Where Do Conservatives Go Now? Part 2 (Don’t Get Suckered into Supporting the Republican Party)

Conservative HQ ^ | 19 Apr 12 | Richard A. Viguerie

[Captain Peter Blood]

Your dreaming on that one. The Republican’s have no “Balls” or anything else.
Nothing and I mean nothing is going to change.

[Bruce Campbells Chin]

In this environment, nobody advances the premise that Conservative tenets are more sound than Leftist tenets. Both campaign from a Leftist point of view, but one is less of a Leftist than the other.

I disagree right there. There are plenty of people espoousing conservative ideals, and they at least get presented as the alternative to what the Democrat does. And frankly, in this election cycle, Romney has rhetorically been a big booster of capitalism. It's his record on related issues that's the problem, but the conservative message is definitely getting out there evne if conservatives themselves doubt his sincerity.

The problem has been that conservative ideals are "tougher love" than the surface coddling that liberals offer, so it takes an exceptional messenger to make that case effectively.

If we want Conservatives to win, our party has to endorse them, support them, and keep lofting them. I'm not making the case they will always win. I am making the case that when our time does come to gain the leadership, a Conservative will be the person installed into office.

I don't see the virtue in drilling holes in the bottom of the boat so that the water runs out faster while waiting for that conservative to emerge. by then, we may be sunk.

Our party clearly fights to defeat this reality. In his day, Reagan WAS NOT the RNC favorite. George Bush was. None the less, Democrats reached out to thim and supported him. The same dynamic is alive and well today. Most people don't realize it.

The problem, again, is that we don't have a Reagan running. We had a pretty flawed slate of candidates. The reason we haven't nominated another Reagan is that another Reagan hasn't chosen to run.

Are you aware of the percentage of the populace that considers themselves to be a Conservative vs a Liberal? 41 vs 21%

41% is not a majority. It gets you 41% of the electorate. In any case, peoples' definition of conservative may be ideosyncratic, and may not match yours or mine. But more importantly, if we assume that number is correct, then why didn't that 41% nominate a great conservative? It's because there wasn't one running. That was the core reason we're stuck with Romney today. Crud, the primaries showed that GOP voters kept flocking to the next non-Romney, in the vain hope they'd turn out to be the next Reagan. And they all failed. I voted for Gingrich, but I'd admit that he isn't Reagan either.

The core problem we've had is a lack of good candidates. And honestly, the only "fault" we can attach to that is to those non-existent candidates themselves. The best I've seen recently is Rubio in terms of the ability to communicate the conservative message effectively, but he's still unripe. I just want to be sure we still have a country when he's ready to run in 2016.

[Turbo Pig]

In turn, I’ll blame you for wasting your vote on Romney and losing the election that could have been won with a credible candidate.

And you would be completely off-base; because Romney isn't my man. Thinking that I am a GOP/Romney supporter shows how blinded by hatred one is; considering I flatly stated I wasn't voting for him, but against obama.

In fact he's the last person on the stage; besides Ron Paul, that I want running for president this year. Unfortunately, my guy didn't win and it looks like Romney will be the nominee; barring an act of God, I fear. You make do with the hand you are dealt.

[CommerceComet]

why don’t you half-wits go out

Since when does standing on sound conservative principles warrant insult on the FR? If your conscience is clear voting for Romney, then do it. I don't agree with your actions or understand them but I respect your right to make up your own mind. Those of us who won't ever pull the lever for Romney would appreciate similar treatment.

I'd feel a little bit worse with Obama's re-election than I would with Romney's election but not enough to abandon my conservative principles. I said five years ago that Mitt Romney is the only major Republican presidential candidate of my lifetime for whom I couldn't vote. That's an unbroken string of Republican votes back to unenthusiastically pulling the lever for Ford. Not Romney, ever.

[sirchtruth]

I am not advocating Romney; I am advocating doing what is needed to ensure that obama is a one term president. Deal with the real and present danger now, deal with extrapolated threats when they arise.

I agree! Allowing the ENEMY inside your camp is much more dangerous than having him outside. Keep electing rinos and keep allowing these liberal appeasing prix to rummage around and destroy the best hope for America that exist!

When does supporting these "lessor of two evils" rino losers end???

[LucianOfSamasota]

On election day , I will be writing in the Tina Fey look-a-like from Alaska.

She's A LOT better looking than Tina Fey. And classier. And more character.

[hattend]

Sorry, I’ll vote for whomever the Pubs throw up against Obama.

Imagine what Obama will do if he thinks he has voter approval of his socialist agenda by being elected to a second term.

I dislike Romney but he is better than another Obama term. Sorry FR, had to say it.

[Captain Peter Blood]

Forget the Tea Party also. What happened to all those Tea Party types elected in 2010?
Last year during the the Debt and Deficit talks they pretty much all folded when they had a chance to define things and draw the proverbial line in the sand.
As far as I am concerned they are yesterday's news, they failed.
As I said nothing will change. There is no political will to do so and when we finally hit the Granite Wall because of all the debt and economic problems these same idiots will be blaming each other.

[rogue yam]

I dislike Romney but he is better than another Obama term. Sorry FR, had to say it.

I predict that by November this site will have again become more sane and practical.

This "Romney-is-Satan" crap just won't hold up for another six months, especially after every conservative who ever held public office has endorsed him and campaigned for him.

[rogue yam]

There are several GOP primary contests ongoing where RINOs are facing conservatives. The tea party movement continues.

One can always be impatient at the pace of progress but there is never any excuse for giving up.

[jammer]

I haven't given a dime to the Neo-Whig party since Bush I.

You're right. Same with me. Every election is, "the most important election of our lifetime," and "now is not the time to abandon the party for the sake of ideological purity."

If we had "abandoned the party" in 1988, instead of nominating the first "New World Order" idiot, we wouldn't be in the shape we're in now. It has to start sometime, the sooner the better. I hope many will give up their hopes for the corrupt GOPe to reform itself. Their problems are genetic.

If we don't put our feet down now, in four years it will be the same old story with the same tired "my guy is less bad than their guy."

[Turbo Pig]

I honestly do not know how to respond to your reply; because ..well I don't want to offend you. I will try, though.

1) They are already inside the camp; the damage is done. The damage that Romney can do; even at his worst, is less than what obama has and will continue to do, if re-elected.

2) The big key this year; and even GOP/Romney haters admit this, is to put more true Conservatives in the Senate. Do that and even if Romney goes all Massachusetts RINO (which he will at points), there will be a mechanism in place to stop him. Refer back to #1.

3) Letting the government go idle(which it never really does)is not an option. Things HAVE to be done in order to roll back the things that obama and his bureaucracy have put in place. Even if the Dems lose control of the Senate, do you honestly think obama won't veto everything that comes across his desk; after all he'll be a lot more "flexible" once he's re-elected. There's no way that you'll be able to get a veto proof vote on even half of what needs to be done to set this ship aright. Romney may. or may not veto things; we know that obama will. Refer back to #1.

4) This whole sick cycle ends, when Conservatives take control at the local level, build a farm team and elevate true Conservatives to the national stage. Are you doing your part locally (you as in the reader, not you sirchtruth specifically)? Refer back to #1.

Until then you make do with what's before you and try to make the best selection possible in order to minimize the damage that is being/going to be/could be done. Abdicating the playing field to the enemy (obama IS the enemy who is the biggest threat to "destroy the best hope for America that exist!" as you put it) is just plain idiotic and counter productive, in my opinion, at this point.

[itsahoot]

I am not advocating Romney; I am advocating doing what is needed to ensure that obama is a one term president.

How can you have one, without the other?

I hold all those talking heads and primary candidates that continually told us they would 100% support whomever the nominee was, responsible for the disaster named Romney.

The next President whomever that is, will forever change our country and I doubt it will be for the better. One might begin to think that there really could be a grand conspiracy.

The TEA Party is dead, long live the TEA Party.

[DoughtyOne]

In this environment, nobody advances the premise that Conservative tenets are more sound than Leftist tenets. Both campaign from a Leftist point of view, but one is less of a Leftist than the other.

I disagree right there. There are plenty of people espoousing conservative ideals, and they at least get presented as the alternative to what the Democrat does. And frankly, in this election cycle, Romney has rhetorically been a big booster of capitalism. It's his record on related issues that's the problem, but the conservative message is definitely getting out there even if conservatives themselves doubt his sincerity.

Okay, so your example is a guy who expouses the evils of abortion, but supported it for decades.  He now speaks out against Obamacare, but he himself supported the individual mandate to get his own health care bill passed in Massachusetts.  He's a strong supporter of gun rights, but signed on to many gun control efforts in the past.  He is the loudest voice on our team, gets full support from the RNC, Republican talking heads, Republican office holders, and the Republican elites, but is his own walking nullification.

This is what strikes you as the Republican party getting Conservatism's message out there?  LOL  Okay.  Does it ever occur to you that a man like this actually destroys our message, cheapens it, causes folks to look at Conservatives as liars and worse?

The RNC should have made it clear from day one, that Romney was a bridge too far.  He was able to run roughshod over Newt and Santorum.  I have no doubt that others who didn't have as deep pockets as Romnye did, decidced to stay out rather then go broke.

Romney was Conservatism's 2012 poison pill.  His message was brought to you by the entirely too willing RNCe.

The problem has been that conservative ideals are "tougher love" than the surface coddling that liberals offer, so it takes an exceptional messenger to make that case effectively.

No, it merely takes a messenger that has espoused these policies for more than six months.  Having done that, it must also be a person with a loud enough voice that he won't be drowned out by someone spending six to ten times more money, to denegrate him with non-stop television spots, to the point that nobody else's voice could be heard above the din.  That's exactly what we had going on this year.

What we utlimately found out this year, is that the RNCe has no standards whatsoever.  Any person can register as a Republican and do whatever they like for decades against almost every tenet of Conservatism, then decide to run for the presidency with the RNCe's full blessing.

If we want Conservatives to win, our party has to endorse them, support them, and keep lofting them. I'm not making the case they will always win. I am making the case that when our time does come to gain the leadership, a Conservative will be the person installed into office.

I don't see the virtue in drilling holes in the bottom of the boat so that the water runs out faster while waiting for that conservative to emerge. by then, we may be sunk.

I don't disagree with your premise, but I'm not confident you are seeing this clearly.

What we actually have is a boat with a good sized hole in it, we need someone to block that hole, and you don't see a problem with a guy(R) holding a smaller drill bit headed into the boat.  What do you expect him to do with that drill?  Stop leaks?  NO, he wants to make more.  They'll probably be smaller, but they'll still let more water in.  When do we STOP putting in guys with a drill in their hand?  McCain, Romney,... more holes...  Look at the holes our last guy drilled in the bottom of the boat.  Hell, he came very close to sinking the thing with the help of others.  Enough already!

Our party clearly fights to defeat this reality. In his day, Reagan WAS NOT the RNC favorite. George Bush was. None the less, Democrats reached out to thim and supported him. The same dynamic is alive and well today. Most people don't realize it.

The problem, again, is that we don't have a Reagan running. We had a pretty flawed slate of candidates. The reason we haven't nominated another Reagan is that another Reagan hasn't chosen to run.

We've got a guy running with hundreds of millions, and we can't understand why a guy with a few million won't decide to run.   As long as the RNCe allows wealthy or well-known Leftists to continue to choke the field, we'll continue to get the Leftists.  What part of this are you missing?

Are you aware of the percentage of the populace that considers themselves to be a Conservative vs a Liberal? 41 vs 21%

41% is not a majority. It gets you 41% of the electorate. In any case, peoples' definition of conservative may be ideosyncratic, and may not match yours or mine. But more importantly, if we assume that number is correct, then why didn't that 41% nominate a great conservative? It's because there wasn't one running. That was the core reason we're stuck with Romney today. Crud, the primaries showed that GOP voters kept flocking to the next non-Romney, in the vain hope they'd turn out to be the next Reagan. And they all failed. I voted for Gingrich, but I'd admit that he isn't Reagan either.  No, he isn't.  I agree with that.  I'm not a big supporter of Newt.  I could vote for him, but it would be grudgingly.

Earlier you were stating that the majority of U. S. Citizens were not Conservative.  I point out that only 21% of the public claim to be Liberals, and you respond by telling me 41% is not a majority.  Pardon me for pointing it out, but 21% isn't either.  The fact remains, people self-declare to be Conservative by almost twice the number who self-declare to be Liberal.  Why are we not appealing to those self-declared Conservatives and enough of a small portion of the self-declared moderates to win?  Instead the RNCe backs the most Leftist candidate every four years.  Why are we continuing to fight for the 21% that declare to be Leftists?  It makes no sense whatsoever, and yet here we go again.  I'll ask you directly.  Why do you find yourself compelled to support this?

The core problem we've had is a lack of good candidates. And honestly, the only "fault" we can attach to that is to those non-existent candidates themselves. The best I've seen recently is Rubio in terms of the ability to communicate the conservative message effectively, but he's still unripe. I just want to be sure we still have a country when he's ready to run in 2016.

Does he have $200 million dollars?  If he doesn't, and another Leftist with $200 million decides to run, don't count on a good candidate coming forward.

BTW, my problems isn't the money or the fame, it's the way a person has lived their lives and whether they can be trusted to mean what they say today?

I also have a big problem with the RNCe's policy of being willing to back any Leftist slimeball(R) whatsoever for the presidency.

Thanks for the discussion.  I know some of this is rather pointed, but I'm not upset with you.  I'm just frustrated by what we are continually faced with every four years.  I want it to stop.

[itsahoot]

By you throwing it out, you saved yourself cash and aggravation.

Tape it to a brick and send it back with the postage paid envelope they send to you.

[Cinnamontea]

They stabbed the tea party in the back so ef'em.

What you really mean is ef all of us, ef the country, ef the future. Because--let's be plain about this--that is what your attitude and inaction will do. You do NOT stop to argue about the furniture in the house while the house is flooding. First you turn off the damn water.

[itsahoot]

Deep thought DoughtyOne, and right on the money.

I really don't hold out much hope for our Republic no matter which of these Marxists are elected.

No politician can cure what ails our country, and we should not look to one of them for the answer.

[itsahoot]

The resulting gridlock would better keep the bastards in both parties in check.

You have a few examples of how the current Republican controlled House has checked the current White House agenda?

[itsahoot]

The stark reality is that conservatives are not the majority in this country.

[AlanGreenSpam]

-—”I am not advocating Romney; I am advocating doing what is needed to ensure that obama is a one term president. Deal with the real and present danger now, deal with extrapolated threats when they arise.”

You’ve got it figured out. This country has gone so far left that it’s just not going to happen that we can jump as far right as we want (e.g. Constitution Party). It’ll take two terms. Suppose a Romney term - and then if the country swings more conservative than now (I expect it will) - and then more conservative challenger.

That would be when Obama is the laughing stock of the mainstream.