Posted on 05/22/2006 10:21:56 PM PDT by FairOpinion
What’s really stunning is this absolute certainty of angry conservatives that A) Republicans will learn the right lessons from the defeat, and not, say, respond in a panic by embracing their inner RINO and flailing around for MSM approval and B) that the Republicans can easily win back Congress in 2008, just by stiffening their spines and pledging to return to their conservative roots.
I have my doubts on both counts. For starters, why would Republicans get the message that “we need to be more conservative” in a year that conservatives were knocked out?
In the Senate, a bad year for the Republicans would mean the loss of Rick Santorum (who has lifetime American Conservative Union rating of 88 out of a possible 100, and a 92 in 2005) in Pennsylvania, Jim Talent (93 rating lifetime, and a 96 in 2005) in Missouri, Conrad Burns (91, and a perfect 100 in 2005) in Montana and Mike DeWine (80 lifetime, only 56 in 2005) in Ohio. Of course, Ohio voters who sit this one out will replace DeWine with Sherrod Brown, who has a lifetime rating of 8 and 4 for 2005.
If the GOP base doesn’t show in Maryland, you get Ben Cardin (lifetime rating of 6, 2005 rating of 0!) or Kweise Mfume (lifetime ACU rating of 4) instead of Michael Steele.
Nice job, guys. Your effort to re-conservativize the Republican Party in Washington by staying home this year will have the effect of massacring the actual conservatives and empowering the moderates who you disdain. Perhaps we can call this counterproductive maneuver “RINO-plasty.”
Once the Democrats regain control of Congress, a GOP takeover is going to be exponentially harder than it was in 1994. You’re never going to catch the Democrats as flatfooted again.
(Excerpt) Read more at tks.nationalreview.com ...
People better re-think the "lst the Dems win" strategy.
I plan on GOP voting this year despite my difficulties with them. The alternative is a nightmare
I guess they just got tired of the spoilers and decided to turn the tables on them. Interesting idea.
When Republicans govern like conservatives, they win. When they govern like liberals, they lose. I have a hard time understanding why this is so difficult to understand.
I will never vote Dim. But perhaps a GOP loss in one of the two houses may be a silver lining for '08.
The question is, do you have a real Conservative Republican to vote for?
My point exactly. Even though the GOP has failed its core in some ways, not voting is not the way to go. The alternative is far worse (Democrats). Now, the difference between democrats and Republicans is quite amorphous (to be honest I'd say Democrats of a couple decades past were probably more conservative than the current batch of conservatives in DC), but all the same I'd rather have the devil I know than the devil I don't. With that said, there has to be some way to weed out the Rinos without killing the entire party at the same go. Any ideas?
LIke the last time we lonst the house, it took 40 years to get it back.
Losing is LOSING, it's is beyond ludicrous to propose losing as a winning strategy.
Good article, Geraghty's got it right. If the Dems get established in the majority it won't be easy to take it back.
FairOpinion wrote: "People better re-think the "lst the Dems win" strategy."
I sure hope so. The key is to win the primaries with conservative candidates. In fact, we need more conservatives than ever to get out there and vote, or we'll lose even more ground.
President Bush draws a lot of fire from some FReepers, including myself. However, we shouldn't feel guilty. A choice needed to be made, and we picked the best one we could get. And, in fact, he's done far more for us conservatives than a Gore presidency ever would have done.
I'm not saying we should be satisfied with RINOs! By no means! If a better, conservative candidate is available, support them. Just be prepared to fight against the RNC, because it invariably backs the moderates. Take a case in point, Chafee vs. Laffey (http://www.electlaffey.com/site/index.php). Who do you think the RNC is backing? Anyone wanna take a guess on who Bush will back? Just think Specter and cringe!
"With that said, there has to be some way to weed out the Rinos without killing the entire party at the same go. Any ideas?"
===
Sure -- keep electing Republicans so we have a supermajority and the loss of a couple of seats won't put the entire House or Senate in the hands of the Dems, then pick out the RINOs one at a time and try replacing them with conservatives.
But to throw the entire Congress to the Dems is just plain anti-American, because the Dems WILL destroy the country.
Gotta bump to that!
There's no silver lining in losing to libs and if it happens much of the gains made will be lost.
And when did we get the House back? When the congresscritters learned conservatism.
How about the idea of voting to protect the Constitution, not just saying, "Well, the Republicans aren't destroying the nation as fast as the Dems would..."
He's opened the US highways to Mexican truckers--that took several years of Bush's hard work. Why did Bush work so hard to take US trucker jobs away from US truckers? Why? Just someone, explain. It's not like Bush didn't have other things to do.
We watched his limp effort to reform SSecurity. But you didn't see his tough and energetic effort to have SS benefits sents to Mexicans in Mexico. Why? Doesn't he have enough to keep him busy? Isn't there enough US money flowing to Mexico from the envios dinero stores that are popping up on every street corner?
It's the Joe Sixpacks who produce the sons who serve in the military, it isn't the children of neocons who do this job. Bush has broken faith with the middle-class conservative citizen that has provided the support for the WOT. He has undermined his base that supported the War in Iraq. He has told us that he can't enforce the law, but somehow he can turn a savage group of tribes committed to a death cult into a peaceful democracy. Which does Joe Sixpack believe?
Fred Barnes already did his enraging, patronizing bit to threaten Joe with the blame--this is an intimidation strategy to promote this ghastly and incomprehensible immigration bill. And Joe wisely suspect it has something to do with Fred's enjoyment of cheap yard help at the expense of the neighbor who used to do an honest landscaping business.
Joe won't "strategize"--he'll just stay at home. Bush could do something about it. He could turn it around right away. But for some reason, it's "talk to the hand" when his base pleads with him to see reason. For years, I've just wanted to know...why?
If Ted Kennedy changes his party affiliation to Republican, would it be alright not to vote for him?
Silly article that claims that conservatives wouldn't vote for conservatives...that's a strawman. The idea is for conservatives not to vote for liberals, even if they're Republican. the conservatives should be rewarded.
Not if he were running against Zell Miller!
There is a huge number of liberals posing as conservatives feeding this suicidal mentality.
They also are talking up the 2008 elections when we haven't even gotten to the 2006 (trying to get us to look past the midterm elections). They are mostly the ones touting the phony MSM polls
I think most of us can pretty well pick them out of the group.
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.