Is It Time For Conservatives To Abandon The Republican Party?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by AAAintheBeltway, Mar 28, 2006.

  1. It's no secret that conservatives are unhappy with Bush and the Senate Republicans. The list of grievances is long and familiar, viz. grotesque spending, a seemingly pointless war, failure to confirm appellate judges, no immigration enforcement or border security, big government approach to homeland security and education, no action on social conservatives agenda and now the ultimate insult, amnesty for illegals.

    It's also no secret that the Republicans would be a small minority party if the religious right and the low tax/opportunity society republicans left the party. Both groups are appalled by how far off course the party has drifted and by how little attention they get from the party regulars and the administration. The party bosses have reasoned that these groups could be given lip service because, like the hapless blacks who dutifully support the Democrats, where else can they go?

    I think that question might become more than rhetorical. If some combination of John McCain and Rudy Guliani are the nominees for president/vice president, a lot of these formerly loyal foot soldiers may simply stay home or support what seems inevitable, a third party candidate. In fact, it would not surprise me if there are four credible candidates, two from the major parties, an anti-war left wing candidate and a conservative candidate. Such an election could well fail to produce a definitive result and force matters into the congress for resolution.

    Here things could get very sticky for the Republicans. Unless things turn around over the summer, they stand a very good chance of taking a shellacking from the voters this fall.

    As things stand now, I see very little reason for conservatives to stay in a party that supports big government, foreign adventures and wants to turn our country into Mexico north. If the country is going to be screwed up, let the Democrats get the blame for it. How could things be that much worse? We lived through Bill, could Hillary be that much more awful? At some point you have to draw a line and say enough. I'm very close to that point and if Bush gives one more speech on immigration, I guarantee that I'll be over it.
  2. Yes, please do abandon the republican party.

    Vote for some third party candiate. No doubt Hillary would support you on this.


  3. Careful what you wish for. Democrats thought our greatest president, Ronald Reagan, was a joke whom they would easily defeat.
  4. Republicans lauged at Bill Clinton's run in 92, back when Bush 41 had high approval numbers.

    Your point?

  5. clinton never got over 50%........impeached as a liar........was he disbarred or just slapped on the big red nose .......roger said that nose was powerful.........zzzzzzzzz you are doing satan's work ..........backing satan's marriage and baby killing is your suit huh? nothing worse than those 2 party planks......only satan's party would go there.........
  6. Kensho


    I can understand Guliani, but why don't conservatives like McCain? I think McCain would have destroyed Gore in 2000 (hence would have had a mandate). He certainly would've vetoed many spending bills. And he doesn't come across as an internationalist like Bush. I think he was this country's last best chance to reduce size/power of federal government, but then I don't follow politics very closely.
  7. achilles28


    The term 'Conservative' doesn't mean what it used too.

    True conservatives support small Government, decentralized power and maximum freedom.

    Modernday conservatives are socialists bordering on mild fascists.

    America is a socialist country.

    50% tax rates. Federalized education. Federalized healthcare. Precarious property rights (eminent domain 'reinterpretation'). Freespeech restrictions. Widespread gun control.
  8. Wow, the worm has definitely turned for you man. Congrats. Welcome.

    Now if Pabst can see the light....then my faith in humanity is restored. Pabst cooome to the light.....cooooome to the light......coooooooome to the light....

  9. Sam123

    Sam123 Guest

    McCain is a bureaucrat and bureaucrats are bad leaders. I respect McCain as a person, and I like the fact that he doesn’t want to spend money, but he can’t lead. Senators are supposed to represent, not lead. Presidents lead. Governors lead. Mayors lead. Legislators follow.

    Both parties, however, have been recruiting bureaucrats for executive offices (both state and federal) because all real leaders are unpredictable –something both parties are too afraid to do because it’s risky. They want the whole process to be predictable, so they recruit and produce “safe” broiler-plate candidates fresh out of Yale -- trained to look at polls, follow consensus, read the NYT, and have no skeletons in their closets. So much for leadership...

    The parties provide these candidates, and we are left to choose what they give us. Perhaps if more people voted and more people became party delegates things would shake up a little. A third party candidate would shake things up as well.

    I wouldn’t throw the party system away just yet. It’s the same as the legal system, education, and everything else today that has been plagued for years with “monopolies of the process” that recruit and produce the same type of mentalities. The legal system needs people who will make conservative interpretations of the law. Education needs people who are not hostile to Western ideas and Capitalism. And finally, the political parties need politicians who will make the tough decisions to lead the nation from being pushed around by arrogant Mexican squatters snubbing their noses at the law and waving Mexican flags in our faces.

    And at this point, only leadership will force the government to stop spending beyond its means. But it’s up to us (ahem… the Majority) to compel our parties to take the risks necessary to bring us the leaders we need.
    #10     Mar 28, 2006