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.
Psst! EV is a political consultant for one of the Democrat hopefuls....pass it on. LOL
Great statement.
Of course, here lately that means you are a gay agenda promoting, baby killing RINO.
Typical liberal. Lie and then laugh about it.
Duh, you don't actively promote a conservative like Hunter, who has the best chance out of all the 1-2% running. You are waiting for Alan Keye$.
When will Alan announce?
You haul out the derogatory requisite "liberal" taunt when anyone hits a nerve, huh?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe cuz he didn't want to be a senator he wanted to be POTUS.
That is one of the stupidest arguments I've heard yet! Hitlery ran for senate and she is running again. John Kerry ran for the senate in 2002 and ran for president in 2004. ALL congressmen are up for reelection every two years. Are you saying that Rudy didn't have time to campaign last year? Because all I've heard is how he "selflessly" campaigned for other candidates last year.
And let's not forget that if Rudy could have won Hitlery's senate seat back in November, her political career would have been over and we would have a GOP majority in the senate.
I can't believe what has happened to the political base. it's so senseless that I first thought it humorous, until I realized that the disease ran very deep in the base.
We have always differed within the base, but we always put it aside to vote in the general elections, and we did this as a minority party under much pressure during those days.
Now, things have markedly changed, with so much acidity directed by the social conservatives and the libertines (to a lesser degree)directly toward the WRONG targets!
Rather than take on their counterpart legitimate enemy within the Democrat base, they chose to direct their fire at the base and it's supporting political structure. They have essentially sawed off the limb that they were sitting on, and now blame the tree. They do this in the name of the Constitution, principle, God and victory for the Founder's, much is the same vain as any radical element that gets involved in a political fight. As such, political history, common sense and compromise are the first casualties in the fight.
The problem with this sort of thinking, is that it has never worked. It has always resulted in defeat, and is very hard to come back from. (just ask the Dem's)
IMO, it is all academic at this point. This political base will require total remodeling and reconstruction, and this will take a few election cycles to accomplish. The problem is that we have not yet hit bottom, and will be forced to endure this cycle before the 2008 smack-down. For those of us who have watched this develop and tried to stop it for years, the next two years will be very painful.
Al,
You're looking at this the wrong way. Let's face the facts that unless most of the Rudy supporters are at heart social liberals, all they care about is low taxes and a pro-business climate. With a conservative like Hunter, they get that - in other words, they get 100% of what they want. So do social conservatives. With a candidate like Rudy, the RINO types get all of what they want, but the social conservatives get none of what they want.
Now there's one scenario under which this simple logic breaks down: the Rudy supporters are in fact social liberals who *want* to live in a world where abortion is legal and we have an openly gay military. If that's the case, the issue is altogether different.
But that's not the case, given that the Rudy supporters have been denying such, right?
We've all seen your family portrait, EV, so you don't have to keep posting it.
That's SOP for the RINOs here.
There, that's better.
Excellent point. You'd think he'd be in the Duncan Hunter camp. Interesting!
It is.
If Hillary decided to become a Republican, I still wouldn't embrace her. I see Guiliani as basically a Democrat.
A major error in CT's calculations is that he is assuming 100% of each group vote.
Even in the most contended races, the normal turn out is 50% of the eligible voters.
That means, if any of the three groups could get 100% of their group to vote, it would effectively increase their votes by nearly 100%. Thus Repubs could get nearly 66% if all of the Repubs voted.
Example:
Let's say we have 100 voters.
33 Repub
33 Dem
34 Middle
Time to vote, only half show up:
16 Repub
16 Dem
17 Middle - Half go to Dem and Half go to Repub
Making the vote:
25 Repub (One Middle guy really hates Hitlery)
24 Dem
But, let's say it went the other way:
24 Repub
25 Dem
Now, let's say the Repub gets a real conservative, that pulls out all the Repub vote, but the Dem is asleep believing the polls:
42 Repub
25 Dem
We win.
Now, let's run the same scenario with Rudy:
Half the would be Repub voters go third party because Rudy is not acceptable:
8 Repubs go Constitution Party
17 Repubs (8 Repubs + 9 Middle)
24 Dem (16 Dems + 8 Middle)
Dems win. and don't get 50% of the votes. It happened in 1992, and gave us BJC, and people who think like you tried again in 1996 by forcing us to take Bob Dole, who turns anti-life and lost the Christian vote.
Don't feed us another RINO.
Well, if it isn't Mr. Treasonous Liberal himself. Don't you have your own pond of discontent to manage?
No, I'm just describing the obvious.
Compromise is like kryptonite to some around here.
They'd rather be irrelevant than compromise.
So who's your candidate? :-)
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.