Replies

Luntz apparently buys the premise that the GOP will get the independents, yet keep the conservatives, by ignoring, downplaying and marginalizing the Conservatives' concerns. Bad premise.

First, if his arguments is that the GOP doesn't need the Conservatives, the GOP shouldn't mind if we walk, or sit on our hands. Give it a try.

Second, if the belief is that Conservatives must, perforce, buy into a candidate acceptable to "independents", in order to triumph over she who must not be named, think again. If the GOP does not represent our values, anymore than the Wicked Witch of the East, why should we support it?. When I was a kid in school doing division, that was called the "lowest common denominator" . On a level Mr. Luntz and the GOP would understand,i.e political power, why should conservatives give up their hard won leverage to influence one of only two major political parties to appease "independents", and lose that leverage? They have carried most of the water for the GOP, in the states the GOP carries. Compare that with the GOP machine in New York. Or Massachusetts. Or California. And if Luntz thinks independents in those states are going to move those states into the GOP column, he's nutz.

For me Luntz and the GOP have only one principle - an impulse to power. That makes them no better than Democrats. And that's no reason to support them, aid them, or vote for them.

You are exactly right. I'm looking hard at throwing away my vote next time on the Constitution Party. At least I'll be able to put my head on my pillow at night.

Luntz apparently buys the premise that the GOP will get the independents, yet keep the conservatives, by ignoring, downplaying and marginalizing the Conservatives' concerns. Bad premise.

No, it was the Republican congress's failure to do anything except generate pork for their districts and money for their campaigns that alienated both the conservatives and the independents. They talked fiscal responsibility when it came to social programs but if you could pave it or build a bridge to it and it was in their district, they paid for it. They even built the bridge to "nowhere". Immigration was the number one issue beside the war and what did they do, authorize building a fence that only covered a small portion of the border and then failed to fund it because they werent serious about building it. They were all sympolism over substance. Oh heck all we got to do to keep the Evangelicals is pass a meaningless bill on partial birth abortion that the courts will throw out, then do some bills against the gays and flag burners and they will come out and vote for us in droves. They are almost as dumb as those traditional conservatives that we sold the tax cuts to that ran out almost as soon as they were fully implemented. They wont notice.

That's not the way I read this at all. I understand Luntz to be saying that the GOP lost power because they forgot their principles, and will only regain power when they again become the party of ideas.

Luntz apparently buys the premise that the GOP will get the independents, yet keep the conservatives, by ignoring, downplaying and marginalizing the Conservatives' concerns. Bad premise.

Luntz has been pushing this BS ever since 2000 when he supported McCain. If you read the article, there is no plan, or acknowledgement really, that the GOP needs to get its base back together.