any attempts at change in the primaries as a third party.
After that, everyone is a weasel if they don't vote Republican, because not doing so enables Democrats power.

On the city level, if a RLC or Libertarian wants to run for Dog Catcher and not go for a Republican, that is cool IMO.

[spikeytx86]

I think that the RLC is good in that it is one of the last outposts of fiscal sanity in our party. My main problem with the RLC is that it is a tool for libertarians to run as a mainstream candidate to win elections. They are by the very definition of the word RINO's. They hold no real loyalty to the party or its principals and do not really try to improve the party but to mainly use it as a election tool.

However, I also don't think the republican party should purge those who do not meat the purity test. I think the republican party must fight to remain a purely conservative party, but there are many degrees of conservatism and not just moral conservatives (who if you take there votes for the FMA away,look no different then democrats!).

Basically I don't have a problem with RLC I have a problem with libertarians exploiting the party for political gain.

[Rick_Michael]

What does everyone think? Should we be a division of the Republican Party, or a separate caucus with its own platform, candidates, and conventions?

---

I think the RLC and the economic conservative base of the Republican party is essential to a long-term goal of shrinking the government. It also forces dems to assimilate to moderate views in economics (in most cases). Dems are splitting up, while Repubs seem to hold strong.

Particular parts of the RLC have to be emphasized. The RLC seems to pursue a relatively friendly 'social' position for most conservatives, with a more libertarian-like view of government size.

It has been very potent in gathering small 'l' libertarians in to the Republican party. Since libertarians vary widely in social views, it garners those on the fence. People such as myself whom could be most aptly indentified as 'moderate libertarian conservatives', are essential to the rebirth of our more affluent history. Prior to socialism birth in America, our country was dominated by a libertarian and conservative arguement. I do think the RLC should remain connect to the Republican party, and we should support each other on values that see us fit. Hopefully within time we could make the extreme left just a thing of the past.

[MNJohnnie]

separate political group that supports libertarians, constitutionalists, reform party members, and independents

Yeah, split your minority group into an even smaller group so you can go from being marginally influential to complete political irrelevance. Where DO you nut jobs come up with this crap? This is so utterly wonderfully stupid an idea you MUST be a Democrat.

[PoetPatriot]

There is too much apathy among the voters to see a value of a third party. The RLC is and will be a much more effective force if it maintains itself as a coalition within the Republican Party.
The Democrat Party has leaped to left that once was considered "off the wall" and not given any credence. As people realize this they will need to consider the other party.
The "third parties" have no power and if to effect change to promote their agenda they will have to work within one of the bigger parties. Many of the fringe left organizations have learned this and work for the democrats.
The two party system is here to stay for some time yet.
- Roger W Hancock - www.PoetPatriot.com

[WhiteGuy]

Each candidate should be judged on his or her merit without regard for party.

The RLC seems to be offering a good option.

[boycottmovies]

one more for our side. By the way, we've decided to take a trick from the Dems playbook, and have stopped going to movies. Why subsidize an industry devoted to pressing the hard left Democratic agenda? Anyone agree with this?

[SeanGrebey]

Without reading through all of this, I'd say trying to opt out of the Republican party is a huge mistake. I would guess the LP and The Constitution Party already cover most of what the base of the RLC is in third party form. I would think that there are way more advantages to sticking within the party. I always thought of third parties as being more about activism than actual results.

[Sam Ketcham]

Not an authority, but sounds great to me. I just joined and never lurked in this thread before. I think we need a third party Republican primarily but one that is forth right, sticks to its promises and tells you up front what they stand for.