Posted on 07/17/2004 5:33:14 PM PDT by Kuksool
The presidential election in November will be decided by priorities, more in this cycle than any other. For the general voter base, America is polarized along party lines. This was obvious, even from four years ago with Al Gore and George W. Bush. This division between left America and right America is intense.
So, as it is with America, the national stage has been lit up with an even more intense division between the two camps. Mud slinging abounds; hatred and spite-filled rhetoric is everywhere in this political season. So much so, it's nauseating to watch and makes me want to ignore politics altogether.
Lately, Moveon.org has continued to compare President Bush to Adolf Hitler. Talk radio continues to hammer on John Kerry. The RNC attack machine is always on alert, with columnists, talking heads and hosts ready to back them up. The same goes for the DNC, with its own talking heads, celebrity friends and liberal news media.
Thus, with everyone polarized, the intensity of partisan politics has picked up, and voters will again head to the polls with a party view of politics. America is no longer together on issues and people; we're divided and we're going to be divided severely in November. That's how it's going to shape up.
Yet, for some conservatives, choosing a candidate isn't limited to George W. Bush and John Kerry. Because President Bush has betrayed conservatives on various social and fiscal issues, the conservative base is divided and hasn't rallied around Bush like it did four years ago.
This leaves some conservatives wondering whether or not they should jump ship for a third-party candidate like Constitution Party nominee Michael Peroutka or even the Libertarian, Michael Badnarik. Meanwhile, the rest of the conservative/Republican camp is griping that a vote for a third-party candidate will do nothing but help John Kerry.
In reality, they're right. A vote for a third-party candidate may be a stand for ideals, and it may send a message to the GOP, but it won't do much good. There aren't enough conservatives who will vote third party to scare GOP officials, but there are just enough third-party voters that it may help John Kerry.
Yes, a vote for Michael Peroutka is a wasted vote. It's hard to say whether a third-party candidate will ever be viable, but it's obvious that no third-party nominee has a shot at the presidency in this election cycle.
Therefore, conservatives need to look at the priorities. What's important? If we truly care about appointing conservative judges, then we can't have John Kerry in office. If we truly care about the economy, then we can't have Kerry in office. If we care about the War on Terrorism, then we can't have Kerry in office. If we truly care about cutting taxes, then we can't have Kerry in office.
The only viable alternative is President Bush. He's not a conservative, true. He has betrayed conservative principles and has taken actions that would make a liberal proud, but he's the man when it comes to the economy, taxes, war on terrorism and, most importantly, the judicial branch.
This election is about these priorities, and it's about choosing the lesser of two evils. It's sad that the grass-roots GOP can't come up with an alternative to George W. Bush, but reality dictates that conservatives should support the president in this cycle.
The Republican Party needs reform and it needs to be changed, but jumping ship from the GOP won't do any good. It will give John Kerry the office of the presidency, and it won't help America.
Some conservatives will take a stand and vote third party because of the principle of the matter, but in the real world, the Republican Party is a conservative's only hope of changing America.
And still you replied; you can have the last work, since it means so much to your psyche.
Great - I'll take it. (The last word, that is)
In short, I find it humorous that when it comes to your comments "this is a public forum and I'm free to comment on any post" yet when I do the same I'm a "forum nanny". Do you feel that free speech rights are only available to you, and that everyone else better agree or be labeled a thread nanny?
The whole thing is very Elton John-esque. Everyone has an equal voice at the table; there's no censorship going on here.
I'm not. I want him to win a landslide victory greater than that achieved by Ronald Reagan.
But in order to do that, he has to be flexible enough to adapt and follow the Gipper's lead, changing his priorities and policies to do what's right for AMERICA instead of pandering to transnational business interests.
Sheesh, Karl Rove's neocon "strategy" has left true conservatives with no choice whatsoever. Dubya v. Kerry is like having to pick between LBJ and George McGovern. It's truly pathetic.
I belive your right. I talk with a lot of people every week...and it comes out around 70-75% in favour of GWB.
Maybe it's just because I'm talking to working stiffs.......
redrock
You might want to correct that last post.
But I will this one. We are at War...and President Bush is going after those who wish to kill every last one of us.
If need be...for that one reason alone...I will vote for President Bush.
Plus...having the likes of John Kerry in the White House WOULD mean the end of the Republic.
redrock
If Kerry wins, then three out of the last five presidents will have been one term presidents, with only one having his vice president elected to office. To assume that Kerry and Edwards will defiantly get elected to four terms between them is completely baseless.
Yep. It's scaremongering, pure and simple. But why let the facts get in the way, right?
What "global ambitions"? Not for territory that's for sure...we're giving Iraqis their freedom to run their own country.
Baseless? Do you really believe that the liberals will EVER let the power go again?
You're delusional if you think so.
You're actively working for Kerry?
As long as his lopsided Anti-American trade policies remain steadfastly focused on expanding our dependency on foreign resources, his policies of national borders eradication remain a legitimate issue to question his motivation.
Here's a party you might agree with:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1173720/posts
Not to worry..... Should 1John and 2John get elected we can just close the borders, make buggy whips and sell them to each other and live the good life off what little petroleum we have stateside.......
Remember 2000...... what you hear bantered about on FR often doesn't reflect what the public in general will ultimately do. This place is far from representative of the United States at large. I'd not get to exercised with the various wings of the political spectrum especially those that form either extreme.
I know; it doesn't even reflect the vast majority of conservatives. They're supporting him 97 percent, according to the latest Pew Resarch poll; you'd think I'd learn.
Not at all.
Beyond any partisan distinction, I actively work for America First!
Go ahead and deliberately misinterpret my post if you want,
but I already made it clear that I hope Dubya comes around to adopting different positions on issues so he can beat Kerry in a Reaganesque landslide. If he doesn't, that's his own fault.
The only delusional one here is you. If it were soley up to liberals, GW wouldn't be president in the first place, so obviously we don't need them to 'let' power go.
Have you forgotten how much they hate him now -- more than they did in 2000?
Have you forgotten all the lies they've told and the rules and laws they have bent to get what they want in the last four years?
I see absolutely no reason to believe that, once they regain power, they'll be any hope of getting them out of there for the next sixteen years.
You can call it scare mongering if you want to; I call it facing the facts.
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.