Does the Republican Party Need to be a Big-Tent Party Again?

Self | 10/4/08 | Self

[etcb]

I suppose I am more optimistic about the party. While no political party can be all things to all people, it can’t be so narrow as to appeal to only those of one belief. After all, the objective is to win a majority of the votes and you don’t accomplish that by excluding anyone who doesn’t agree with you on every issue. You need to be narrow enough to maintain a degree of cohesiveness and broad enough to appeal to a majority of the voting public.

[meyer]

The big flippin’ tent is what screwed the party up in the first place! Get back to conservative values, small government, and low taxes. Those attributes are universal.

[paudio]

I’m aware of it, you are too. We, however, cannot make assumption that all social conservatives or fiscal conservatives to share that. But your point about “what’s so horrible about working to help the team” is actually the reason why I wrote the vanity. The cooperation will not take place if the recent tendency to call each other RINOs and threaten to throw the other out of the party continues.

[do the dhue]

You might think this is crazy, but I would kinda like a guy like Ted Nugent.

[Lucius Cornelius Sulla]

The Goldwaterites were correct, it seems to me.

As a Goldwaterite I thank you. What we did after 1964 was to get involved in internal Republican politics, month after month, year after year. After 16 years, on the third attempt we nominated our leader over that entire period, Ronald Reagan. That is what conservatives did then, and what we need to do now, especially since the former liberal Republicans are virtually nonexistent, and the RINOs are weaker than they have been during this entire period.

[teletech]

You might think this is crazy, but I would kinda like a guy like Ted Nugent.

You're right, I think that's crazy.

[do the dhue]

I thought so, but I liked his book God, Guns, and Rock N Roll. And he takes a stand against abortion too.

[do the dhue]

I believe in a pre trib rapture. So, quicken me.

[teletech]

I thought so, but I liked his book God, Guns, and Rock N Roll. And he takes a stand against abortion too.

Maybe I'm thinking of the wrong guy. Wasn't he ted Baxter on the Mary Tyler Moore show?

[teletech]

I believe in a pre trib rapture. So, quicken me.

OK. LOL!

[do the dhue]

hehe Quite a contrast.

This is the Ted Nugent:

[do the dhue]

I try to look at the bright side of life.

[meyer]

I respect the base, but only for as long as they are willing to give a little to save our country.

The base has been giving a little and giving a little and giving a little. In terms of domestic policy, Bush is a socialist. McCain offered the same, or worse. Half the Republican senators are RINOs. They lost in 2006, not because they were Republicans but because they lost their path from the principals of small, less intrusive, less expensive government.

They spent like drunken democrats for 6 years and voters got tired of that. They embraced an enlarged government and voters got tired of that. They tried to force amnesty on the people and the voters got tired of that.

The solution to a wrong turn is NOT to continue turning in the same direction.

[paudio]

To elaborate further. . .the core values of the party is what establishes the “tent.”

I agree with you. But what are they? As I mentioned in my original post, there are many ideas floating about 'conservatism'. They maybe conflicting with each others.

[freekitty]

I didn’t think the Republican party excluded anyone. It’s been made very clear the Democratic party has. If you don’t believe their way; you are not one of them period.

[teletech]

I try to look at the bright side of life.

I tried that once. I was blind for three days!

[paudio]

Bottom line: Social conservatism, small government, and individual liberty. All are required for those who realistically want to achieve any one of them.

The thing is, I don't think people (read: voters) actually are coherent, even those who claim to be 'conservative'. Newt's Contract with America, for instance, didn't have anything on social issues. Was it not conservative?

[do the dhue]

LOL

[Nam Vet]

RINOs, independents and dims may VOTE for our candidates, but they cannot have any say at all in who runs. If we don't correct the assinine primaries that allow non-Repubs to vote, I'm quitting the party.

Nam Vet

[roamer_1]

That is what conservatives did then, and what we need to do now, especially since the former liberal Republicans are virtually nonexistent, and the RINOs are weaker than they have been during this entire period.

Respectfully, to what end? To take control of machinery that will eventually subjugate us once again to the will of those we oppose? It makes no sense. It needs to go.