Posted on 01/08/2007 8:42:14 AM PST by jmaroneps37
Is there any evidence that conservatives stayed home? I don't know any who did. Further, I don't know any conservatives that voted for Democrats as a "revenge" vote.
What I saw was that the Republicans lost the middle so called swing voters on the war and immigration.
In either case, the collective "we" conservatives did it to ourselves.
I wish it *had* been due to principled conservatives staying home. If so, the party might actually have to move right in order to regain their votes. But since it was the swing voters we lost, the party bigwigs will simply continue drifting leftward in a vain attempt to out-Dem the Dems.
There is an excellent article in Commentary magazine which disects the words of the conservative commentariat who have turned against Bush and exhorted voters not to support him. For example, the author cites what writers who now are saying that Bush is "no (saint) Reagan" were saying about Reagan in the 1980s. He was not conservative enough for them while he was in office.
Is Conservatism Finished?
Wilfred M. McClay
January 2007
Unfortunately a subscription is required to read it online.
Pick yourself up, dust yourself off, and figure out a way to help move things forward.
If you have a natural critical bent focus on Pelosi and Co.
Many others on this thread have basically said the same thing. But hey, it's a free country and an open forum!
Single issue? Illegal immigration, federal power grabs and out-of-control spending are but a few of the issues that Republicans have grossly mishandled.
The Reagan Democrats stayed home or voted populist Dem candidates. Why? Simple, they were tire of being told that it is OK for GOP corporate types to outsource their jobs, hire H-1B replacement workers and tacitly approve illegal immigrants to take away their jobs. When these blue collar types ask what will happen to America if everything is outsourced and the middle class is displaced. GOP response, free trade is innovative and dynamic, but it comes with a price, the middle class laborer must learn to live thru the instability and accept a saw tooth salary pattern and career (i.e begin at a starting salary, work for three years and then be replaced, start all over again in a new field/company and a new starting salary, work three years and get replaced and start the cycle all over again) while the CEO/financiers/free traders enjoy salary increases year after year after year. When the working man lobbies for their interests, they are called protectionists, isolationists and etc, but when the corporations lobby to protect their interests it is called astute business/political practice. The working man basicly did what corporate America has been doing to them in the last twenty years, they became political consumers, and looked after their narrow interests, no different from their corporate employers. Until the GOP comes to grip with the instability caused by free trade, the Dems will use populism to beat the GOP (ironicly by narrow margins) in future elections, over and over and over. Free trade GOP will never give up their policy, because even under Democrat rule, they will get what they want. Higher taxes is not a problem, because the wealthy will simply move it to another low tax/tax free investment, but atleast illegal immigrants will be given amnesty and cheap labor will be available forever in the US for their factories and domestic services.
I agree with you 100%. Those "conservatives" who either flipped their vote or stayed home displayed an all-or-nothing mentality that no one will represent. And in the process of us trying to reason with them, we find out that their feelings are more important than logic and common sense. They have decided that cynicism and apathy will suffice for reasoned thought, yet they still want to be identified as politically conservative. Since when did "abandon all pragmatism" become a right wing commandment?
"Is FreeRepublic a Republican blog site or a conservative blog site?"
It's not a blog, it's a forum, and as far as "Republican" or "Conservative," that depends upon who is in office. Pre-2000, FR was Conservative. Post-2000, the stated position of FR has been to keep Democrats out of office via electing Republicans. Theoretically, this advances Conservatism, although Republican behavior on several notable issues sort of begs the question.
as the "true conservatives" twist themselves into rhetorical,
What beautiful posting of enlightenment!
Since when did "abandon all principle" become the Republican Party's silver bullet?
Like I said immediately after the election: I dare call it treason.
My way of explaining that breakdown is 40% who blindly vote Democrat and 40% who blindly vote Republican, neither of them really paying attention to what the party is actually doing. Then you have 20% thinking for themselves and voting on actual issues and candidates.
IMO, any FReeper who is pushing this "blame conservatives" meme is deeply suspect. What they betray is a deep dislike for conservatism. Personally, I'm sick of it.
If "conservatives" like you are willing to ensure that Democrats get elected to a majority, then kindly go pester the Democrats for what you want, and leave the Republicans alone.
Which Republicans abandoned all principals?
Oh really. How about the RINOs who openly supported Democrat candidates? In my district, the Dem's TV ads even featured nasty quotes from RINOs about the Republican nominee. Not coincidently, those quotes sounded suspiciously like what you and your RINO compadres post against conservatives every day on FR.
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.