No thanks, we're stupid...... (conservatives who stay home)

Wash Times ^ | October 18, 2006 | Tony Blankley

[IrishMike]

John Stuart Mill once famously called the British Tories "The Stupid Party." From time to time since then, the Tory's American cousin, the Republican Party, has also earned that moniker. Now may be one of those moments. If current polls and anecdotes are to be believed, there may be a million or two conservative Republicans who are planning to not vote this November. Of course, Mill also said that : "A person may cause evil to others not only by his actions but also by his inaction, and in either case he is justly accountable to them for the injury." Apparently, these anticipated conservative non-voters are annoyed with Republican imperfection. They are disheartened, disappointed, disillusioned, distempered, dismal -- and thus plan to dis the party that better advances conservative principles in government. They appear to have fallen victim to the false syllogism: 1) Something must be done; 2) not voting is something; therefore, 3) I will not vote. Of course the fallacy of the syllogism is that the second category could be anything. For example, number two could as well read "eating dog excrement is something." I rather suspect that they will feel about the same afterward, whether they chose the non-voting option or the scatological one. They are both equally illogical -- and repulsive -- and would deserve the moniker, "Stupid." Here are some tell-tale signs of the sort of person who would vote (or not vote) to cause the election of a party which would act to defeat every value and interest he holds dear (merely because the party that will at least try to advance most of those issues has not done as well as he might havehoped) ...............

[Dan Evans]

If you refuse to compromise because candidates are not pure enough for your tastes, you will be directly responsible for the impeachment proceedings...

I would blame that on the Republicans who have lost their way. I haven't changed, they did. And Dick Cheney will do a fine job of prosecuting the War on Terror.

...and all of the loony-left judicial appointments you'll be saddling your children with ...

My plan is for the Republicans to wake up by 2008 and nominate a Republican with conservative principles. Hopefully he will be able to identify a judicial nominee with respect for the Constitution.

[Dan Evans]

"Hi. I'm Dan. I didn't vote for you in 2006 so you really need to listen to me in 2008."

Funny thing though, it works. It worked in 1994.

[sauropod]

You are just plain wrong. No one can wave a magic wand and make fifty years of socialist policy disappear. Tax cuts, no new gun laws, conservative Supreme Court justices, tort reform, bankruptcy reform, building up the military, missile defense, the list goes on and on of conservative goals that Republicans have made happen over the last six years..

Pills for Grandma, the bloated Farm Bill, Law of the Sea Treaty, rampant red ink in Washington for entitlements, extorting certain policies in the States or else they will withhold Transportation funding, continuing BATF abuses, continuing Department of Interior abuses...

Suggest you educate yourself further before you continue your mindless bleating.

[Siena Dreaming]

And Dick Cheney will do a fine job of prosecuting the War on Terror

Blankley is right. Your statement shows that there really are stupid Republicans out there.

[Soul Seeker]

Evidently you are incapable of processing a single point that doesn't fit your paradigm that conservatives are stupid for not voting Rep and hence must be insulted because that has worked so damn well for the Democrats in winning elections.

Grow up.

Learn to construct an argument people can rally towards rather then alienating the very same voters you need for a majority. I told you how to go about doing so, and you are too harded to listen. Your loss, but forgive me if I find any contribution you consider yourself to have made in this thread to be worthless about now.

[sauropod]

Yes and they hold your position.

[Oberon]

You are just plain wrong. No one can wave a magic wand and make fifty years of socialist policy disappear.

Well, then, how about a reduced Federal budget? Is that too much to ask? Failing that, how about a budget the same size as it was six years ago?

How about even a budget that didn't grow as fast as it did under the Dems?

Apparently even THAT's too much to ask.

It would have been nice to have seen at least one cabinet-level department get a serious reduction in force.

Wholesale reform of the Federal tax code would not have been impossible within six years. Republicans own the government, and what have they done with it?

If your chief argument is that a Republican government is a lot better than the alternative, then I'm sorry for you. You're being played for a chump. You have voted for being rump-rangered just a little because it's preferable to being rump-rangered a lot.

I would very much like to vote for the party who will shrink government, reduce Federal spending, and increase the freedom of the several states and the people. Would the party willing to do that please stand up?

[Prophet in the wilderness]

What them " Teach them a lesson " voters don't realize, is what you say is not to far fetched, just take a look at Canada and Europe for size..... these " Teach them a Lesson " voters are under the MSM's spell , and are delusional, THERE IS NO SUCH THING OF A SURE THING THAT WE WOULD GET BACK IN POWER,,,, DID I MAKE THAT CLEAR ENOUGHT TO YOU DELUSIONAL " TEACH THEM A LESSON VOTERS " ??????
You are what the Democrats are counting on to win...

[Oberon]

You go, 'pod!

[Siena Dreaming]

No, the person said it's OK that Dick Cheney would take over for the President is stupid.

[A.Hun]

Nor, does anyone in Washington have the right to lecture conservatives. I told them they risked letting this happen. I told them that while mid forties would stay pat that if a 1% or 2% decided to stay home they could easily throw the election. And some fools, even here, said fine let them stay home. That they weren't needed. Now they turn around, call them names, and threaten them to coarce their vote. The vote they decided wasn't so damn important by their words and by their actions earlier. No, if Republicans lose anything the fault is theirs and theirs alone. They got arrogant and they assumed the conservative base was like members of the Dem coalition that cared more about power then the issues. That's their fault.

You're basic premise is flawed. This is not a conservative nation, and Republicans as a party reflect the nation as an entity. They have to in order to win elections. However, they are far more conservative than the Democrat party. THe fight to change the Republican party is during primaries, where you support the most conservative candidates you can. If your district supports your position, your candidate will win.

Once the primaries are over, you must support the most conservative party if indeed you are a conservative, and begin the fight over in the next election cycle.

If Republicans lose control of the House and Senate it will send only one message to the nation.... Support for conservative positions is a loser.

[mountainfolk]

"Hi, I'm Dan. I didn't vote for you in 2006 so you really need to listen to me in 2008"

Now that is funny.

[Niteranger68]

Funny thing though, it works. It worked in 1994.

How so? Clinton was in office until 2001 and completely *ucked-up national security, the economy, the courts, etc.

[edsheppa]

I have to question the intelligence of those who think people will be driven to vote by insults.

Well, he did call it the Stupid Party.

[Siena Dreaming]

Exactly. The Perot voters got us 9/11 and the nuke explosion in N. Korea and they use this to justify not voting now?

IDIOTS!

[Dan Evans]

or perhaps the dems will hold the house for another 40 years.

Then it doesn't make any difference. If we reward Republicans for what they've done, what incentive do they have to change? But after the country has had enough of Democrats, maybe the states will call for a Constitutional Convention to drop the hammer on them.

94 was a perfect storm, no way the Media will go after any dem scandal

The media is changing. The MSM is going out, new conservative radio and Internet coming in.

Further, in the next two years they will keep Bush and republicans tied up with investigations, that the MSM will go 24/7 about so in 2008 republicans will be in a worst spot and could give us President Hillary.

Or maybe it will inspire them to run more principled men that conservatives will vote for.

[Soul Seeker]

Exactly.

Though right now I'd settle for some around here realizing that insulting the very people you need to win an election is NOT an effective strategy for victory. All that attitude signals is that they themselves see little to recommend Republicans keep the majority.

It is pathetic, really, that I've spent months railing against the Republicans and until over a week or so ago was not voting for some of them..yet I can make a better case then waving pelosi, Threats, or namecalling as to why they should be extended mercy this once.

Voters that traditionally vote Republican do not not do so because they are voting against someone or something. They like to vote FOR someone or something. I certainly do. And if people want the disenchanted conservative vote, insulting them is doomed to fail. Give them a reason to vote FOR Republicans. And right now the strongest argument they can make is that Republicans with enough pressure from their base can be made to keep the promises they have made, or change course as with the fence. That's the key to winning their support, not using Dem tactics against conservatives.

[MelonFarmerJ]

But understand this Republicans. There is going to be no "rah Rah" pom pom waving after this election that you are still in power. You didn't earn it, you were just extended mercy. And the day after we're going to take back up the issues you have failed to implement and demand some changes.

A big AMEN to the above!!!

[FlipWilson]

Quote: "If you want to win over voters, you're going to have to be smarter than Cameron Diaz."

First off, I was being figurative. I don't believe we are being shipped to gulags. But the examples I gave of what we have seen in the past from John Conyers et. al. are real, not fake, and certainly not sensationalized. The Stalinist tactics of our opponents are alarming. They aren't imagined or a scare tactic. They are real. For example, the fairness doctrine is no more than a means to silence all who disagree with the leftists. You know, the dems, the leftists, those people who actually stand with the enemies of this country everyday and stand ready to assume power. The people who believe the war on terror is a silly thing created by Rove to win elections. The people who believe that we are the source of all evil. The people who have openly stated that they would cut funding to our troops in Iraq. (oh wait, that is an issue, I don't talk about those, sorry)

I also think that you have it confused. Winning over voters is not what is being discussed here. That is the easy part since the dems offer NOTHING, nadda, ziltch in the way of anything to vote FOR. I can "win over" the voters but still lose if those voters stay home. For example, the voters may agree with the House bill to secure the borders first, but the House may still go democrat if those voters stay home. Wow, a democrat congress, open borders, that sure will teach those Republicans to be more conservative!! (I wanted secure borders, now I get open borders. . oh wait, there I go talking about the issues again.)

But speaking generally about the issues, there is no question as to who wins the day. The problem is that the "teach em a lesson crowd" is angered that they didn't get everything they wanted all the time. They have amnesia and have forgotten what it is like to get NONE of what you want any of the time. They have also forgotten that there are these little things called primaries where the real woodshedding could have taken place and did in some instances.

Now, I could argue issues all day with the "teach em a lesson" crowd, but they are far too busy tantruming for a debate on the issues, especially since I agree with them on most of the issues so it really wouldn't be much of a debate. The "teach em a lesson" thing isn't about the issues, its about being a bit out of touch with political reality.

[Steel Wolf]

On target. We watched the democrats try this in the last election and it was a disaster for them yet it's somehow supposed to work for republicans.

So far, these are some of the notable arguements on this thread.

Conservatives who don't vote for Republicans in this election:

-are stupid.

-can kiss the Republic goodbye

-will be sent to gulags

-will put the Democrats into power for the next 40 years

-are just like handing power over to Adolf Hitler in the middle of WWII

Now, these are not reasonable arguements that will appeal to wavering voters. They're basically the right wing version of the "Jim Crow laws are coming back!" tacits that don't work for Democrats. Republicans need to get smarter, and fast, to get people to the polls.