Conservatives not satisfied with Bush's record

The Washington Times ^ | June 18, 2002 | Ralph Z. Hallow

[jimkress]

Conservative lawmakers and activists disappointed with President Bush's first 18 months in office are calling into question his tactics and strategy in advancing the conservative agenda.

"The president for the most part has been our guy," said House Majority Leader Dick Armey, Texas Republican and a prominent conservative on Capitol Hill. "A few times we disagree."

[Austin Willard Wright]

P.S. You state that the Democratic base stayed home in 1994. Please note that they did this despite Newt's in-your-face contract with America. Why do you think they stayed home? If the me too advocates are right, one would have expected that Newt's "take no prisoners" strategy should have galvanized the left to turn out for the Democrats and thus overwhelm the right at the polls.

BTW, the fallacy of Dubya's approach this year is that he is paving the way for conservatives to stay home out of apathy and dismay and the likelihood that the moderates won't switch to him in sufficient numbers. Moderates, after all, are not known for being "galvanized." It is the ideological base (left and right) which matters the most.

[Harrison Bergeron]

"Based on ABC News exit polling data from 1996 and 2000. "

BTW, it's not that I don't trust you, but do you have a link to the original poll data? What was the sample size? MOE? Was this "data" aired during voting hours in an attempt to affect the outcome of the election - as the networks have been wont to do? I probably wouldn't be asking these questions if the data came from the Family Research Council or the American Enterprise Institute... or even the National Review.... but we're talking Peter Jennings ann his minions here.

[Austin Willard Wright]

Well yes but you seem to be assuming that a more conservative approach by Dubya would encourage the Democrats to to turn out. I see no evidence for this. I do see evidence, however, that a more moderate approach will discourage conservatives from turning out.

[Poohbah]

You state that the Democratic base stayed home in 1994. Please note that they did this despite Newt's in-your-face contract with America.

So noted.

Why do you think they stayed home?

Because they were extremely PO'd at Clinton. The man and his administration were a complete Charlie-Fox from 1993 to January 1995.

If the me too advocates are right, one would have expected that Newt's "take no prisoners" strategy should have galvanized the left to turn out for the Democrats and thus overwhelm the right at the polls.

The Democrats didn't have anything coherent to offer in response, just a bunch of hysterical attacks on the wrong end of reality.

The problem with Newt's strategy is that it only works ONCE in a generation. They do learn from their mistakes, and not voting at all is a BIG one. Unfortunately, the "conservative base" has not figured this little detail out in 10 years.

[WRhine]

Sure is. Rove strictly referenced white evangelical Christians in that comment, and he never backed it up with poll figures or demographics, as far as we know.

I was perplexed when Rove made that statement last year. Though he singled out evangelical Christians (easy to do) I sensed it was really a broadside to ALL conservatives. Based on anecdotal evidence from this board during the election season of 2000 and what I know many of my conservative friends did, I believe the conservative base turned out very strong for Bush. Something I can’t say about the elections in 1992 and 1996. In retrospect, it appears that the Bush & Co. were looking for an excuse all along to flip off the conservative base once they got in power and embrace a decidedly liberal agenda. In other words, we were had.

[Harrison Bergeron]

Oops got the link. Thanks.

[Poohbah]

Well yes but you seem to be assuming that a more conservative approach by Dubya would encourage the Democrats to to turn out.

After 1994, that's exactly right: the Dems discovered that staying home is really stupid.

I see no evidence for this.

Your model assumes that liberals are just as stupid as conservatives. On this issue, they aren't.

I do see evidence, however, that a more moderate approach will discourage conservatives from turning out.

A more conservative approach did NOT significantly motivate the base in 1994, either.

When "the base" is a no-show for eight years, despite numerous fall-on-their-sword efforts by the GOP (Contract with America, budget deadlock, impeachment of a popular President), it's hard to argue that the base even matters.

[Dan from Michigan]

While 4 million EVANGELICALS stayed home(That's an internal 'poll' - and being addressed by the RNC and MIGOP), the GUN VOTE did turn out in force.

Bush's chick***hit signing of the CFR bill steps on the GUN OWNERS. He has a mixed record on that issue.

Good
1. Told UN to screw themselves on small arms treaty.
2. Told courts 2nd is an individual right.
Bad
1. SIGNED CFR
2. Against armed pilots(buck stops on exec branch there).

Since I'm still pissed off at the unPatriot Act and CFR, I've decided that it's come down to gun shows and the AW ban. If he remembers why he won, I'll back him. If not, I don't know what I'll do.

Back to the base comment. I think too much is brought up on the presidential level. The president isn't the party. He's the most imposing figure, but he's not the party. Politics is local first. If we want out guys in there and not the country clubbers, than we have to get our guys elected.

In my state, our candidate for Governor, Lt Gov Dick Posthumus, has been to at least THREE MCRGO events, and also had a fundraiser with Ted Nugent which was a gun event as well. He needs our support and he'll get it.

In my county, every republican running has asked for our endorsement. Six running for an open seat. Another one is unopposed, and he's pro-2a as well. Our state senator is a pro-2a leader and won largely on that issue.

That's where our reps come from. The smaller ranks. That's how to beat the liberal republicans.

[Dan from Michigan]

ad bans will probably be stripped.

You don't know that.

[Dan from Michigan]

The GOP may be the only current viable party for the Constitution's (hopeful) revival, but certainly not in it's present form. We'll be back when you guys figure out that principles matter more than political gamesmanship. Loyalty to ideals, not loyalty to name brands. That's what is bothering so many of us the most, I think. I really, truly, honestly thought that GWB was a Reagan-esque man of PRINCIPLES. I was excited. My hopes were sky-high. I thought that my very first steps into 'active' political proselytising (and MARCHING, fer cryin' out loud!) would be vindicated. I SWORE to all my friends (and anyone who would listen) that THIS was the guy who would turn back the tide of Socialism in America. I got TWELVE non-voters and first-time voters to go to the polls and vote for him! Instead, he's made a BIG liar out of me on that "Socialism" stuff, and he's proven to be just "more-principled-than-Clinton-and-Gore-combined"... and that's a depressingly low bar to hurdle.

Don't write off a whole party based on one jerk.

If you must leave the presidential spot blank, that that's what you have to do, but PLEASE don't forget the smaller races, since THAT's where our next congresscritters come from.

[Harrison Bergeron]

"Do you have figures that prove the point that CONSERVATIVES -- not RELIGIOUS CONSERVATIVES -- are staying home?"

I would have answered no too, but then, I voted for Bush. Karl Rove explicitly identified the rogue republicans in his speech before the AEI as "white evangelical Christians." Based on that particular poll data, it's pretty clear he was taking mild liberties with the results. BTW Poohbah, I was way off base in my statement that Rove's audience was open to white Christian bashing. The American Enterprise Institute ain't quite the NAACP.

[jimkress]

"Tis the business of little minds to shrink, but he whose heart
is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue
his principles unto death." --Thomas Paine

[Dan from Michigan]

I agree with laz.

I don't vote for GUN GRABBERS. PERIOD.

[Austin Willard Wright]

Well...our memories are different. I don't remember that the liberals were mad at Clinton in 1994. Clinton was giving them everything they wanted such as pressing for socialized medicine and abandoning his pledge to make a middle class tax cut. This should have motivated them...but for some reason it didn't at least not as much as it motivated conservatives.

In 1996, the liberal base was *more* motivated (and conservatives were *more* dis-spirited) when Dole ran a very weak moderate campaign. During that same campaign, the GOP in Congress was aimless and mushy because they had backed down on the government shutdown issue. They didnt' have a "contract with America," they had nothing and got nothing in return.

[Dan from Michigan]

There seem to be some rather sharp Hispanic Republicans

We have one in Michigan - Garcia(my state senator). He won in a seat that is 98% Anglo, and won it on pure merit. He's a big favorite of MCRGO and Right to life. He also slapped a couple of cavers in the side of the head in the budget bill. Some want the tobacco tax to go up. Garcia said NO.

[Dan from Michigan]

NOW they not only don't block it, the craft it, pass it and then gripe because Bush signs it.

Hell, I griped about Bush on this. He signed it. I griped about Nick Smith as well for voting for this. Fred Upton has always been a gun grabbing RINO and he voted for it. He's primaried by Dale Shugars.

At least Mike Rogers(My rep) voted right.

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

The plain fact of the matter is that the Country Club RINOs ARE running the GOP. You have ZERO chance of taking it over or making it truly conservative. Reagan was able to get the GOP to move on some issues, but he was saddled with Bush as the price of power.
When are you people going to wake up?

[Dan from Michigan]

The plain fact of the matter is that the Country Club RINOs ARE running the GOP.

What are you going to do about it???

You have ZERO chance of taking it over or making it truly conservative.

Bullshit. I AM.

When are you people going to wake up?

When are you going to stop being a coward?

[snag_matic]

I think a lot of the dissatisfaction lies with how un-original Bush has been in advancing the agenda

Lack of originality in the Mideast as well. He continues the failed policy of appeasing Arafat while day after day there are more suicide bombers. Can't this president grow a pair of balls and be consistant with his own "With us or Against us" policy he articulated after 9-11?

[Poohbah]

I don't remember that the liberals were mad at Clinton in 1994.

Look at the string of people he PO'd: gays (don't ask, don't tell), feminists (Kimba Wood, Zoe Baird), blacks (Lani Guinier), and the beat goes on...