Posted on 10/03/2005 7:57:40 AM PDT by for-q-clinton
I'm a conservative; just not a Donner Party Conservative.
The "real, true" conservatives voted in no larger numbers in 2004 than they did in 2000.
Great, now substract that number from the total vote for Bush. Does he win either election? I didn't think so.
Have you ever had a job where you were the reliable one who consistently delivered, and it led to you being crapped on while the boss pandered to the lazy to try to cajole a little work out of them, simply because he needed people? That's how I feel as a conservative in the republican party. They keep fighting for the middle and screwing me because they THINK I will vote for them regardless.
All I see right now is a lot of conservatives 'scratchin their collective heads and mumbling... “What happened?”
BS..........
If we lose in 2006, the dems will have control and will make the last 2 years of Bush's Presidency Hell. They will have subpoena power and be in charge of the agenda-- they would purposely thwart everything in the run up to '08 and, with the help of the media, would blame Bush for all problems. They would be happy to drive the country into the ground so Hillary could swoop in in '08. How effective was Papa Bush with a Democrat Congress? That sure didn't help him win in '92.
Nope. You're a kool-aid Konservative. You'll drink whatever Bush hands you.
I'd eat flesh before bullshit any day.
It's remarks like yours that win so many over to your "kind" of conservatism.
You know, it's the UGLY face of conservatisim.
They pretty much get what they want now by demanding independent councils that do their bidding.
If they do spend all their time on bogus charges they will feel the backlash in the 08 elections. I was actually going to address this in the article, but thought it would be rambling on (more so than I already did :-)
You drew first blood with the Donner Party reference, friend.
Losing elections in the hope of a backlash has never worked by the GOP before, with the exception of 94, and the reason why it worked in 94 was that Bill Clinton pushed thru Congress the largest tax increase in the history of the world. I don't think we can count on that happening again, nor would we wish it.
Wow, great analogy. And yes, I've been the one of those workers most of my life. Eventually you just get fed up and leave or try to play lazy, which eats at your core because it's just not you. And since it's not "you" the boss knows it and then trys to get rid of you as a bad influence :-) Lucky for me the boss ends up leaving before me ;-)
Trust me, if the Dems sweep in '06, Hillary will win in '08.
;o)
"The current batch of elected officials has sold out the principles of conservatism on far too many points."
Our two RINO senators from Ohio are prime examples. DeRINO is up for reelection next year. I hope some REAL conservative has the cajones to run against him in the primary and WIN, but I'm afraid it will be Toomey vs. Specter all over again. There are rumblings that the RAT darling du jour, Paul Hackett, will run against DeRINO. That would be interesting, given the close election he ran against Jean Schmidt, and the state of the GOP here in Ohio.
Who said sweep? Or what do you mean by that? I'm thinking if we just barely lose...shed some RINO weight and are no longer the party in power (by about 1 vote).
"Go Team! Let's lose one for the Gipper!"
That was really funny; I'll give you that.
I’m not advocating that we campaign to lose
I like the idea of voting 3rd party in 2006 to send Republicans the message to get back to conservative roots.
Better to send them that message in '06 than in '08 ;)
The evidence for that is mixed. When Republicans run as conservatives in conservative states, they win. When they run as conservatives in liberal states, they lose. When Democrats run as liberals in liberal states, they win. When they run as liberals in conservative states, they lose.
The reality is, most people like their pet government programs, and don't really want smaller government. And most people don't like radical change. Shrinking government when people don't want it shrunk is a recipe for electoral failure. That's a lesson the Republicans seem to have learned. If they keep control of the purse strings, they have the chance to direct policy to encourage individual responsibility and individual choice. The long term effect of this would be to reduce demand for government.
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.