Posted on 02/28/2007 7:54:19 AM PST by Al Simmons
Wedge Issues Posted by: “Common Tator” in FreeRepublic.com April 16, 2002
The one thing that amazes me on this site is the belief by some that the conservative position is the majority position.
Mostly people tend to believe it could be the majority position if the right candidate ran, or if it weren't for the media or RINOs or etc, etc. They really don't have a clue.
Roughly 2/3 of the public has firm views. They have made up their minds and do not change them. This group is nearly equally split between the left and the right.
There are about a 1/3 of the population that is never sure. Sometimes it will go left and sometimes it will go right.
When a party restricts itself to its base it will be in a minority party. The "base only" party will be reduced to crying as the other side works its will. In some nations both the left and right restrict themselves to just their base. That nation then develops five or six parties. And all governments in that nation are coalitions of a major party and some of the minor parties. In that situation the minor party always has more influence than its numbers represent. For the Rino and Dino haters that is the worst of all worlds.
Many of Rino and Dino haters try to make ours a 3 or 4 party system. They never figure out that their splinter right or left party would never get much power in a government based on coalitions. They are too small. It is the centrist parties that have a 1/3 of the public as potential members that get the clout in the Multi Party system. As you can see in a 2 party or a 5 or 6 party system the center tends to prevail.
But in our two party system the center is an instrument the major parties use to enact their goals. In the multiparty system it is the center parties that use the right and left to enact their centrist goals. Such a system like those in Italy and France are RINO and DINO paradise.
This nation now and for all of the last 140 years has been roughly 1/3 left, 1/3 right and 1/3 in the middle. Those in the middle who run for office are what we call RINOs and DINOs.
When Republicans drive RINOs out they leave the party to become DINOs and take their political power with them. The Democrat party gets them by default.
Then the Democrats thanks to its Dino buddies have a veto proof house and senate. It was Barry Goldwater's greatest accomplishment. In my BRAIN I knew Barry would elect a lot of DINOs ... and he did.
If a party with most of the center wins the presidency too, they have a filibuster proof senate. That party then can do anything it wants to do. When the party leadership takes control they implement the parties’ core beliefs. It was what LBJ did after Goldwater drove all the RINOs into LBJ's camp. It let LBJ do the "Great Society." LBJ had to have Barry's help to do it. And Barry did what it took to give LBJ the support he needed... LBJ had all the left. Barry gave him all the center.
To win control a party must keep its base and get over half the middle. If the Republicans have more RINOs than the Democrats have DINOs the Republican agenda prevails. If the Democrats have more DINOs than the Republicans have RINOs the Democrat agenda prevails.
Those that demand the defeat of RINOs are doing all they can to enact the leftist agenda. They are the most valuable asset the left has. One of the most effective tactics in politics in the negative campaign.
Negative campaigns are not about getting votes for your candidate. They are about getting the other side's base to not vote for their candidate. Thus if you can get the right to vote against a Rino or not vote at all, you can elect a very liberal candidate.
If you can force the Republicans to nominate a right wing candidate so right wing he can't get the center voters, you elect the left candidate.
I have no say in this matter...
..It's JimRob's house....
G'bye, I'm taking a breather today!
As far as JR...I asked him specific questions, which you can easily read. That isn't disrespectful. As far as I know, the only ATRW people on this thread were me, Peach, Howlin, and A Citizen Reporter (for one post only). So I think you should be more specific about what you are talking about so as to avoid confusion.
Accusations? Towards you? You're the one telling me I'm disrespectful or did you forget that. By all means, take a breather.
Oh please tell us all, oh great wise Professor...
what does a Republican have to do to become a RINO?
Do you disagree with vitriolic attacks against other liberals like Obama and Hillary? Then why would you disagree with vitriolic attacks against Giuliani? They're all liberal no matter what letter you put after their name. At least Obama and Hillary know which party's nomination to run for.
Do you dislike personal attacks against posters who might come on Free Republic and start shilling for liberals like Obama and Hillary? Then why would you dislike personal attacks against posters who shill for a liberal like Giuliani? Again, no difference.
Not lockstep. Support whichever conservative candidate you like. Even a semi-conservative candidate would do. But supporting the most radically liberal Republican presidential candidate ever is not supporting a conservative. Giuliani is a liberal. Period. Not acceptable on a conservative forum. If you support liberals on a conservative forum you're going to face fierce opposition. If a number of posters attempt to hijack the conservative forum to support the liberal, it's going to cause divisiveness just as we've seen displayed already. Jim Robinson has been very patient with the Rudybots given that they're using a conservative forum to openly campaign for a radical liberal. Some of the abuse heaped upon him by you and your buddies, and threats to stop donating, is stretching his tolerance quite thin.
Your tag lines are cracking me up.
Newt Gingrich:
Said the GOP needs to nominate a Ronald Reagan-type candidate and added, "I think it's not an accident that Giuliani is running as well as he is in the polls."
Gingrich called New York's evolution under Giuliani "a tremendous story . . . It's a different city."
http://www.nypost.com/seven/03012007/news/nationalnews/newt_rips_nasty_hill_nationalnews_maggie_haberman.htm
Now, you don't like him and you won't vote for him. That's fine. I probably will vote for someone else, myself. No need to be so nasty about it, and I will never agree with you that Guiliani is equivalent to Obama or Hillary.
Do you consider Hunter or Tancredo supporters "shills?" Do you think that anyone who supports them is PAID to do so? If not, then give the benefit of the doubt to the Rudy supporters, many of whom are long-time freepers, and simply allow that they hold a different opinion than you.
I vehemently disagree, with three issues showing his lack of character.
He shipped off his official documents to a warehouse and does not make them accessible to the public, in direct violation of NY sunshine laws.
He tried to have 9-11 compensation funds transferred to one of his companies to hoover 2 mil in admin fees from that money, and
He pushed his crony Bernie Kerik for the most important anti-terror job in the country without properly vetting him first.
Throw in his marital messes, and I simply don't see the character that you do.
I don't really care for Rudy's political views, but he has substance. He's not a ball of fluff like Edwards, a tabula rasa like Obama, a human windsock like Romney or an ambitious but otherwise empty pantsuit like Hillary. He strikes me as someone composed of more than just talk, ambition, and a love of cameras. Yeah, he has a lot of socially liberal views, more than I'd care for.
Still, I've followed people into some rough situations, and they were far from saints. While they were great leaders, I imagine you could see a lot worse than Rudy's dirt, if you delved into their personal lives. Great men are often flawed men, I guess. (I'm musing about people I've known, not necessarily saying that Rudy is great). In the end, I don't know. Perhaps I have a soft spot for people successfully tested in fire, especially leaders, even if I don't agree with their personal views.
Dirt? All of those are documented facts.
I'm not saying your wrong, and I don't doubt the veracity of what you posted. Negative information is commonly referred to as dirt. Like the Keating Five thing would be to McCain, or Monica would be to Bill. You can't dig up dirt on a clean man.
"I may not agree with a lot of his views, and know he's no saint in his personal life. I still recognize him as a man whos character was chisled in adversity, and made better for it."
Jumping in here, gotta jump in somewhere, kinda like drinking from a fire hose ; P
I agree that Rudy definitely comes across as an intelligent, straight forward, stand up kind of a guy, that any one of us could happily pass a little time chatting with in the check out line.
I agree that Guiliani's work in New York, and leadership post 9-11 are undeniable proof as well of his considerable abilities. I would love to see him turn things around in any number of large American cities... mmmm...maybe a new Cabinet post there ;}
But as the party standard bearer? There are just too many disconnects. By no means am I looking for the "perfect" candidate, but I am holding out for someone who does not believe so strongly in so many issues that give me pause. Precisely because he is such a well spoken, straight up guy, I definitely believe, that HE believes that the 2nd amendment is open to interpretation. I believe that he believes that abortion serves a purpose, and that he is AOK with homosexual rights.
That being said, IF Rudy becomes the nominee, will I vote for him? Yup. For the same reason I voted for W, or any other candidate; because he was the better man for the job. W was not my ideal candidate then, and is even less so now, but I shudder to think of any of the other candidates at the helm on 9-11. So, supporting Rudy now, when his strengths have so clearly highlighted his weaknesses, (and we are still accepting applications ;) is something I can't do.
Thankfully, we do have some time to get it right..and a place to hash it out, (thanks Jim), as long as we don't tear ourselves apart... Seemingly OT, but speaking to the ongoing battles within our ranks -
Always have believed that a conservative's deeply held beliefs are one of our greatest strengths, but that it is a double edged sword. During the Clinton impeachment, I used the comparison of Richard Nixon to help my kids understand the differences in the parties. Both men broke the law, both men where found out. Difference was, the Republican party, and it's base, called as loudly as the Dem's, for Nixon's resignation. And Nixon accepted it, because he knew that was he did was wrong, and that no one in this nation should be above the law, least of all, a President.
Republicans are no less flawed, as a whole, than anyone else, but when found out, we will not stand for it. Whereas Dem's certainly seem to have no problem hanging together, protecting their little criminals, no matter how heinous the crime.
Pretty troubling around here of late, reading posts from longtime freepers that sound like something off of DU :( I'm for stepping back a bit, remembering who we are, and who we need to be fighting.
tatt
************
You may be right. I certainly have no sure way of predicting what will happen in that regard. We may disagree, but thanks for a thoughtful response.
I guess my response to you was a waste of time. I'll remember that for future reference. Have a great life.
Very nice post
I think you are "spitting" in the wind. These people including the founder of the forum have ratcheted up the garbage talk because they now realize that most of America and even most of the Republican Party no longer listens to them. They know the game is over, and this is just early retribution against any who are perceived to have taken that leadership role away from them.
What you are seeing here simply demonstrates that the hard right and hard left have much more in common than what distinguishes them from each other. What you see from these people may reflect "social" values, but definitely not conservatism.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.