Posted on 11/18/2008 3:48:33 AM PST by Al B.
It all depends on when that will happen. If it’s Obama for 8, and hillary for 8....I’m sure the demographics for real conservatism will be dead. Some form of it will be possible, but it won’t be up to us anymore.
The person running the party will not be the presidential candidate, we need someone with the polished tone of a Reagan to start the conervative movement (which has disappeared with our current leadership). OBama won because his B.S. captured the young people (and the stupid...).
First we need a great leader to step forward, and then the others will hopefully follow. I am sure there are some potential leaders out there besides Palin and Jindal, who would make better candidates in a few years.
I too was for Thompson but felt he did not inspire many in his campaign.
“Thompson??? He was old as the hill this year. Can you imagine an 80 year old running for President in 2012??? Please, this was his last Presidential election run. We need youth of Palin or Jindle.”
This ISNT about being the Presidential candidate!!!!!!
This is for party Chairman.
Fer cryin’ out loud, at least read the article.
Yeah, collected money while he was at it
No way on Thompson. He didn’t seem to really want it the last time, so why bother trying again. It looked like he only ran to mess up Romney. As soon as Romney was out, Fred dropped out, too. What was THAT about?
You're sure about that? I'd need a link - because my recollection had it that Romney was in the race for a month after Thomson bowed out.
LOL! No it won't! Conservatism isn't a demographic. It is a way of life. After forty years plus of overwhelming Democrat congressional control, and *no* Conservative administrations, Reagan walked in and spoke with a clarity of a ringing bell.
Look at what he wrought.
When we listen to those who would have us react to fear and take the lesser road, the safer route, we will suffer ignominy, and we will find exactly the thing we fear the most.
It is only when we strike out boldly, anchored firmly by principle, confident in our beliefs, and righteous in our cause, that we ever succeed- And then our success is always great.
“The person running the party will not be the presidential candidate, we need someone with the polished tone of a Reagan to start the conervative movement (which has disappeared with our current leadership). OBama won because his B.S. captured the young people (and the stupid...).
First we need a great leader to step forward, and then the others will hopefully follow. I am sure there are some potential leaders out there besides Palin and Jindal, who would make better candidates in a few years.
I too was for Thompson but felt he did not inspire many in his campaign.”
The best thing we could have is someone who can get up and articulate conservative principles well. Thompson has shown that he can do that. He also is UNLIKELY to be using the position to advance his own personal candidacy for anything. (as opposed to Newt, who is, if nothing else, a tireless self-promoter) Party Chairman is an ideological post. They have managers and such below them for administrative detail, and fundraisers who do their thing. Chairmen are the ones who lay out the direction the party should take. In my opinion, Fred would be ideal for that.Heck, he was doing so with his commentaries before the campaign even started, on Paul Harvey’s radio show. He’s also quite good at playing the attack dog when necessary, yet doing so WITHOUT being overtly offensive. He’s almost ideal for this position, should he want to take it. To nominate Palin as co-chair (per the bylaws stated) would boost HER standing within the party insiders, who were problematic for her during this recent election.
We need to keep our Great Leaders (though I despise the term, as having been used for Kim il Sung) for candidates to put in office. We need conservative ideologues running the party and keeping it true to its ideals. Candidates can be inspirational, and that’s fine. We need good conservatives at the party level to keep them on the straight and narrow, and keep the prinicples to the forefront.
I still think there are those within the party “elite” who hold Palin’s reforms in Alaska (getting rid of some crooks and beating Frank Murkowski) against her.Certainly it would explain at least some of the attacks against her from the inside.
Good comments, I believe Thompson would be inspirational, being an actor he comes across “Reagan like”. His speech at the convention was good, but so was Rudy’s! I think now we all need to keep praying and staying positive. I thought the sky had fallen after Mac lost, but as I look at things I don’t think this guy will be around after four years. He cannot pick a team that wasn’t Clinton’s!
The other requirement is that they be neutral about
the 2012 sweepstakes.
Does Steele make this cut?
Newt: he really believes the GOP will be out of power for a while otherwise he would not chat-up his Dem Rivals.
Arnold: sorry can't claim fiscal responsibility with CA massively in debt.
I don't think a sitting governor should be the one
unless it's his last term.
I agree with you!
Yep, I agree. Thompson would be great for the head of the RNC. He has strong conservative principles, and articulates them well. While Fred didn’t run a perfect campaign, I think the near media blackout on all things Fred during the campaign had its effect. Fox wanted Rudy, and when it became apparent that wasn’t going to work, they propped up McCain.
I am pulling for Sarah in ‘12, but Fred would be great as RNC head in the meantime. He’s not one to back down from a fight or to apologize for conservatism. We need somebody tough, not a moderate who wants to “reach across the aisle”.
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/k6KUDv1wzraWhwlBt1
I like Fred, he is unafraid to tell it like it is, he also has more mass appeal because of his days on Law and Order.
Hopefully some dems who haven’t drunk too deeply of the Kool-Aid will give Fred a fair listen.
I posted before I read the full article. Fred would make a great chairman, but a co-chairmanship of Fred and Sarah would be awesome, IMO. They would complement each other nicely. I’m fairly young, but I recognize the wisdom and experience of those older than myself. I don’t think of age as a liability, but maybe Americans as a whole do.
He also walked in after an incredible saturation among the states (ie excessive growth in spending), and a totally incompentent admin before him....with another alternative to offer.
California will never be a conservative state...no charisma will change that. I’d love to be wrong, but the demographics changed and it’s all downhill there. Florida’s next, then...texas....then the republican party will shift dramatically to the left.
The best chance for conservatism is 2010-2020. Medicare will collapse and we’re likely to see a conflict with Iran. If we can’t come up with incredibly good alternatives and sell them 100%....then we’ll lose a grip of government for sometime. We have to perform well from now on or that’s it.
LLS
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.