They are falling for it......both parties are shopping at the Chumporium!!
The Democrats are following Osama Obama,
And the Republicans are following Political landscape nobody's.
My Plan is working!!
Posted on 03/12/2007 8:26:01 PM PDT by Trueblackman
The Great Disconnect between the Republican Party and the Conservative Base
The Republican Party better get its act together like yesterday and realize that without its Conservative base, that it will be left to wonder in the wilderness for many more years to come.
Republicans in Congress are now back in the minority after 12 years of majorities granted to them by the base who envisioned the death of big government agencies like the Departments of Education and Energy with control of the purse strings from 1994-2006 and in 2000 with the election of George W. Bush the base demanded the unabated end of the Clinton Era Tactics of manipulation federal government numbers and phony government surpluses.
Conservatives felt that Bush and company would govern like Conservatives, but after 6 years the base saw no victories as the federal government grew bigger under Bush with “No Child Left Behind” and “Medicare Part D.” Bush refused to fight for our most Conservatives Nominees allowing them to be blocked for years on end by a minority within the minority Democrats Caucus in the Senate. Bush’s “new tone” in Washington DC amounted to the abandonment of his Conservative Principals within 6 months of his first term.
Liberal Republicans like John McCain were allowed to cut deals behind close doors on Judicial Nominees, Taxes and Immigration, while the Conservatives in the Senate seem dumbfounded and refused to stop this self-proclaimed maverick and his band of merry sellouts. McCain seems to take joy in stabbing the base in the back every chance he gets, gleefully going on MSNBC to be praised by Chris Matthews, because he feels that he is somehow owed the Presidency and blames the base for his 2000 Primary defeats to George W. Bush. Now McCain wants to be the 2008 Nominee, “Sorry John, but paybacks are a bi*ch” and I will not vote for what amounts to the Republican Party’s Manchurian Candidate.
The House Managers became fat, dumb and happy and governed more like Republicrats than Conservatives and they thought that the fears of impeachment, higher taxes and liberal control of the House would be enough to rally the base to their banner again in 2006, but this time their rally cries fell on deaf ears and their majorities were lost.
The Republican Party still refuses to learn from 2006’s mid-term election defection by the base, Republicans need to realize that they live and die by the votes of the base and that any candidate that does not appeal to the base will not receive our votes. It is better to lose to a Democrat, than to elect a CINO (Conservative In Name Only).
Now as we enter the 2008 Presidential Race we have Northern Eastern Republicans like Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney trying to sell themselves to the base as having Conservative Credentials, but when one looks at their records and how they have governed, it has been anything but Conservative, yet there are those in the Republican Party who are trying to sell Giuliani as our best bet in 2008. The only difference in a Liberal Rudy Giuliani and Liberal Hillary Clinton is the fact of which bathrooms they select to use and there are some who are willing to even question that.
As a Conservative, I would rather back a Conservative Republican Candidate and see him lose the Presidential Election on principal than back a Liberal Republican IN Name Only like Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney and John McCain, who will end up stabbing me in the back anyway and govern himself by poll and focus groups.
The base would rather lose on principals than win out of convenience and the leaders of the Republican Party better start realizing that.
There are some folks who will not vote for a man who promotes abortion, the homosexual agenda, and gun control.
I agree.
" It can not be done from the "top down" by expecting to elect a conservative to the white house. There are not enough votes."
Here we disagree. If a charismatic principled conservative, ran for the Presidency, he could win. Likability is more important in this situation than ideology. It is the number one reason Reagan won twice.
In this particular election, finding that conservative, is the problem.
Instead, they just let them get by with it"
What exactly do you mean? What did you expect them to clean up?
The Clintons did a lot of damage at the White House, in case you have forgotten. They left the offices, computers, etc. in a mess with their childish pranks.
The Clintons, themselves, walked off with everything in the White House that wasn't nailed down.
This forum was loaded with complaints about the Clinton gang and what could now be done about it, but Bush let it slide....even started chumming with Ted Kennedy.
He left a dangerous number of Clinton employees at the State Dept., CIA and other administration jobs....most of which have come back to haunt us later.
I can't believe you weren't aware of it or have forgotten. George W. Bush became "Carpet Man" for the Dems and they immediately started taking advantage of it.
Excuse me? I'm still fighting a case from 1998 when I protested Clinton during impeachment season which was widely publicized on this forum. I followed the Clinton years very closely. I've hardly forgotten.
I wanted to know exactly what you meant before responding.
I never expected President Bush, nor would I have expected any other Republican President, to clean up after the Clintons. When it comes to such situations, Republicans are wimps. We're lucky we got Clinton impeached. That in itself, was a major miracle.
Reagan was elected by Democrats and society had changed in the last 25 years. Remember Reagan carried California. Never again will a conservative carry that state.
I have said this before. America is a socialist country now. The Goverment controls about 2/3 of the ecnonomy when you consider its employees at all levels, federal, state, local and the contractors who do business with them.
Bush is about the most likable, honest, sincere guy I have ever seen in politics and he lost in most all the urban areas.
We can't expect to win the white house by running all the small states again. We are going to have to win some of the big state or Kentucky Fried Hillary will be Prez.
John
One issue? Three and counting from where I sit..and three is enough for me...
One issue? Three and counting from where I sit and three is enough for me..
>>"Ever since W's first election in 2000 and with Republicans in control of both houses, I was waiting with bated breath for them to start cleaning up the Clinton mess.
Instead, they just let them get by with it"
>What exactly do you mean? What did you expect them to clean up?
Huge spending. Entitlements. Borders. In short, everything we were promised that Republicans could do if they were unhampered by a Dim prez or a Dim congress.
They blew the historical opportunity. Big time. And now the opportunity has passed, and we have a Dim congress and a weakened president. Had they seized the opportunity, we may well have had a majority in Congress today. It is a dang shame.
GW campaigned on the idea of compassionate conservatism and faith based initiatives. It was not a sign that he was going to reign in entitlements and in fact was more likely an indication under GW entitlements would increase. Furthermore, I never heard President Bush talk about small government or decreasing the size of government on the campaign trail. It is no surprise government spending grew on his watch.
9/11 was a perfect opportunity to get all of our immigration problems, both illegal AND legal under control and I agree with you this administration "blew it, big time." You are probably right about the repercussions, though this past election cycle seemed to be more a referendum on the war than anything else.
The president should have spoken to the American people during prime time TV at regular intervals regarding the war's necessity and progress and should have ousted Rummy sooner, at least six months before the elections, as painful as it is to admit it, and we probably would have seen far more successful election results.
They are falling for it......both parties are shopping at the Chumporium!!
The Democrats are following Osama Obama,
And the Republicans are following Political landscape nobody's.
My Plan is working!!
When you left the domocrat party were you thinking to change our pro-life, pro-gun party to be more like the party you left?
Thanks, TA!
Ron Paul has no chance to win.
As I said to someone else the other day, better odds with him than on a previous project LOL!
So you believe electing someone who in his owns words says that his policies are almost exactly like Bill Clintons is the answer?
In case you hadn't noticed, the real purpose of "campaign finance reform" is to protect liberals. They can get all the advocacy they want from "news" pieces on broadcast television networks. Although the playing field is uneven, its roughness allows groups like Swift Boat Veterans for Truth to engage liberals in a reasonably balanced fight. Campaign Finance Reform would seek to level most of the playing field except for the liberal encampments which would be left intact.
Here's my question to you, my friend - Overall did we lose more under Clinton or under President Bush?
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.