Conservatives Won't Win Elections by Refusing To Compromise

Townhall.com ^ | May 28, 2014 | Dr Ben Carson

[nathanbedford]

Ronald Reagan, as you have alluded, was more successful in electioneering then in governing, although he had great success as President. One need only cite his roles in the restoration of the economy and winning the Cold War to establish that case.

I contend that Ronald Reagan practiced two virtues which greatly contributed to his success in governing: First, he carried the country with him so that when he had to call upon Republican Rinos to support his programs they had no choice but to do so or risk disaffection of the voters. He did this in a positive way but in a way that left Republican Senators and Representatives with no choice but to support him. He communicated these values so effectively that even many Democrats were forced to vote with him.

Second, Reagan prioritized. He had four or five cardinal issues which he explained to the people in terms they can understand and in ways they would support and he followed through.

I see nothing in any of this which is inconsistent with my arguments concerning how to win elections by attracting people into our tent rather than pandering to those outside of the tent. Reagan simply applied these principles to governing as well is getting elected.

[Kickass Conservative]

Levin Rule, period.

You won’t have a say in what’s for Dinner if you’re not inside the House. Standing outside screaming isn’t the answer.

[ExCTCitizen]

Ben I have to agree... a conservative who is 90% right is better than a 100% liberal. I won’t compromise on 3 things: the 2nd amendment, illegals (kick them out) and abortion.

[eyedigress]

If he expects me to compromise with socialism/marxism/fascism
or whatever, he is decidedly wrong.

I support the Constitution and States Rights. Period.

[Yogafist]

Problem with this scenario is, the red army has been carrying the blue army's flag for way too long. At this point, we need a red army.

[centurion316]

A republican presidential candidate that actually lived up to the party platform would probably be enough.

I completely agree with you on this point. We have done a terrible job finding the right candidates, not only at the Presidential level, but at the Senatorial level as well. We have done much better for the State, local, and Congressional races.

[JRandomFreeper]

If Republicans demand that conservatives vote for liberal republican candidates, republicans will continue to lose.

If you want to win, run conservatives, close the primaries, and move the initial presidential primaries out of liberal northeastern states. But the GOP doesn't want that.

/johnny

[wku man]

How 'bout:

"Conservatives Won't Win Elections by Refusing To Compromise Knuckling Under to the Commies, or

"Conservatives Won't Win Elections by Refusing To Compromise Until They Actually Do It", or

"Conservatives Won't Win RINOs Haven't Won Any Elections by Since They Began Refusing To Compromise Compromising With The Commies"

Any of those are more accurate.

Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!

[JRandomFreeper]

I will vote for any candidate that is pro-life, pro-gun, against amnesty, against socialized medicine, and is provably for smaller government.

It's not hard. That's all it takes to win my vote.

I'm willing to compromise on how long it takes to shut down the Department of Education. I'm not willing to compromise on foundational issues.

/johnny

[CapnJack]

Where are the Republicans that agree with conservative values 90% of the time?

You could probably count them on one or maybe two hands.

That is the problem.

The RINO’s as the author calls them, believe in far less than 50% of conservative values at best. And what they do believe in they are all to willing to compromise just to get an honorable mention in the Washington Post.

[EDINVA]

If you recall, he was so successful he not persuaded “moderate” Republicans to support him, but many Dems who eventually switched party. There was a LOT of that going on during his time. I just wish some Rs would not become R!

[Tanniker Smith]

I don’t agree with RINOs 90% of the time, and they NEVER “compromise” and move to our side.

[ctdonath2]

Compromise?

“Can I borrow $10, but you only give me $5, that way I owe you $5 and you owe me $5 so we’re even!”

Compromise?

“Would you have sex with me for a million dollars?”
“Yeah!”
“How about ten dollars?”
“Whadaya think I am?”
“We’ve established what you are, now we’re just compromising.”

Compromise?

“Eh, she’s just a little bit pregnant.”

Compromise?

“Give me 100% of your income.”
“No! You get 0% of my income!”
“OK, let’s compromise: give me 50% of your income.”

Compromise?

Bill Of Rights: plain meaning, as written, no compromise.
Right To Life: only “bright line” is conception, no compromise.
Taxation: if 10% is good enough for God, it’s good enough for Caesar, no compromise.

Sure, we’ll compromise.
Just not those points.
Don’t demand I back up when my heels are already over the cliff.

[Kickass Conservative]

Levin Rule: You Vote YOUR Candidate in the Primary and you Vote your Party’s Candidate in the General.

If YOU can’t convince the Republican Primary Electorate that YOUR guy deserves to win, you don’t hand the Elected Office to your ENEMY without a fight. To be clear, the DEMOCRAT’S are the enemy of America as founded.

Taking your Bat and Ball and running Home whining only gives the other Team the easy Win.

Disagree, so be it. I made the mistake of Voting Perot in 1992 because I wasn’t looking at the Big Picture. Too busy with my Career and not really Politically involved.

What did that accomplish, the road to Obamaville. BIG ERROR.

[PA Engineer]

That isn't to say that I'm not willing to compromise on non-foundational issues. I'm willing to allow the EPA 5 years to wind down, instead of close immediately.

I don't disagree with you much, but this is an exception. Make that 4 years. Too much of a risk the vampire will be resurrected during the next election cycle. Drive the stake deep into the heart and deliver a massive coronal hole ejection.

Better yet, nuke them from space.

[JRandomFreeper]

Are you telling me that I need to vote for a pro-abortion gun grabber just because he won the republican nomination?

/johnny

[JRandomFreeper]

It's a negotiable point. I'm ok with using nukes ;)

Abortion and the 2nd amendment aren't.

/johnny

[Jim Robinson]

They’re not looking for compromise. They’re looking for unconditional surrender.

No thanks. Our unalienable rights are not subject to debate, compromise or surrender!

Btw, there’s no GOP-e Rino out there that I’d agree with 90% of the time. Not even 80 or 70. Most of them should be democrats. When they start talking about compromise on life, family, borders, guns, liberty, etc, they become the enemy within and can KMA!

[ModelBreaker]

“Perhaps an illustration is in order: Two armies are engaged in a war.”

Trouble is, there are three armies. The yellow army thinks the Red army should support it no matter what. But the yellow army will bomb the Red army every time the Red army advances a little.

A coalition only works when both sides support the other. Moderates take their marbles and go home all the time when conservatives win primaries.

[ROCKLOBSTER]

Conservatives Won't Win Elections by Refusing To Compromise

When the parties agree...The People get screwed.