Here is a big picture to keep in perspective:
I disagree with W on several issues.
I ALSO remember voting for Perot, thus electing the Clintons.
I do not repeat mistakes. If the Republicans ran Mickey Mouse, I would never repeat the Perot Disaster.
I lived with the knowledge for eight miserable years the damage a Third Party did, and my complicity in it.
Ditto.
Never forget that a choice between the lesser of two evils is still a choice.
"I ALSO remember voting for Perot, thus electing the Clintons.
I do not repeat mistakes. If the Republicans ran Mickey Mouse, I would never repeat the Perot Disaster.
I lived with the knowledge for eight miserable years the damage a Third Party did, and my complicity in it."
===
But at least you learned from your mistake.
The sad part is that so many didn't and WANT and ADVOCATE repeating exactly the Perot disaster that gave us 8 years of CLinton, some openly advocate that it would be better to help the Dems take power. These people are either deluded, or part of the Dem movement to get conservatives to stay home or vote third party, precisely to help the Dems win.
Read this article and tell me, if some of the posters here don't fit the description:
The new 'Republicans vote on Wednesday' game (FR Mentioned) (article full text)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1613957/posts?page=87#87
But there seems to be a new “Republicans vote on Wednesday” taking form in time for the 2006 election. This effort targets grassroots conservatives known for their passionate views about issues who may be open to a grassroots voting rebellion. But the effort is being led, or at the very least aided, by liberals pretending to be grassroots conservatives, as opposed to actual grassroots conservatives themselves.
The premise follows a scheme previously found most often on talk radio programs: a liberal activist calls a conservative radio host, such as Rush Limbaugh or Laura Ingraham, and delivers the line: “I’ve been voting Republican for 30 years, but I’ve finally had it and I’m not voting this year.” Or my favorite: “I’m a Reagan Republican, but I’m fed up and voting for John Kerry.” (Because that is what Reagan Republicans would do, vote for John Kerry.) At this point, the host usually asks a couple of questions and it becomes painfully obvious that the supposed Reagan Republican has probably never voted for anyone left of Michael Dukakis.
The intentions are clear: the caller hopes to make it appear as though there is already a large uprising of conservatives who are rebelling against GOP candidates, and thus, wishes to incite other Republicans to pick up the same attitude and pass it along, leading to the Democrat becoming more competitive. The successes of such a strategy on voting habits are unclear, especially given that the conservative radio host often refutes the caller’s talking points.
But the pretend-conservative act is being carried onto a whole new playing field, one that has become wildly influential over the past few years and one that does not stand to be instantly recognized as a fake. That playing field is the blogosphere, which is then used in conjunction with massive e-mailings to “spread the word” (as one e-mailer insisted I do to my readers/e-mail list) to other conservatives.
The concept is the same: the blog or e-mail claims, first, that the said writer has been a conservative for years and that they have “had it with Republicans.” They then point to an issue that conservatives would likely be upset about such as excessive spending, immigration, or the expansion of government. Their supposed rage over the issue has convinced them to either not show up to vote in 2006, or, in order to really show Republicans, vote for the Democrat instead.