Posted on 03/03/2009 5:21:17 AM PST by GeorgiaDawg32
I think we can all agree (perhaps not) the GOP has a long way to go to simply get to mediocre as far as conservative principles are concerned. RINO's abound and the GOP has become nothing more than "Democrat Light".
WHAT IF Rush does in fact start a conservative 3rd party, and his 20 million listeners immediately leave the GOP and join this new outfit. Let's also assume this happens in the next couple of weeks..
What are the implications for the '10 races?
What are the implications for the '12 race for President?
Wouldn't this simply split the GOP and hand '10 and '12 back to the democrats? (small "d", it's intentional) due to a split vote??
Would the new conservative party become large enough in the next 2 years to displace the GOP or at least have a major impact on the upcoming elections?
Who would lead? IOW, who are the current Republicans that we'd like to take with us, and who are the RINO's we'd leave on the bench with a pleasant, "Thanks but no thanks, we don't want you"?
The chances of this actually happening are somewhere between slim and none, IMO, and I believe I just saw slim climb on his horse and head out of town, but the time is coming, eventually, for a new conservative party. It's not a question of "if", but "when"..
No, I didn't....because Rush isn't dumb or egotistical enough to try to start a third party.
But is he Patriot enough to maybe think it’s the only way? With even the GOP’s Steele running a RINO line, it may in fact be time to pull the Eject handle on the GOP.
I would question the premise of your question: I don't think scrapping the GOP and trying to start a third party is "patriotic". I think it's a sure-fire way to hand the country to the Dems permanently. I think the "patriotic" approach is for conservatives to get off their duffs, unite behind the GOP banner, and start taking back the party, one county at a time. If we did that, then guess what? There wouldn't BE the RINOs in power to complain about. WE'D have the power once again, just like in 1980 and 1994. Conservatives need to start thinking long-term - this nonsense of reacting to things as they are now, instead of planning to make them how WE WANT them to be five years down the road, is what got us where we're at now.
While the rest of us see the GOP becoming ever more "pragmatic" in its attempts to match the Dems Leftward slide.
How'd that strategy work out with McCain anyway? Think if maybe we keep doing the same thing, we'll get a different result? Look at the back biting between the Romney backers and the Palinites. Think that'll do us any long term good?
You have a lot of excellent points.
As far as “taking back the party”: when you have a system of participatory control with few people participating, each additional person that DOES participate has a helluva lot of leverage.
I have observed this even at our local level. One fiscally responsible voice at a school board meeting goes a long way. Just about everyone else there is a special-interest voice, looking for a “gimmee”.
This is a good, thought provoking discussion and I hate to cut it off but I have to get to work to pay my tax burden! :-)
ONe other quick point: I’m convinced that any “take back the GOP” effort MUST focus first on LOCAL politics. That is the cupboard wherein fiscally irresponsible Chamber of Commerce RINOs breed.
It is vote for us, we spend less on social programs and earmarks.
Look, you're still thinking short term. Instead of acting, you're REACTING. That's never a good place to be, and any third party started out of knee-jerk reaction is doomed to failure from its inception anywise.
Let's think about this.
Q. What do we want to see?
A. A solidly conservative party that will provide leadership on issues we care about, which will unite conservatives and draw in the "mushy masses" who follow leadership more than they do ideology, thereby winning elections and putting conservatives into place to implement our agenda.
Q. What has the organisation to do this already in place, the GOP or some pie-in-the-sky third party that doesn't exist yet and would need to be built entirely from the ground up?
A. the GOP.
Q. Which makes more sense for putting the conservative agenda into place, taking over the apparatus already in place, or starting from scratch with a party that only one out of three or four conservatives will actually leave the GOP to join?
A. Taking over the apparatus already in place.
Look, conservatives need to act with foresight. That's a hallmark of conservatism - being smart enough to look down the road and plan and say "Hey, I'd better do this now, to make preparations for the future." That's what underlies our whole ethos on fiscal responsibility and traditional moral values. Personally, I'd rather plan to retake the GOP, even if it takes a few years, rather than just being another notch carved into Howard Phillips' walking stick. I, for one, would not waste my time leaving to go join a third party, and you can count on roughly 50-75% of conservatives agreeing with me.
I TOTALLY agree.
Thanks, I'm glad somebody thinks so ;)
As far as “taking back the party”: when you have a system of participatory control with few people participating, each additional person that DOES participate has a helluva lot of leverage.
I have observed this even at our local level. One fiscally responsible voice at a school board meeting goes a long way. Just about everyone else there is a special-interest voice, looking for a “gimmee”.
That is so true. That's part of the problem to date with the Party in my county. We have 49 precincts - each of whose chairman gets a seat on the county Executive Committee, in addition to the actual elected county EC officials (Chair, Vice, Treasurer, Secretary, etc.). So, there should be up to something like 55 members on the county EC. As of right now, there are like 10, and they've been in there forever and have gone country club. That's going to change in less than a week, if all goes well.
This is a good, thought provoking discussion and I hate to cut it off but I have to get to work to pay my tax burden! :-)
Yeah, I hear that, we gotta work so President 0bama can turn up that thermostat!
It’s a good idea, but in this techno era, it would be hard to organize and get members if the MSM continues in its corrupt ways. The people would need to hear about it, and Obama’s media would boycott the subject.
Of course, there was no technology in the 1800s, so anything is possible. (Whose side was the printed press on when GOP was formed?)
It would split the vote and hand the government over to Soros.
Of the 20 million listeners, many (my guess: better than half) would not identify with the party because they are afraid of being viewed as extreme.
IMO, soros already has the government with ears as his sock puppet..
Solid? Most Republicans can't even agree on First Principles! Anything that doesn't start with Bill of Rights Enforcement and Constitutional Limitations on government in general, isn't going to get you very far.
Most of the arguments get bogged down in minutia, personality conflicts, personal grudges, and Nanny State tendencies.
With that much baggage, no amount of counseling will save the relationship. There is too much built in inertia in the GOP to "haul it back to the Right". Look what happened with Steele and McCain if you need evidence of this.
In my own world, one thing I've done is to get more involved. I agree that forming a 3rd party to represent conservative ideology is a sure fired way to make Conservatism a minority player for a generation. It makes far more sense to take back the Republican Party. After all, we're clearly not fighting genius here. Some of what I'm doing involves subtly enlightening folks I see regularly to the folly of what is happening. Some of this effort involves staying in at least weekly contact with my representatives offices. Another thing I've started doing, especially with my 'Rat congresscritter, is keep an eye on his website and watch for public appearances. I've already shown up at one event and asked a very polite, but pointed question regarding his support for the Porkulus bill. I had "done my homework" and knew that this Rep. has five kids and a dozen grandkids. So, I framed my question in terms of the Porkulus impact on his family and heirs. He clearly thought that he was in safe water, but, as I expected, many in the room were not satisfied with his response to me, saw the parallels in their own lives and they carried on until the Rep. claimed a time conflict and dashed out. An interesting discussion followed his hasty departure and I think it left a lot of his supporters questioning his re-election.
Putting face to face pressure on these folks, as well as enlightening others in such situations, will be a major part of my efforts between now and November of 2010.
Having met several of my congresscritters over the years, both Senators and Representatives, both Republican and Democrat, one thing sticks out in my mind. These people impress me as being gutless wonders at best and sniveling cowards at worst. The one thing they fear the most is not getting re-elected. Face to face pressure seems to work better for reminding them who they work for, especially if there is media present at these sorts of events. I wish more folks would adopt this idea, especially the "doom and gloomers" who seem to prefer to sit back, rant and rave to each other instead of putting their efforts to more constructive uses.
Problem with the third party proposals we're hearing is that they only appeal to pissed off people who don't have much sense about what actually needs done. All they know is they want to do SOMETHING, and they want to do it RIGHT NOW. So, they're doomed to failure.
Further, from the handles of FReepers on her who are pushing for a third party on this thread, I'm noticing a strong correlation between who is doing so here, and who on other threads have roundly castigated as RINOs everybody who didn't agree with them on every little thing 100%. So what happens when you form your third party, and then have a difference of opinion on your first policy question? Well, some of your egotistical hardheads will proceed to split and form a fourth party, and castigate you as a TPINO (Third Partyist in name only). And soon we have a fifth party, and so on.
It's so ridiculous, I can't believe anyone is giving it serious thought.
I plan to work within the system aggressively, with or without the egoists and lazy ones unwilling to do any heavy lifting.
That is AWESOME!
As for the rest of what you said, I agree with it wholeheartedly, and would love to see 10,000,000 conservatives across the country doing the same!
Yeah... How dare we expect our Government to adhere to the Constitution and Bill of Rights 100%. How outdated...
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.