Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

'W' – the only realistic choice for conservatives
WND ^

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.


TOPICS: Editorial; Political Humor/Cartoons; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: conservatives; conservativevote; gwb2004
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-170 next last
To: glockmeister40
The Pubbies in congress will not grow a spine that is a pipe dream. They like the status quo. Without W, they will be even weaker.

2nd amendment rights will be done away with one pen stroke at at time under hanoi john's 2-3 supreme court justices and lower court judges. No votes on it just pen strokes...law of the land. Same goes for the death penalty. Gay marriage will also be law of the land.

This election is about TWO things JUDGES and WOT.

Who do you want to appoint them or prosecute the WOT.

The cowardly internationalist hanoi john?

Or GW who we know has brass balls when it comes to WOT.

21 posted on 07/17/2004 6:13:02 PM PDT by GailA (hanoi john kerry, I'm for the death penalty, before I impose a moratorium on it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Blowtorch; Willie Green
Assault Weapons Ban, although I have no idea how withholding a vote from Bush will help pro-gunners. Willie, I've always enjoyed your posts, but Pat Buchanan has destroyed Perot's party, and caused a rancorous divide in the Republican party. The reason Buchanan is gone from the political landscape is because he loses more votes than he brings in, and he doesn't bring in many.

I would like to see a more aggressive stance on immigration and on the war effort from Bush. Anyone who thinks that there's no difference between Bush and Kerry, though, is just flat wrong. Get Kerry in office and Handgun Control Inc will be in the White House setting policy. Taxes will go up and NAFTA will continue. Kerry will capitulate on Kyoto, to the UN and will effectively make the US a subdivision of the UN. Bush is hated by the left because he won't kiss the UN's rear end. Bush dropped the immigration proposal when it went flat with his base. Kerry's base thinks it doesn't go far enough. They didn't think Bush's education reform went far enough. They want more money, and to give control of that money to the NEA. Choice in schools will be dead. Standards will be dead. Middle class taxes will go up dramatically, because despite his rhetoric, Kerry has to know that the rich can move their assets of offshore accounts. Military funding will be slashed, and we'll be back to the days of the Clinton Administration when troops had to quit marksmanship training because they didn't have any bullets. Soldiers were deployed with one clip of ammo into hot zones, while the Navy was working on a propeller that wouldn't put out waves that bother dolphins. Military secrets were moved to China wholesale. Jimmy Carter negotiated a nuclear treaty with North Korea that had us building them a nuclear plant but didn't include inspections. Now North Korea has nukes.

The current leaders of the Rats are Kerry, Edwards, Kennedy, Clinton, Clinton, Frank, Schumer, Daschle and Leahy. I may not be thrilled with some of the Pubbies, but that bunch cannot get in charge of this country.

22 posted on 07/17/2004 6:21:04 PM PDT by Richard Kimball (We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men are ready to do violence on our behalf)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: GailA
2nd amendment rights will be done away with one pen stroke at at time under hanoi john's

Bring it on. We made this mess and it's our responsibility to clean it up, rather than pass a socialist dictatorship to our children, one penstroke at a time.

23 posted on 07/17/2004 6:26:18 PM PDT by glockmeister40
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Kuksool
Yes, a vote for Michael Peroutka is a wasted vote.

Wrong. Very wrong. A vote for a more conservative candidate helps to set the agenda for mainstream political parties in the future. It may not help win the election, but given that the GOP has drifted so far leftward (on immigration, education, spending), at least a few of us are trying to figure out just how we can possibly care anymore.

24 posted on 07/17/2004 6:28:10 PM PDT by MegaSilver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MegaSilver
Wrong. Very wrong. A vote for a more conservative candidate helps to set the agenda for mainstream political parties in the future.

Oh you mean like Perot's reform party.(/sarcasm)

25 posted on 07/17/2004 6:34:07 PM PDT by Dane (Trial lawyers are the tapeworms to wealth creating society)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: glockmeister40
hanoi john's black robe tyrants will make it a dictatorship. The senate is to close and a hanoi john win could wash our enough GOP to flip it, especially with so many open GOP seats.

The AWB is set to sunset, and the pubbies are trying from what I've read to keep it off W's desk.

26 posted on 07/17/2004 6:42:01 PM PDT by GailA (hanoi john kerry, I'm for the death penalty, before I impose a moratorium on it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: writer33

"W" must win!


27 posted on 07/17/2004 6:48:03 PM PDT by TatieBug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: rdb3

It is a black or white decision. Those who want to muddy the water by wasting their vote on a grey candidate might end up regretting their choice when the other MAIN contender wins the election!


28 posted on 07/17/2004 7:02:13 PM PDT by Knute (I may not agree with what you have on your bumper sticker, but I will defend your right to stick it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Kuksool
Really, Bush is the only realistic choice for liberals.
They will not get nearly so much of their domestic
wishlist passed through congress with the Frenchman in
power as they are getting from Bush and their program will
be trashed royally if they get the Metrosexual boys and
proceed to give back all our ME gains. They will get
us much deeper into this war because they will take
the heat off the Saracens long enough for them to lay
some big ones on us. Then we go into a war economy with a
Crat president. This is not good for Liberal desires at
all, unless the overriding liberal desire really is for
the destruction or at least the humiliation of the US.
29 posted on 07/17/2004 7:04:06 PM PDT by arthurus (Better to fight them over THERE than over HERE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Richard Kimball
but Pat Buchanan has destroyed Perot's party, and caused a rancorous divide in the Republican party.

Not true. I voted for Papa Bush in '88.
Only went with Perot after being backstabbed.
Reagan won his landslide elections with the Christian Coalition and the crossover blue collar vote.
The neocon globalists backing the Bush Dynasty reject and marginalize both those constituencies.

30 posted on 07/17/2004 7:06:34 PM PDT by Willie Green (Go Pat Go!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

Comment #31 Removed by Moderator

To: TatieBug

"W" will win. And bigger than most people think.


32 posted on 07/17/2004 7:20:36 PM PDT by writer33 (Try this link: http://www.whiskeycreekpress.com/books/electivedecisions.shtml)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: glockmeister40

What will happen is the gunowners will vote out George Bush and the rest of the politicians will say to themselves, "Gee, I didn't know the country wanted more gun control and a liberal government." And then for the next eight years or more, we'll have gun bills enacted every month.

We'll also have Supreme Court Justices retiring during that period which will affect the country for the next twenty years.


33 posted on 07/17/2004 7:24:14 PM PDT by Shooter 2.5 (Vote a Straight Republican Ballot. Rid the country of dems.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62
but he is right about the judgeships.

We trusted Ronald Reagan much more than Bush and we still got O'Connor. And father Bush gave us Seuter. Not exactly what should have been achieved sad to say. Sorry but I don't hold much hope for what this clown will nominate.

Don't lecture me on how worse it will be with Kerry. Pubbies cannot win without conservative support. And we're entitled to better than a: 'screw 'em; where else can they go' strategy.

34 posted on 07/17/2004 7:25:49 PM PDT by Swanks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
First of all, good answers. I first started worrying about Bush I when he started distancing himself from Reagan, with his "thousand points of light" and "new world order" speeches. I voted for Bush in 92, because even though I felt he was driving the country in the wrong direction, I thought he was going 20, while I feared Clinton would kick it up to 60. I was right. I still strongly suspect that there was a deal between Perot and Clinton, and that Perot had no desire to win, but merely to siphon off enough of Bush's votes to put Clinton in office. I suspected this because Perot dropped out during the week of the Democratic convention, when it was likely to give Clinton the biggest bounce. He got back in when the polls showed Bush closing on Clinton, and used the last of the campaign to attack Bush's economy. Perot allowed Clinton to become the only man elected to office twice without ever winning a plurality of the popular vote.

Buchanan is like many fringe candidates, including Nader and Pat Robertson, who have a very strong base, but have no prospects of reaching beyond that base.

I also agree that the Republican party is becoming the old Democrats, while the Democrats are becoming the new Bolsheviks. I think that some of this was unavoidable. When Reagan made being a Republican respectable for a working man, many of the Rats changed parties, but didn't change positions. I still think that the hierarchy of the Republican party disliked Reagan, and continues to do so. They can't say it openly, because the only people who liked Reagan were the vast majority of voters. I fear we will not see his kind again.

35 posted on 07/17/2004 7:30:24 PM PDT by Richard Kimball (We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men are ready to do violence on our behalf)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: GailA
The AWB is set to sunset, and the pubbies are trying from what I've read to keep it off W's desk.

The Republican Party is doing everything they can to keep it off his desk. Will it matter to the Conservatives who dislike Bush because he's a moderate? Not in the slightest. They'll still find some excuse not to vote a straight ticket. I'm noticing a lot more broken glass dems than Republicans. kerry can still win this election, not because he's kerry but because the conservatives would rather have him than Bush.

36 posted on 07/17/2004 7:31:21 PM PDT by Shooter 2.5 (Vote a Straight Republican Ballot. Rid the country of dems.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Swanks

Clinton gave us Ginsberg. Bush gave us Clarence Thomas. Think Thomas would have been nominated by Clinton?


37 posted on 07/17/2004 7:31:48 PM PDT by Richard Kimball (We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men are ready to do violence on our behalf)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Kuksool

Well of course... has some other conservative announced he was going to run and I haven't heard about it? Let's not get wobbly now, folks. It's GW and hard work until the election is over. We'll iron out any squishy areas from the Whitehouse...


38 posted on 07/17/2004 7:33:53 PM PDT by Libertina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: writer33

No doubt about that. He is the only one we can support, as a practical matter.


39 posted on 07/17/2004 7:34:46 PM PDT by HitmanLV (I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Shooter 2.5
What will happen is the gunowners will vote out George Bush and the rest of the politicians will say to themselves, "Gee, I didn't know the country wanted more gun control and a liberal government."

THANK YOU. That is EXACTLY what will happen. I'm glad some people are getting it.

The politicos don't pay attention to people who don't vote. Bush doesn't care if only 10,000 people vote, as long as most of them vote for him. And it's those 10,000 people who decide the future of the nation.

As for voting for a third party candidate, politicos don't pay much attention to them either. Why? Because they focus on the WINNER. If Kerry wins, then the GOP will assume that voters want liberal policies (not a bad assumption, since that is what the voters will have voted for). If Kerry wins, expect to see MORE "moderate" Republicans, not less.

40 posted on 07/17/2004 7:36:00 PM PDT by DameAutour (It's not Bush, it's the Congress.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-170 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson