Third Party Tragedies

Private Web Site ^ | 1/24/2006 | Hopeful Patriot

[HopefulPatriot]

FreeRepublic's Mission Report:

• Our first article, Free Republic And Freedom, has been viewed 1,739 times.
• Our second article, Free Republic's Roots, has been viewed 2,125 times;
• The third, Another Ronald Reagan, has only been viewed 1,111times.
• The fourth, Where's the Instant Replay? has been viewed a paltry 718 times.
• The fifth article, A Republic If You Can Keep It, has been viewed 2,197 times.
• Our most recent article, An Encounter Too Close, has been viewed 584 times.

    We believe this plan to restore the Constitution is the best ever put forward by anybody because of the solutions that it provides to the most significant problems that will face any such effort. In addition, this effort only needs to cross one bridge before it is easily executed. Prove us wrong if you can! For the benefit on anyone wishing to present their own plan, our goal is to complete the series by the end of February.

We renew our request to Jim Robinson to please lead and moderate a discussion on restoring the Constitution in order that FreeRepublic can complete its mission.

We repeat our request for the addition of a Mission Link on the News/Activism Sidebar.

And we invite each and every Freeper to please consider taking The Pledge.

[HopefulPatriot]

Ping for the Constitution!

[HopefulPatriot]

Ping for Freedom!

[lilylangtree]

"A Republic if you can keep it!" sounds like the same reply be given to the Iraqis for the first time in their lives.

[E.G.C.]

BTTT

[Reagan Man]

Bump for later

[mbraynard]

You fail to recognize that the reason so many, er, 'conservatives' go the third party route isn't because they fail to understand the consequences but because they are brain damaged. It is futile to try and discuss this with them.

[HopefulPatriot]

Conservatives are independent thinkers and tend to go their separate ways. Most are not joiners. This measurably adds to the difficulty in organizing an activity to do anything, even one designed to restore the Constitution.

[Bob J]

Once again, who are you?

[Reaganwuzthebest]

Remember Ross Perot's Reform Party that gave us the Clinton tragedy?

The Reform Party was going places until Perot blew it by backing out temporarily in 1992. If he hadn't done that he very well could have won and given rise to a successful third party. He did prove though that even today they have potential if the right person with the right message comes along, something both parties who take their base for granted should keep in mind.

[ForGod'sSake]

Here's hoping we can take our country back, but I'm afraid hope alone will not get it done. The conservative "revolution" while seemingly moving us in the right direction, may not be enough. Are we running out of time???

FGS

[ForGod'sSake]

Hi Bob. What do you think of HopefulPatriot's ideas? Concept, implementation, whatever??? Do you believe conservatives are winning and can we make the changes in the direction of the country soon enough to forestall a reckoning?

[Mind-numbed Robot]

The Reform Party was going places until Perot blew it by backing out temporarily in 1992.

Ross Perot never intended to win. He accomplished exactly what the wanted, the election of Bill Clinton. His payoff was to be for Perot Systems to run a large part of HillaryCare. Instead, he gave us all Clinton and got nothing in return for himself. Thanks Ross.

[308MBR]

So, why can't we force out the "closet socialists" in the GOP? I guess that's because they aren't in the closet anymore.....like Tom "No Fat to Cut" DeLay.

[Ditter]

Perot was a fraud. Sorry you fell for it.

[HopefulPatriot]

"Who am I"

A nobody with a plan that can restore the Constitution if people recognize the value of the ideas. It is not the who that matters, it is the what. It is curious to me that anyone wants to know about the author when they can know the plan. Why would anyone want to trust somebody when they can simply trust their own judgment about the content of the ideas.

If the goal, restoration of the Constitution, fits your goals and ambitions, who cares who was the first to say let's see if we can restore the Constitution. If the plan that finally evolves from this effort seems sound to you, who cares who put forward the first draft, even if it becomes the working draft. If the goal fits, and the plan seems reasonable, what matters in the big picture is whether the execution is successful. And what should matter to you, is whether you were part of it or standing on the sidelines. Were you pushing the plan forward and executing it or were you part of the problem>

[the tongue]

I'm all for sticking strictly to the Constitution, but the Republican Party, in their support for Social Security, Medicare, and all of the other unconstitutional programs enacted in the last 70 years is obviously NOT. Sorry to disagree brother, but they're simply a little right of the Dems, which is in reality, centrist.

[Reaganwuzthebest]

He accomplished exactly what the wanted, the election of Bill Clinton.

Perot gave us Clinton, no doubt about it. I think his real goal was to stop Bush from winning so even if he didn't himself and Clinton won his mission was accomplished.

[Reaganwuzthebest]

Perot was a fraud.

Even if he was a fraud that doesn't change the fact had he stayed in he could have won. The 19% that he still got wasn't bad for an unknown third party.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

The rumor was that he had a grudge against Bush but I think that was just cover for the more selfish reason.

Before he even got involved he wrote a long article for the Dallas Morning News criticizing the first gulf war as unnecessary. Surely he didn't think allowing Saddam to have Kuwait was wise or that Saddam wouldn't next move to take over Saudi and eventually all the ME oil. It was just criticism of Bush to help Clinton. Apparently, they deemed that not to be enough. Perot started doing so well they feared he would hurt Clinton more than Bush so he pulled his "withdrawal" stunt to slow the momentum.

You notice that Perot spent very little of his own money on his campaign, allowing instead for the "volunteers" to carry the load. Nor did he use the campaign material prepared for him by a political consultant. The political consultant, whose name doesn't come to mind at the moment, had to go public in order to get his money from Perot.

The whole thing was a sham and he has been laying low since.