Don't Forget About Your Conservative Base

The New York Times ^ | 03/28/04 | LYN NOFZIGER

[ConservativeMan55]

bttt

[Texasforever]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1106487/posts


Any questions?

[ServesURight]

Thanks for pointing out the contrast.

Looks like the Slimes is engaged in some good-old fashioned divide-and-conquer strategy. Get the conservatives riled up at Bush so hopefully they'll stay home.

[Atchafalaya]

I'll sleep well tonight knowing that the NYT is concerned about my politics and my candidate.

[Doohickey]

Conservatives pay attention without the help of the Old Gray Whore, and are already riled up.

[Texas Eagle]

The Bush administration may be moving leftward in the belief that Reagan conservatives have no place else to go. If so, it is a colossal mistake. Reagan conservatives do have someplace to go: it's called home. They can sit on their hands and not vote at all.

Damn straight. We've done it before and we'll do it again if necessary.

[cynicom]

No problems Lyn. Bush people here do their best to alienate conservatives. If Bush loses, it will be those horrible conservatives that did it.

[Cicero]

The Times is trying to stir up trouble, of course. But some of this is true.

For instance, the No Child Left Behind education act pleases almost nobody. Most of the people who work in education are leftists, and they issue a constant stream of complaint that this law is bureaucratic, expensive, cumbersome, and a general pain in the neck. Therefore it probably has done more harm than good among liberals. At the same time, it offends conservatives, who either resent the money it costs or think that money would be better controlled at the local level.

As I anticipated, the immigration reform proposal caused such a firestorm of protest from the base that Bush seems to have dropped it. He is unlikely to follow up on it, and congress is unlikely to pass anything along those lines.

But why keep annoying the base with this stuff, when it's not clear that it does much to bring in votes from the middle? I still plan to vote for Bush, but I'm annoyed that he has been persuaded to do some things that will probably lose him some votes from conservatives with shorter fuses.

[EternalHope]

We've got your back Mr. President.

BTW: No one at the NYT or in the Kerry campaign has the slightest idea what that means.

[LA Conservative]

I'll definately vote Bush/Cheney this year, but why the heck did W feel the need to lurch left with this Medicare and amnesty for illegals crap?

There is nothing wrong with a true conservative platform, particularly against the backdrop of the socialist agenda of the Democrats.

A majority of Americans will vote for a true conservative platform. That's all you need to win. The haters and bigots of the left will never vote GOP, no matter what. Reagan only got his crossover dems because of their disgust with Carter.

[NYCVirago]

Is the Times' op-ed page theme today "We bash Bush from all sides"? That's the third column in a row I've seen telling W what he needs to do to get re-elected! Sheesh.

[kcar]

Now that the NY Slimes has co-opted my prior complaints, I abjectly withdraw them all. Sorry, George, you are, you've gotta be, The Man. Doan screw with the expiration of the AWB please, but my vote is humbly pledged elsewise.

[South40]

President Bush's proposal to legitimize the presence of roughly 10 million illegal aliens, as well as what appears to be his indifference toward tightening border security, makes many conservatives irate.

Quite an understatement.

[Euro-American Scum]

President Bush's proposal to legitimize the presence of roughly 10 million illegal aliens, as well as what appears to be his indifference toward tightening border security, makes many conservatives irate.

But it's O.K. for Bush to do this, because after all, he's a Republican.

[Reagan Man]

This isn't a bash Bush article! It's constructive criticism by someone who knows a thing or two about politics.

The article was written by Lyn Nofziger, a key conservative advisor to Ronald Reagan when he was Governor and President. I'd take it at face value, for what its worth. Nofziger knows what he's talking about. I'm sure the article was brought to the President's attention by some astute politico working in his administration. And I'm sure the President will take Nofziger's advice seriously.

[primeval patriot]

Newsweek

February 2, 1981

Former campaign press secretary Lyn Nofziger, now White House political liaison, is poised for further complaints from conservatives. "The first thing were going to do is listen to them," says Nofziger. "So much of the frustration in the past has been that they didn't have anyone who would listen to them. The second thing we're going to do is try as much as possible to remind ourselves how we got here and what we promised to do when when we got here."

[NYCVirago]

This isn't a bash Bush article! It's constructive criticism by someone who knows a thing or two about politics.

I'm sorry, I should have clarified what I said. Let me put it this way -- I'm quite suspicious of the Times' running three articles giving advice to Bush today. The message I think the Times is trying to send, no matter how honorable the intentions of the writers are (and I'm sure that Nofziger, Campbell, and Dole's intentions are all honorable) is that Bush is in trouble from all sides of his party. Call me a cynic, but the Times obviously isn't interested in helping get Bush re-elected, that's for sure.

Check out today's lead editorial, "A Long, Long Muddle, which begins with "George Bush's vision of the nation's future will undoubtedly be one focus of the presidential campaign. We suggest the debate start with the question of whether Mr. Bush actually has one." I don't think it's a coincidence that these op-eds are running on the same day as that editorial.

[Reagan Man]

Good one.

Reagan, Nofziger and the rest, listened to the GOP's conservative base back then. Reagan united conservatives like never before and I was proud to campaign for Reagan.

[Reagan Man]

I read all three articles. I don't agree with you. Printing three articles from three different political perspectives, should be viewed as a plus for the Bush campaign.

Constructive criticism can be a useful tool.

The NYTimes is read mainly by liberals and those liberals have already made their mind up. The focus of these three articles was to the GOP's centrist, moderate and conservative factions.