Posted on 05/10/2006 7:15:13 PM PDT by Dems_R_Losers
Disaffection over spending and immigration have caused conservatives to take flight from President Bush and the Republican Congress at a rapid pace in recent weeks, sending Bush's approval ratings to record lows and presenting a new threat to the GOP's 12-year reign on Capitol Hill, according to White House officials, lawmakers and new polling data.
Bush and Congress have suffered a decline in support from almost every part of the conservative coalition over the past year, a trend that has accelerated with alarming implications for Bush's governing strategy.
The Gallup polling organization recorded a 13-percentage-point drop in Republican support for Bush in the past couple weeks. These usually reliable voters are telling pollsters and lawmakers they are fed up with what they see as out-of-control spending by Washington and an abandonment of core conservative principles more generally.
There are also significant pockets of conservatives turning on Bush and Congress over the their failure to tighten immigration laws, restrict gay marriage and to put an end to the Iraq war and the rash of political scandals, according to lawmakers and pollsters.
Bush won two presidential elections by pursuing a political and governing model that was predicated on winning and sustaining the loyal backing of social, economic and foreign policy conservatives. The strategy was based on the belief that conservatives, who are often more politically active than the general public, could be inspired to vote in larger numbers and would serve as a reliable foundation for his presidency. The theory, as explained by Bush strategists, is that the president would enjoy a floor below which his support would never fall.
It is now apparent that this floor has weakened dramatically and collapsed in places.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
While John Kerry's and Hillary Clinton's approval ratings are in the low 20's.
Which conservative is your party concentrating on getting elected this year? How many races are you fielding candidates in nationwide?
There are a few points you've made about me which are absolutely correct and to which I admit. Prior to the protests, I was completely unaware of Bush's position on illegal immigration because I was not paying attention. And one might think that because the focus of my attention, at least since 9/11, has been national security, I would have and should have been paying attention. I was not.
So color me shocked when millions of illegal aliens took to the streets and I realized our Border really was not as secure as I'd been hoping Bush was keeping it. Color me further shocked and now angry when I saw their demands and plans to take over major cities and effectively shut down our country. Color me even further shocked, angry, and now outraged when our President and D.C. leadership did nothing to stop what, post 9/11, could have been a huge risk to our national security on May 1. But color me disappointed and greatly saddened to find that my President, since 9/11, has failed to effectively secure our borders and rather than enforce our laws, wants to eventually reward those who've crossed it illegally, with amnesty.
As I said, I am not willing, without a fight, to turn over my country to the democratic party who I feel is incapable of protecting it, who (IMO) will force our troops to surrender in Iraq and who I feel will not proactively fight the war on terror. And whether or not I knew earlier what Bush's position was on illegal immigration, it still comes as a shock now.
Totally agree.
Precisely. Our Dear Presidente has caught himself by his own petard.
If he was serious about border enforcement, he would simply say...the House Bill is the way to go. End of story. He should tell the RINOs in the Senate...I got my veto pen ready for any of your pusillanimous positions!!! The Conservatives in the senate would suddenly rediscover the backbone they have lacked for 6 years.
I'm a registered Republican.
I want to see the Republican party field a conservative.
I don't want to go third party, but I will,
and I believe millions of other conservatives will also.
I don't believe the day is past when a Ronald Reagan
conservative can be elected in this country.
If that day is past we're sunk anyway.
Who's running in your district?
You voted for the President TWICE after he made clear his support for a guest worker program. Yet NOW you claim to have been "betrayed". Weak.
As far as "the enemy" is concerned, I do not wish to speak for JimRob, but I believe he is speaking of Leftists who are trying to split conservatives over this one issue -- an issue about which, let's be honest, the 'Rats have no intention of doing what you want.
The attacks by some on "Republicans" over the border issue are very crude. Tancredo is a Republican. Does that mean you won't support him?
I absolutely do support Tancredo, who's position, by the way, like mine, also does not agree with President Bush. He's not a leftist, but his position, because it is in disagreement with Bush, could also be considered by those here as 'divisive' and splitting the party. So is he "the enemy" too?
You will if the Dumbocrats take the House this Nov. cause he's next in line to be House Judiciary chair.
My opinion is some will not bother to come out and vote because they feel frustrated and that could be enough to get Democrats elected. Just like Republicans did not come out in 2005 in CA because they were uninspired and lazy.
Oh please. I clearly stated my opinion that the "enemy" refers to Leftists. Nobody characterizes Tancredo as a Leftist.
"The point is, the enemy (The Beast) is the same enemy that we've been facing all along. And they are using this issue to divide and conquer. The Beast never dies."
I'm sorry, perhaps my post was unclear? Sometimes I get longwinded when I am upset, but considering the importance of this issue and the nature of your post, how it is being used by some here against others, I think it is especially important for ALL of us to have a clear understanding of where we stand. So, with all due respect Jim, I will ask again.
I disagree with President Bush on this issue. Do you consider me, and the rest of those on Free Republic who disagree with Bush on this issue, "the enemy" (The Beast)?
You ought to post more. All we need is one more church lady on this website.
He is divisive, he refuses to compromise.
JMO, the reason for his obstinance is to keep funds flowing into his and bay buchanan's PAC.
And also I don't like his demonization of business, which I can understand why he doesn't like business since he has basically worked in the public sector all his life and not in the wealth producing sector.
I read Jim's post. He never once used the terms "Republican" or "Republican Party" when he laid out who the enemy is and what his plan is.
He clearly associated illegal immigration with the marxists who are using it to exert influence and who are organizing the illegal alien marches.
It is the amnesty supporters who are on the side of the marxist organizers of the illegal immigrant masses, not those who are fighting that amnesty. That includes the Republicans in Congresa and the President who are working in ways that support the illegal aliens and their marxist supporters. I mean, just what were the marchers demanding? Amnesty, jobs and citizenship. What are President Bush, Sen. McCain, and others trying to give them? Guess.
The division is not caused by those who oppose capitulating to the marxists and their useful illegal alien idiots. It is not caused by those who oppose socialist Ted Kennedy's amnesty scheme. It is caused by those who have fallen for the enemy propaganda and are supporting socialist Ted Kennedy's plan and trying to meet the demands of the marxist march organizers. The division was caused when a number of Republican Party leaders, Republicans in Congress, and the President himself abandoned grassroots Republicans on this issue and started doing things and saying things that helped the marxist enemy. That division can be eliminated as soon as they recognize who they're really helping, figure out whose side they're supposed to be on, and they return to the values shared by the vast majority of the Republicans and conservatives who elected them and of Americans in general - respect for our laws, protection of our sovereignty, security for our nation, preservation of our traditions and culture.
You weren't asking me - but I'm PA 13th - so we need a republican to oust Allison Shwartz. At this point I'd pull any Republican out of a hat at random. I watched Swartz and the other Dems on C-Span last night (as long as I could stand it) talking about energy prices. I sat through about six dems and EVERYTHING they said was just wrong. Either a) they weren't paying attention in Economics 101 when the professor explained the law of supply and demand, or b) they want bad policy so the economy will fail during Bush's tenure.
And We need to keep Santorum - believe it or not there are people who call themselves conservatives complaining Santorum is not conservative enough so they are going to stay home.
I just don't see how anyone can fail to see the stark difference between Democrats and Republicans on issue after issue.
If they are "hard core" where are they fleeing to? The dims?
Congressman Bob Dorman of California lost his seat by 900 votes (illegal aliens). That's a hint to how 12 million can change politics nationwide. There is a race now to register 1 million illegals by Nov. 2006
No, I do not think you are part of the enemy. I think some here are being used though.
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.