Replies

I don't find anything wrong with that argument as written, but it certainly implies a causal link that hasn't been proven. Namely, that the reason the country has slipped to the left is because conservatives or Republicans are willing to vote for the lesser of two evils. But I don't think that has anything to do with it.

If you'll give it a bit more thought, I believe you'll realize that it does.

We have five elections over twenty years, where an avowed Leftist campaigns against a person who claims to be a Conservative, but actually doesn't campaign by voicing staunch support for Conservative ideals. In this environment, nobody advances the premise that Conservative tenets are more sound than Leftist tenets. Both campaign from a Leftist point of view, but one is less of a Leftist than the other.

Does Conservatism grow stronger under this model? No. It's impossible for it to. It grows weaker, and that's precisely what has taken place.

The problem isn't conservatives voting for the lesser of two evils. Oh yes it is. If Conservatives won't take a stand against Leftists within their own ranks, then they'll fall for anything. McCain..., Romney...

The problem is that the horde of liberals and mushy-minded moderates all get to vote too, and they don't want the same people we do. We could have said the same thing in Reagan's day. Instead of adopting that strategy, Reagan reached out to Democrats by making sound arguments. He prevailed because he supported sound policy, and sold it to others. Who is selling it these days? Nobody.

The stark reality is that conservatives are not the majority in this country. So if we want conservatives to win Presidential elections, we have to be fortunate enough to either 1) be running against a really crummy, uncharismatic Democrat, or 2) have a truly great conservative candidate. Not true. I don't think that's an outlandish comment by any means, but it is misguided. If we want Conservatives to win, our party has to endorse them, support them, and keep lofting them. I'm not making the case they will always win. I am making the case that when our time does come to gain the leadership, a Conservative will be the person installed into office. Our party clearly fights to defeat this reality. In his day, Reagan WAS NOT the RNC favorite. George Bush was. None the less, Democrats reached out to thim and supported him. The same dynamic is alive and well today. Most people don't realize it.

Are you aware of the percentage of the populace that considers themselves to be a Conservative vs a Liberal? 41 vs 21% LINK

Sadly the RNC is operating under the same misconception you are.

Unfortunately, neither of those was available to us in this campaign cycle. I don't see that as a justification to give up on opposing the greater of two evils because of the greater damage that can be done by that greater evil. And, it seems obvious to me that conservatives are certainly going to have more influence over a GOP President than a Democrat who will be pandering to his base heavily his entire second term.

Okay, then you buy into the idea that we must always vote for the (R), no matter what. I say that because the Leftist is always without fail described as someone we can't allow to be elected, or the nation will crumble. Strangely, the more this seemed to make sense, the more Leftist our candidates(R) happened to turn out to be. Now we're at the point that folks who partner with Soros, Kennedy, Kerry et al are the folks we're being asked to support. McCain formed a 501c(3) with Soros, Teressa Heinz Kerry, and the Tides Foundation. Look at what Romney has been up to. Who needs Democrats when you have the level of treachery on our own side?

I'm not saying this to be mean, but you're playing right into the hands of the RNC here. You're proving them right. We'll vote for anything with an (R) after it. Why should they move back to the Right, if they can get people this Leftist elected? Do you want people this Leftist? I don't think you do.

Just because the President is a Republican doesn't mean conservatives can't loudly and strongly oppose his policies with which we disagree. Look, if you want to kid yourself that Republican Senators and Congressmen stand up to Republican presidents, go ahead. The Medicare Prescription plan? The Kennedy/McCain Immigration Reform Act? Nice try. Lest you forget, the Immigration Reform Act was a done deal, if McCain hadn't wanted to run for the presidency. The Democrats were in charge. They had the votes. Republicans would have joined them. So no, failing the withdrawel of support by one of the drafters, this bill passes. Is anyone at all operating under the delusion that McCain wouldn't have revived this as soon as he was elected? It was the realization of this that more than anything else, cost McCain the election. And remember, he was the lesser of two evils. His bill would have seen over 100 million Mexican nationals become U. S. Citizen in under 20 years.

As much of a squishy moderate as Bush was on some issues, I think most of us would agree this country would be in even worse shape if Gore of Kerry had been elected in his stead. And it does us no good if the patient dies before we can find the right doctor.

If the Republican party couldn't get Bush elected without Conservative support, do you think the next candidate would have been less or more Conservative? Yes, we got Bush elected, and then he proceded to join with the Republicans and the Democrats to shape the nation that was handed off to Barack Obama. Tell me this destroys my arguments here. Well, you can't.

Do I want Kerry, Gore, Obama, in office? No. At the same time, I don't want Bush, McCain, and Romney in office. I'm sorry, but the RNC will never get the message if we don't send it loud and clear. This nation will get no better, and will only get worse until it gets that message. Now, when will we send that message if not now?