Skip to comments.Conservative-GOP marriage over?
Posted on 05/07/2012 8:59:54 PM PDT by Bigtigermike
It should come as no surprise that the Republican National Committee has been covertly supporting Mitt Romney throughout the primaries, as POLITICO recently revealed. It was the worst-kept secret in Washington
Reagan, the über outsider, called for a new Republican Party back in 1977. Reagan wanted the GOP to shed its country club, corporate boardroom image and become a genuine conservative movement, focused on the individual.
Reagans words threatened the status quo of the scions and heiresses of the country club and corporate boardroom set. The former California governor and his conservative followers were never accepted by these insiders
The Republicans desire for power is usually stronger than any desire for restraint by conservatism. It always seems to leave conservatives disappointed.
Many conservatives have, in fact, decided that their beliefs have become permanently inconsistent with Republicanism. This may be more apparent in 2012 than ever before. No offense to Romney, but he is the perfect nominee for the Republican Party in 2012 because he like the GOP has adopted a variety of positions over the years in order to acquire power. The Etch A Sketch comment was stunningly accurate.
The lesser of two evils argument is now settling over the landscape. Perhaps. The conservatives have no place else to go storyline is being pushed. Maybe.
On the other hand, some conservatives now view this election as a clear Hobsons Choice or possibly a Mortons Fork. One choice is bad or nothing; the other between two bad options.
Conservatives should be clear-eyed, though. The job of the Republican Party is to deceive conservatives into handing over their support. This does not mean that conservatives cant arrive at the conclusion that this choice is between the lesser of two evils.
But they should prepare to be disappointed.
(Excerpt) Read more at dyn.politico.com ...
The anti-Prop 187 Kemp? the HUD Kemp who fought Costa Mesa when they tried to evict illegals from taxpayer subsidized housing? The Kemp who thanked Al Gore when Gore congratulated him on not being a nasty racist like most conservatives? The Kemp who routinely hectored conservatives on not being progressives on civil rights like he was?
No thanks. He would have been no improvement over the Bushes, just more of the same leftward drift.
The problem for us conservatives concerning Romney of course is that he has flip-flopped so many times on so many core issues that it is risky in the extreme to believe that he will not flip again once he obtains office with our support.
I believe his essential message is that he can fix the economy, the message, if you will, of the mechanic. I am not sure that people are listening to his position on immigration or taxes or his 59 point proposal the fix the economy, or on energy. As long as his positions are not so peculiar as to be remarkable, it is assumed without serious thought that he will behave reasonably.
But it is also true that in American politics the message cannot be separated from the man. That is how presidents get elected by the national voting block, especially the independents who are so decisive. That is probably why Truman defeated Dewey, Eisenhower defeated Stevenson, and Kennedy defeated Nixon. The people vote on the character of the man, or his charisma or some distillation of his essential character. I have often advocated that they should be far more mindful of his ideology but my pleas fall on stone deaf ears. We conservatives are far more likely to have a punch list of issues which a candidate must fulfill for our support. Independents, (forgive me) especially women, draw a subjective judgment of the man. Democrats are a mob whoring after the latest false Messiah.
So if the electorate sees Romney as a competent mechanic who can fix the economy and they see Obama as an ideologue, they will elect Romney. On the other hand if they see Romney as an opportunist who will cut and trim on every issue and they see Obama as likable, we know the result.
I suspect that we as conservatives will be moderately favorably surprised overall by Romney's decisions in office just as we were profoundly disappointed by many of the positions taken by George W. Bush in office.
>”The lesson [of Romney trying to speak as if he were a conservative] is that the conservative message does sell. Even when the sellers arent conservatives.”<
Frankly I didn’t pay much attention to what Romney was saying myself because he wasn’t anybody I was considering until it came down to him and Obama. I suppose he did do more of that than previously (hence the charges of flipflopping), and that did make it more difficult to label him a liberal. I don’t think voters really believed that he was more conservative than some of the others, though. So in choosing him they didn’t vote for conservatism itself.
I don’t know how much of what he said that sounds conservative he would really implement as President (probably not much), but I still support him. I think he’d be considerably better than Obama.
Disagree. And I have to defer to Gov Palin's acumen in all things political. I have yet to see her actually misstep, yet.
I remember plenty of people criticized Reagan walking out at Reykjavik, but who can doubt that move today
We're killin' 'em with the truth, man, and they've got nothing of substance to fight back with. It's truly pathetic.
Mitt Romney is the first and only presidential candidate I've seen in my lifetime whose supporters, in order not to fail the laugh test, absolutely must start every sentence with "Yeah, I hate him too, but..."
I avoid prognostication like the plague, but every bit of two a half decades of campaign experience tells me that such a campaign is absolutely doomed.
Breyer, who believes in applying the laws of other countries at our SCOTUS level so that we may be deemed civilized, is nonetheless not ALL BAD. He wrote the decision in which SCOTUS dismissed the most ancient case then still active in the federal courts: NOW vs. Joseph Scheidler on the basis that the Racketeering Statute (RICO) was not applicable to the actions of pro-lifers protesting at abortion mills. Breyer is by no means perfect but he IS capable of being a grown-up now and then which is better than Sandra Day O'Connor or David "Swish" Souter or John Paul Stevens or Herod "Ohhhh, the candle is flickering low!" Blackmun.
Herod Blackmun was the worst evil of them all and has claimed the deaths of 54 million (and counting) utterly innocent human beings to date. Blackmun made Hitler look like an amateur. That evil beats the hell out of increases in the federal budget or affirmative action schemes or any number of other things that acual conservatives may also care about.
#86: Last sentence: acual = actual
You hit it square...”if they are honest with themselves”. Most don’t recognize the precious the gifts we were given and how few of them truly remain.
“Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their country”...Its not just a typing exercise! Appreciate you guarding the wall and standing tall!
If the fix were in the fixers were far more clever than I am because, as a fixer, I don't think I would've permitted other candidates to take the lead over Romney three or four times and expect to get it back. It's time for Occam's razor to shape our thinking.
But I don't suppose my guesses are any more to be esteemed than anyone else's especially, as Yogi Berra said, about the future.
I do not concede that Gov. Tim Pawlenty was a "teaser horse." If you recall the media were searching everywhere for an alternative to Romney. One can dismiss them as disingenuous but the bulk of the electorate may not have recognized their deviousness and simply gave Tim Pawlenty no traction.
Why was Mitch Daniels the darling of the media, which should parallel the desires of the establishment Republican Party, if the fix for Romney was in fact dominating the day?
Romney had raised money, he had name recognition, he was the runner-up, or nearly so, behind McCain, he was telegenic, and he had, of all the candidates, been doing his homework for four years. These are all important considerations and they are the way nominations for the presidency in America are won and no one can legitimately infer from them the existence of a conspiracy.
I think we need to understand there is a GOP-E out there that has no place for conservatives who want a smaller government.
When guys like Paul Ryan in the House envision a balanced budget in ten plus years and get cheered as great conservatives, I can’t fathom that.
My own Senator Pat Toomey envisions a ten year path to a balanced budget that includes tax increases by closing “loopholes”.
What’s conservative about any of that???????
How about getting rid of EPA and OSHA? They are redundant with agencies that the states already have anyway.
The Department of Education and Department of Energy and more need to go......
Now that’s conservative and will help to balance the budget along with entitlement reforms.
The insiders want no immediate solution to the debt problem..
Why not now???????
What a pathetic litany.
To us in ‘flyover country’ Romney appears better than Obama and to many that’s all that counts to them
To those who like to retain access to the power brokers, the corrupt, the gravy train and the money machines in Washington D.C. sees Romney just the same as Obama and to many there that’s all that counts to them .
“>There are those here who seem to take it as axiomatic that whatever Obozo would appoint to SCOTUS and other courts must inevitably be worse that whatever Robozombie might appoint. That is the planted axiom.”<
Thanks for explaining because nothing in my posts in this thread referred to the Court, so there was no way I could have guessed that this was the planted axiom I was Fee, Fie, Fo Fummed for. :-) I did say in another thread a day or two ago, though, “I wouldnt like that either [Romney naming leftist justices]. I think the opposite is more likely, though that people would settle for a worse nominee from Obama than from Romney because theyd figure that would be the best they can get.” (I just say ‘likely’ because I don’t think we can know for sure.)
I don’t see why that would have to be a planted axiom, though. It may not have been consistently true, but I’d place Democrat presidents to the left of their Republican adversaries for the last half century at least, so I’d make that assumption on my own without anybody having to plant it. You can’t always tell how some of these justices will turn out, though.
The economy will drive many votes this year and Romney stands a good chance of winning without my vote.
But in the end the debt bomb is going to burst first in Europe and eventually here.
Austerity measures the GOP-E and Romney will support are probably going to resemble Europe’s with tax hikes alongside of spending cuts.
What are the people going to do then?????
Maybe they’ll be ready for that conservative third party that wants to eliminate government agencies and programs.
A third party that wants government downsized without tax hikes.
I can’t recall more disinformation coming from Republican candidates and “conservative media” at any time in the past, and yet you say we were not defrauded and that we lost fair and square? Nuts!
The Romneybots and the GOPe bought the nomination. They want him so bad, THEY elect him. I’ll have nothing to do with it.
My daughter, who is 28, said she rather have Obama for four more years than Romney for eight. I am so disappointed in the republican party. I don’t want Romney but I sure don’t want Obama. Not much of a choice.
Thank you for stating more eloquently than I would have the real answer here.
The TEA Party movement has been very clear from the beginning that the goal was to take over the Republican Party. We need to continue working at a local level to ensure conservative candidates end up in positions of political power.
The GOP has not nominated my first choice for President since 1984. That doesn't mean I'm going to take my marbles and go home.
I am sometimes tempted to switch to a party I can agree with 100% of the time, but I don't know where I would find a second member.
> I am sometimes tempted to switch to a party I can agree with 100% of the time, but I don’t know where I would find a second member.