Can a Traditional American Conservative Win the Presidency and Secure the Nation and our Liberty?

Vanity Opinion | Feb 21, 2007 | Jim Robinson

[quidnunc]

Jim Robinson wrote: Can a Traditional American Conservative Win the Presidency… ?

Not unless he/she compromises on some conservative positions.

There are simply not enough Republicans — much less conservatives — to elect a president without forming coalitions with more liberal-minded groups.

Like it or not, in today's climate Rudy Guiliani and Arnold Schwarzenegger are the future of the Republican Party.

Many, if not most, conservatives admire fire-breathers like Newt Gingrich, but such people — those who are polarizing figures — are simply unelectable on a national level.

[dmw]

"Personally, I'm happy to see so many deep-cover Democrat trolls outing themselves so openly in response to the Rudy opprobrium. It really is refreshing!"

True, but it surprises me to see how many of them are long time freepers. I never realized there were so many liberals hanging out here for that long. As I often say, I learn something new here everyday!

[Antoninus]

I'd love it if I were wrong. : )

Have faith and fight for what you believe in. If the American people are given a real choice and still vote for Hillary anyway, the country is in a lot worse shape than we thought.

[Antoninus]

Oh, I get it; you forgot the /sarcasm key and my followup barf.

Your cabin ain't made of logs, is it?

[Amalie]

"OK, we'll support you, but give us our judges, leave our 2nd Amendment alone, and give Michael Steele a job".

Ivan, if I thought we had the staying negotiating power to do that, I'd probably say sure - those would be very important points. My feeling is, however, that once Rudy is in the ivory White House tower, promises like that will go out the window, and very quickly (especially ones related to 'them Bible Belt southerners' like me). I understand your point, and pragmatically I would agree that I'd rather get a little of what I want then get nothing. However, we are now dealing with some very basic philosophical conservative points with the front three guys, and the literal soul of the party itself is at stake from that viewpoint.

The liberals scream we are losing our freedoms because of the war on terror; well, that knife cuts both ways. We could lose our conservative principles to it as well. The ONLY big reason I can see putting Rudy in the White House is the WOT, and even than with no solid background on how he would manage it. Managing the aftermath of a disaster like 9/11, when everybody WANTS your help, is a lot easier than walking the tightrope of policy when they are not so desperate. If he proves malleable to the popular media drumbeat, that will go badly as well (moreover, we already know where he stands on many issues that are anathema to conservatives). IMHO, this nominee will very likely set back the conservative movement a considerable amount.

Again, everyone here needs to decide what they think is the right direction in their conscience and fight for their voices in these matters now. If you want the GOP back, it will mean the use of raw political force and some heated discourse; you will have to stick your neck out and you will see the media get very personal about your viewpoints. Once the primaries are over, it's a whole different story. To make any difference in 2008 will have to be done long before then, as the delegates will be making their minds up prior to caucusing.

If Rudy's the candidate, I will deal with that then. I refuse to allow the process to go unchecked just because the media says he is our guy. I give Hunter credit; he is presently doing a lot to make sure his name is a mentioned one in congress. And then let's hope that Mr. Nader decides to run again on a platform to the left of Hillary's!...

[GrandEagle]

RE:#181
Excellent Post.
So far I like Duncan Hunter. I've not had time to check into his record to see if his actions match his talk, but in my mind he is the Man to run based on the information I have seen thus far.

GE

[Amalie]

"I similarly will not help liberal Republicans dismantle the national GOP the way they have done in New Jersey."

Again, a crucial reason why this debate is so important at this moment.

[Antoninus]

I believe the GOP lost because people are sick of those who pretend to be Republicans and vote like democrats.

You are 100% right. Which is why the Democrats were able to take out some conservatives by portraying them as squishes or wobbly on the border (Santorum and Hayworth come immediately to mind). The fact that the Democrats running against them were worse on the issue didn't matter. All that mattered is that the voters felt that the Republicans were sell-outs.

And if Rudy gets the nomination (spit!), the sell-out factor will increase several orders of magnitude. It will be a GOP cataclysm.

[Antoninus]

As a matter of fact, if you were twice as smart as you think you are, you'd still be a moron...not that there's anything wrong with being special.

Yawn. Friend, you've got nothing. Even your insults are lame.

[GrandEagle]

for people all along the border with Mexico ????

I see you have not been to Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia, Michigan, Colorado, Kansas, Pennsylvania, or Wisconsin.
These are the States I have recently been to - all of which consider it a SERIOUS problem.

[Antoninus]

Ivan, if I thought we had the staying negotiating power to do that, I'd probably say sure - those would be very important points. My feeling is, however, that once Rudy is in the ivory White House tower, promises like that will go out the window, and very quickly (especially ones related to 'them Bible Belt southerners' like me).

You are absolutely right. Rudy has a track-record of party disloyalty a mile long. He supported ultra-liberal Mario Cuomo over George Pataki in 1994. Of the 60-odd judges he named while mayor of New York, the vast majority were Democrats. He is completely untrustworthy.

Rudy is the quintessential Republican-in-name-only. If he's elected, the party will change from top-to-bottom such that conservatives will become personae non gratae. That's why the press loves him so much and will continue to produce poll after poll showing him to be the "frontrunner." Even if they have to skew their data badly to get that result.

[af_vet_rr]

And if Rudy gets the nomination (spit!), the sell-out factor will increase several orders of magnitude. It will be a GOP cataclysm.

Unfortunately, I could easily see Rudy getting the nod. We can talk about the party platform and Conservative beliefs all we want to, but the fact is, the GOP leadership is going to push who they think can win - Conservative beliefs, platform, etc., are all secondary when it comes to national elections. It's all about winning - nobody hired Karl Rove because he was a Conservative, he was hired to help win election (I'm not commenting on what he does or does not believe, just that what he believes doesn't matter).

If I had the chance to remake the GOP, I would start with booting out the RINOs in the House and then move on to the Senate (which would be a lot tougher).

In that aspect, while 2006 is a loss on paper for Republicans, I think that it's a chance to run true Conservatives for those lost spots. Most people are afraid of running a new Conservative candidate against a RINO incumbent, for fear that the Democrats have a chance at winning against an non-incumbent office holder, but I think this is the starting point, and is a good chance to get true Conservatives firmly back in control of the party, rather than the sell-outs we have running the place now.

[Delphinium]

Especially in Minnesota, that proves my point.

[af_vet_rr]

Rudy is the quintessential Republican-in-name-only. If he's elected, the party will change from top-to-bottom such that conservatives will become personae non gratae. That's why the press loves him so much and will continue to produce poll after poll showing him to be the "frontrunner." Even if they have to skew their data badly to get that result.

I would argue that we already have become personae non gratae in some instances. Look at Bush's win in 2000 - you would have thought the GOP would have reached out to Conservatives to try and draw them back in. Instead, the GOP pandered even more to the left, all of which culminated in the 2006 elections.

[GrandEagle]

at the same time throwing stones at gays and others who believe they should have equal rights as well.
What right is it that I have, that homosexuals don't have?

by insisting she does not have that right you are imposing your will over something that is none of your business.
So then why is it our business when a woman drowns her 5 year old? By insisting that is illegal, I am (an I assume you too) are imposing my values on her - and something that is (by your definition) none of my business.
What about the girl who delivered her child at home and suffocated the child? The only difference is time (a few minutes earlier and it would have been an "abortion"), location (just a few inches from the womb), and money - (the "abortionist" and the body parts salesmen didn't get their cut.)

All laws are imposing someone's will on another. The only way to avoid that is anarchy - and then only the strong survive.

[Beagle8U]

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1780767/posts

Also try an nonpartisan rating site...

http://www.ontheissues.org/CA/Duncan_Hunter.htm

[pissant]

Bush brought in some very conservative folks in the 2002 midterms on his coattails. He helped the GOP hold serve in 2004. His track record for elections is pretty darn good.

[Delphinium]

And if Rudy gets the nomination (spit!), the sell-out factor will increase several orders of magnitude. It will be a GOP cataclysm.

It would take years if ever to recover from this.

I don't think Haworth was seen as a sellout was he? He was strong on the border issue wasn't he? I figured it was the huge hispanic community, (legal, and illegal) that went against him in a big way. Am I wrong?, I have no real knowledge to back up my opinion?

I do know, (from FR) that Santorum made many very angry and disallusioned when he endorsed Spector.

And part of Bushes lost support was his seeming love affair with these RINOs and liberal ideas, especially the border issue.

[toddlintown]

Don't worry. The RINO Rudybots are poised and ready to hand us...defeat.

[Amalie]

"All through the general the polls the media released were so ridiculously low , some showing him in the single and teens.,really! The press kept tearing him apart."

Great story. We hate to admit it, but it is at this point a lot of us go spineless - our guy is down, the media hates him, he cannot win and will be awful if he does, etc. As with all wars, the propaganda to break the other side's spirit plays a large role in victory. The MSM, though not as powerful as it once was, has become this for the left. It again all comes down to principle versus electability, and where any candidate makes that connection. IMO, we still need to stay more in line with principle...