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

Skip to comments.

The GOP has left me.
Self | Juse 1, 2007 | Natural Law

Posted on 06/01/2007 5:22:56 PM PDT by Natural Law

I am really getting sick of the "Whiny Bitch" wing of the GOP blaming its conservative base for losing control of both houses and now undermining the party further by not continuing to fund or vote for a more slow descent into socialism. This shows a complete lack of integrity on their part.

I for one refuse to vote for a Democrat, even when they call themselves a Republican, no especially when they call themselves a Republican. In fact, I would vote for a Democrat before I would a RINO because they at least have the integrity to admit to what they are. I for damned sure refuse to give them any campaign contributions when they have demonstrated that they can't manage the tax dollars they collect in the trillions.

Ronald Reagan, who began as a Democrat, once said he didn't leave the Democrat party, it left him. Me withholding my votes and financial support for the Republican Party isn't because I have changed political philosophy or party affiliation. I am withholding my votes and supports because the Republican Party has morphed into the Democrat Party.

The Whiny Bitch wing will say that there is no alternative and that not voting means that the Democrat Party (the old one that has now morphed into the Socialist Party) will prevail. The Democrat Party, or at least its principles, is prevailing anyway. One only need look at the actual status of Secure borders, immigration reform, government spending, balance of trade, energy self-sufficiency, whacko environmentalism, and voter fraud to see this.

If the GOP doesn't right itself will fade to irrelevance and will be replaced by a conservative party. When either of these two options happen I will again break out the check book and resume voting. Until then I will refrain.


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: amnesty; conservatism; elections; gop; illegalimmigration; wastedvanity
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-178 next last
To: Natural Law

Hmmmm....I’ve been thinking a lot about the same thing in the past few months. Bush seems to have gone south on us in a big time way. I war effort is OK, but the immigation bill is a disaster waiting to happen that will compound the real problem, not eliminate it.

It makes me wonder if people in power start to think of themselves as far and above their party affiliation - that what they personally believe is far more important than what the party believes. Immigation could have been fixed in small steps - securing the border first - it’s just a no-brainer with virtually no lack of support from the party or Americans in general.

We all tend to think that we are smarter than most politicians - now I’m beginning to think that that is true.

For years, I’ve never thought that I’d be on the other side of Bush - now, I am.


51 posted on 06/01/2007 5:54:00 PM PDT by Sonora
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

My point is that what passes for the conventional wisdom on FR is rejected my many, many people. And that an amalgam of the typical Freeper’s values would appeal to probably not much more than 1-2% of the population.

What’s the historical trend in 2008? I think that a traditional GOP candidate tops out at around 200 EVs. Nothing much has changed with the GOP since election 2006. Most of the country thinks the GOP sucks. In some cases they are right. The good news is that they seem to be accepting hat the dems suck, too.

I don’t see how any of that necessarily helps us.


52 posted on 06/01/2007 5:56:09 PM PDT by HitmanLV ("Lord, give me chastity and temperance, but not now." - St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: HitmanLV
In 1980, I voted for Carter.

I was in the Army that year.

One day I ran into another trooper who was quite annoyed with me when I defended Carter and certain of his policies.

In time, I came to realize that I totally had my head up my butt, and I recognized that I had been so wrong about the man Carter.

I cannot undo the conversation that I had back then, but I am sorry now.

When Reagan won almost every state, I realized that I was missing something. I realized it even more later, Big Time.

I’ll try to not be so naive again in the future. I’ll try to explain it to future voters as well.

53 posted on 06/01/2007 5:56:16 PM PDT by Radix (Lighting a flame to dead leaves, and inhaling the toxic vapors associated is pretty dumb.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law

“...I would vote for a Democrat before I would a RINO because they at least have the integrity to admit to what they are....”

What RAT has integrity? What RAT ever admitted he was a flaming socialist?


54 posted on 06/01/2007 5:58:13 PM PDT by Zman516 (socialists & muslims -- satan's useful idiots.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kevao

1980 was a powerful rejection of Carter and the dems. 1984 was a powerful conservative victory, but the electorate kicked the GOP out of power in the senate two short years later. 1988 was a third term for Reagan that didn’t materialize.

1984 was a long time ago. The country isn’t as conservative as it was back then, sorry.


55 posted on 06/01/2007 5:58:33 PM PDT by HitmanLV ("Lord, give me chastity and temperance, but not now." - St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law
IF this Congress passes amnesty, the GOP will cease to exist.....

Even if everyone stayed with the party and everyone voted Republican, it still won't be good enough to beat the Mexican vote being added to the RAT party....

The IDIOTS in the GOP think they will keep their jobs because they think the Mexicans will vote for them, but they are dead wrong....

56 posted on 06/01/2007 5:59:29 PM PDT by NRA2BFree ("The time is near at hand which must determine whether Americans are to be free men or slaves!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LasVegasMac
"2006 “We can punish republicans for not being conservative enough to suit our tastes.”

That worked out well, didn't it?

As Abraham Lincoln once said: "If you call a tail a leg, how many legs has a dog? Four, because calling a tail a leg doesn't make it one." Calling that pack of RINO's republicans doesn't make them Republicans when their actions clearly make them Democrats.

57 posted on 06/01/2007 6:00:53 PM PDT by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: durasell

There is a remarkable inability for either side’s most dogged, dedicated soldiers to cope with the realities on the ground. Welcome to Fantasy Island.


58 posted on 06/01/2007 6:01:26 PM PDT by HitmanLV ("Lord, give me chastity and temperance, but not now." - St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Radix

I agree with you.


59 posted on 06/01/2007 6:01:55 PM PDT by HitmanLV ("Lord, give me chastity and temperance, but not now." - St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: HitmanLV
Whatever.

You can support the candidate who'll promise everything to everyone with only negligible differences between his/her opponent, and I'll support the candidate who's able to draw a sharp contrast and is confident that his beliefs are the right approach.

We'll see who wins.

60 posted on 06/01/2007 6:02:03 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Sonora
"It makes me wonder if people in power start to think of themselves as far and above their party affiliation"

I think the problem is that the people in government begin to believe that government is the solution instead of the problem.

61 posted on 06/01/2007 6:02:51 PM PDT by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: HitmanLV

What language do they speak on Fantasy Island?

Three dialects:

Bumper Sticker
Sound Bite
Worn Cliche


62 posted on 06/01/2007 6:03:03 PM PDT by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: HitmanLV
The country isn’t as conservative as it was back then, sorry

So we should just throw in the towel then and adopt the Arnold strategy.

63 posted on 06/01/2007 6:03:05 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist; HitmanLV
Originally posted by Extremely Extreme Extremist:

"Part of the GOP's loss in the mid-terms was due to historical trends. Nobody likes to see one party in control of government. (albeit, technically there is a one-party, they're just divided by halves)..."


That's strange. Historically the "American people" have been in favor of a single party dominating all three of the elected branches of the Federal government - the Presidency, the House of Representatives and the Senate. How can I say that? Well the historical record says that around 63% of the time since 1789 a single political party has been put in charge of the entire Federal government. So why do people keep insisting that the 'American People' do not wish one party in charge? Never heard this bitching about 'single party' control under FDR, JFK, LBJ, Carter or Clinton, did you... Hmmmn, I sense a pattern here... could it be they were all Democrats? Ah, that explains it.

There have been five major political parties in the history of the United States, the Federalists, the Democratic-Republicans, the Democrats, the Whigs and the Republicans. Each of these major parties has in at least one Congress controlled the House, Senate and Presidency concurrently. This is what has defined them as major parties...



Party Control of Presidency, House and Senate
1789 to 2007


Congress Years_Term President Presidential Party House Majority Party Senate Majority Party The Big Tri-Fecta
1st 1789-1791 Washington No Party Administration Administration *
2nd 1791-1793 Washington No Party Administration Administration *
3rd 1793-1795 Washington No Party Opposition Administration  
4th 1795-1797 Washington No Party Opposition Administration  
5th 1797-1799 Adams(2) Federalist Dem-Reps Federalist  
6th 1799-1801 Adams(2) Federalist Federalist Federalist *
7th 1801-1803 Jefferson Dem-Reps Dem-Reps Dem-Reps *
8th 1803-1805 Jefferson Dem-Reps Dem-Reps Dem-Reps *
9th 1805-1807 Jefferson Dem-Reps Dem-Reps Dem-Reps *
10th 1807-1809 Jefferson Dem-Reps Dem-Reps Dem-Reps *
11th 1809-1811 Madison Dem-Reps Dem-Reps Dem-Reps *
12th 1811-1813 Madison Dem-Reps Dem-Reps Dem-Reps *
13th 1814-1815 Madison Dem-Reps Dem-Reps Dem-Reps *
14th 1815-1817 Madison Dem-Reps Dem-Reps Dem-Reps *
15th 1817-1819 Monroe Dem-Reps Dem-Reps Dem-Reps *
16th 1819-1821 Monroe Dem-Reps Dem-Reps Dem-Reps *
17th 1821-1823 Monroe Dem-Reps Dem-Reps Dem-Reps *
18th 1823-1825 Monroe Dem-Reps Dem-Reps Dem-Reps *
19th 1825-1827 Adams(6) Dem-Reps Dem-Reps Dem-Reps *
20th 1827-1829 Adams(6) Dem-Reps Dem-Reps Dem-Reps *
21st 1829-1831 Jackson Democrat Democrat Democrat *
22nd 1831-1833 Jackson Democrat Democrat Democrat *
23rd 1834-1835 Jackson Democrat Democrat Whig  
24th 1835-1837 Jackson Democrat Democrat Democrat *
25th 1837-1839 Van-Buren Democrat Democrat Democrat *
26th 1839-1841 Van-Buren Democrat Whig Democrat  
27th 1841-1843 Harrison(9)/Tyler Whig Whig Whig *
28th 1843-1845 Tyler Whig Democrat Whig  
29th 1845-1847 Polk Democrat Democrat Democrat *
30th 1847-1849 Polk Democrat Whig Democrat  
31st 1849-1851 Taylor/Filmore Whig Democrat Democrat  
32nd 1851-1853 Filmore Whig Democrat Democrat  
33rd 1853-1855 Pierce Democrat Democrat Democrat *
34th 1855-1857 Pierce Democrat Republican Democrat  
35th 1857-1859 Buchanan Democrat Democrat Democrat *
36th 1859-1861 Buchanan Democrat Republican Democrat  
37th 1861-1863 Lincoln Republican Republican Republican *
38th 1863-1865 Lincoln Republican Republican Republican *
39th 1865-1867 Lincoln/Johnson(17) Republican* Republican Republican *
40th 1867-1869 Johnson(17) Republican* Republican Republican *
41st 1869-1871 Grant Republican Republican Republican *
42nd 1871-1873 Grant Republican Republican Republican *
43rd 1873-1875 Grant Republican Republican Republican *
44th 1875-1877 Grant Republican Democrat Republican  
45th 1877-1879 Hayes Republican Democrat Republican  
46th 1879-1881 Hayes Republican Democrat Republican  
47th 1881-1883 Garfield/Arthur Republican Republican Republican *
48th 1883-1885 Arthur Republican Democrat Republican  
49th 1885-1887 Cleveland(22) Democrat Democrat Republican  
50th 1887-1889 Cleveland(22) Democrat Democrat Republican  
51st 1889-1891 Harrison(23) Republican Republican Republican *
52nd 1891-1893 Harrison(23) Republican Democrat Republican  
53rd 1893-1895 Cleveland(24) Democrat Democrat Republican  
54th 1895-1897 Cleveland(24) Democrat Republican Republican  
55th 1897-1899 McKinley Republican Republican Republican *
56th 1899-1901 McKinley Republican Republican Republican *
57th 1901-1903 McKinley/Roosevelt(26) Republican Republican Republican *
58th 1903-1905 Roosevelt(26) Republican Republican Republican *
59th 1905-1907 Roosevelt(26) Republican Republican Republican *
60th 1907-1909 Roosevelt(26) Republican Republican Republican *
61st 1909-1911 Taft Republican Republican Republican *
62nd 1911-1913 Taft Republican Democrat Republican  
63rd 1913-1915 Wilson Democrat Democrat Republican  
64th 1915-1917 Wilson Democrat Democrat Democrat *
65th 1917-1919 Wilson Democrat Republican Democrat  
66th 1919-1921 Wilson Democrat Republican Republican  
67th 1921-1923 Harding/Coolidge Republican Republican Republican *
68th 1923-1925 Coolidge Republican Republican Republican *
69th 1925-1927 Coolidge Republican Republican Republican *
70th 1927-1929 Coolidge Republican Republican Republican *
71st 1929-1931 Hoover Republican Republican Republican *
72nd 1931-1933 Hoover Republican Republican Republican *
73rd 1933-1935 Roosevelt(32) Democrat Democrat Democrat *
74th 1935-1937 Roosevelt(32) Democrat Democrat Democrat *
75th 1937-1939 Roosevelt(32) Democrat Democrat Democrat *
76th 1939-1941 Roosevelt(32) Democrat Democrat Democrat *
77th 1941-1943 Roosevelt(32) Democrat Democrat Democrat *
78th 1943-1945 Roosevelt(32) Democrat Democrat Democrat *
79th 1945-1947 Roosevelt(32)/Truman Democrat Democrat Democrat *
80th 1947-1949 Truman Democrat Republican Democrat  
81st 1949-1951 Truman Democrat Democrat Democrat *
82nd 1951-1953 Truman Democrat Democrat Democrat *
83rd 1953-1955 Eisenhower Republican Republican Republican *
84th 1955-1957 Eisenhower Republican Democrat Democrat  
85th 1957-1959 Eisenhower Republican Democrat Democrat  
86th 1959-1961 Eisenhower Republican Democrat Democrat  
87th 1961-1963 Kennedy Democrat Democrat Democrat *
88th 1963-1965 Kennedy/Johnson(36) Democrat Democrat Democrat *
89th 1965-1967 Johnson(36) Democrat Democrat Democrat *
90th 1967-1969 Johnson(36) Democrat Democrat Democrat *
91st 1969-1971 Nixon Republican Democrat Democrat  
92nd 1971-1973 Nixon Republican Democrat Democrat  
93rd 1973-1975 Nixon/Ford Republican Democrat Democrat  
94th 1975-1977 Ford Republican Democrat Democrat  
95th 1977-1979 Carter Democrat Democrat Democrat *
96th 1979-1981 Carter Democrat Democrat Democrat *
97th 1981-1983 Reagan Republican Democrat Republican  
98th 1983-1985 Reagan Republican Democrat Republican  
99th 1985-1987 Reagan Republican Democrat Republican  
100th 1987-1989 Reagan Republican Democrat Democrat  
101st 1989-1991 Bush(41) Republican Democrat Democrat  
102nd 1991-1993 Bush(41) Republican Democrat Democrat  
103rd 1993-1995 Clinton Democrat Democrat Democrat *
104th 1995-1997 Clinton Democrat Republican Republican  
105th 1997-1999 Clinton Democrat Republican Republican  
106th 1999-2001 Clinton Democrat Republican Republican  
107th 2001-2003 Bush(43) Republican Republican Rep/Dem */no
108th 2003-2005 Bush(43) Republican Republican Republican *
107th 2005-2007 Bush(43) Republican Republican Republican *



Hope this clarifies,

dvwjr

64 posted on 06/01/2007 6:04:02 PM PDT by dvwjr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: HitmanLV
A hardcore conservative new party would do about as well as a hardcore liberal new party. Most people aren’t that extreme.

Look at that...now simple integrity has become extremism.

Wouldn't it be nice if, for once, Republicans would actually pursue the party platform? I mean, just now and again, for form's sake?

65 posted on 06/01/2007 6:05:58 PM PDT by Oberon (What does it take to make government shrink?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

I never suggested promising everything to everyone.

I do advocate our elected leaders at least reflect the values of the majority, even if the majority has come t a different conclusion that I have.

Conservatives like the federal system because they like the idea that states should decide many policy positions. We are right in that respect. But there are many, many cases where those states are going to tell conservatives and their values to go to hell. It’s called losing. Under that setup, we will win many times and lose many times. That’s fine with me, it’s the nature of the social contract.

Will stick up the arse conservatives take rejection and defeat as well as stick up the arse liberals take rejection and defeat?? From what I see on FR, my guess is ‘yes.’

And that really sucks.


66 posted on 06/01/2007 6:06:16 PM PDT by HitmanLV ("Lord, give me chastity and temperance, but not now." - St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

We should have our ideas compete in the marketplace of ideas, make the case, and let the people decide. When we win, good. When we lose, have the fortitude and maturity to cope with it.

And times change. We may lose today and win tomorrow. And we may win today and lose tomorrow.


67 posted on 06/01/2007 6:07:37 PM PDT by HitmanLV ("Lord, give me chastity and temperance, but not now." - St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: HitmanLV
"A hardcore conservative new party would do about as well as a hardcore liberal new party. Most people aren’t that extreme. The sooner some folks can absorb that, the better."

You mistakenly believe that those who are fed up with Bush are "hard core conservative." You're wrong. Though it's obvious the elitist Republicans detest conservatives, the "peasant" class and a sovereign America. BTW, please define "extreme."

68 posted on 06/01/2007 6:07:38 PM PDT by EverOnward
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: HitmanLV

Methinks your voice is lost in the wilderness my friend. It won’t be heard. You’re right of course, but it won’t be heard.


69 posted on 06/01/2007 6:08:00 PM PDT by Melas (Offending stupid people since 1963)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Oberon

Simple integrity isn’t extremism. What made your mind dart in that strange direction?


70 posted on 06/01/2007 6:08:55 PM PDT by HitmanLV ("Lord, give me chastity and temperance, but not now." - St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Melas; HitmanLV

Did somebody say thing? Is there something good on TV?


71 posted on 06/01/2007 6:09:05 PM PDT by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: HitmanLV
The country isn’t as conservative as it was back then, sorry.

I believe it's only the political parties that aren't as conservative as they used to be, and that a majority of the population is still essentially conservative.

If I'm wrong, and you're right, then nothing we say or do really matters anyway. The slow (or rapid, if the amnesty passes) slide into socialism is inevitable.

72 posted on 06/01/2007 6:09:26 PM PDT by kevao
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law
I for one refuse to vote for a Democrat, even when they call themselves a Republican

Given a choice between a Rino that votes for this Bush/Kennedy immigration bill and a Democrat, I will write in John Galt.

It would be great fun after the elections to hear the Rinos asking: Who is John Galt?

73 posted on 06/01/2007 6:09:29 PM PDT by RJL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dvwjr
Your post is misleading.
74 posted on 06/01/2007 6:10:11 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law

Suit yourself, but no sniveling later.


75 posted on 06/01/2007 6:11:23 PM PDT by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HitmanLV
You may need to do some absorbing yourself:

The far left usually votes in the Demoratic candidate and the far right usually votes in the Republican candidate. The sooner you absorb that, the better.

The 'extremist' show up and vote in Primary election and the general. The 'not so extreme' hardly ever shows up to a primary and can miss the general, if the lines are long, it is raining, or they have something better to do.

I don't understand why it is so hard for people to understand that you have to keep your base happy. If you make the base digtruntled and you don't want to make them happy, then you better start building another base. If the Republicans do that and they do not support Life, Guns, and God this Conservative leaves the Party because I will not compromise these principles.
76 posted on 06/01/2007 6:11:43 PM PDT by do the dhue (May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I wont - George S. Patton Jr)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: dvwjr
Well the historical record says that around 63% of the time since 1789 a single political party has been put in charge of the entire Federal government.

Nice chart and all that, but this sentence IS the problem.'SINCE 1789'. Didn't take long for political parties to screw up a GREAT Constitution by not heeding the warning of the founding fathers to NOT form these parties, certainly not one or two running everything. We had slavery for a couple hundred years on this continent too, doesn't mean we must keep making the same mistake.

77 posted on 06/01/2007 6:11:58 PM PDT by AuntB (" It takes more than walking across the border to be an American." Duncan Hunter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
You really don't get it, do you. Conservatism isn't "hard-core" like you think it is. Everyone believes in low taxes, limited government, traditional values, strong defense. These are the tried-and-true beliefs that have sustained our nation since it's birth.

Oh come on, he's not talking about geniune convervatives who hold on to genuine conservative principles and you know it. He's referring to the Bircheresque wing of radicals on the far far right. We can pretend that they don't exist all day long, but they're out there.

78 posted on 06/01/2007 6:12:25 PM PDT by Melas (Offending stupid people since 1963)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

Why?

I guess that the politics of 100 years ago means nothing today. After all we now have computers, TV, space travel, welfare, etc... We are so much more politically sophisticated than the generation of the Founding Fathers.

Right?

dvwjr


79 posted on 06/01/2007 6:13:10 PM PDT by dvwjr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: EverOnward

Extreme is something that turns most people off because it is too draconian, impractical, or advocated by what come across as assholes.

So for example, the idea to shore up the borders could probably gain a lot of public support. How you go about it might alienate people. Alienate enough people and you don’t have the mandate anymore.


80 posted on 06/01/2007 6:15:08 PM PDT by HitmanLV ("Lord, give me chastity and temperance, but not now." - St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: jaredt112
I want a party and politicians with actual solutions and a can-do attitude instead of a “minimize the damage” milquetoast approach to every problem that the RINO’s take. Take the immigration issue for example. Instead of believing in Adam Smith’s “invisible hand” they say that nothing can be done because you “can’t arrest and deport 11 million illegals. A real conservative would know that the government is not the only or best solution to everything and that when the cost and risk of being in the US exceeded the benefits the illegals would find equally efficient ways to sneak back into Mexico en masse.
81 posted on 06/01/2007 6:16:02 PM PDT by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Melas

Just trying to make some sense out of what I see on FR, brother. Oh well!

Chuck Lidell let me down. Jackson will be a good champ, though.


82 posted on 06/01/2007 6:16:08 PM PDT by HitmanLV ("Lord, give me chastity and temperance, but not now." - St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: AuntB

OK. Now you have a data chart. Pick your start date as to when the ‘American People’ started to care about maintaining ‘divided government’ and then calculate the percentages.

The key of course is determining when the electorate became politically ‘aware’ and wanted to prevent single-party control of the Federal Government.

So when is your ‘start’ date?

dvwjr


83 posted on 06/01/2007 6:18:07 PM PDT by dvwjr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: jaredt112

Stick around Natural Law...

You’ll be happy to have a strong conservative voice like Fred Thompson advocating genuine conservatism.


84 posted on 06/01/2007 6:18:13 PM PDT by Mister Politics (www.misterpolitics.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kevao
a majority of the population is still essentially conservative.

Like I said, in a range where 100 is fruit loopy liberal, 0 is moderate, and +100 is cocopuff conservative, I think a majority instinctively rates at about a +10 or +15 or so. Though that can range between -25 and +25. Right now, it's hard to figure, but I think they are at -5 or so.

If we didn't have terrorist bad guys around, it might be at -15.

85 posted on 06/01/2007 6:18:28 PM PDT by HitmanLV ("Lord, give me chastity and temperance, but not now." - St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: do the dhue
The far left usually votes in the Demoratic candidate and the far right usually votes in the Republican candidate. The sooner you absorb that, the better.

Fully absorbed - now what about the other 90% of us?

86 posted on 06/01/2007 6:19:35 PM PDT by HitmanLV ("Lord, give me chastity and temperance, but not now." - St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Melas
Oh come on, he's not talking about geniune convervatives who hold on to genuine conservative principles and you know it.

Could've fooled me.

He's referring to the Bircheresque wing of radicals on the far far right.

ROFL. Let me guess - they ride pickup trucks with Confederate flags on them, looking for minorities to harm too right?

87 posted on 06/01/2007 6:19:51 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: do the dhue
I don't understand why it is so hard for people to understand that you have to keep your base happy.

I understand that fine. It's just that the nuttiest 3% has no moral right to jack things up for the other 97%.

88 posted on 06/01/2007 6:20:35 PM PDT by HitmanLV ("Lord, give me chastity and temperance, but not now." - St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Melas
He's referring to the Bircheresque wing of radicals on the far far right. We can pretend that they don't exist all day long, but they're out there.

Thank you, Melas. You are right, of course.

89 posted on 06/01/2007 6:21:17 PM PDT by HitmanLV ("Lord, give me chastity and temperance, but not now." - St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: usmcobra
Bye, I hope you enjoy the next eight years of Hillary.

The more liberal the GOP leadership becomes, the less conservatives are going to respond to that threat. Scare tactics go only so far, and given recent events I'm not sure your message is going to resonate with anyone. The GOP had better start figuring out how to get people to vote FOR its politicians instead of trying to demonize the Dems.

90 posted on 06/01/2007 6:22:56 PM PDT by NittanyLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: usmcobra
Bingo! If that election had swung the other way, there would be more votes against today’s amnesty bill. More outrage isn’t going to fix the problem.
91 posted on 06/01/2007 6:23:09 PM PDT by ishabibble (ALL AMERICAN INFIDEL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: HitmanLV
It's just that the nuttiest 3% has no moral right to jack things up for the other 97%.

I can understand claiming that "jacking things up" is shortsighted, counterproductive, etc. But "no moral right"? Who are you trying to kid? Individuals are under no moral obligation to support a candidate simply because others happen to do so.

92 posted on 06/01/2007 6:24:59 PM PDT by NittanyLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist; Melas
ROFL. Let me guess - they ride pickup trucks with Confederate flags on them, looking for minorities to harm too right?

And we've "had our feet on their necks for too long."

93 posted on 06/01/2007 6:25:46 PM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: dvwjr
I guess that the politics of 100 years ago means nothing today.

Apparently you fail to recognize that the party in power at the sixth year have lost seats in Congress since the FDR administration. That's what I was referring to.

94 posted on 06/01/2007 6:25:55 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: Diogenesis

A picture says a thousand words “ ha, ha, ha, ha, we fu#@ed them again”! Dispicable humans!


95 posted on 06/01/2007 6:26:55 PM PDT by ronnie raygun (I'd rather be hunting with dick than driving with ted)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: NittanyLion

I’m sorry if I didn’t make myself clear. All i meant to say was that a cocopuff conservative fringe or fruit loopy liberal fringe have no moral authority to screw up everyone else.

Has nothing to do with supporting candidates. It has to do with an overstatement of their policy positions, and a complete disregard for everyone else.


96 posted on 06/01/2007 6:28:16 PM PDT by HitmanLV ("Lord, give me chastity and temperance, but not now." - St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law
The GOP has left me.

If the Democratic Party could leave Ronald Reagan...
the GOP could leave many of us folks that simply want secure borders
and a transparent and deliberative (thoughtful and slow) approach
to anything foisted on us as "comprehensive immigration reform".

I bet the GOP weasels trying to push this Bravo Sierra are SHOCKED to
to find that their base recollects what a mess the Simpson-Mazzoli bill
of 1986 brought to us.

Including massive fraud that included amnesty for that red-beared Muslim
that participated in the first Islamic Assault on The World Trade
Center in 1993.
97 posted on 06/01/2007 6:29:35 PM PDT by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HitmanLV
I would refine your scale slightly to recognize the issues. On social issues, I would put the typical voter at -20 to -30. On economic issues, -10 and on defense/terror issues +10 to +20. The typical voter wants the President to take care of the economy, protect the country, and stay out his or her personal life.

Frankly the more excited the FR becomes about a candidate, the more likely the moderate independents become nervous. I don't like it but I think that is the current state of the electorate.

98 posted on 06/01/2007 6:31:00 PM PDT by CommerceComet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law

Count me in with you. The Ronald Reagan quote has stuck in my mind all day.

I voted for GW twice, working very hard for him in ‘04. After he was elected he said he would use his political capital.

I just didn’t know until this week that he would use it against me.

So, he’s the enemy now. He has failed to discharge his duties as the Chief Executive and to enforce immigration laws. He has an idiot like Chertoff, who oversees border agents like the one on the Canadian border, who thinks he is a medical doctor and lets in a Typhoid Mary type without even consulting a supervisor. ICE can’t handle 50,000 legal immigrants a year, how the hell are they going to handle 12-20 million new visa applications and track them for 13 years. They are out of their minds!!!

So, no one can accuse me of being disloyal. I stayed on the train as long as I could. But I’m done now.

He’s made his stand. And I’m making mine.

I called the White House contact line today and told the screener that GW needs to get a copy of the Wall Street Journal and read Peggy Noonan’s column today. That’s how I feel.

In NJ, I saw how the liberal RINOs systematically shut out conservative Republicans, until now NJ will forever be Democratic. Now, the RNC is doing the same thing o n a national basis.

Unless Fred Thompson or Duncan Hunter get the Republican nod next year, they are doomed as a party. Two terms of Hillary Clinton, an arch criminal, will spell the end of our Republic, unless a second American Revolution takes place.

If they’re stupid enough to jump off the political cliff, then I’m going to let them. They don’t care about me. And I’m tired of being used time after time by the Republicans and getting nothing in return.

When I moved to Delaware last year, I changed my registration to Independent from Republican.

Now we are involved in a fight for our very nation. And we can’t slack off until this legislation is deader than a dorrnail.

Being blamed for not doing what’s right for America, is the last straw.


99 posted on 06/01/2007 6:31:55 PM PDT by exit82 (Sheryl Crow is on a roll)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

But your post said nothing about the ‘sixth year’ losses. It said mid-term losses. Every president has at least one mid-term election; only two term presidents have a second mid-term election.

Did I miss your ‘sixth year’ or ‘second mid-term’ election?

My point stands.

dvwjr


100 posted on 06/01/2007 6:33:08 PM PDT by dvwjr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-178 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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