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

To: Wolfstar
I just don't think it's limited to California.

Looking over the last 40+ years, with the rise of Goldwater and the conservative movement, his landslide loss, the rise of Reagan and the GOP rebound in 1966, the victory of Reagan in '80 and the capping victory of a 49-state sweep in '84, the Republican Congress in '94, the victories of GW Bush in a clearly divided nation, and all that has transpired over the last 5 years, I have come to the conclusion that ideology isn't enough. Conservatism has become a big tent. Who are we referring to when we talk about "conservativism"? -- 2nd Amendment conservatives? Fiscal conservatives? Social conservatives? Libertarian/conservatives? Religious conservatives? Neo-conservatives? Paleo-conservatives? Isolationist conservatives? American-excellence conservatives? Anti-immigration conservatives? Economic/pro-business conservatives? Tax-cut conservatives? Deficit hawk conservatives? Country club conservatives? Southern NASCAR conservatives? (Sorry, I know you're a NASCAR fan :-) It's a big tent! But we win elections only when we have a leader with the political skills and character who can pull the pieces together into a whole, and project a positive message to the remaining 10%+ of the electorate needed to actually win elections. The "pure conservatives" tend to be back-stabbers, not political winners, IMHO. If conservatism fractures over the next two or three years, it will be because there isn't focused leadership on the national level (in the likeness of Reagan) to keep the factions together. Sadly, I think someone like Ronald Reagan comes around about once every 100 years. We will likely never see another one like him in our lifetime.

160 posted on 12/02/2005 3:17:36 PM PST by My2Cents (Dead people voting is the closest the Democrats come to believing in eternal life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies ]


To: My2Cents
But we win elections only when we have a leader with the political skills and character who can pull the pieces together into a whole, and project a positive message to the remaining 10%+ of the electorate needed to actually win elections. The "pure conservatives" tend to be back-stabbers, not political winners, IMHO.

Well said. Looking forward to '08, none of the potential candidates who might have a serious chance to win will be acceptable to the purists. George Allen currently is the leading candidate who might, but he made a mistake in running for reelection to the senate, in my opinion. He would have been much better off leaving the senate and running from outside Washington.

Rudy is the strongest candidate we have, and a Rudy/Rice ticket (if Condi could be persuaded to run) would be a smasher. But it would not be acceptable to the purists.

McCain? Hagel? A mainstreamer like me sure as heck could never support either of them. One of our governors? None have emerged, yet, as a candidate.

There certainly is no one of the caliber of RWR or GWB on the horizon right now, that's for sure.

162 posted on 12/02/2005 3:29:01 PM PST by Wolfstar ("In war, there are usually only two exit strategies: victory or defeat." Mark Steyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies ]

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