GOP PRIMARY PROTEST VOTE

e-mail from Citizens Lobby | 1/18/2004 | Unknown

[JimRed]

If your state is holding a "primary" vote for the Republican candidate for president, Citizens Lobby strongly urges you to cast a "blank" ballot -- OR write in a candidate of your choice.

We recommend Tom Tancredo, Ron Paul, Pat Buchanan or Alan Keyes...

President Bush needs a wake call and your vote is a great way to send him a message.

[FreeReign]

Can I vote for Ronald Reagan?

You could write-in Reagan but it wouldn't be much of a protest.

They both did the right thing taking on our foreign enemies -- the cold war for Reagan and the WOT for Bush.

However they both signed campaign finance bills limiting free speech, they both signed amnesty legislation and Reagan spent more as a percentage of GDP than GW.

[Owen]

Exactly. I keep teaching the lesson and they keep forgetting it.

All y'all Tancredo extremists . . . stand up, read this screen and repeat after me:

I am an extremist. I will NEVER EVER get to vote FOR anyone in a general election. My candidates of choice can NEVER survive the process that long. In general elections I vote FOR no one. I vote AGAINST the opposition, and I do that by punching the chad in the column of the Republican. That's how I vote AGAINST the opposition. Any other action votes FOR the opposition.

There, you can sit down now.

[JimRed]

Yeah, vote against the first control of Congress in 40 years! Vote against tax cuts! Vote for partial birth abortion! Vote against the war on Iraq! Vote for more liberal judges! Vote for the war against Christians! Vote against honor in the WH! Vote for the Rats! Never!!!

Opinion seems to run 65-35 against the idea, but I think you are misconstruing the purpose, which is to bring to President Bush's attention the fact that many conservatives are not comfortable with several of his positons.

You ARE right about this: Vote for the RATS? NEVER!!!

[Sabertooth]

Really? When did he say this? It's not that I doubt it, but I would like to see his quote(s).

I've seen him say it a few times, but don't have a quote handy.

I tried a few searches, but the quotes are needles in the "vote for Tancredo" haystack. I'll keep my eyes open.

[Catspaw]

How are you going to decide which one is the worst?

For me, it means giving someone false hope--that they might even have a chance--and right now, I'm leaning Dean. But then, it could be Kerry or Edwards. I won't decide until they show up in Wisco and woo me (snicker).

[FreeReign]

We recommend Tom Tancredo, Ron Paul, Pat Buchanan or Alan Keyes...

In 1984 I supported Buchanan as a protest vote. I won't be doing it again.

As far as the others go, Keyes is a cry baby, Paul is a Libertarian and Tancredo believes we have Mexican military incursions based on unnamed sources.

[JimRed]

As far as the others go, Keyes is a cry baby, Paul is a Libertarian and Tancredo believes we have Mexican military incursions based on unnamed sources.

OK, lets throw some names up for consideration!

[Howlin]

Now, that I got to see. You don't seem to be the kind of woman who can be "wooed."

[Catspaw]

Well, they have to come to Wisconsin--and they all do, especially that symbolic trip to football mecca--and persuade me. I might even lead them along when they "poll" me, even show up at my door (well, at least their minions will). It depends on who needs the false hope the most.

[FreeReign]

As long as people have your attitude, that we must choose only between 2 major parties, and that a vote anywhere else is just wasted, the dems and the pubs can do ANYTHING they want to us with impunity.

What makes you think that the D's and R's aren't doing what the general electorate wants?

If I recall waaaay back in 2000, and I know that's a loooong way back to remember, the majority of the electorate voted for either Al Gore or Ralph Nader.

What do you thing that shows?

[ShandaLear]

It's dumb because it will have little effect on whatever policy results from his speech. You are better off calling and writing the White House and your representatives.

[Catspaw]

You don't seem to be the kind of woman who can be "wooed."

Little ol' moi? Of course I can be wooed. I mean I'm sooo undecided that any number of volunteers are going to be spending a lot of time out in Wisconsin weather (think cold, snow, sleet and slush) trying to convince me that their candidate is the best candidate on the Dem ticket. Oh, yeah :-))

[savedbygrace]

Since you don't offer any evidence that leads to your conclusion, it appears you are saying that unless we toe the Bush line, we have evil motives.

You can check my posts, but you'll find that I've advocated that those who stand against the administration's position on the immigration proposal contact their reps (congresscritter and senators who are up for re-election) and tell them you'll not be voting at all, as a protest.

If you stop reading there, then you'll conclude I'm anti-Bush, I'm sure. But if you continue reading, you'll see that the purpose is to convince those reps to pressure the WH to back off their proposal.

If you ascribe evil motives to this idea, you'll be wrong. Not that this will stop you, of course.

[k2blader]

I don't think Keyes was ever offered a position within the current admin. He's a little "too conservative" for most Republicans, if you know what I mean.

[savedbygrace]

Of course, those two methods should go hand in hand. That's what I've posted on more than one thread here.

But to say it's dumb isn't correct either. You're saying that President Bush doesn't care how many votes he gets. There are plenty of conservatives who are upset by this proposal, and if he continues down that path, he might lose in November.

But the way to reverse that is NOT to name-call the protesters. You will only be encouraging them to leave the Republican Party altogether. And there are a lot of them, so you might, by your childish name-calling, be helping to defeat President Bush in November.

[k2blader]

Well, my guess is about 67% of FReepers are conservo (see latest Bush illegal amnesty poll). The rest are liberals.

[af_vet_rr]

It's dumb because it will have little effect on whatever policy results from his speech. You are better off calling and writing the White House and your representatives.

Yes, because the WH and your reps are going to read your letter and say "oh my gosh, this person feels we've strayed from Conservative beliefs, we better do something."

Just as large corporations only listen when it affects their profits, it's the same with politicians. They only listen when they are in danger of losing their power.

They need to be reminded that they serve at our pleasure and just as we elected them, we can elect somebody else to represent us.

[sinkspur]

He's a little "too conservative" for most Republicans, if you know what I mean.

He's too unpredictable. He's liable to say or do anything because life is more about what Keyes wants than about what anybody else wants.

[ClintonBeGone]

But the way to reverse that is NOT to name-call the protesters. You will only be encouraging them to leave the Republican Party altogether.

What you do with these 'protestors' is you treat them like the children they are. You stick 'em in the corner, tell 'em to shut up and deny them the attention they crave. After a period of time they'll show up for dinner. They always do.