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

To: JamesP81
That’s asking the base to accept a pro-gay marriage, pro-gun control, pro-abortion candidate as president.

If the base cannot get "their" candidate nominated, then, excuse me, what should the Party do?

If the views of the base are not the views of the majority of primary voters, on what basis does the minority claim that the majority is illegitimate?

You asked: is it "all about retaining power by any means necessary"? No. But it is about retaining (or regaining) power by the legitimate exercise of personal responsibility for the good of the country.

Doesn't someone, some party always retain (or regain) power in an election? Is there something wrong with that?

If one party is even a nanometer better, or potentially better for the country, than the other party, is there something wrong with desiring that that better party retain (or regain) power?

Is there something good or morally superior about losing power within the context of our constitutional political process?

53 posted on 05/17/2007 10:07:38 PM PDT by wouldntbprudent (HONK IF YOU'VE SACKED TROY SMITH.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies ]


To: wouldntbprudent
"..what should the Party do?"

They could try listening to their base.

However, seeing as how they are hell-bent on self-immolation, they don't need to.

72 posted on 05/18/2007 6:12:37 AM PDT by Designer (growing weary of this already)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | 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