Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The False Myth of the 80% Conservative
Canada Free Press ^ | March 23, 2014 | Jonathon Moseley

Posted on 03/23/2014 5:34:26 AM PDT by Moseley

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-83 next last
To: Moseley

I think the GOP-E defines it as:

80% of the issues = lower taxes on the wealthy

20% of the issues = everything else

So if I agree on lowering taxes, I should ignore every other belief I hold and vote for the guy who disagrees with me on ‘the 20%”...

And meanwhile, no GOP-E person will EVER support someone who disagrees with them on anything. Thus, when a conservative who agrees with me on 99% of things wins a primary, the GOP-E gets out the knives and slices him into little pieces while cheering his Democrat opponent.

No thanks. Not buying.


61 posted on 03/23/2014 4:39:34 PM PDT by Mr Rogers (I sooooo miss America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing
Some veterans will find fault with any given thing on any given day. Just spend an afternoon at my VFW hall and you’d know what I mean.

Another dig at veterans in support of the pro-abortion, anti-American Romney family.

Also, not voting for your pro-abortion liberalism to take over the GOP, doesn't mean conservatives are staying home.

62 posted on 03/23/2014 4:46:06 PM PDT by ansel12 ((Libertarianism offers the transitory concepts and dialogue to move from conservatism, to liberalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing

Do you know how Mitt Romney reacted to Reagan’s ascendancy in the party and that wave of American patriotism and success?


63 posted on 03/23/2014 4:47:44 PM PDT by ansel12 ((Libertarianism offers the transitory concepts and dialogue to move from conservatism, to liberalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

Yes I do, here’s an informative read that covers the topic.

http://bluemassgroup.com/2006/12/romney-against-reagan-and-contract-with-america/

You’re a slow learner, aren’t you. I have expressed my voting philosophy on this thread, that’s all. I havn’t expressed any affection for Romney, quite the contrary.

What I have made clear to anyone who can read is that I don’t consider staying home on Election to be a worthy endeavor. It’s important to me to vote to deny the most destructive candidate a victory. In 2012, that candidate was Obama, not Romney. Only a fool would ignore it or deny it.

You’re going to need to find someone else to heap your pathetic insults on, I’m finished with you.


64 posted on 03/23/2014 5:17:51 PM PDT by smoothsailing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing

You keep repeating that people stayed home rather than vote for your anti-American, pro-abortion candidate, they didn’t, many just didn’t vote for your man, not enough to endorse his proabortion ads and coming out against the party’s pro-life platform.

The article you linked to didn’t cover half of Romney’s reaction to Reagan, your man left the party, in time he became a supporter and fund raiser for the democrats, and even voted for Tsongas in 1992, and didn’t return to the GOP until October of 1993.

Romney has spent years trying to create a myth that Reagan was “adamantly pro-choice”. Romney’s goal was to bury conservatism and get revenge for his lifetime of family slights from the Reagan/Palin wing of the GOP.


65 posted on 03/23/2014 5:28:24 PM PDT by ansel12 ((Libertarianism offers the transitory concepts and dialogue to move from conservatism, to liberalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing; ansel12

I will vote for the most conservative choice in the primaries.
I will vote for the most conservative choice in the general election.
To do anything otherwise is foolish.
My vote is my voice, and I will not be silenced.
Period.
End of story.


66 posted on 03/23/2014 5:34:12 PM PDT by Repeal The 17th (We have met the enemy and he is us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Repeal The 17th

IMO, you’ve got it right, yours is the best way to approach every election, be it primary, general, or runoff. It comports well with the Buckley Rule.

http://www.nationalreview.com/node/340485/print


67 posted on 03/23/2014 5:41:16 PM PDT by smoothsailing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Moseley
what???

68 posted on 03/23/2014 5:46:07 PM PDT by skinkinthegrass (The end move in politics is always to pick up a gun..0'Caligula / 0'Reid / 0'Pelosi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

“Settling for mediocrity” is one of the GOP’s central problems.


69 posted on 03/23/2014 5:49:04 PM PDT by fieldmarshaldj (Resist We Much)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing
What I have made clear to anyone who can read is that I don’t consider staying home on Election to be a worthy endeavor.

But you are ignoring the fact that there are millions of other Americans, mostly the conservative grassroots who WILL stay home on Election Day.

So your 1 vote will show up on Election Day, while MILLIONS will stay home and do something truly important like read to their grandchildren or make love to their spouse or teach their son how to repair a car engine.

This does not need to be. That's the critical point.

Republicans could:
a) Provide candidates that would inspire people to show up and vote, because it is worth their time and trouble, or
b) Continue to live in fantasy land by proclaiming their own personal theory, and imagine that that actually matters in the grand scheme of things.

If we had no other way, then I would agree with you and the establishment folks that we should appeal to people to go out and vote for the reasons you urge.

But we DO have a choice. There is no requirement that the GOP nominate bad candidates whom the grassroots do not want to support. No one is forcing the Republican Party to nominate candidates that the grassroots doesn't like.

Furthermore, it is not just about showing up on Election Day. Campaigns are won or lost MONTHS before Election Day by all the work done by volunteers -- or not done.
70 posted on 03/23/2014 9:06:42 PM PDT by Moseley (http://www.MoseleyComments.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Moseley
If you're a politician who does nothing to slow the growth and influence of the Federal government in the lives of the citizens, I won't vote for you.

Show me your real plan to cut taxes, slash spending, reign in cronyism and corruption - and act on those plans once in office - and I'll vote for you. If you don't, I won't.

I'm beyond party now.

71 posted on 03/23/2014 9:14:57 PM PDT by dead (I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Moseley
I want one more choice on the ballot, one I view as critical to actual representation in a legislature. That choice, were it to get the most votes, would force a new slate of candidates to be prepared and a new election.

I want to be able to vote for "None of the Above".

At least the electorate would have the ability to reject the candidates proferred by the parties in toto, without getting stuck with "the lesser evil".

YMMV.

72 posted on 03/23/2014 9:15:20 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Atlas Sneezed
The problem is that ~80% of a politician’s votes are meaningless, on issues where they have no effect on the outcome, so they can vote in a way that burnishes their conservative credentials while doing nothing for the cause. They can then vote 20% of the time in a way to undermine conservative principles, when it counts.

Precisely!

If the issue is lost (or sometimes won decisively), they let a few vote to please the hicks back home so they can trumpet their hometown cred come next election.

If it's close, the people lose.

73 posted on 03/23/2014 9:19:17 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: 60Gunner

I agree with your premise (How much poop in the soup before you call it poop soup?) but it’s polyticks, Gunner, when the dust settles you’re lucky to get 20% cake.


74 posted on 03/23/2014 9:26:07 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: MCH
What got me about McQueeg's candidacy was that the GOPe couldn't accept that Sarah Palin was even more popular. The insiders scuttled her as much as they could with leaks about clothes (as if! Look at the 12000 dollar dress the Moose wore) and such. The MSM was happy to play along, and it is hard to decide who was more afraid of her--the Liberals or the GOP.

Too late!! We had a taste of what a real candidate, not just someone 'whose time has come', but someone who could light a fire in the belly of the electorate, and I for one, am done eating pablum and being told it is 3-alarm chilli.

My vote ISN'T automatic for anyone, and the GOPe can't count on me and others like me to vote the ticket, regardless of who is on it.

75 posted on 03/24/2014 10:53:26 AM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe
What got me about McQueeg's candidacy was that the GOPe couldn't accept that Sarah Palin was even more popular.

I never thought of it quite that way. Exactly right! Great insight!
76 posted on 03/24/2014 4:19:37 PM PDT by Moseley (http://www.MoseleyComments.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe
I want to be able to vote for "None of the Above".

That makes great sense in so many ways. I even think our Founders would approve... except to the extent that offices like Commander in Chief might be vacant. But that's a brilliant idea!
77 posted on 03/24/2014 4:21:16 PM PDT by Moseley (http://www.MoseleyComments.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: B4Ranch

Independent. Hmmm? Bernie Sanders comes to mind and I’m betting you are about as far removed from his ideology as anyone, yet you claim independent status. Bernie is the face of the independent party and makes no bones about it. There is no one claiming an ideology for independents other than Bernie.

We have Independents, Democrats, and stay at home Republicans in ideology similar to independents, to thank for the two times elected face of tryannical Government, the lawbreaking, Constitution hating, race baiting, progressive Barak Obama.

Like it or not we have a two party system, so the idea should be, if the party isn’t to your liking, gather a group of like minded folks and at least attempt to get it back, lest we be forever gifted with politicians like the present occupant of the White House.

I suggest also a reading of the party platform to understand the fundamental differences in the two primary parties, and know that in many cases the platform is ignored by legislators who ought to know better, just as the Constitution itself is ignored by those who do not understand the meaning of an OATH.


78 posted on 03/25/2014 6:13:23 AM PDT by wita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: wita

What we have is a one party system now. Has been for quite some time. I have yet to see the Republicans repeal any legislation (even when they had the majority in both houses) that was passed by a democrat majority. They support the most irrational Dim legislative bills without a thought to their announced party line.

The Republican elites are in control and they are globalists. They follow the strides of international corporatism, after all that’s who pays their bills these days. They have no intention of ever reducing the size of government or any of the social programs.

You need to accept that the GOP is dead and gone. They hate the idea of the Tea Party standing up for the Constitution or the Bill of Rights. I am done with contributing to them.


79 posted on 03/25/2014 9:29:14 AM PDT by B4Ranch (Name your illness, do a Google & YouTube search with "hydrogen peroxide". Do it and be surprised.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Colonel_Flagg
What will your side do to earn my vote, rather than simply expect it?

So, what's the plan to keep another ultra-leftist out if we don't have a "solid" conservative on the ticket?

What does the Left do to earn your compliance as they take over the place?

80 posted on 03/28/2014 3:43:52 AM PDT by trebb (Where in the the hell has my country gone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-83 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson