Posted on 09/17/2007 11:07:54 PM PDT by goldstategop
Oops. Must’ve misunderstood a post. Sorry about that.
From my perspective, all GOP Pres. candidates except Rudy and Ron Paul have already expressed and displayed fairly conservative values.
I can support Mitt, Fred, Duncan, Huckabee, and/or maybe even Brownback.
(ron paul, of course, is a joke and Rudy would tear the GOP apart. McCain is too hateful)
That said, the main function of any of the above viable GOP conservative candidates such as Fred, Mitt or Duncan should be to meet, greet, and attract as many OTHER voters to their cause as possible.
With limited time, it is not always possible to meet and stroke every conservative group, ValuesVoters.com not withstanding.
“The calculus is pretty simple this year, goldie...vote for the Pubbie, or don’t, and accept Hitlery as President by default.
No, I don’t much like it either, but you’re perfectly well aware that the sentence above is entirely true.”
Personally, I’m not going to vote AGAINST someone. I’m going to vote FOR someone. This trap is how RINOs have managed to take over the Republican party. They ignore us because they know - with absolute faith, beyond any doubt - that no matter what they do we’ll vote for them anyway.
Are they right? Are we the “black vote?”
I already had my doubts about some of those (mostly the established RINOs) who did not show up. Now I have doubts about others who did not show.
...agreed. There will be no win without the support of social conservatives.
Pride goeth before a fall.
No conservative group has the right to demand that any candidate appear at any particular event.
“If Hitlery becomes President, in four years’ time there will not be anything resembling the Constitution as we have known it. Her Heinous has exactly no use for that document.”
We haven’t paid attention to the Constitution for a long time.Show me the line that says its a woman’s right to kill her baby. That is my bottom line value...the “right to life”.
What fiscal conservatives fear is that Hillary will take their stuff, and their stuff is all they have. Fiscal conservatives don’t care about my values, and I don’t care about their stuff. That’s the split in conservative politics.
There were no electable candidates in the "debate", and it's more than a year from election time. I believe that only one candidate has taken the right course, which is to recognize that more than a year and a half of campaigning is a waste of time and money. The bulk of voters do not even think seriously about their vote until about 6 months ahead of the election date.
Of those who participated in the "debate" you're referencing, if one or two of those are even still around by July 4, 2008, let alone the Sept. 1, 2008 Convention. I would be very surprised.
The money being wasted on the non-electables could have been better utilized if the field were narrowed to an electable candidate.
Election fatigue hurts the Republicans more than the Democrats, as the Democrats do nothing but pound the "Bush's Fault" drum in their campaigns, and that's what their voterbase wants to hear.
The MSM has been pounding that drum for 8 years (Bush lied, Halliburton, "we was robbed", etc., etc.).
As for the base question, we get the vote out and put our money where our mouth is. The value voters may be a little loud and passionate, but they go all out behind somebody they can support. Now the question becomes, is the GOP able to garner that support, or are we going to have another year of the Bob Dole-drums...
If we were really powerful in the process Rino Rudy and Flip-Flop Mitt would not be top tier candidates.
People with "values" will definitely have an effect on the elections, but it won't be because of this narrow group or the constituency challenged candidates who showed up at their show.
I think the reaction of average, decent, good people against the Clinton years was mistaken for a real influential group of holier-than-thou 'values voters'. The whole concept of 'values voteres' insinuates that all other voters are pagans or nihilists.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic Ping List:
Please ping me to all note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.
A choice between a RINO and a Democrat is no choice. Send me a RINO, I stay home. You choose.
Easy,
1 - life (Dem’s and RINO’s favor killing babies)
2 - faith (Dem’s and RINO’s favor banning faith from the public square)
3 - patriotism (Dem’s and RINO’s favor multinationalism)
4 - the traditional family and children (Dem’s and RINO’s favor redefining family)
Now you have your list. Send me a RINO, I stay home.
I posted 54 before I got to your post. Amazing how consistent we are, eh?
“They have no place else to go.”
Indeed we do. We can stay home. You choose. Send me a RINO and I will stay home.
It’s bunk.
Hillary vs. Thompson, and you won’t vote for Thompson? Please.
We survived eight years of Bubba. We survived 40 years of Dem control of the Congress. Hillary wins, the Congress returns to the GOP in 2010 and most of the Chafee style RINO’s will be gone. That’s OK with me.
Then make sure the Senate GOP has the backbone to stop them. The Dem’s are demonstrating how to hamstring a President. We can do the same.
Send me a RINO and I stay home. Period.
With all due respect Sir, your answer surprises me.....& saddens.
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.