Did you notice that Alan Keyes ran for president in both 1996 and 2000? Did you notice that he got a lot of support on FR? Did you notice that he did not get a lot of votes?
Either you are wrong, or there aren't many conservatives out there.
Are you thinking about this series of posts that I have made on this thread. I am right...
My most charitable thought about your series of posts is that I very much admire your idealism.
What makes you think that you are right and everyone else is wrong?
Your question is a bit open ended. If you are asking why I am convinced that the United States will not survive as a nation beyond a decade or two, it will take a while to find out for sure, but history offers some clues. All democracies and all socialistic governments have eventually failed. When one segment of society parasitizes another, eventually those being preyed upon overthrow their slavemasters or flee. When there are no productive members, the society collapses. Production over and above a sustenance level requires incentive. Take away the incentive and you wipe out the production. Can you name a single government program or agency that is a success in your mind? Can you identify anything that you believe government can do better than private enterprise? Even if you are convinced there is something where the government is a resounding success, is it the exception or the first of many good things to come.? Are you willing to concede that my conclusion is factually correct: Socialism is growing relentlessly in the United States and the continued growth of socialism will eventually bring about the end of the United States. If you are, then that only leaves the question of timing.
Look at the chart of our national debt on the Grandfather's Economic Report>. How long do you think the socialists can continue to compound that chart? Parabolic growth ends in crashes. Now look at total US debt>, which includes public (all governments and corporate) and private. If you thought the prior chart was terrifying, this graph should put most conservatives into shock. Mr. Hodges asked if we should be concerned about the debt being handed down to younger generations? That is not the right question. The children and the grandchildren of the boomers are going to start getting the bills for their parents in less than decade? They are also going to get handed the bill for the debt you see compounding on these two charts. The question to ask is how concerned are they going to be? They will also be asking themselves if they pay these bills, how will they provide for their own sustenance let alone their own retirement? And if they can't, who will?
I have given you my opionion of the timing? What is yours if you disagree? Have you considered that the record debt that you see accumulated over the last ten years has been accumulated during what has been reported to be the most extraordinarily good times in the history of the world? Have you also factored in that the next decade is expected to be one of subnormal economic performance and that some experts are predicting that a depression is possible while others say inevitable?
I suspect your question was actually how do I know I am right about controlling the behavior of the Republicans? There have only been four occassions since 1932 when Republicans have run either a conservative candidate or a conservative agenda. They won three of the four elections by very wide, even sweeping margins. In the sixty-two years between 1932 and 1994, Republicans controlled both houses of Congress for a total of two years under Ike. They controlled the Senate for another two years under Reagan. My parents are in their 80's; the Republican Revolution of 1994 was unique in their lifetimes. The Contract with America was the difference. After Dole dropped the ball on the balanced budget amendment and Republicans were embarrassed by Republican defections on Term Limits, they began moving left. Newt's embarrassing resignation and the even more embarrassing aftermath destroyed the conservative leadership and the party moved left. They have progressively lost seats in every election since 1994 because they abandoned the conservative agenda. While you may disagree with my reasoning and conclusions, I think you will find the facts are basically accurate even if somone finds a minor error in the detail. What are the outcomes of the various possibilities with the backgrounds above? Kenneth Fisher is the portfolio editor of Forbes magazine, and the CEO of Fisher Investments, a $12 billion private investment firm founded by Philip Fisher, Kenneth's father. Philip may be the second most successful investor in history behind Warren Buffet. Kennth Fisher postulates that the market can move up a little, up a lot, down a little or down a lot. Those four combinations cover the possibilities. He believes that portfolio theory says results will be superior if you are 100% invested in the market in three of the four scenarios. You want to be zero invested when the market is down a lot. How does that relate to your question about how I know I am right and everybody else is wrong?
Look at those charts again. If the country keeps moving left, those graphs will continue to go straight up until they fall straight down. For most of the last seventy years, it didn't matter whether Republicans were in control or not, the country moved relentlessly to the left. For the last eight years, Republicans have controlled either Congress, the Whitehouse or both. Has it made any difference? The only time in the lifetime of any living American that it made a difference whether socialism was getting worse instead of better was the eight years under Ronald Reagan, and the first two years of the Republican Revolution in 1994. At some point in the not too distant future, it won't matter who is in control, the collapse that is predicted by those two graphs will become inevitable. If reversing socialism quickly is the only possible way to avoid economic collapse and the destruction of the United States and that is only possible by completely changing the political strategy of the Republican Party or replacing the Republican Party with a conservative third party, then the decision to make the change is easy. I have offered one suggestion of how to force the Republican Party to change. There may be other ways. I hope Freepers will offer several. The other outcomes, Democrats win leads to more socialism and collapse, Republicans win but don't change leads to more socialism but at a slower rate and still leads to collapse. If collapse is inevitable, I would argue that the sooner it happens the better. Freedom now is better than freedom later, and certainly better than never enjoying freedom again in out lifetime. That is not an acceptable alternative.