Republican candidates face 'Ronald Reagan' test

Telegraph ^

[Sub-Driver]

Republican candidates face 'Ronald Reagan' test A proposed litmus test of Republicans' conservative credentials has triggered warnings of a "disaster in the making" for the party just as it stands to make major gains from President Barack Obama's falling popularity.

By Alex Spillius in Washington Published: 7:16PM GMT 26 Nov 2009 Ronald Reagan: Republican test would be based on the former president's '80 per cent' rule Ronald Reagan Photo: GETTY

The draft resolution would withhold central party funding for candidates in next year's midterm elections who failed to meet eight out of ten principles that supporters of the idea describe as fundamental to Ronald Reagan's rule.

They include supporting the Defence of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as being between a man and a woman, opposing amnesties for illegal immigrants, government interference in health care and hefty bailouts of the kind started by George W Bush and continued by President Barack Obama.

"Conservatives have lost trust in the Republican Party, with government spending, deficits, and ultimately bailouts at the end of the Bush administration," said James Bopp, a Republican National Committee member from an Indiana who wrote the proposal.

"A candidate must be with us most of the time," he said. "If they want our money, then they need to support our values."

Critics have said the move – which the committee will formally consider later this year – would result in the further marginalisation of the Republican Party, as moderate candidates who could appeal to independent voters would have more difficulty winning nominations.

Senator John McCain of Arizona, the party's presidential candidate last year, would almost certainly fail the test, along with at least 40 other Republicans in Congress.

[Behind Liberal Lines]

Senator John McCain of Arizona, the party's presidential candidate last year, would almost certainly fail the test

In other words, the test works as planned.

[Gaffer]

Well, I, for one, will not be voting for any more RINOs. And, I don't want to hear this "Vote for McCain [or RINO of the day] routine".

Neither of my two Georgia Senators will EVER get my vote again. BOTH tried the amnesty route and got their hands slapped. They recanted and changed their 'tune' but didn't change their hearts. Now, Chambliss has voted to increase the size of the Federal Judiciary during a hostage presidency and we will have an insurmountable task of dealing with the effects of adding thirtysomething odd new liberal radical judges making law.

Isaksson is no better. He'd run for dog catcher if there were perks and power involved

Just EFF THEM, and the horse they rode in on!

[DallasSun]

Is this the purity test? The one Reagan failed...failed 8 out of 10?

[Gator113]

If you want to make an omelet, you gotta crack some eggs.

BTW, McCain didn’t meet our standards last year, but we didn’t pick him to run, the traitor party and their scum media did, and THAT, with racism votes, is what gave us Americas First Failed Black Pres-dent..... Of course Huckaspoiler also helped insure the lib win.

No more friggen RINOs.

[Arkinsaw]

Well, I, for one, will not be voting for any more RINOs. And, I don't want to hear this "Vote for McCain [or RINO of the day] routine".

I didn't vote for him last time. The people at the top just want to win elections.....they believe that since Democrats won elections last time that they must become Democrats to win elections. "Marginalization" is the excuse.

Reward that thinking at the peril of your party.

[Texas Eagle]

And, I don't want to hear this "Vote for McCain [or RINO of the day] routine". I didn't vote for him last time.

The time to lay down the law is NOW. Not in the middle of the primaries.

But I'm like you. I've voted for my last RINO. If we somehow survive Ubama, we can survive anybody.

[Gaffer]

I probably don’t have much time left on this earth as some young fart turk, but I’ll be goddamned if I ever relent again.

[uncommonsense]

"Critics have said the move which the committee will formally consider later this year would result in the further marginalisation of the Republican Party, as moderate candidates who could appeal to independent voters would have more difficulty winning nominations."

While I greatly appreciate the Lame Stream Media's heartfelt concern for the Republican party... they can take their Euro-Socialism, left-coast, beltway wisdom and stuff it! The independents are running full speed away from the "moderates".

[Texas Eagle]

One small correction to my previous reply. I realize you didn’t vote for McCainnedy but I did and THAT will be my last vote for a RINO.

[Arkinsaw]

One small correction to my previous reply. I realize you didn’t vote for McCainnedy but I did and THAT will be my last vote for a RINO.

Our party is scared of the legacy of Ronald Reagan. Until they get over that they will be lost.

[HighlyOpinionated]

Isakson’s up in 2010, isn’t he? So who’s running against him in the Primary?

I’m already supporting McBerry for Governor. I love Nathan Deal but he’s toooooo quiet and doesn’t stand up and argue at Liberals enough. In other words he needs a Michele Bachmann infusion. Or rather if he were going to be outspoken, he should have already been there. We do not need a limp placid Governor.

Pundits are saying that he is a shoe in. I don’t like it. What can we do?

Freepmail me.

[org.whodat]

Hope there is no question about support of nuclear energy. LOL

[KC_Conspirator]

Don’t quote communists if you want to make your point.

[HighlyOpinionated]

Do NOT Allow The Media To Choose The Democrat Opponent! Do Not Allow The Media To Choose OUR Candidate!

We let this happen last time and got John [I left my mojo in a North Vietnam Prison] McCain. WE must choose OUR Candidate, even if the Liberals deride, mock, belittle, and otherwise try to destroy her/him.

Are we going to go with a "safe" candidate? Romney? He can't get more than a quarter of our support. Huckabee? Doubtful, he's got maybe one tenth of our support, if that. Gingrich? Newt has little name recognition. Jindal? His first Republican rebuttal of the President's address was WEAK, like Friday's cup of tea using Monday's tea bag.

Petraeus? Will the Nation support a Military Officer as CiC? Powell? Nope, he's too RINO for most. Guiliani? Far too Liberal for most conservatives. Mikey Steele? He could have had a go at running if he had come out of the GOP gate with excitement and Constitutional pronouncements.

Ron Paul? He's a Libertarian, not a Conservative. Alan Keyes? Can Conservatives and Republicans join together to support him? Where's he been the last few months?

Well, what about Palin? After this book signing tour, she'll have tested the waters, such as they are. Does she want the 2012 Election? Would she not rather test the political waters by supporting Conservative Candidates in 2010 to see just how far her influence extends?

If the "test" is Ronald Reagan, then Sarah Palin appears to be THE Candidate. However, maybe the test is bigger than Ronald Reagan.

If we do not do something to support Conservative [Republican] Candidates in 2010 and vote in a Republican Majority . . . we can kiss 2012 and beyond good bye.

So Get Busy in Your State Politics!

[Gator113]

Help me out. Where in the hell did I quote a communist?

[KC_Conspirator]

In the Soviet Union the Reds used to say "in order to make an omelette, you must break some eggs" in regards to the purges and deaths of millions. Communism is the omelette and the eggs are people. It might actually be a quote from Lenin, but I can't confirm that at the moment.

It just shows the total disregard that communists had for freedom and human life.

[wastedyears]

They could just lie.

[Gator113]

Oh for crying out loud. You sure as hell know that my words were not meant in that context.

Go make an omelet without cracking eggs and let me know how it turned out.

This conversation is stupid.... and it’s over.

[wastedyears]

I would pass in flying colors.