Posted on 05/25/2006 11:42:38 AM PDT by BigNoddy
Please forgive me if I have transgressed in some way here. I am new and am just learning to navigate this interface. And I am not privvy to much of what has been discussed here.
This stems from a mildly inflammatory exchange I had elsewhere about the Republican Party here in Illinois. A poster suggested that the moderates here were the cause of the current disarray, and that when "we" regain control again of the party then "we" will get people elected again.
I found that most curious since the "we" he seems to be referring to never had control of the Republican Party here, to the very best of my knowledge and belief.
I consider myself to be a moderate Republican. I have a problem with other Republicans telling me that I'm irrelevant, or to f*** off. So what is it? Am I part of this party, or what? Is the future of the Party going to be exclusively with the right wing? Is there any room for the left at all?
" I wish I knew. The GOP "leadership" is not listening to the base (that'd be us) right now.
2006 is gonna be a bloodbath. There's lots of denial, some of it right here on ol'FR. "
Exactly my concerns, and the reaction I seem to have provoked here with some simple questions confirms the latter part of your statement.
I wish you knew too. Then you could tell me.
At some point were you going to answer the question, or did you just want a flame war? How about this?
The Republican primary comes down to Mike Pence (R) Indiana or Rudy Guliani (R) New York. Whom do you support?
My best advice to you would be to start out on threads where you agree with the majority of freepers. Make a name for yourself and make online friends. After a while of getting to know the place, then venture out into topics where you might disagree with conservatives. As long as you stay respectful and polite, you should have no problem. I would definitely advise you to follow my advice on the "waiting period" though. It's been pretty crazy around here with the illegal immigration debates of late, and the moderators are on the lookout for trolls. I hate to see anybody banned because of false assumptions.
AFA being a minority in your state, you should try the People's Republic of Maryland some time. Having moderates in power would be a severe lurch to the right in this godforsaken state.
****************
Not at all. The laughs were all mine.
Best of luck to you in all your future political endeavors.
Good day.
What is the alternative? I say that as a self identified "RINO." In the real world, politics is about coalitions. Granted, on individual issues, one can and does mix and match. I least I do. The Dems well remain unattractive to me as long as that party is controlled and funded by trial lawyers, and public employee unions, with a bevy of entitlement minded folks looking for a handout, and idealists who are not realistic about many foreign policy issues, along with its own stable of protectionists.
Not just in the real world. Our parties themselves are coalition parties. A third party candidate's only role is draw votes from one party or the other.
Karl Rove is to be congratulated for holding the discipline for so long. Unfortunately in the real world we also experience diminishing returns and the old discipline is long in the tooth. It's time for a new discipline.
Granted, on individual issues, one can and does mix and match. I least I do. The Dems well remain unattractive to me as long as that party is controlled and funded by trial lawyers, and public employee unions, with a bevy of entitlement minded folks looking for a handout, and idealists who are not realistic about many foreign policy issues, along with its own stable of protectionists.
The Dems mix and match too. Yes, they are unattractive and yes they are not only the only alternative, but they are our countrymen as well. They have every right to be represented in our system and to have a dialogue with us. If the extremes of either party can't negotiate with us moderates then the moderates of both parties should get together and marginalize the extremes. If you ask me, the extremes are begging us to marginalize them. Look at what I've gotten here? And they have the temerity to blame me for their attacks on me?
A pox on their house.
I don't proclaim myself to be a "RINO". I see myself more as a traditional conservative as opposed to the current stable of "neo-conservatives" and "neo-conomists". I think the goals of the neos are great. Their roadmap for how to get there is unsustainable, radical, and not at all conservative.
I am not above playing both extremes off against each other. As for politicians, I have been around enough of them to tell you with great confidence that they are all the same thing. They are all bought and sold. That is the nature of things. Sometimes you get good ones, in their first term. But they either change into that same thing, or they're gone. I.e. Peter Fitzgerald here in Illinois.
Political labels such as "right" and "left" and "conservative" and "moderate" and "liberal" and "radical" mean different things when applied to exactly the same views in different places.
Your self-classification as a "moderate" therefore means nothing to me as your points of views could be the polar opposites or could be identical to mine.
The fact that strong disagreement can be found in any Free Republic thread demonstrates that everyone here is cut out of a slightly different cloth.
All true. And so what should I make of the fact that anyone would get rude with me, or anyone else?
I suppose the more functional response to rudeness of any sort would be to ignore it. But then that kind of goes back to my original questions about where a "moderate" is supposed to fit into the future of the Republican Party.
Rudeness is not the monopoly of a particular party or a particular forum. It only reflects upon the individual poster.
But then that kind of goes back to my original questions about where a "moderate" is supposed to fit into the future of the Republican Party.
The "moderate", the "conservative" and the "liberal" will all be fighting to convince the majority of the "brand name voters" that they are the voice of any party.
With each election cycle, the political pendulum will swing gently back and forth and each side will complain that "the Party left me". The "name brand voter" will then pull "D" or "R" as they always have and not bother too much about the choice.
As I wrote on another thread where the complaint was that the Republican Party had abandoned conservatives:
***************************
"The Republican Party left me!"
That's fine but that's not my point.
My point is that "Republican" and "Democrat" are merely political brand names and that a very large number of voters will pull the Republican or Democrats levers on Election Day simply as a matter of brand loyalty just like millions of Americans would buy caramel-colored hamster piss just as long as the plastic bottle said "Coca-Cola" on it.
If you want to win, the best way to do it is to fight to get candidates with your point of view on the "name brand" ballot.
It is relatively easy to defeat an incumbent on the wrong side of a 70%+ hot-button poll issue but it is virtually impossible for a third party to break the brand loyalty of the majority of American voters.
822 posted on 05/07/2006 4:43:40 PM PDT by Polybius
**************************
Is Illinois a blue state or red state? Moderates are blue.
Let me have a slice at it..
Would you categorize yourself as a Rockefeller, Reagan or Goldwater Republican?
Also, are any of these your reps. locally?
Rep. Judy Biggert, Illinois, Rep. Timothy Johnson, Illinois, Rep. Mark Kirk, Illinois, Rep. Ray LaHood, Illinois, Rep. Jerry Weller, Illinois
sorta like the last time you were desperate to find a motel:no vacancy
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.