Posted on 11/06/2015 6:16:40 AM PST by refreshed
It is unfortunate, but it always seems as if the Republicans strive much harder to wound fellow candidates for office than Democrats. I have also noticed this trend on FreeRepublic. Instead of waiting to see how things shake out and making a defense for our choice, there have been concerted efforts to make fools of candidates (and the posters that defend them) that do most things right, but might have an area or made a decision with which we disagree.
Instead of discussions being based on ideology, mockery, derision and lampooning ensure our candidate is bleeding and vulnerable when it comes to the general election.
Donald Trump - Yes, he is bombastic and lacks a long history of conservative ideology (or doing anything conservative for that matter). Yes, he is arrogant and appears incapable of empathy. This said, he has done an excellent job of bringing the Illegal Alien issue to the forefront and has called out the media and other politicians on their hypocrisy and ignorance.
Ted Cruz - TPP is terrible as is H1B. This candidate, however, is so solid on so many other issues, that he is certainly my choice this election cycle (which means he probably won't win the primary). He has been a solid and proven conservative, who has lived that conservatism on the Senate floor and paid the political price for doing so.
Ben Carson - He is proving himself to be a political amateur. This is exposed for all the world to see. That said, he seems sincere, honest, and is targeted by the right people to expose him as someone who really is Conservative on most issues.
Marco Rubio - The press and Jeb! are doing a good job of exposing his many flaws. I'm not sure what he has done that has actually been good, but it is out there I'm sure. Maybe there is a Rubio supporter on FreeRepublic that can summarize this for me.
Everybody else - No real chance for election, mostly not conservative (although I really like Huckabee for some reason) so I really don't care.
This post is nothing more than my simple inept attempt at introducing some sort of civility to the debate for who the Republican nominee should be. While it is certainly okay to debate policy positions of candidates and even moral failings and differences of ideology, shouldn't we get beyond the petty bashing of candidates and each other?
I hate to see fellow old-time Freepers mocking and ridiculing and tearing down each other on their pick for the nomination. Can we make this a civil discussion? The disrespectful actions of many posters do not seem particularly useful. In fact, this vindictive spirit is out of place on FreeRepublic.
I forgot to add “Vanity” to the title. Can you do that for me? This is like the second Vanity I have ever posted.
Truth.
Yeah, that about sums it up.
I agree with all that you said. I let people know that I am a Cuz supporter, and will occasionally expose a troubling position, action or hypocrisy, but in general I want to beat the RINO.
In this campaign we can thank Trump, whom I personally regard as reflexively pro-big government for making it impossible for the Establishment or MSM to frame the discussion. He also makes it impossible to credibly paint Cruz as an extremist.
At one point John Ellis Bush was in the thick of things. I hope you have no issue bashing John Ellis Bush to derail the Establishment train. We can only take Laissez-faire so far.
“Hey, Bobby, get me a cherry slurpee.”
Et cetera.
If you truly want civility you should have left out your opinion of the candidates.
So what you are really saying is. Can’t we all just agree with your assessment and get along?
“it always seems as if the Republicans strive much harder to wound fellow candidates for office than Democrats. I have also noticed this trend on FreeRepublic.”
Absolutely.
DemocRATS are in for the long game and any advance, however small, is supported.
I have no issue with bashing Jeb. As far as I know, there are no supporters of Jeb on FreeRepublic. Besides that, you could have something substantive to hit Jeb on every day of the week and not run out. He is NOT a conservative anyway based on his stands, his actions and who he runs with.
I agree with this. Hate to see some of the vitriol in some threads.
We have to vet our candidates but can do that without going postal.
Newt Gingrich left Congress in disgust saying, “Republicans eat their own”. He was dead-on correct. I find conservatives to be, in general, mean as snakes to each other.
My thoughts exactly. This guy bemoans a situation, but in two seconds flat contradicts himself and engages in the same behavior he at first found troubling.
What you said is incorrect. One can disagree civilly. Or do you disagree?
Newt then proceeded to snack himself in 2012.
True.
It is not persuasive to promote a candidate by trashing everyone who disagree with him. All that does is make people hate your candidate and vow to never vote for him no matter what.
It is best to qualify things with “I think” “to me” “What I am going to do” etc. Then the listener will think about it. They may not agree, but they won’t be pushed into vowing never to support your candidate, at least not for emotional reasons.
When the primary is over, the winner will need to gain all the republican support possible.
There needs to be more respect for the idea of republicanism. Every voter must decide for himself. Bullies and cheaters are anti-republic.
Who did I mock or ridicule, thereby exposing myself as a hypocrite?
No, he is saying that it is possible to converse and even disagree with each other like gentlemen. The art of conversation and debate has been replaced with personal diatribe. It seems that folks have been raised by wolves rather than good Christian families.
What is ironic is that all those people are doing the work of the Democratic Party and their media shills. It's that simple! Whether it is mocking Carson for something he said 17 years ago (what did YOU, or better yet, your candidate, say 17 years ago), or Trump for being vague (he's not), or Cruz for being only good for the Supreme Court (if he's good for the SC then as President he would knwo EXACTLY who to nominate) ....all those statements help one person.
The Democratic Party Candidate!
Oh, it does help someone else looking at the last two election cycles - the GOP-e preferred candidate. Conservatives, being 'silly people,' spend their ammo attacking each others' candidates, while the GOP-e candidate waltzes unscathed. Goodness, if it wasn't for Trump attacking Jeb that would be a repeat of McCain and Romney!
They only serve to alienate fellow Conservatives, cause unnecessary bile, and are not helpful to YOUR candidate (just because Carson drops out, to use him as an example, doesn't mean the votes go to Trump. Just because Trump drops out doesn't mean the votes go to Cruz. Etc. I'd be willing to bet that if Trump/Carson/Cruz dropped out, those votes would go to ...wait for it ...Rubio! Guaranteed!).
The guns should be aimed at the Dems ...the Republican/Conservative voters will decide who the Republican nominee is, and don't need 'help' deciding.
But guess what ...Conservatives are not bright enough to realize that, and that's why even with grassroot support it is either a GOP-e candidate or a straight-up Democrat who gets elected president. It's been almost 3 decades now since a Conservative won.
Why?
Because Conservatives are, in general, too dumb to realize when they are getting played!
So - continue with the circular firing line (and yes, I know I am referencing a 'circular line'). Trump supporters - kill Carson. Carson's supporters - kill Trump. And all in between join the party as well.
The eventual GOP-e candidate, and (hopefully not but it is a possibility) President Hillary Rodham Clinton, send their kindest regards.
And yes ...I am totally aware I truly wasted my time with this post. Conservatives are as a rule too illogical and will not only miss the point I am trying to make, but will probably lose this election as well. And the sad thing is this ...considering it has been almost 3 decades since someone who could be called conservative won, it may never happen in the future as true Conservatism is getting diluted every passing year, and some time will come when even the 'Conservative' candidate will be a Liberal. Think of it another way ...JFK today would be considered a Conservative (or put another way, most - not all - conservative candidates today are more liberal than JFK). There may never be another real Conservative candidate - ever.
But hey ...let's character assassinate the current lot of 'more-conservative-than-not' candidates. After all, the GOP-e candidate, as well as Hillary Clinton, need all the help they can get, and we have been so so so helpful to them in the past.
No sarcasm. Absolutely none, and to be honest when certain Libs look down their noses at us they are quite correct to do so. We are the stupid party after all.
Flame away (not you Refreshed ...the others who feel I am insulting them)! It would be a compliment to me to be flamed by idiots who do the work of Hillary unwittingly, liked maddened braying donkeys!
"Donald Trump - Yes, he is bombastic and lacks a long history of conservative ideology (or doing anything conservative for that matter). Yes, he is arrogant and appears incapable of empathy."
This statement does not invite civility. It is your opinion.
It is my opinion. You disagree. I’m okay with that, but I disagree. See, that’s how it works! Thank you for engaging civilly.
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.