Rasmussen: 73 percent say GOP leaders have lost touch with Republican base
posted at 5:19 pm on October 22, 2009 by Allahpundit
I know what the first 50 comments below are going to say if I don’t say it here first, so here you go: Only 73 percent?
President Obama told an audience at a Democratic Party fundraiser Wednesday night that Republicans often “do what they’re told,” but GOP voters don’t think their legislators listen enough to them.
Just 15% of Republicans who plan to vote in 2012 state primaries say the party’s representatives in Congress have done a good job of representing Republican values.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 73% think Republicans in Congress have lost touch with GOP voters from throughout the nation. Twelve percent (12%) are undecided…
Republican women are nearly twice as likely as men to say their representatives in Congress have done a good job of representing GOP values.
That last part is probably explained by the fact that men tend to be more fiscally conservative than women at the polls.
This seems like the perfect place for a Hoffman vs. Scozzafava update, so if you haven’t already listened, check out DH’s new radio ad goofing on Team Dede for calling the cops on the Weekly Standard. I’m skeptical that most voters up there are following the race closely enough to get the reference but the grassroots conservatives who are tracking it hour-by-hour on the ‘Net should love it.
Meanwhile, courtesy of Laura Ingraham’s producer Tom Elliott, here’s Gingrich taking yet another stab at defending his decision to back the liberal Republican in NY-23. He’s got a blog post about it out today too, but for my money, the exchange starting at around 5:10 is the best he’s done thus far to make the case. In a nutshell, he doesn’t care about Scozzafava; what he cares about is the encouragement third-party conservatives will take from Hoffman’s run, which could prove disastrous next year if centrist Republican candidates in purple districts suddenly find themselves bleeding votes to right-wing independent challengers. Populists like Beck — and Sarahcuda, maybe? — will love the idea of fiscally conservative third-party insurgents making the GOP sweat, but if it produces a split vote among Republicans in a bunch of close midterm races, it could be the difference between the Democrats losing or keeping the House. I still think he’s wrong on balance since there’s no good reason for the local party bosses to have nominated a liberal in a reliably red district, but he’s right that this could have bad repercussions.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3
I want the Republican elites…to move to the right.
I hear to much crap from them when they endorse middle of the road republicans.
I am conservative/Independent now. I have not contributed since Bush ran in 2004.
If the party doesn’t move to the right and focus on the spending issues, then the social issues will never get addressed.
You can’t elect people like Scozzafa and expect to really control congress. If you back too many of these people your not going to get anything done.
I don’t understand how HARD THAT IS TO UNDERSTAND.
Back the conservative or the Independent who is more conservtive like Hoffman. Send out a good message which the Republican party seems unable to do and STAY AWAY FROM THE PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT GOING TO GET YOU ANYWHERE.
Scoreboard44 on October 22, 2009 at 7:42 PM
Second that… but can we add…
If you don’t agree with at least 80% of the Republican Platform, don’t run as a Republican?
Romeo13 on October 22, 2009 at 7:43 PM
I’ve wondered about this too. Is there more to the story? Possibly…Nothing in politics happens by chance.
indypat on October 22, 2009 at 7:43 PM
If the running back sucks, then the running back sucks.
The Republican party leadership right now are bad coaches and bad management. If they can’t see how to win this, then once again we will lose.
Idiots. Absolute Elitist Idiots.
Scoreboard44 on October 22, 2009 at 7:44 PM
We need to grab the Republican leadership dragging and screaming back to the right.
Scoreboard44 on October 22, 2009 at 7:47 PM
You said much better than I could have…
You have to draw a line sometimes and deal with the results.
Accepting responsibility and standing for priciples is what will eventually prevail.
Nelsa on October 22, 2009 at 7:49 PM
Excellent question, one many of us on the Right as to voters have wondered and often (I certainly have).
There are local GOP groups, so, like in college times when the “College Republicans” were easy to find (usually) on campus among groups one could meet and join, as adults (non school-related), just look up County and City Republican groups and attend a meeting, ask to network, exchange emails, sign-up for newsletters and ongoing events in an area.
Years ago, I worked among mostly-Republican associated persons (not in politics but in an organization that was mostly populated with Conservative and/or Republican voting persons), so it was a daily thing to have political discussions with many others employed there, just briefly in the course of discussing work and tasks, etc., the socio-political aspects would enter into discussions because they were relevant to the job at hand and the liabilities that needed to be discussed in the course of that.
But afterward, no longer associated with that org., I found that the most highly visible in a city I resided in were the inevitable Leftwing/Democrat groups and also orgs. associated with Leftwing goals and causes and fundraising.
So I had to search out — after a bad experience I found myself in after I attended what I thought would be an opportunity to get involved was being held in the building leased to/inhabited with an exceptionally Leftwing, militant group (and I’d thought I was going to “just get involved locally” by volunteering some skills, took the first opportunity I came across without looking “beneath the covers”) — the actual CONSERVATIVE and/or Republican groups and meetings.
It can be intimidating but if one really wants to make changes, the time and place to do so is to just attend one of their dinners or after-work-drinks (you don’t have to drink alcohol) get-togethers.
And then start asking questions, don’t be shy about your issues you support or your complaints, just try to get socially involved.
Lourdes on October 22, 2009 at 7:50 PM
Yeah, it used to be a mystery to me why someone would be campaigning for office as a Republican but didn’t associate or support most of what the GOP represents.
THEN I figured it out (internet experience helped enlighten me in this regard): Leftwingers infiltrating.
The Left will just go to any lengths to lie, cheat and steal elections, even if it means posing as one party but supporting the issues of the other party.
It hurts confidence in the first party, it upsets, insults, disillusions, degrades the party that is being pretended. Which is also a lot of the incentive to why some Leftwingers engage in such.
Lourdes on October 22, 2009 at 7:53 PM
Are they only counting Republicans in the poll? There are Conservative Independents too.
Dr Evil on October 22, 2009 at 8:02 PM
DITTO, Sugarbuzz.
Also, with someone as experienced politically as is Gingrich, the obvious seems entirely overlooked (and he looks inept because of this): the GOP backing a Leftwinger (Scozzafava) DRIVES MORE VOTES AWAY FROM THE GOP.
It’s like Gingrich is acting like some Manchurian Candidate in this regard…very disillusioning to me to see transpire.
His latest book looks great (I’m planning on buying it — it’s about George Washington), but his latest political ‘strategery’ sounds weird.
Lourdes on October 22, 2009 at 8:03 PM
I’m actually surprised it’s at 73%. I guess Newt and his PAC only poll Democrats.
eforhan on October 22, 2009 at 8:15 PM
Does anyone have a quote or statement otherwise from Scuzzafava that explains WHY she’s “a Republican”? From the issues she supports, she is not one, so I wonder howtheheck she’s even rationalizing or trying to rationalize the party registration value.
Lourdes on October 22, 2009 at 8:15 PM
Well said.
Lourdes on October 22, 2009 at 8:26 PM
She’s a republican just like McCain and Lindsey Graham are republicans. The only way the GOP leadership wises up is if Independents run and beat them in the election and I can see that happening.
flytier on October 22, 2009 at 8:26 PM
I don,t care what these Rep elite say.You can not sacrifice principle just to elect someone who has a R by there name.When you choose the lesser of 2 evils you still get evil.
thmcbb on October 22, 2009 at 8:30 PM
Here is where you go wrong on the core issue. I agree the conservatives voting for conservatives will split the vote. But here’s a thought- Why is it that Newt’s candidates are the right ones in the first place? Have we not learned from the past that going “democrat lite” cost us elections. Does anyone remember McCain? Y,know, old guy, stumbled around a lot mumbling “my friends my friends” and trying to agree with about everything Obama beat him to??
Why not accept the Republican leadership has lost its way and is leading the rest of us down the wrong path, instead of taking the position that we are in the wrong for wanting conservative, principled,fiscally responsible people in office?
Really, don’t you??
archer52 on October 22, 2009 at 8:32 PM
I don,t care what these Rep elite say.You can not sacrifice principle just to elect someone who has a R by there name.When you choose the lesser of 2 evils you still get evil.
thmcbb on October 22, 2009 at 8:30 PM
//
I second that!
ohiobabe on October 22, 2009 at 8:33 PM
Sorry Allah, but Newt’s completely wrong. In fact, by supporting Scozzafava, he’s makign things worse.
This race is a shot across the bow of the Republican “leadership”, telling them that they’re going to have to act like Republicans if they want victory. No trying to force a Charlie Christ on us when a Mario Rubio can win, too. No picking “Republican” candidates who are to the left of their districts.
If Newt had backed Hoffman on this, then next year, he could have occasionally credibly made the case that this RINO was the best we could do in that district. His support for a DIABLO (Democrat In All But Label Only, thanks Mark Steyn) who is to the left of the district, however, has marked him as lacking all credibility on this front.
Greg Q on October 22, 2009 at 8:48 PM
You realize of course, that all Republican politician look at this figure and ask themselves: “What can we do to straighten those idiots out?”
logis on October 22, 2009 at 8:49 PM
Just a little
larvcom on October 22, 2009 at 8:51 PM
We need a new party. Start all over. Get rid of those in office now. They all suck.
Jeff from WI on October 22, 2009 at 8:53 PM
73% feel the GOP has lost touch with them, but they’ll blame the voters instead of looking in the mirror.
Jeff from WI on October 22, 2009 at 8:54 PM
Here’s the problem:
Purpletown, Ohio is not Suburbia, Texas. The local Purpletown GOP may choose someone to run for the Purpletown Congressional seat who the folks in Suburbia Texas would think of as a RINO. Some guy who didn’t get the nod in Purpletown could appeal over the internet to folks in Suburbia Texas who can’t find Purpletown on a map to back the “real conservative” in the race–and end up splitting the vote or losing in the general election.
Don’t think this isn’t what the 0bama Administration is hoping for.
Sekhmet on October 22, 2009 at 8:56 PM
Hot off the presses:
Sarah Palin: Support Doug Hoffman
Boohay!
gary4205 on October 22, 2009 at 9:03 PM
Gingrich is a traitor to conservatism!
Buffalo on October 22, 2009 at 9:08 PM
Sometimes you just have to say “Heh”.
Jaibones on October 22, 2009 at 9:08 PM
Newt’s argument seems to boil down to- I made a huge mistake backing her but if your guy wins it might be bad for us…because we’re going to keep putting forward candidates who aren’t fiscally conservative.
Genius tactic, Newt- keep alienating the base.
So, yeah, sounds to me like the GOP’s out of touch with reality
Jay Mac on October 22, 2009 at 9:10 PM
The GOP is looking forward to business as usual…you know, the “pendulum theory”. Hey, dumba$$es in the GOP…the clock is broken and stuck to the Left. Wake up and quit pushing the RINO thing because no one’s buying it anymore, except maybe the Libtards and their allies of course.
Dr. ZhivBlago on October 22, 2009 at 9:15 PM
As for Newt and his “health of the party” concerns, I don’t get it. When was the last time this guy ran for elected office? He’s not a part of GOP party leadership, is he?
I view Newt Gingrich with about as much interest as I do Bob Dole, maybe less. There is a credible argument to be made that if he hadn’t effed up the Contract with America, we would be in control of congress, with several trillion dollars of wealth we don’t have now, and this effing idiot Obama would still be running public housing scams in the ghetto.
Jaibones on October 22, 2009 at 9:15 PM
The problem with Newt referring to Reagan as the standard bearer for advancing conservatism in the House and Senate is…Reagan never achieved the majorities he desired in congress. Reagan was an executive, never a legislator. He is not the standard for legislatures.
Leonard210 on October 22, 2009 at 9:17 PM
Yeah lets elect more of this lame ass RHINO’s so we have a shot at a coalition. How are Spectre and Snowe and Collins working out for the Republican cause. How did running McCain work out for the Repubs? I only hope and pray we do get some 3rd party Conservatives running against these RHINO’s so maybe the frigging party will get the message they aren’t going to win with these dim wits so they might as well run Conservative candidates who will have a shot. Maybe Newt’s willing to sacrifice his principles for the sake of the Republican Party but I will no longer join in their big tent love fest. Send me a RHINO and I’ll send them back, return to sender just like I do their fund raising mail now!
chickasaw42 on October 22, 2009 at 9:38 PM
Newt may talk like a conservative, but he first ran as a Rockefeller-Ford Republican and got beat, I don’t trust him, Bob Novak also told the truth about this guy in his book “Prince of Darkness”. He can’t be trusted!
Crazzy Ron on October 22, 2009 at 9:41 PM
And Democrats always do what
ObamaPelosi tells them to do.PoodleSkirt on October 22, 2009 at 10:00 PM
Newt. Go home. Let me see if I understand your strategy. Let’s just get the Republican party as big as we can so we can have a majority-even if it means some representatives that will vote for things that are clearly not conservative principles. And let’s just say “Ronald Reagan” every time someone asks where the hel* our principles have gone. Newt, you have no idea what’s going on in the conservative world right now. You might as well be a blue dog democrat yourself so go join them.
Alfresco on October 22, 2009 at 10:09 PM
republican this, Republican that. I like you Newt, I really do but you’re dead wrong on this. Who CARES about the Republican party, it is conservative principles that we care about. I don’t care who the local hacks in New York selected to run, all that means is she had better connections than Hoffman. Hoffman is the true Conservative and never would have lost to Scozzafava in a primary decided by the voters.
Newt’s Giuliani analogy was a straw man. Hoffman is a conservative trying to represent a conservative district while Giuliani was a moderate running for mayor of a liberal city. Two completely different situations. You support the CONSERVATIVE if he/she has a chance to win. Hoffman never lost a primary, it was political patronage that got Scozzafava on the ticket but it will be the voters who put Hoffman in the house.
Newt is letting his pride cloud his judgment. He is too busy trying to be a good Republican instead of a smart Conservative.
Daemonocracy on October 22, 2009 at 10:12 PM
Newt is just another beltway politician, talks out of both sides of his mouth. Sarah has endorsed Hoffman. What does that tell you?
cjs1943 on October 22, 2009 at 10:34 PM
Newt: Reagan is a sure loser. Now John Anderson… that guy has broad appeal! But if they both run, Carter is sure to win.
Newt: John McCain? Big Tent Gold!
mankai on October 22, 2009 at 10:57 PM
The problem with Newt, Prissy Graham, McSwine, and the rest of the snob-squad is that those douchies think that being a REPUBLICAN is a F^^&ing Country Club membership not a soldier in a war against absolute effing evil in the person of Der ObamanFuhrer and the rest of his fascist, lying, treasonous, pedophilic cabal.
They don’t get that we have to destroy these psychotic morons – even if it means we end at Ft. Sumter again to do it. I’d rather we did it at the ballot box but its idiots like Collins, Snowe, and Cain that are making it less and less likely.
If we don’t win this war we will die on our knees and our children will be slaves to thieves and Sodomites for generations – maybe forever.
babylonandon on October 22, 2009 at 11:01 PM
The Republican party has had many factions over the years, from Hamiltonian business-oriented country clubbers, to religiously conservative social voters, to libertarians, and even states rights advocates. But it was Reagan who was most successful in modern times. He was a philosopher who espoused the Jeffersonian creed that resonated with a lot of Americans. Since Reagan, the party has tried to erect the big tent to include all the disparate factions on a pragmatic basis, as if politics was like a war in which you build coalitions, marshall the largest army you can, and then after sweeping the enemy out of his capital, enjoy the spoils of jobs, patronage and power for its own sake. The Republican leadership stands for nothing anymore other than what other politicians have become, promoters of their own career at the expense of enduring values. It’s a pity, but the only leadership the Reaganites have these days comes from such stalwarts as Limbaugh, Levin, Hannity and Beck. If the Republican party wanted to inspire the nation instead of bribing it with Democrat-lite programs, they’d remind us all of what it is this country has always stood for, the worth and liberty of the individual.
NNtrancer on October 22, 2009 at 11:08 PM
For all the Newt bashers here I would like to defend Newt a little bit. I would hope you would consider Newt’s past accomplishments before you haphazardly label him or are quick to dismiss him as a RINO. Newt is a good man. I admire him because of his WORK actually getting conservative things done in our inept government bureaucracy. Newt held the line against leftists and stopped them for years when he was minority whip in the house. America would be a very different place today if he had let leftists get away with half of what they wanted to do after Clinton got elected. We would already have socialized HillaryCare if not for Newt. After the republican sweep into congress Newt actually cut spending in many ways, and cut the growth on over all spending in spite of the cries of liberals and the press who tried to turn him into a demon. As Speaker of the House Newt passed a flood of conservative bills, right out of the contract with America. Armed with a veto proof majority of dems and reps he FORCED Clinton to sign his name to welfare reform. It was Newt’s leadership that passed a balanced budget through congress. I think Newt is the only former Speaker of the House still alive who has ever actually passed a balanced budget. Newt brought together his majority brilliantly. Most of The Contract With America was passed because of Newt. Newt knows congress, he knows how things are done and what in needed to cut taxes and cut spending. Newt is one of us, even after he gets elected. He might have picked the wrong republican in this one, but it is foolish not to take seriously what he has to say. He can be very valuable to the conservative movement. We shouldn’t throw him under the bus.
Dollayo on October 22, 2009 at 11:09 PM
To sum it up, Newt (and for that matter, Steele and the rest of the “big tent” Republicans) are more about QUANTITY than QUALITY.
I guess I have to agree that QUANTITY is what wins elections, but what good is that when you’ve sold your soul and made a deal with the devil (the left)?
UltimateBob on October 22, 2009 at 11:47 PM
1. We’ve seen enough locals here to say that NY-23 aint Purpletown.
2. I’d rather see a Democrat majority that helps destroy the liberal Republicans, as it helps rally a Conservative majority that will FIGHT LIKE HELL TO REVERSE THE DAMAGE. Stop playing “hold the line”. Whole-loaf time.
Chris_Balsz on October 23, 2009 at 12:10 AM
Reagan himself said that many on the Right would rather starve than get half a loaf. This ain’t bread, folks. This is your freedom.
NY-23 might or might not be Purpletown, but if third parties derail various races, the next place will be Purpletown. This is why Newt Gingrich is taking the stand he is taking.
And liberal Republicans don’t get destroyed, they just join up with the Democrats leaving conservatives even more surrounded.
Sekhmet on October 23, 2009 at 12:19 AM
The obstructionist third party here is the Republicans.
Chris_Balsz on October 23, 2009 at 12:48 AM
Newt is obsessed with the (R) after a name, principles be damned.
Screw the GOP!
DTogo on October 23, 2009 at 1:02 AM
What has happened is that the Democrats have shifted so far to the left that they need to be renamed at the very minimum, “Social Democrats”. The Republicans that conservatives call RINOS, are now actually what used to be Democrats. Conservatives actually seem to have enough differing viewpoints from Republicans to qualify for a separate party. The three party system would definitely hurt the Republican Party, and I’m not saying I advocate a split, but it seems to be already happening, just not offically named.
Boudica on October 23, 2009 at 4:07 AM
Only idiots think leftwing Republicans will save us from something bad. Banana republics have two parties you know.
rhodeymark on October 23, 2009 at 6:13 AM
In plain english, conservatives have no voice in the republican pary and need to shut up and take what they are given. Do not delude yourself that the process is open and fair. The powers that be pick a candidate and more often then not that candidate gets the nomination. The whole point is not that the base needs to wake up, we are awake. The point is to overthrow the entrenched professional politicians and self annointed elites running the republican party. Things aren’t being done the way they are supposed to be in washington, the left has corrupted the process. But the republican leadership makes excuses and plays the demofascists’s game. This economy and country can be turned around very quickly with the right solutions but washington refuses to do it because all the poloticians, democrats and republicans, want things at just below a crisis point all the time to make sure they appear relevant. Well, things have gotten out of control now and the people need to step in and straighten the mess out. We need all new leadership in congress that isn’t afraid to go to battle with the left instead of the squishy dishonest professional politicans that are there now. boehner has to go. mcconnell has to go.
peacenprosperity on October 23, 2009 at 6:44 AM
Smartest comments around here realize that the basic conservative tenets have value and that RINOS are leverage for the weight on the other side.
Like liquor, the “compassionate conservative” and big spending or centrist positions make the cocktail party in DC all cozy. It also makes you acceptable to the society editors running our media. Happiness all around.
The last election was ironic because it was between a gracious and inoffensive old soldier who ran a respectful campaign and a ‘new guy’. The cool new guy just had to win.
If the new guy avoids wrecking the place with His friends and doesn’t cause major problems with trying to turn the place into a gang headquarters, the same problems will arise that were faced after the Bush spending keggers. Both parties will have had some really unhappy guests.
Namely, after you get drunk and wake up the next morning, you blame the bartender.
IlikedAUH2O on October 23, 2009 at 9:23 AM
The irony lay in the fact that we didn’t need either one of the guys in the last election and most people haven’t noticed, even now.
IlikedAUH2O on October 23, 2009 at 9:25 AM
You have to understand the GOP in New York State. The Chairmen hold sway over the whole program. Our County Chairman once said as he announced their choice, “We’re not paying for a primary.” Shows you what the voters mean to the New York Republican Party.
Mr. Grump on October 23, 2009 at 9:28 AM
Newt said: Doug Hoffman was in the Republican primary and lost. So if there was no primary and Scuzzy was hand picked by the party apparatchiks then what the hell is Newt talking about?
It seems like he is trying to portray Hoffman as a sore loser.
Bill C on October 23, 2009 at 9:47 AM
If the district really is conservative, wouldn’t a third party then be forcing liberal/progressive Democrats and Republicans to split that voter base?
Somehow this ‘if you vote for a third party you are voting for the other party’ meme only works if you think you are in a bare majority, and the constituency is wedded to party affiliation. If you can appeal to values and concepts held by the majority in the district across party lines, then it is up to the parties to decide if they will address those things or face splitting their committed base votes which are a minority against a candidate representing the majority.
I’m tired of this ‘lesser of two evils’ voting concept as I’m always left voting FOR evil. Plus it only encourages the two parties to become more evil, not less. A century of that is how we got to voting for people you don’t know, don’t like, don’t agree with and nearly half (and more like 65% on the off-years) not voting at all.
ajacksonian on October 23, 2009 at 10:35 AM
Hmmmm.
So Newt’s explanation is that the “little people” need to shut up and do what they’re told?
Yeah that will convince me.
memomachine on October 23, 2009 at 10:42 AM
Now, let me type slowly, put this information into the polls of stated GOP.
The GOP is down to a size that, as a national party, honestly isn’t viable. When less than 30% will claim this as their party, that party is pretty much dead in the water.
So all these stories about how “head-to-head,” in GOP, Pawlenty wins! Huckabee wins!
Wins what? 28% of 30%?
Come on. We all have taken basic math.
AnninCA on October 23, 2009 at 12:07 PM
I seriously doubt whether there actually aretwo parties any more. The elite “political classes” of both parties have much more in common with each other than they do with most of us. I believe they generally identify with each other, regardless of party, more than they do with the people they supposedly represent and that, when forced to choose between the desires of their constituents and their relationship with fellow politicos, they will support their fellow politicians if they can possibly get away with it.
When given a chance to be the majority party, the Republicans did not deliver. And that was in the days of the great, principled “Contract with America.” The current party bosses frankly concede that regaining their market share in Washington trumps any and concern for principle. Kill a few million more babies? Sure! Ignore the Constitution? No problem, that part about not not impairing contractual obligations is so 18th Century! Move ever closer to tyranny? Good idea! How many of us Repub bosses will get to be tyrants?
Wake up. The politicians will ignore us unless we put the fear of God in them – or, at least, the fear of losing their cush jobs, private airports, and yummy interns. About fifteen or twenty million “teabaggers” in the Mall would be a good next step.
Venusian Visitor on October 23, 2009 at 12:30 PM
Exactly.
All the more reason why Scott Rasmussen should start digging deeper – asking and polling people about what they think is the problem.
The Republicans in Congress (Michelle Bachman) lean very much to the Right, so people are obviously not happy with this.
AprilOrit on October 23, 2009 at 12:37 PM
Now, tell me again why we should even bother to vote if we don’t like either of the choices? I lose you there.
Venusian Visitor on October 23, 2009 at 12:43 PM
So what’s the real problem? Too Fra Right, not Far Right enough?
AprilOrit on October 23, 2009 at 1:05 PM
What Newt isn’t considering is that Scozzafava was selected by liberal leadership in NY. She was not chosen by the people.
Republicans have an opportunity to bring a more conservative viewpoint to NY23- there is no doubt that Hoffman would be the front runner were Sozzafava not in the race. But Republican leadership is determined to let the same old standards that they’ve always used to lose elections stand.
Jewels on October 23, 2009 at 1:09 PM
Love the use of “far right” to characterize righter-than-Newt. You’re a pro. But the answer is neither: from my standpoint, there is simply no meaningful difference between the Democrat and Republican contestants in the NY-23 race. I have zero loyalty to the Republican Party – they have never sent me money; it’s always been the other way around. My interest is in having my views effectively represented. And, it appears, an awful lot of other people who have voted Republican up until now think the same thing.
So, let’s summarize: The Repub party ran a RINO presidential candidate who generated zero enthusiasm until a conservative was put on the ticket. The ticket then made a credible showing despite being saddled with GWB. Now, the party is moving further and further left to maintain market share, and 73% of Republicans object. On these facts, are you seriously contending that the present unhappiness of the rank-and-file is the result of the RNC not moving far enough to the left? Because, if you are, I would very much like some of what you’re smoking as soon as that legalization thing goes through….
Venusian Visitor on October 23, 2009 at 1:54 PM
“The Republicans in Congress (Michelle Bachman) lean very much to the Right, so people are obviously not happy with this.
AprilOrit on October 23, 2009 at 12:37 PM”
April, I’m guessing that you’re a liberal since you already don’t know the answer to your question. Michelle Bachmann is one of a handful of conservatives representing the GOP in Congress. If all GOP Congressman were as conservative as Michelle Bachmann, the favorability rating would be 73% rather than the disapproval rate.
orlandocajun on October 23, 2009 at 1:54 PM
The fun starts at the 00:33 mark:
Newt Worried About Intra-party Fight in New York
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXOPPJ_FE_U&feature=player_embedded
Comments to Newt Gingrich on the ‘Big Tent’
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lW18qDjUTM&feature=player_embedded
Video from Dallas Tea Party H/T to MM
lovingmyUSA on October 23, 2009 at 3:53 PM
Let’s see…. 73% think you’re out of touch.
12% can’t decide whether or not you’re in touch.
Well there you have it Newt! the 15% RINO/liberal swing vote your all ways going for. SUCCESS!! /s
nolapol on October 23, 2009 at 4:03 PM
I would welcome more people just running as independents on their own principles rather than towing any party line.
ReneePA on October 23, 2009 at 5:17 PM
You guys are missing the point. The GOP wants a candidate that win in a general election in New York; that means what you guys call a “RINO”. The entire country isn’t as conservative as the South and the Democrats will be laughing all the way to the polls if the GOP alienates centrist Republicans and Independents.
HeroesforGhosts on October 23, 2009 at 6:46 PM
No, you’re missing the point: There are lots of conservatives and we’re highly motivated. If we support independent candidates who share our values, we at least force a runoff election. Look at the numbers in NY-23.
You need us more than we need you. But we are being increasingly marginalized and sometimes even ridiculed by the Republican party leadership. That’s fine – it’s a free country, still – but don’t expect us to support a party that holds us in contempt.
Good luck with those pesky Democrats. ;)
Venusian Visitor on October 23, 2009 at 7:37 PM
They need to move right or get out of the way
Nearly Nobody on October 23, 2009 at 11:39 PM
Sorry, I stopped giving credit to Newt the moment I saw him on the “wecansolveit” AGW commercial. Newt may have done good things in the past, but he has become nothing more than a self-serving irrelevant sell-out.
SG1_Conservative on October 24, 2009 at 12:33 AM
Can’t lead, won’t follow, so get the hell outta the way!
Making the GOP & Gingrich nervous about “Conservative Movement” inroads is a good thing! Perhaps they’ll come to realize, before election day, that their Dem-Lite strategy is the party’s ticket to political oblivion…
Attempting to elect Crist and Fatsosava types, those who will take a dive at the first sign of Statist resistance to Conservative Principles, is a self-defeating Republican political strategy. And Newt should know it! That he constantly rolls-over for the Democrats these days, reveals that the only conservative principles remaining in him, is his urge to pander his latest pulp-fiction!
2 Thumbs down!
“Let’s Roll”
On Watch on October 24, 2009 at 5:55 AM
As much as I would like to see the “progressives” out of power in the house as soon as possible, the ends do not justify the means for me. More important to me is that the representatives that our side elects are TRUE conservatives, and not just pawns in the power grab game of D.C. Our “leaders” need to wake up and listen to us and not just assume blind loyalty, no matter what President Hopenchange thinks of us.
Huckabye-Romney on October 24, 2009 at 6:01 AM
Gingrich has become a total fraud, his support of DIABLO (Democrat In ALL But Label Only) Scozzafava was the last straw.
nelsonknows on October 24, 2009 at 6:38 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3