Skip to comments.The GOP has left me.
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.
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.
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.
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.
“...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?
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.
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....
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.
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.
I agree with you.
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.
I think the problem is that the people in government begin to believe that government is the solution instead of the problem.
What language do they speak on Fantasy Island?
So we should just throw in the towel then and adopt the Arnold strategy.
"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...
Hope this clarifies,
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?
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.
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.
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."
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.
Simple integrity isn’t extremism. What made your mind dart in that strange direction?
Did somebody say thing? Is there something good on TV?
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.
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?
Suit yourself, but no sniveling later.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
Stick around Natural Law...
You’ll be happy to have a strong conservative voice like Fred Thompson advocating genuine conservatism.
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.
Fully absorbed - now what about the other 90% of us?
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?
I understand that fine. It's just that the nuttiest 3% has no moral right to jack things up for the other 97%.
Thank you, Melas. You are right, of course.
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.
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.
And we've "had our feet on their necks for too long."
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.
A picture says a thousand words “ ha, ha, ha, ha, we fu#@ed them again”! Dispicable humans!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.