Posted on 02/25/2007 3:24:10 PM PST by Rudder
My Dear Feepers,
It’s not just on Free Republic alone, the rift within the GOP perhaps more properly described as the rift between the GOP and one its constituents---Conservatives---has caught the attention of virtually all the major political prognosticators.
It’s a painful thing to endure, and likely it will not enhance our effectiveness as a party, as a political movement or in winning elections. And, at it’s current rate of development and the sometime nastiness of the invective on FR, I think it’s going to get worse long before it’s going to get better.
Think about this as a possible solution, one which allow all of us to still retain our own brand of conservatism and still push for a big win in 2008.
Consider the latest FR poll: 62% Hunter--27% Giuliani.
If the question could have been asked (perhaps it will in the future):
“Hunter is 15 points ahead of McCain and the rest of the pack fall further behind.
Giuliani shows ratings between 1 and 2% at this time, but with hard work and a creative campaign strategy, he just might pull it off in the next 22 months.
For whom would Freepers vote? My guess those going for Hunter would 99% of Freepers.
Can we do both? Support Hunter and yet, despite our best effort and he loses the primary, vote for a win in 2008 no matter who (except McCain) is our candidate?
I suspect the great majority of us could.
I propose this as one who wholeheartedly supports both candidates. Right now, Rudy looks like a winner and a guy who can best handle the job as CIC. Should it be Duncan, I would feel secure knowing that he represents my conservative philosophy and would govern as such.
I see two advantages obtained by this approach: 1. It may well reduce what could become damaging rifts within our community of Freepers. 2. If it works, it could spread and give conservatives in general (not just Freepers) unity---and a louder, focused voice (Re: Meiers?) that would influence the platform and the candidate.
I eagerly anticipate your comments and the flames.
R
Bear in mind, that like Guiliani, Reagan himself was once a Democrat.....and even , as Governor of California, in 1967 signed legislation liberalizing abortion laws.
The true left in this country finds more in common with totalitarianism elsewhere in the world, than in what you or I would think or want for one another or our families... and would, if it could, bring that mindset to bear on those it perceives stand in its way.
Just on this reason (one of MANY) - he was DRAFT DODGER.
"...vote for a win in 2008 no matter who (except Rudy) is our candidate?"
I asked a question regarding Catholic's opinion of Rudy on another thread and got no reply. Since he professes to be a Roman Catholic, I believe it's important to know what such a large voting block thinks about electing one their own.(?)
You're correct on one point: Only Republicans will vote for Hunter or Gingrich.
To win the general we also need independents and crossover democrats.
No party can hold together so many disparate elements in today's media-saturated society. Even if the GOP splits, the Dems would follow suit soon after that. They are just as unwieldy and fractious.
In the long run it may be a good thing (more choices) if BOTH big parties split, resulting in a 4 party system of Rhinos, Hippos, Jackasses, and Mules. Minor parties would wield more "swing" power by aligning themselves in coalitions with the other parties, similarly to what goes on in most parliamentary republics today.
I'm glad you made the distinction between the GOP and Conservatives. I'm only one of those.
I respect Rudy as a mayor, but he will not get my vote for POTUS. If Rudy wins the GOP primary, I will explore third party candidates.
That is not going to happen.
The MSM HATE Bush invective of 8 years has transferred itself to the Republican Party in general.
Obama will be the Dem nominee, he is just getting started, and Hillary cannot unite the Dem party. She is basically done for. Her winning the nomination is the supposition that is in error, and leads many Republicans to see a need for crossover moderate democrats, who will ALL vote for the populist dem candidate, Obama. Soros has a winner.
This is the wrong approach. Republicans need to rely on their successes, and there are many. And the Republican party needs to mend its bridges to 40% of its electorate, severed when the Republican Party failed to deliver on promised legislation in the Senate, thanks to the tyranny ( and that is not a strong enough word) of the gang of 14.
We need to simply reconstruct that momentum, and that WILL be a lot more possible than creating a "moderate " constituency out of whole cloth, by foisting a liberal on to an already reluctant Republican electorate.
This moderate cross over argument got Republicans diddly squat in 2006. And it will get the party diddly squat in 2008.
And the MSM barrage on Rudy is basically an attempt to hi jack the party over to a liberal philosophy in governance, which is not acceptable to the vast majority of Republicans, on issues of the 2nd amendment ( opposite a renewed ban on self defence weaponry), abortion ( opposite a refusal to use birth control over abortion), illegal aliens ( opposite a no secured border and wholesale immigration), the war in Iraq ( opposite treason and mis-information), health care ( opposite socialized medicine, a failure in Canada) , pharmaceuticals ( opposite a policy to reduce prices ** the only dem winner), nuclear power generation ( opposite wind power and no drilling), social security (opposite do nothing but increase social programs for the elderly), and taxation ( opposite tax the rich)and gay marriage ( opposite pro gay marriage amendment).
Rudy has a pretty inconsitent record on all of these issues as Mayor of New York. He was a draft dodger, getting a law clerk deferment like Clinton, or that is what we called Clinton for the same. Rudy has no military experience at a time when we need a commander in chief, the war against Islamofascism must achieve bipartisan status, just as the Cold War did. And Rudy hasn't the right stuff as a militarily inexperienced mayor who cross dressed to pander for the gay NYC vote.
Rudy as the nominee? Its a wet dream that everybody needs to get over, so we can get down to the business of reconstructing the party post 2006 apocalypse, preceded by the loss of such good men as Tom DeLay ( thankyou RINOs) and the Dem legal kangaroo courts initiatives.
Rudy is no Republican, and he cannot unify the Republican party, which should be apparent to anyone who sees the Freeper polls conducted here.
Will the conservatives secede in the Republican party? Not really. The question will simply be will they be forced out with a top down hi-jacking of the party? Thats the question. And so far the answer is YES to that question, according to the MSM, and Rudy mavins, who are a bit too enthusiastic for any conservative's liking.
THe MSM want Rudy to run. They think they have won a propaganda war with their continuous barrage of lies and deception and now seek to dictate who will be the Republican annointed ( If you want to win you had better.....etc.)
What a laugh, as if the MSM will have ANYTHING to say about who a Republican nominee should be.
They can stick their early Polls right up their pre- greased MSM asses. Republicans know how to win elections, we beat the Dims in the last two and we will beat them in 2008, in our own inimitable fashion: via representative democracy, and that won't involve creating a new,so called "Moderate" Republican constituency out of whole cloth.
Thats a pipe dream and an MSM trap.
Where is McCain's moderate constituency in Arizona? Look at what the Arizona Republican caucus did to McCain in its member survey, where he finished dead last as a nominee for president because of his attacks on conservatives in the 2006 election cycle, in Arizona. The bitterness for that betrayal is overwhelming in Arizona, just as it would be if Rudy gets on the same way, and he will, he will be forced to, and when that happens, if he is the nominee by hook or crook, the Republican party can waive goodbye to 40% of its electorate, which can NEVER be replaced by " moderate crossovers."
So finally the Republican leadership has actually lost its noogies. The Age of Aquarius has dawned for them? What a recipe for disaster. And conservative Republicans will continue to point that out and lobby hard for a unifying , nationally appealing, nominee who has the qualities needed to reconstruct the party after its RINO debacle in the last congress.
That ain't Rudy Giulliani by a long shot. He is basically a liberal, one of the kind who pr3evented the legislation we so needed to lead our nation forward, and when push came to shove, the liberal Pubbies , McCain at the forefront, sacked it. Now McCain and his ilk, Rudy among them, will have to account for that. No MSM polls or RNC jumpimg around will prevent that accounting, and its on its way.
When we are done, there will be a wonderful nominee who will unify the Republican party, and he or she won't be a cross dresser.
I, for one hope the right secedes. They are long overdue for any secess they can get. As my mama used to say: "If at first you'rn don't secede, try, try again. So, there. That oughta shut up all them folks that say us right wingers ain't too smart.
Tip of the Day: Buy real estate in that area being started as a secession movement---New Hampshire, I think.
'We have met the enemy...and it is us.' (pogo)
Candor7: That is not going to happen.
That happens every election. The dems and the GOP must garner votes from independents and crossover dems to win any election.
So, to win any election the candidate has to appeal to independents and cross-overs---and you say no way.
Why?
The GOP has done split, already. 2006 was the first manifestation of the schism.
It'll get worse.
Keep on truckin' Cindy!
I've been having pretty much the same conversation on another thread.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1791077/posts?page=466#466
I do not see how a candidate splits a party. The majority votes for him...the minority can either respect the majority or they don't.. THEY split the party
Those numbers roughly describe the social conservative-social liberal split, not just at FR but within the Republican Party generally.
Each of these two candidates is currently perceived by FReepers as being the most consistent and reliable representative of his kind. As the campaign season wears on, the names of the favored nominees could change, but the actual split is not likely to vary much.
Ok, here's an analogy to work with. Take a small box and fill it with some rocks. Then add some rice, filling it to the top.
Now take all the same stuff, but in a different order. Put in the rice first, then add the rocks.
What you'll find is that if you put in the big stuff first, the small stuff will fit around it. But if you put in the small stuff first, the big stuff won't have room.
The republican tent is the box. The Big issues are the socon issues, to be put in first. The little issues are things that can be accommodated around the bigger stuff.
A candidate who tries to focus on the smaller issues first and leave out the bigger issues has no way of getting all of us into the tent. He splits the party. The candidate who gets the big stuff right and as much of the little stuff that will fit, he can fit more into the tent. We're often amazed at how much rice can keep fitting in.
Rudy flunks some of the big issues, and on some of the little issues it looks to me like anyone else's rice would do just as well.
It boils down to this, "socons" want to dictate the stance of the nominee on a single issue (abortion). If they don't get thier way, many will stay home rather thn support the ONLY party that has tried to do anything substantive to end abortion. Once the nominating process ends, assuming he wins, Rudy will be the lead candidate for the party. You support the team you play for. Either that or you find anew team.
Rudy isn't driving that process, the majority isn't driving that process. The single issue "socons" are. I've yet to read one post from a Giuliani supporter saying they will stay home if Hunter gets nominated. I've yet to converse with a single Hunter supporter who states he or she will vote for Rudy if he's nominated.
It aint Rudy that's threatening to split the party, it's the "socons"
: yawn :
Wake me up when you start discussing reality and not your own pity party.
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.