Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Graybeard58

I both agree and disagree vehemently with everything written so far on this thread. I can’t condemn or promote the argument of either side.

On the one hand you don’t want this Marxist in charge of your country and then on the other hand, if Conservatives show up and vote for McCain, will that be used as proof that a more moderate candidate is always the best fit for republicans?

I have no doubts that McCain will alienate us and throw us all under the bus in short order. He has never shown any desire to work with us, but on the contrary, against us.

I am lost somewhere in the ether and I think many of my fellow conservatives are lost with me. I find Obama repugnant, but I can see where in the long run McCain could be just as bad for Conservatives.

I think much of this will ride on who McCain selects as VP. The VP choice doesn’t usually matter a great deal but this election will be a bit different I think. The names being tossed about will not hack it. McCain will win this election by giving the conservative base hope for 2012. IF they feel they have no hope in 2012 then they may decide to go for broke and fight the battle in 2012, hanging the Maverick out to dry as he has us so may times.

May God grant you all the wisdom to make the right decision. I still haven’t a clue.


53 posted on 08/12/2008 11:27:53 PM PDT by WildcatClan (Duncan Hunter isn't opaque.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: WildcatClan

Bump to post 53.


63 posted on 08/12/2008 11:44:07 PM PDT by rabscuttle385 ("When you can't make them see the light, make them feel the heat." Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]

To: WildcatClan
if Conservatives show up and vote for McCain, will that be used as proof that a more moderate candidate is always the best fit for republicans?

No.

This is simply part of the ebb and flo of history. A similar situation occurred after WWII. Eisenhower was hardly a Republican, much less conservative, but he emerged as the right man for the time---that being, having just fought the war, then being in charge of mopping up, the Army of Occupation in Europe and so on.

Conservatives whined then too, and Eisenhower basically told them to kiss his butt, he'd find someone else to vote for him.

Which he did.

He did the job he was hired to do, and the cause of conservatism wasn't the worse for it in the long run---nor, more importantly, was the country (considering the alternative, especially).

Not too long and along came . . . Ronald Reagan.

So, no, the fact that a moderate candidate, or a "war" candidate, or whatever emerges because of the circumstances of history can't be used as "proof that a more moderate candidate is always the best fit for the Republicans."

That said, if a noticeable chunk of self-described "conservatives" refuse to support the Republican nominee, that fact makes it more likely that the party moves to the center a notch.

Like football teams, parties try to find a way to win. If a bunch of players keep threatening to quit on game day--and especially if they actually do quit---duh, the team goes out and finds other players to replace them.

68 posted on 08/12/2008 11:53:16 PM PDT by fightinJAG (Rush was right when he said: "You NEVER win by losing.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson