Posted on 06/29/2013 12:48:40 PM PDT by Finny
I think they are ignoring people who act like 2 year old brats whenever things don’t go there way.. Like you
good post. the GOP-e will next begin in ernest to destroy “established” conservative opposition in their own party at the “red state” and local levels. there really is no choice. we must begin to transfer our existing conservative local power to a true conservative party.
I have no idea what your post has to do with my post...
My point which have seemed to have missed...is the democratic party is the enemy of conservatives because they embrace liberalism with abandonment...
Nowhere in my original post did I mention republicans...
At least part of the republican party (TP) do not embrace liberalism...whereas the dem party pretty much is the embodiment of liberalism...
Papa, I wish that language wasn't dynamic, and I wish that real roses didn't fade and the petals drop. But reality is reality. "Liberal" has taken on a new meaning as has the word "gay" and as has the word "gender." None of those three mean today what they meant originally. Oh well. Tell Mark Levin, or Rush, or Thomas Sowell to stop calling the left "liberals." Those guys know what the original meaning of "liberal" is, but they also recognize the dif between wishes and reality, that language is dynamic and even when they hate the redefinitions of words, it is a living force of nature entirely distinct from anyone's wishes.
Actually they are not all the same concept, fascism is different from communism, and so on. We need to call what is going on here what it is, not several different things, but what it actually happens to be. And what we have here is fascism.
I think now is as good as it’s ever going to get as far as timing. Hillary is inevitable. Might as well get a real third party going. Only problem is, will it be a libertarian third party or a Christian conservative third party?
At least part of the republican party (TP) do not embrace liberalism...whereas the dem party pretty much is the embodiment of liberalism...
Exactly true. Presidential candidates is where the Third Party can really do some good, and hope that by being left with only minority support, moderate and liberal candidates in the GOP will grow weaker, and limited government conservatism grow stronger. I vote R downticket (but am being more picky than I used to be).
I mean, a big part of this risk is that even if the Third Party candidate did win, if he/she won with a plurality, he/she would face the same difficulties of having been voted "against" by most Americans. But really -- risk is the price you pay for opportunity. There is ZERO, big fat donut hole, risk or opportunity in electing a liberal/progressive/Marxist/facist/insert-your-pet-word-here Republican president.
Or I have a better idea ... stop letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.
It takes a long time.
This is what has happened here in Canada over the last 27 years.
First came the Reform Party. http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/reform-party-of-canada
Then we talked a lot about “Uniting the right”, and they formed the Canadian Alliance.
http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/canadian-alliance
Which became the Conservative Party headed by Stephen Harper.
http://www.conservative.ca/
It is nowhere near as conservative as I would prefer, but it’s way ahead of whatever is in second place.
So is the GOP, apparently.
My error.
What wasted effort do you propose? I have faith that non-Progressive Democrats whose comments are legion on internet forums to recognize a candidate that presents a better alternative. The OBJECT is to split the vote so that the guaraanteed liberal/proressive/facist/socialist/leftist/what-have-you Republican or Democrat only gets a plurality and enters office with liberalism/progressivism/facism/socialism/leftism/your-favorite-word-here made weaker because most Americans voted "against" that president.
Anything more of a win than that is GRAVY.
Think Perot, and think outside of the box. Perot's effect, though unintended, was to WEAKEN Clinton and to give the Republican Revolution more momentum.
You ask about "plans." What plan do YOU have for weakening liberalism/socialism/facism/progressivism/whateveryouwanttocallit in American politics?
My PLAN is to make it weak and to make it lose in the GOP. What is YOUR plan?
To each his own. I sick of calling them what they aren’t. They’re socialists, and that’s a nice way of putting it (not on them personally, but on their belief in coercion of others to get what they want).
Ah, yes. Just did an “in forum” FR search on fennie. A TOTALLY different entity. Yikes! No, I am Finny, but more importantly, I am a disgruntled, disillusioned, FORMER loyal Republican voter.
Get in line. I don't like it any better than you do. The difference is I've accepted the sad truth that there's nothing you can do about language changing so that "they" are called what "they" aren't. I know that if you get too wrapped up in semantics, your message gets lost.
Totally okay.
I am sorry. My words were in error.
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.