Replies

Ummm...no is the tim to trim the fat before the Dems trim it for us.

Besides, if there was an established middle, the Dems vote would often be split. If anything, the majority would increase - and the moderate caucus would find itself voting with the GOP on many issues. Win - Win.

We must pay attention. We could gain a seat, but we could lose (in 2008) some States, e.g. Iowa, who thanks BUSH & Republican first term agenda!

Ummm...no is the tim to trim the fat before the Dems trim it for us.

No, I'd say the time to "trim the fat" is during the primary season. We just came out of an historic election win (again) and so now is the time for unity and maximzing our new found power. If we were to purge everyone who doesn't fit some arbitrary mold of "conservativism" after each election, then what is the point in building on our party majority in the first place?

Conservatives had a chance to "trim the fat" with Specter earlier this year, and they failed. If they had not, then we would have at least had a chance to replace him with a more conservative Republican. But at this point, the only thing that would be accomplished is to replace Arlen Specter the Republican with Arlen Specter the Democrat.
That is not a good trade in my mind.

And I am also left wondering, who, exactly, gets to decide which Republicans are worthy of remaining? Someone always has a complaint about any politician not being "conservative" enough on some issue. Who decides? Pat Buchanan? Jerry Falwell? What is the definition of "conservative" that we measure with? Is protecting freedom of religion for all "conservative" enough, or do they have to be a fire and brimstone fundamentalist like Judge Roy Moore? What you propose is a dangerous and slippery slope where only fools rush in.

There are people who believe John McCain isn't "conservative" enough. There are people who believe George W. Bush is not "conservative" enough. In the end we might end up with no one fitting the bill except for sure losers like Alan Keyes bringing in 20% of the vote.

Plenty of people attack my governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, for not being "conservative" enough. But they don't seem to take into account that he is the absolute best that California politics can deliver at the moment. No politician is elected in a political vacuum. They have regional politics to contend with, and they have an opponent that they must defeat in their home state. Senators and governors are not elected nationally. Every state gets to elect their own two senators. I for one would much rather keep a moderate Republican from a liberal state than replace them with a liberal Democrat. Some states, like Maine or Iowa are just not going to elect a conservative. So you take what you can get, and be happy with what you've got.