I don't think anyone should be considering leaving the Republican Party to socialism without one heck of a ugly dog fight. Not to put too fine a point on it, moderates don't seem to have a dog in this fight, or want one. Nor do they intend to protest actions that if a Democrat President took would have them howling at the moon.
Some conservatives feel they do have a dog in this fight, and to many conservatives, dumping Bush in 2004 is not dumping the Republican Party it's saving it. I don't think name calling and finger pointing is called for while disinfranchized conservatives, who think eight years of Bush is more dangerous than four years of Hillary, hammer out a strategy. That comes in stages, first anger and discontent, stating why, then hopefully organizing into something more than just discontent by calling the RNC and letting them know just how they feel.
Some on this site want to air the obvious Bush failures for the conservative base and feel free to do so without having a crew of other members come buy like zoo keepers busily shoveling the truth of the matter into a wheelbarrow and carting it off. Dumping the truth is never a good idea, no matter how one justifies it.
That some members here want to stifle the free exchange of information and ideas speaks volumes about them and it ain't pretty. This is however a private site and if Jim Rob doesn't want these things discussed here then that puts a whole nother light on the matter.
I also take issue with those who believe that the way to win, is to lose. Or those who fail to understand that splitting the conservatives will result in a string of victories for Liberals. That's just a fact, and they need to deal with it.
Those who leave the battlefield with the battle joined, then blame the ones left behind for the losses, are hypocrites.
Reagan did not join the Republican Party in order to somehow secure future victories for the Democrats, did he?
In the 60's. Men change. Reagan for the better. There is still time for many others, too.