Oh! So you want to be treated as if you were black, right?
Very interesting...
$710.96... The price of freedom.
Posted on 06/21/2004 5:41:56 PM PDT by freedom44
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Moses Murphy was as Republican as they come. The 27-year-old former Marine always voted a straight ticket and his Jeep Cherokee sported three "Bush-Cheney '04" bumper stickers.
But two months ago as the Boardsman, Ohio, resident was surfing the Internet, he came across the Web site for the Constitution Party, a small, conservative group still struggling to be on the ballot in every state.
Off came the Bush paraphernalia and now Murphy's Jeep is plastered with stickers for Michael Peroutka, the Constitution Party's little-known presidential nominee.
Media attention has focused on Ralph Nader as a potential spoiler to presumptive Democratic nominee John Kerry, but President Bush could face a similar threat from third party candidates on the right.
The Constitution and Libertarian parties believe they could siphon away enough disenchanted conservatives to tip a close election.
For Murphy, Bush's proposal to grant amnesty to illegal immigrants living in the United States was the final straw.
"We can't keep letting illegals come in; we need troops on the border," Murphy said in a telephone interview. "(Bush's) views no longer reflect my views, and I need to vote my principles."
The party occupying the White House is typically more prone to disgruntled ideologues bolting for a third party, said Lawrence Jacobs, director of the 2004 Elections Project for the Humphrey Institute at the University of Minnesota.
And hardline conservatives have no shortage of gripes with the president they helped elect. Topping the list is the dramatic increase in federal spending, especially the $500 billion new Medicare entitlement for prescription drugs Bush pushed through Congress, said Paul Weyrich, head of the Free Congress Foundation and a leading conservative activist.
Weyrich said grassroots conservatives "have a real problem with this administration's out of control spending."
TIPPING THE BALANCE
But it is unclear whether this grumbling on the right will translate into votes for the Libertarian or Constitution party nominees. In 2000, the Libertarian nominee received only about 385,000 votes or 0.36 percent, and conservative commentator Pat Buchanan won about 450,000 or 0.42 percent. By contrast, Nader, running from the left, took almost 3 million votes or 2.74 percent and possibly swung the election to Bush with a strong Florida showing.
Any defections from Bush's base would be "minuscule" said Stuart Rothenberg, editor of the Rothenberg Political Report, and the policy gripes of Washington political elites do not necessarily resonate among the Republican rank-and-file.
"Spokesman for the conservative movement see it as their job to grumble" when politicians on the right begin to stray, Rothenberg said.
However, even a handful of defections in key states could tip the balance. For Bush to have a hope of winning, Rothenberg said, his support among Republicans cannot dip much below 90 percent.
Unlike Nader, who was on 43 state ballots in 2000 as the Green Party nominee and is struggling to match that this year, the Libertarian nominee is typically on the ballot in all 50 states, Jacobs said.
The Constitution Party was on the presidential ballot in 42 states in 2000.
Libertarians have already proven they can decide the outcome of close elections. In the 2002 South Dakota Senate race, the Republican challenger lost by about 500 votes, with the Libertarian candidate receiving more than 3,000.
That same year, Libertarian candidates in the Wisconsin and Oregon gubernatorial races received 11 and 5 percent respectively, far exceeding the Democrat's margin of victory.
Bush lost both Oregon and Wisconsin by less than a percentage point in 2000, and both will be in play this year.
Swing states like New Hampshire and Nevada may also be fertile ground for Libertarians, Jacobs said.
But the Libertarian and Constitution party platforms could be an obstacle in peeling away conservative votes from Bush.
Both sound familiar conservative themes of slashing government and lowering taxes, but they also advocate the immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, and the Libertarians are socially liberal, supporting abortion rights and drug legalization. A general rule of thumb, Rothenberg said, is that about half of the voters who support third parties are outsiders who would not vote if their candidate was not running.
But if his candidacy does siphon away enough conservatives from Bush to put Kerry in the White House, Libertarian presidential nominee Michael Badnarik says that is fine with him. There is little difference between the major parties, he said, and playing the spoiler in a presidential election would greatly enhance Libertarians' national profile.
Peroutka, the Constitution nominee, said a Kerry victory could even help the conservative cause by prompting Republicans in Congress, who have approved Bush's spending increases, to oppose similar measures proposed by Kerry.
This third-party-on-the-right idiocy must be stopped.
It is defensible only in years when the GOP cannot lose (1984 or 1972) or cannot win (1996). Otherwise, these people are betraying their fellow citizens with their political masturbation. Get real, guys. Presidents are never what we want them to be. Reagans don't grow on trees. The left hates Bush's guts. Isn't that enough for you?
And what good can possibly from a Kerry win?
If neither Republicrat candidate represents your principles, what difference does it make?
also since you seem to love RINOS so much, i suppose you love abortionists, stem cell research, gun control, open border, socialistic spending, NAFTA, hate crime legislation, affirmative action, etc.
By the way, How's everything over at DU? LOL.
According to Rove approximately 4 million of the religious right stayed home. I don't know where he gets that number .... But of the 14% that claimed to be a part of the religious right 19% of them voted for Gore...
So you can't make them all happy and some are going to take their ball and play in some other party or stay home... Happens ..
Will wonders ever cease.
Since they're predicting a Bush landslide, what would a few votes going to the Constitution party matter? Nader's party will get more votes than the Constitution party so it shouldn't affect Bush too much since he's in the lead.
Oh! So you want to be treated as if you were black, right?
Very interesting...
$710.96... The price of freedom.
None of these whining malcontents were politically awake when Reagan ran in 76 or got elected in 80.
Compared to Reagan, Bush is Genghis Khan.
Just compare their VP and Chief of Staff selections.
I'll match you issue for issue. Bush is far more conservative than Reagan.
By the way. I loved Reagan and served in three of his campaigns. I spent a decade fighting the Bushies. But facts is facts and GWB is heads above Reagan in every category except acting (public speaking).
lol, they just wish.
Sorry but your analysis does not hold water.
In non-battleground states, such as New York or California, a principled conservative can certainly vote for the Constitution Pary or Libertarian party candidate without affecting the outcome of the election. You can be sure that the Republicans and Democrats watch the inroads that 3rd party candidates make on their margins of victory.
In battleground states, its even more critical that they win. In these cases, its up to each individual voter how they will vote. Will they vote with their head held high, or will they vote with their fingers pinching their noses.
It's more like,as a drowning man,would you like a ten ton brick (Kerry),a ten ton brick with the word "principles" stenciled on it (fringe vote),or a like preserver(Bush)?
Exactly!
"In 2000, the Libertarian nominee received only about 385,000 votes or 0.36 percent,"
Many libertarians, like me, voted for, and even contributed to Bush in 2000. Since he has shown himself to be socially repressive and fiscally irresponsible, in fact, the exact opposite of what libertarians wanted, it is unlikely many of us will make the same mistake this time around.
I know most of you don't care. I don't think we will be the reason he loses even if he does. Mine is just an observation.
And a Kerry presidency will just warm the cockles of your heart,I bet. :-)
Third Party voting only works in the primaries. This is how it works. Say that the Democrats get 35% of the vote, the Communists get 2% of the vote, the Socialist Worker's Party gets 3% of the vote, the Greens get 6% of the vote, and the Libertarians get 2% of the vote. Then, in the general election, the Democratic candidate can look at the primary election results and say: "Gee. 13% of my important constituents feel really strongly about moral-liberal issues, so therefore I will alter my message accordingly in the general election!"
Rove must be posting under several different aliases.
Why do you seem so angry that a voter sticks to his conscience? A vote for Peroutka is not a vote for Kerry.
Why are you so blindly mesmerized by Bush that you claim that anyone who doesn't WORSHIP him, is a liberal? I contend that you are mesmerized by men and have not educated yourself about the important issues,. Do you know what sovereignty is? do you comprehend it? Tell me what you think it is.
Do you have any principles? if so, what are they? Do you approve of promoting sodomites and their male 'wives' to head a foreign embassy in Bucharest? If so, you can stop claiming to be a 'conservative' right here and now.
Do you support the communist clinton /feinstein gun ban? If so, you can stop claiming to be a 'conservative' right here and now.
do you support funding United Nations propaganda such as UNESCO and indoctrinating US schoolchildren into becoming good 'global citizens' and rejecting nationalism and cultural pride? Oh, but first you'd have to actually look up UNESCO and find out what your hero promotes.
Do you promote prosecution of Judge Roy Moore, and believe that the ten commandment monument in Alabama was 'unconstitutional'? if so you agree with the ACLU and with Bush.. who promoted the man who PROSECUTED roy moore. But then again, you might have to do some reading to learn this.
Do you support FTAA? sigh.. okay, go look it up, find out what it is, and get back to me.
The country twang and cowboy that Jorge Bush wears, is not enough to mesmerize everyone. sorry!
Would you support Specter in PA who is an adamant abortionist and supporter of homosexual marriage, like Bush does? if so, i suggest you repent and ask God for forgiveness. (if religion or morality matters at all to you, that is).
Anyone who worships men to reject Godly principles will have to answer for their choices.
Thank you for falling into my trap. You are probably a sincere conservative, and have become discontented with Bush and Republicans by what you've read on FAIR, CIS, NumbersUSA, etc.. sites. You are a victim of Liberal democrat disinformation. Consider this excerpt from The Wall street Journal a couple days ago:
"In fact, CIS, FAIR, NumbersUSA, Project-USA and more than a half-dozen similar groups that Republicans have become disturbingly comfy with, were founded or funded (or both) by John Tanton, a retired doctor in Michigan. In addition to trying to stop immigration to the U.S., appropriate population-control measures for Dr. Tanton and his network include promoting China's one-child policy, sterilizing Third World women and wider use of RU-486.
FAIR, where Mr. Krikorian once worked, is run by Dan Stein and shares advisers and personnel with CIS and other members of the Tanton nexus. As our Jason Riley noted in a March op-ed, "By Dr. Tanton's own reckoning, FAIR has received more than $1.5 million from the Pioneer Fund, a white-supremacist outfit devoted to racial purity through eugenics."
Representative Cannon says, "Tanton set up groups like CIS and FAIR to take an analytical approach to immigration from a Republican point of view so that they can give cover to Republicans who oppose immigration for other reasons."
And in answer to your question, I am not Karl Rove, but I've worked with him in several campaigns. You're fortunate not to be discoursing with him. Karl Rove does not suffer fools lightly; in fact he doesn't suffer them at all.
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.