i know many will bark out “abortion!” “gays!” “mexicans!” but these are the same sort of people who told me once that barry goldwater was a liberal.

i think many respondents to the poll see the current “conservatism” correctly as beeing deeply unconservative.

Actually, it makes us more of true conservatives because we want the party to get back to its limited government and fiscal conservative roots. We cant honestly say we will be for limited government, oh except for moral issues, and have any credibility.

Moral issues can be defined by you and your family for your own lives. Its not neccessary for it to be part of the GOP platform.

If our party is going to define being more conservatism as trying to have morality as platform and policy, then we may as well just say we are for big government too. And then watch even more of the western states go Democrat.

Being Republican is not about being Christian. Its about a political philosophy about limited government, and individual freedom. I want atheists, agnostics, Hindis, pagans, etc to be able to be just as much of a part of our party.

/David Brooks

*beating my head against the wall*

No specifics on the how and why, but since party orthodoxy’s already firmly hawkish, pro-life, anti-gay marriage, and anti-amnesty

Talk is cheap. All conservatives want is that candidates actually adhere to those principles. Too many RINOs have infiltrated the party and refuse to support the principles that the party was founded on. Sad really…

Gallup: 59% of Republicans want GOP to become more conservative

No specifics on the how and why, but since party orthodoxy’s already
firmly hawkish, pro-life, anti-gay marriage, and anti-amnesty (among
the grassroots, at least, on that……

CNS News
The liberal Republican leadership in Congress should resign!
I’m pretty sure I can tell you where most of the GOP House leaders heads are at. UP THEIR A – -!
If you don’t believe it, just read what Lefty Boehner says below.
Boehner…

You see, the strategy that Whitman and Bostock espouse – fake left, embrace the fringe, and get their vote – was embodied in life-long ‘maverick’ John McCain. It didn’t work. But 52-48 is not by a landslide, as a giddy Whitman and Bostock incorrectl…

You win elections by fundraising, consistent message, and having an active energized base. Stick to our Conservative principles and folks will be more willing to support you financially.

hawksruleva on November 20, 2008 at 5:28 PM

…there ya go…a consistent message, and the funds pour in…see Obama and the nutroots club…no bucks, no Buck Rogers….

…besides, the days of “I’m a proud Republican!” are long gone, and are nestled comfortably next to “My Dad was a Buick man, so I’m a Buick man!” in the trashcan of history…brand loyalty will only get you so far…and the range on that one is shrinking with each news cycle….

…it’s always been “what can you do for me?”, playing in the background, which explains the Murtha victory…but, to be able to look in the mirror in the post-election morning, the voter wants “what does this feller stand for?” playing in the foreground….

…like it or not, a tissue of whoppers or not, Obama appeared to stand for something, while the Republicans didn’t even stand against anything…hence, they were the muddy wet splotch on the pavement on 5 November….

…having started as a muddy wet splotch, getting muddier each day Mr. Bush “compromised” his way into the history books, it wasn’t much of an adjustment….

But they’re wrong. You win elections by fundraising, consistent message, and having an active energized base. Stick to our Conservative principles and folks will be more willing to support you financially. And they’ll volunteer more often. And they’ll tell their friends “hey, Mr. X is a candidate we can trust.”

Lastly, Rasmussen found that in the Presidential race, the candidate who wins over voters on the “I will lower taxes” issue wins the election. There are only 2 ways to win that argument. Lie (see B. Obama) or trim government programs.

Thank you for putting words in my mouth. That sure adds to a substantive conversation. You could have actually read my comment, instead of knee-jerk scrolling down to the comment box. I thought only liberals did that. But please…tell me how good for business the “War on Drugs” has been?

budorob on November 20, 2008 at 3:53 PM

You seem a little touchy. I was merely asking you how being on the liberal side of those issues would correlate to your conservative support of lower government and fiscal responsibility. Immigration in particular is a net negative at the state and especially local level.

It’s so sad that now it’s about winning votes and not about educating people as to why your point-of-view is right and sway them to your side. That you must appeal to what they are rather than what they can be. We’re now a bunch of unmotivated, victim-hooded, whiners who think it’s someone else responsibility to clean up after us or we’re just to lazy to think for ourselves so we tack on to the majority view. Pathetic.

Listen to Pres. Reagan’s early speeches. He schooled people, and the polls never, ever schooled him. Undeniably one of the top 3 Presidents in our entire history. Now we’re lead by a bunch of followers and we’ve lost a generation of ‘leaders’ to socially engineered schools.

Well, it sounds like you are in the mushy middle. Do you actually HAVE an opinion or do you wait until the 11th hour to figure out who you are going to vote for?

HornetSting on November 20, 2008 at 4:14 PM
No. I have voted Republican for 12 years now. Now I’m hesitant to share my opinions, especially on the internet, where so many (notably liberals) can attack anonymously from their home computers. Not Wishy Washy, Hybrid. Mushy middle is better terminology, though I’ve never been a swing voter. I was a huge fan of Rick Santorum, and voted for him twice. Character, IMO, is overrated and can be faked…I judge mostly on record and experience.

budorob on November 20, 2008 at 4:45 PM

Then what the HELL are you doing on HA. Don’t want to give my opinions in case someone attacks me….wow.
Space is tight here. Maybe you should give your spot to someone who is unafraid of being “attacked” by some nutfruit sitting in their mom’s basement.

Well, it sounds like you are in the mushy middle. Do you actually HAVE an opinion or do you wait until the 11th hour to figure out who you are going to vote for?

HornetSting on November 20, 2008 at 4:14 PM

No. I have voted Republican for 12 years now. Now I’m hesitant to share my opinions, especially on the internet, where so many (notably liberals) can attack anonymously from their home computers. Not Wishy Washy, Hybrid. Mushy middle is better terminology, though I’ve never been a swing voter. I was a huge fan of Rick Santorum, and voted for him twice. Character, IMO, is overrated and can be faked…I judge mostly on record and experience.

According to Hot Air posters, all the polls leading to the run-up for the Presidential election were tainted, biased, etc.

Did something change between now and then?

Can you say “cognitive consistency” and “cognitive dissonance”?

There is more to my political philosophy than my religion. and the GOP should appeal to the conservative political philosophy of the general public, rather than their religion.

kelley in virginia on November 20, 2008 at 4:02 PM

…in the world as it is, with parties trying to play “capture the flag” with people reduced to being “members” of political “demographics” — and with the electorate’s own lockstep cooperation with that dehumanizing generalization — it’d be hard to pull that one off….

…in short, people are living up to their stereotypes….

…the funny thing is that I’m sure that Huckabee thought that he’d capture the evangelical vote, and did somewhat by virtue of his resume (NOT his political stances), but didn’t do as well as I’m sure he thought he would. Given the choice, folks vote their pocketbooks and vote the future more than they vote their religion…and Huckabee was short on future…not that McCain was a winner there, either….

In the end, success will follow the flag of any politician who can give voice to what the electorate would say and do if they could take the time off from their lives to waste time arguing with Ivy League-educated idiots in Bedlam-On-The-Potomac. The overwhelming majority of the electorate has bills to pay, kids to raise, and (sad to say) isn’t above taking home a little “bread and circuses”…so long as they don’t later find out that they got stiffed on some of their ration to benefit some less productive, more “connective” slice of the population….

…O’Reilly beat his breast about plugging into the anger folks felt the economy, the bailout, etc…populist claptrap, and the usual overheated O’Reilly rubbish….

…rather, the guy or gal who’ll win will be the one who actually seems to understand what people want him to do…it’d be a refreshing change from crop after crop of well-mentored empty suits who seem to think that they can think for their neighbors…so long as they don’t have to associate with them….

…somebody real would sweep the board in 2012, and bring a lot of folks in on his coattails….

…but, given the current crop of possibles, the control of almost every organ of popular communications by the lunatic left and a gaggle of pundits more impressed with themselves than the political process they’re paid to comment upon, I don’t see such a person making it through the Establishment’s cordon….

…so, maybe it’s time to water that tree of liberty with a little of that nomenclatura juice….

y-not, be true to yourself. persecution for political belief or affiliation is a lawsuit waiting to happen. since i am in Indiana i have no concerns about the prop 8 psychos
samiam on November 20, 2008 at 4:21 PM

If only that were so, but unfortunately I don’t think it is.

Whenever I’ve asked the Affirmative Action or Diversity Officers at the places I’ve worked about “hostile work environment” issues pertaining to political views, I’ve always been told that members of political groups are not afforded the sorts of protections that women and minorities are. And what I’ve read of workplace harassment regulations supports that. (Frankly, I was subjected to sexual harassment at another university years ago and even that was handled in a way to protect the university rather than address the behavior in a way that protected the women being harassed, so I doubt anything would ever be done about political harassment.)

I lived and worked in Indiana for several years and was subjected to treatment that would have been actionable if it were based on my gender. Liberals are extremely intolerant when they are in the majority and they are in the majority in academe. And, since faculty are notoriously undisciplined when it comes to administrative and HR issues, they feel very free to wield their politics as a club because they know there will be no repurcussions.

The other 41% (RINOs) agree with 56% of Democrats and should go ahead and join them now while the power grabbin’ is good.

That’s Ms. and I don’t have to insult your intelligence. You’re doing a fine job of it yourself.

HornetSting on November 20, 2008 at 4:02 PM
Well, thank you for jumping to conclusions and proving my initial point. I never even divulged my opinion, just noted that it’s not exactly in line with the base, and voila: the smug zealot appears. Thanks for not going crazy-foul-mouthed-liberal on me.

budorob on November 20, 2008 at 4:25 PM

“Smug zealot”? Well, I have been saddled with worse. So, please, enlighten me. What do you believe, oh merciful one?

That’s Ms. and I don’t have to insult your intelligence. You’re doing a fine job of it yourself.

HornetSting on November 20, 2008 at 4:02 PM

Well, thank you for jumping to conclusions and proving my initial point. I never even divulged my opinion, just noted that it’s not exactly in line with the base, and voila: the smug zealot appears. Thanks for not going crazy-foul-mouthed-liberal on me.