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.
I'll say it again:
Someone else said this:
About half of the "life long Republicans now fed up with Bush" posters you see on FR are actually DUh trolls. The other half are Buchananites. Impossible to tell which is which, though, as they are naturally interchangeable (with or without disguises).
Yes, it does; a vote denied Bush is a vote FOR Kerry, no matter how you rationalize it to yourself.
But go ahead, put YOUR agenda before the rest of the country; just be gone from here the day after the election if Kerry wins; we won't want to hear your whining then.
Bump!
You mean the election in 2020? Because if Kerry wins, that's the first chance you're going to get.
Will you even be alive then?
No, you're putting YOUR values ahead of the rest of the country.
No matter what you tell yourself, you're putting YOUR views ahead of everybody else's.
Whoever you are, you're not a conservative OR a republican.
You are not among that number.
Yep, that rugged individualism is such a nasty concept.
You realize, of course, that the purpose of the secret ballot is to encourage voters to put their views to work without regard for others' views.
You realize, of course, that this is a public forum and I'm free to comment on any post where somebody says that they're willing to turn this country back over to the liberals, don't you?
If they don't want comments on their votes, they should keep them to themselves.
As I'm free to comment on yours. Nowhere have I suggested you shouldn't be free to speak; I simply find your suggestion that he's obligated to subvert his individual interests to those of the whole to be...curious.
It's not curious at all; there is a distinct choice this year: for the country or against it.
Oh, they want it; don't you know that they are convinced that if we lose this time, we'll turn back to the whacko right wing of the party.
As I said before, it will be too late; we won't get another chance for 16 years.
And evidently you propose to persuade people by telling them:
No, you're putting YOUR values ahead of the rest of the country. No matter what you tell yourself, you're putting YOUR views ahead of everybody else's.
Here's an idea. Why don't you tell this poster why a vote for Bush will also serve to uphold their values?
I'm not wasting MY time on a "voter" who probably didn't vote for Bush in the first place.
I'm out working to convert real voters, not sycophants.
Evidently not. It would appear you're wasting your time posting large-font rants on an Internet forum.
I'm out working to convert real voters, not sycophants.
ROFL! Now that's great irony...
Well, I wanted the job of forum nanny, but you'd already secured that spot.
I'm much too reasoned and logical for that post. One needs to be far more given to over-the-top hysterics than I am.
With that in mind, by all means feel free to take the job.
Paraphrasing a very wise FReeper in regards to the CA elections, Vote Bush but keep a picture of Peroutka (or Badnarik if you prefer) on the bedside.
It's all about the ever present moderates. We all want conservatives running the show, no questions asked. But in caucuses you can see clearly that a large segment of Americans want moderates, whether they lean to the left or right. That explains part of Clinton's success. He fooled his voters into thinking he's a centrist. Hence we have 8 years of hell. Also explains why we have President George W. Bush instead of Alan Keyes. Keyes is open and upfront about his policies and is more conservative than Bush. That scared the voters. So, a lot of Republicans went for Bush and McCain. Same with the Specter/Toomey race. Although that one is quite close, Specter still won.
If we wish to be able to vote straight ticket conservative, we have to educate the moderates. The fact that a lot of Americans are more afraid of Keyes than Kerry shows that the 40 long years of leftist disinformation worked. The two type of moderates are those who buy the lies of the left on domestic issue or those who buy their lies on international issues. Educate them, and we can vote straight ticket conservative without fear.
I like Keyes. I also like Bush. These men are both patriots and decent, God fearing men. But one of them is President and the other isn't. That's life. There are times I wish Keyes was in charge. But then I simply look at one of Bush's speech, his character, and his courage. And it's clear that Bush would not have done any less than Keyes.
Of course I have my disagreements with Dubya. Who doesn't? But a few of his bad policies do not erase all the good he has done. Remember, conservatives picked on Reagan too. And now America hailed him as a genius.
By the way, that "Read my lips" thing? That's Dem politicking. Dems promised to back down on something that Bush the elder wanted if he raise taxes. He did. Lo and behold the Dems didn't back down and he lost on taxes, policy, and the presidency. Dems simply have no character.
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.