Replies

Luntz apparently buys the premise that the GOP will get the independents, yet keep the conservatives, by ignoring, downplaying and marginalizing the Conservatives' concerns. Bad premise.

First, if his arguments is that the GOP doesn't need the Conservatives, the GOP shouldn't mind if we walk, or sit on our hands. Give it a try.

Second, if the belief is that Conservatives must, perforce, buy into a candidate acceptable to "independents", in order to triumph over she who must not be named, think again. If the GOP does not represent our values, anymore than the Wicked Witch of the East, why should we support it?. When I was a kid in school doing division, that was called the "lowest common denominator" . On a level Mr. Luntz and the GOP would understand,i.e political power, why should conservatives give up their hard won leverage to influence one of only two major political parties to appease "independents", and lose that leverage? They have carried most of the water for the GOP, in the states the GOP carries. Compare that with the GOP machine in New York. Or Massachusetts. Or California. And if Luntz thinks independents in those states are going to move those states into the GOP column, he's nutz.

For me Luntz and the GOP have only one principle - an impulse to power. That makes them no better than Democrats. And that's no reason to support them, aid them, or vote for them.

I am going to have to disagree with you. Luntz points out the problems, of which many are correct. However, the whole article is full of incorrect assesments. The basic message for the GOP is "be more liberal", which I have heard for 7 years from Luntz, or basically since he supported McCain in 2000.