[af_vet_rr]

Fine. Lay out a series of "conservative" principles that 80% of the American people will not vote for, ignore the dramatically changing demographics, and turn the Party into a historical footnote. No thanks.

I only have to get 51% (and not even that with a third major candidate, and I don't even have to have a major voter turnout) :-)

I really have a hard time believing that so many Americans have given up on limited government and fiscal responsibility, but maybe I'm wrong, maybe they have, maybe you are right, it's all compromise from here on out I suppose.

[MACVSOG68]

I really have a hard time believing that so many Americans have given up on limited government and fiscal responsibility, but maybe I'm wrong, maybe they have, maybe you are right, it's all compromise from here on out I suppose.

It's always been about compromise. The only governments that don't compromise are tyrannies. Representative government reflects the differing needs of all of its citizens. Within reason, limited government and fiscal responsibility can be improved. Vote in a congress that reflects those priorities. But don't expect it to take us back to 1789.

As for a major 3d party candidate, history reflects what that accomplishes. A 3d party candidate put Clinton into office in 1992, and one put George Bush in office in 2000. Of course, those are not the only 2 examples. It's called shooting oneself in the foot!

[Cboldt]

I really have a hard time believing that so many Americans have given up on limited government and fiscal responsibility, but maybe I'm wrong ...

It's not "bad enough" yet. See 50/50 DEM/GOP split in national elections and tendency of both parties to increase government influence in society. Makes a darn good reality show though.

As for the flaming and exchanges on this thread, I give a grade of C-. I've seen FR lots more entertaining than this, and I'm sure it'll get back up to speed as the election draws closer.