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.
You fancy yourself the SAVIOR of the Republican Party?
It is the goal of you fifth columnist disruptors to elevate the blood pressure of any who read your divisive words. I am glad to see so many are figuring out that you are a fifth columnist, intent upon nothing but contention.
Like he said, he's busy "right now" trying to save the Republican Party...doesn't have the time to be FOR a candidate.
If this were not another of your filthy lies you could prove it, easily, just stop saying us.
Mr. Robinson, is this true?
Careful. CT can't be here to defend himself because of health issues.
But twice the laughter ...
I didn't say that, you did. I just said what I'm for.
I don't think the liberals in the Republican party want that.
Uhmmm...they were cut and pastes of his posts from the last 24 hours.
I think it is more like a savior pimp.
BTW you were a great baseball player..."
Interestingly, a nephew of his got word of my nic, joined FR for a day and castigated me for being a conservative anti-semitic (see my tagline below!!) homophobic right-wing hater.
Needless to say, he was gone before I could respond.
You'd have thought he'd have appreciated my bringing attention to the memory of one of the greatest forgotten players of the 1920s-1930s...there's a reason why, at the very first All_Star Game, a famous photo was taken of 4 men standing shoulder to shoulder with their bats: Ruth, Foxx, Gehrig, and - Simmons. Because they were considered the 4 best hitters of their time (in the A.L.)..
Which you, and other fifth columnists use to twist into messages of division.
The only Republican candidate who is really unacceptable in terms of the WOT is Ron Paul. McCain would also be pretty bad in that area. The rest, however, have given us no reason to think that they wouldn't be as good or better than Rudy. I do NOT believe that Rudy is some great war leader, as he has no experience in the area. Cleaning up after a terrorist attack does not equal foreign policy experience. There's no real reason for me to support him on that front.
Furthermore, there is no reason to think Rudy will be good on judges. Who he thinks is a good judge and who I think is a good judge are two very different things. We know that even the farthest left liberals sometimes make claims to appoint "strict constructionists".
Let's say though that we take Rudy at his word. Even "strict constructionists" in the way we use the term today are not in the mold of Scalia or Thomas. They are both originalists. There is a significant difference. I'm not sure Bork would label himself a "strict constructionist" if he were big in the movement today. The legal world has changed thanks to Scalia and Thomas.
While that has been true in the past, under Rudy Giuliani that would not be the case any longer. He agrees with almost the entire Democrat platform, and almost none of the Republican platform. That's kind of the point.
"Most of Clinton's policies are very similar to most of mine." - Rudy Giuliani
"fifth columnist"
You really need to expand that vocabulary.
Good find. Thanks for posting it.
Somehow I doubt it; I'm sure they'd find things about him to trash.
He's not "their" guy, you know?
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.