GOP Left Holds Right Hostage

Insight Magazine ^ | September 16th, 2002 | Rod D. Martin

[GraniteStateConservative]

In 2000, they hated Bush in RI more than they did in Assachusetts. He deserves a Profiles in Courage award for being a Republican there.

[callisto]

In 2000 alone, Republicans lost two key Senate races — in Washington state and Nevada — by just a few hundred conservative votes cast for third parties. Had the party won that handful of votes, or those of the countless others who just stayed home, a 52-48 Senate would have been impervious to Jeffords' and Chafee's treachery.

Third parties can drain crucial votes away from the either of the two major parties. Along with the lack of votes from those who choose to "sit out" the election because of perceived personal injustices or animosities. I'm not advocating only a two party system, but in today's tight split among American voters, those who vote for a third party are only drawing votes away from the mainstream parties.

What we need to do is gain control of the both Houses so legislation can be introduced that will direct our nation more towards the right. Once we have control, we can easily vote out those representatives who have chosen to vote "middle-of-the-road," so to speak.

Jim Robinson, this bears repeating loudly:

"The Republicans must retake the majority and the larger the margin the better. Vote out the Democrats! It's the only way to retake America!"

[AAABEST]

OK hold on a second. Right after my above reply I saw somebody pinging you to a Sawgrass Rebellion thread.

Are you thinking of becoming involved? If so I'll put you on my ping list and never call you a half-socialist again. Even though my great-grandfather was Cuban and you've called me a racist.

[GraniteStateConservative]

Some here at FR think the aircraft carrier of New Deal and Great Society liberalism can be turned on a dime. It's a slow process. They don't realize that the ideal of having a two-party system of conservative Republicans and moderate Republicans is better than the present system that has socialists getting representation.

[hchutch]

"You don't suppose back-handed insults like "I'm a compassionate conservative" and other attempts to send a non-conservative message had anything to do with that?"

And Poohbah's point also exists. Keep in mind, Sabertooth, politicians AND PARTIES have memories, not to mention their pride, too. The memories are long ones. Kick `em in the teeth, and they're a lot more likely to say "the hell with you" and look for votes and support elsewhere. And I would not blame them one iota.

If incidents like the one Poohbah mentioned earlier are any indication, some conservatives (the "unappeasables" or what I refer to as the "hard right") who have chosen to allow perfect to remain the enemy of good enough have been deemed to cause the party's chances to win elections (and thereby maintain power) more harm than good. And so, the politicans won't go there.

As far as the GOP is concenred, conservatives weren't backing them up in the earlier stages of the shutdown of 1995. Conservatives did not back them in the 1996 or 1998 elections fully. So, Rove and Bush, to an extent, felt they had to make up the votes elsewhere and build a new "base" for the GOP because they felt the current "base" was not on board to a sufficient extent.

"Rove had a strategy that didn't work as planned. Rather than rethink his premises, he intends to blame the voters?

Where is the electoral appeal in that?"

Kick `em in the teeth, stay at home, or bolt because you disagree with polticians, and I can promise you that they won't crawl on their knees begging you to come back. *I* certainly wouldn't be begging those who stayed home to come out and vote for me if they weren't there when it counted the last time. Instead, I'd go elsewhere. Most politicians wouldn't kowtow to Lyn Nofzinger's threats to stay at home, it would be, "don't let the door hit your butt on the way out."

You have to be sure that by staying home or bolting, it *will* take the GOP down. Oops, am I bringing up the need to be SURE you are sucvcessful again, as I have been derided for by others in the past? Yep, I am. Because if you CANNOT kill the GOP with a bolt to a third or by staying home (i.e. swing the Congress to the other major party or cost them a Presidential race), they will have NO reason to listen to whatever complaints you make.

Politics involves horse-trading, and the least reliable supporters will be the ones who get dropped for a bigger voting bloc when the opportunity presents itself.

Trust me, Sabertooth, some of us Freepers (and a fair number of Republican politicians as well) are already looking at ways to get around the "stay at home" and "third party" crowd. And don't think that once we're convinced there are enough votes to be had via other outreach programs that we WON'T drop the unappeasables and those who make noise about going to a third party like a bad habit.

The conservatives who are team players will be the ones coming in early, staying late, and doing the hard work for the well-meaning Republicans. And we'll be the ones you listen to while you are off in the wilderness.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"How about with a LOT OF EXCEPTIONS...LOL. Louie you are the Bill Clinton of Free Republic. Like Clinton you want all sides of every issue and have a well-noted tendency of playing fast and loose with the truth. This proclivity of yours has earned you ZERO credibility outside the Brain Dead Rah Rah contingent of GOP Loyalists on FR."

Haha!!!

The sheet and hood crowd arrives!!!

That's right WR, I can trade insults and barbs with the best of them (which does not include you BTW), but unlike you, myself and the others whom I have flagged to this response, have some sort of intelligent remarks to contribute to this forum.

You see, lacking either the intelligence, or the knowledge to enter into a discussion on the topics, you (using an old and worn out play from the left's playbook) attack the poster, and ignore the issues.

If in fact the GOP is leaving you and others like you behind, well then I say good riddance, I'll help you pack your carpetbag for the your move to a third party. I can't think of a better way to convince intelligent conservatives attaching themselves to losers like Pat Buchanan, that they've moved into the wrong neighborhood, than seeing you move your velvet Elvis and set up your TV on one of those telephone company cable spools right next door to them. Then, we can welcome them with open arms when they come running back, frightened and scarred from the experience.

Loser.

[Luis Gonzalez]

BRAVO!

[Luis Gonzalez]

Come on, prove your claims or shut the hell up. Link me to all my liberal posts.

I've already exposed you as a liar, but I guess that's something you don't consider to be a negative trait in an individual.

What's really going on here, is the old attack the messenger and bury the issue Liberal trick. One that you seem to be extremely well-versed in.

Pinko? Get yourself a mirror.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Your great-grandfather was Cuban?

That little breeze you just felt wasn't the air conditioner kicking in, that was his ghost trying to slap you.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Oh, and yes, people whom I respect (you not being one of them) have been talking to me about the Sawgrass Rebellion, and I am considering a FR Radio show on the topic.

Your support just brought the whole movement under question in my mind.

[Luis Gonzalez]

So...too young to detail the things that Reagan did to stand up against the UN, but you KNOW poeple who voted for Perot, and are privy to their motivations?

[Luis Gonzalez]

My fear about privatization is that those who make bad investments, will expect to be bailed out by the Feds anyway.

[RAT Patrol]

It's not that I totally disagree with your post 292, but I think you should start preaching (for lack of a better word) that to the "moderates" who never want to support conservative nominees.

Conservatives are getting ignored and mistreated because we do not demand our vote to be earned. Our party just says "they have no where to go" and takes us for granted while they move left--staying just barely right of the 'rats. That is just not good enough. I am not talking about winning on every issue. I am talking about winning on at least 50% of my issues.

I will support Taff for Congress even though he's pro-abortion and anti-vouchers. I don't like it but he sounds like he is great fiscally and on the 2nd Amendment. I doubt he ever gets a primary vote from me. But too many candidates don't even offer me that much. Why should I vote for them? Just because they have an "R" by their name? I don't think so.

[rdb3]

Y'all don't want a candidate. You want a Messiah.

They definitely want a dictator. That's for sure.

[hchutch]

See my post #265 on this thread.

[Constitution Day]

I won't like it either, but I am still going to.

[Sabertooth]

Kick `em in the teeth, stay at home, or bolt because you disagree with polticians, and I can promise you that they won't crawl on their knees begging you to come back. *I* certainly wouldn't be begging those who stayed home to come out and vote for me if they weren't there when it counted the last time.

So, politicians don't recast their campaigns in response to what worked or didn't the last time? Do you really believe that?

What do you suppose was the purpose of Clinton's DLC after the Carter, Mondale, and Dukakis losses of the '80s?

It was to remold the image of the Democraty party to regain the Reagan Democrats. And it worked well enough to help Clinton win a couple of terms in the White House.

Instead, I'd go elsewhere. Most politicians wouldn't kowtow to Lyn Nofzinger's threats to stay at home, it would be, "don't let the door hit your butt on the way out."

Yes, I've seen such coalition-building sentiments on FR.

A pox on politicians who think our votes are their birthright. Votes must be earned. If they aren't, politicians have only themselves to blame if they lose.

As far as the GOP is concenred, conservatives weren't backing them up in the earlier stages of the shutdown of 1995.

So, it was the conservatives who jumped ship and the RINOs who hung tough?

Rove and Bush, to an extent, felt they had to make up the votes elsewhere and build a new "base" for the GOP because they felt the current "base" was not on board to a sufficient extent.

I've got no problem with reaching out to folks who aren't traditionally Republicans, but I have confidence in the intellectual strength of conservative arguments on their face. Outreach can be done in such a way was to pick off wavering Democrats without depressing turnout in certain conservative camps.

Bush, Rove, and the RNC need to find a better balance.

You have to be sure that by staying home or bolting, it *will* take the GOP down. Oops, am I bringing up the need to be SURE you are sucvcessful again, as I have been derided for by others in the past? Yep, I am. Because if you CANNOT kill the GOP with a bolt to a third or by staying home (i.e. swing the Congress to the other major party or cost them a Presidential race), they will have NO reason to listen to whatever complaints you make.

I'm not trying to take the GOP down, I'll be voting the straight ticket again this Fall. And you're right, people who join third parties will be ignored.

But you're wrong in thinking that Republicans who stay home will be ignored in future elections. What to you suppose is the purpose of "get out the vote" efforts? In part, it's to reclaim lost votes.

Politics involves horse-trading, and the least reliable supporters will be the ones who get dropped for a bigger voting bloc when the opportunity presents itself.

Fine, but don't blame the old mare if you end up with a mule in the bargain.

Trust me, Sabertooth, some of us Freepers (and a fair number of Republican politicians as well) are already looking at ways to get around the "stay at home" and "third party" crowd. And don't think that once we're convinced there are enough votes to be had via other outreach programs that we WON'T drop the unappeasables and those who make noise about going to a third party like a bad habit.

Oh, I completely trust that you are, hchutch.

What I reject is the contention that this is an effective means of coalition-building. I also reject the false dilemma that the only way to appeal to voters in the center is by appeasement to the Left, losing votes on the right in the bargain.

Consistent failure to effectively make the conservative case in terms that appeal to the center is not evidence that conservatism has no mainstream appeal.

[callisto]

I truly hope that you and other conservatives are not feeling ignored because you and your opinions do make a difference. Your beliefs are part of our nation's heritage and its future.

I am much more conservative than most on this forum would begin to realize, but I understand the nuances of maintaining a political future. If we want more conservatives in office, we are going to have to compromise in some of the elections this year in order for conservatives to gain a safe majority in both legislatures.

Once we get the majority we can begin to tell our representatives that their words, actions, etc. are NOT in line with what their constituents desire and that if they don't adjust their voting and legislative bills accordingly we will rapidly replace them with those who are MORE conservative and will vote along the lines of the people. Our forefathers saw this and planned accordingly.

We have to remember to live for today but plan for tomorrow. In the short term we need a majority in both Houses of Congress; that can be achieved by voting for the most conservative candidates elected in the Primary. In the long term we need more conservative representatives; that can be achieved by continually monitoring our representatives voting records and positions on current and future legislation. We all need to learn to compromise at least a little, or we will forever remain seeing only those things that we wish to see.

A favorite bumper sticker of mine has always been:

A mind is like a parachute; It only functions when it's open.

[AAABEST]

That little breeze you just felt wasn't the air conditioner kicking in, that was his ghost trying to slap you.

No Louie, he was a freedom lover who had everything stolen from him by Castro after immigrating here. He started what was then the largest circulation spainish language newspaper in New York.

His bitter lesson is engrained in my family. You never aid those who want to take things from others that don't belong to them. That's why I tend to look down at people that assist the takers, like yourself.

BTW, are you sure you want to be around all those right-wing freedom types that are putting their lives on hold to come to Florida to help the Cubanos in the 8 1/2 mile "Pariah" area?

Try not to be your usual tempermental self and start calling them racists or lyers, they're here to help.

[spintreebob]

simply turning out all your own people will win time and again

So true. So in the primary, where we have a clear choice, how do we convince "Our people" to turn out? Pro-life and pro-gun types had a uniquely high turnout in 1994 never seen before, nor since. This March the Illinois primary had a 3way race between a liberal, a country club conservative (100% pro-life, no exceptions) and a true conservative (100% pro-life and 100% pro-constitution.)

The Republican primary voters voted for the country club conservative because "It was his turn". Many people with pro-life bumper stickers, officers of pro-life groups and recipients of awards in pro-life newsletters did not even register to vote...or if they did register, they did not vote. When asked, they refused to work for their candidate.

The RINOs are not the problem. We are our own problem.