Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: yefragetuwrabrumuy

I agree with your post, except for this:

>> the leadership has foisted worthless presidential candidates on the party

I don’t feel like anyone was foisted on me. I never liked the field that ran, and the one I picked of the bunch, not enough others - on here and elsewhere - wanted him to win either.

We need some good conservative candidates, but I don’t know who. I don’t blame the party or the leadership for that.


258 posted on 11/07/2012 9:58:28 PM PST by D-fendr (Deus non alligatur sacramentis sed nos alligamur.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]


To: D-fendr

The limited list of candidates that are *allowed* to run with party backing are predetermined by the leadership. Anyone else can run, but they will be denied party funds, access to the database of party members, introduction to the big money party supporters, etc. In effect, they will be third party candidates within the Republican party.

Setting aside his platform and opinions, Ron Paul made a great example of this. He obstinately chose to run, though he had no backing from the leadership. And while he was able to muster a large group of very dedicated backers, he could “only bring a spoon to the gunfight.”

Even pushing it all the way to the convention, his people were forced out of the rules committee by the leadership, and he was denied the chance to appeal to the delegates. In effect, they even went so far as to change the rules so that he could not win.

And this is where it really hurts conservatives. Because Republican liberals (who call themselves ‘moderates’), are far more in agreement with the Democrat status quo, if not all the leftist changes they want, than they are with the conservative agenda. To the point they would even prefer a Democrat win instead of a conservative Republican win.

On the plus side, the Tea Party has had considerable success in eroding the liberal wing of the Republican party, systematically taking out many of the worst offenders. And this is the way to slowly and methodically make the party more conservative.

This is often a painful process. For example, persuading the two liberal senators from Maine to retire means that these seats are now controlled by independents working with the Democrats. But at least now the enemy is in front of conservatives, instead of standing behind us with a short knife to sabotage us from within.

And the RINOs were and are expert at this, doing far more than the Democrats to thwart the conservative agenda. Until they are purged from the party, and the conservatives take over the leadership, everything conservatives want to do will be twice as hard.


267 posted on 11/08/2012 5:55:54 AM PST by yefragetuwrabrumuy (DIY Bumper Sticker: "THREE TIMES,/ DEMOCRATS/ REJECTED GOD")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 258 | View Replies ]

To: D-fendr
We need some good conservative candidates, but I don’t know who. I don’t blame the party or the leadership for that.

We may be in the minority here, but I agree with you. It's astonishing the flawed field that showed up for the Republican nomination.

On the other hand, the GOP hasn't picked a true Constitution-loving, limited-government republican (small "r") since Reagan. And Reagan had to fight the GOP establishment to win and implement the economic boon that followed.

We can't discount the devastating role the MSM played, but where is the quality pool of quality candidates for the next round in four years who can beat the MSM and the socialists?

308 posted on 11/09/2012 6:33:46 PM PST by PapaNew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 258 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson