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.
That's not going to happen....
R. Reagan G_d-rest-his-soul got us O'Connor who is more interested in keeping relations with Georgetown Libs that the US Constitution. George Bush .... is no Ronald Reagan.
Hey. I'm gonna be moving your way in about 2 months. And your right, you can change anything with Kerry in office.
bump
No alternatives? Rubbish. Bush should concentrate on reassuring conservative voters so that they'll vote on election day instead of hunt for places to hide their life's savings.
hey bub,
Freepmail me when you can so we can compare notes!
Adios!
As someone aptly said here: My choice is between a party that wants to burn my house down this week, and a party that wants to burn my house down this year.
VOTES, are not wasted!! We vote for the one that best represents us on all the issues. That said, Bush did not represent my conservative values, so I voted for the Constitutional Party candidate who did stand on principals I believe and would fight to defend.
Bush still does not represent me, does a vote for the C.P. mean I'm throwing the election to Kerry? No. I believe that those who are voting for Bush to keep Kerry out are wasting their vote! There is nothing easy about this election cycle. It won't get any easier if voters are not sending "THEIR" representatives to Washington.
ALL VOTES COUNT, that was the intent of our founders.
Everybody tells me that I'm wasting my vote because my candidate "can't win." But if they and all the others who agree with me on pretty much all issues would stop talking about defeat and dare to vote third party then a truly conservative candidate most definitely could win.
So long as we continue to vote for short-term victory over life-long, eternal principle we will continue the long, but hastening march towards socialism, communism and loss of freedom. And our descendents will blame the party yes-men, not the bold few.
God save the Republic.
Dems must really be the new Bolsheviks because they still consider GWB an ultra conservative (lol).
I recall a history professor, during U.S. History class, making the point that historically, third-parties generally succeeded in getting their issues incorporated into the party(ies) that defeated them.
That is, their individual candidates may have lost, but eventually their platforms won out.
What will happen with the courts is extremely important, and not just the Supreme Court. A judge or Justice appointed by Republicans may or may not be a dissappointment. A judge or Justice approved by a Kerry Administration is sure to be a Marxist who will drive judicial activism to new levels. A Supreme Court with a majority dedicated to pushing a Marxist agenda would be the end of the Republic. With enough halfway decent judges and Justices, however, we will have at least bought some time, and we need all the time we can get to counter the effects of political correctness and postmodernism. If Kerry wins, the last vestiges of the rule of law will be shoved aside and the judicial activists and special interest groups will impose their will by Diktat.
I tell you the truth. If you do not vote for Bush/Cheney this November you are doing worse than wasting your vote. You are betraying this country.
Sitting home got us slick willie for 8 long, long years. And look how much worse things are today than they were under Bush 1.
We got 9/11, the USS Cole, and many other terrorist bombings all because slick gutted the intel communities.
GW is a modeate with a Right of center view point. He is to the right on some issues, in the center on some. But does not go to the left on any.
People also forget he is the president of ALL, not just conservatives. So he has to do things to appeal to the middle as well.
You will never please the LEFT until pure marxism is installed.
After a few weeks of hanoi john, they'll be gripping big time about their loss of gun rights, the return of PBA, and the gays getting married in all 50 states and the increased taxes.
They are throwing the baby out with the bath water.
I don't like the border situation or some of the social spending, the military spending was a MUST.
But I sure as HECK would like what hanoi john would do to the USA even less.
We thought slick willie was bad, hanoi john is WORSE!
Here's the problem-
Letting the Republican party go left is hurting, not helping, our chances of getting our guys in office.
It's not just the far right that will vote for a third party over Bush, it's swing voters who will object to some of his polices and vote for the other guy. Take spending for example- Kerry will spend more than Bush. That's obvious. But deficit spending is not a strong position to be in, and Kerry can attack Bush for it (having no shame helps out). Kerry's record will never see the light of day as long as the left controls the media, so people who are to the right of Bush on this issue might wind up voting for a guy who is to the left of Bush on the issue.
RINO's do more than just help advance liberal ideas, they damage our party's credibility and make it harder to stand on our principles. There's a reason that Clinton (and now Kerry) pretended that he was more conservative than he was- it's because conservative values will slaughter liberal ones in a nation wide election. Liberal values no longer sway most of the public. That's why liberals have had to resort to lying and strawman tactics to stay in power. So, to win big, what we need to do is not just try to play to the middle, but to win the middle over to our side (the left is a lost cause). Liberals can play to the middle as well, so they have an equal chance if we do that- but not if we try to win over the middle. Liberal ideas can't do it. Strong conservative ideas will, as Ronald Reagan proved.
But, that's hard to do when your candidate isn't conservative enough.
So we're caught in a trap- do we want to win this election, or the next one?
If I vote for a man who stands for God, family and the Republic, then I count myself to have voted for the RIGHT man for the job. If I vote for a man who, believe it or not I actually like as a person, but puts politics ahead of what's right (a.k.a. the Medicare entitlement, amnesty for illegals, No Child Left Behind, allowing limited fetal stem cell research, etc.) then I count myself to have voted against my conscience and against what is right and best for this country.
It's not I who has deserted my country. It's those who vote RNC or DNC without regard to principle who have done so.
Bush has increased NON DEFENSE spending 12.5% each year he has been in office...After bragging abotu signing campaign finance reform, kennedy's education bill, a few hundred billion in increased farm subsidies, and a new $700 billion dollar medicare entitlement....no thanks.
The GOP has abandoned conservatives. They need to EARN my vote.
Bush 41 sealed his fate when he broke his "no new taxes" pledge. Bush 43, while I disagree with him on several issues, does what he says he'll do. You don't have to parse what he says to figure out what he means. That's why he gets my vote.
Yep. Its Kyle Williams. He doesn't think Bush is a true conservative but John F*ckin' makes Bush look restrained by comparison. Its a choice between a milquetoast and and a Hard Leftist. When it comes right down to it, the answer's obvious. Conservatives who think there's an alternative to "W" are fooling themselves and with their votes would be helping the Left back into power just like they helped Clinton.
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.