Replacing the Republican Party

[Cyber Liberty]

You have that small group. I think it could be a significant group by the time some of those people are up for reelection. If a senator has 3,4, or 5 years, even 2, to work on it, things can change.

I'm not the type of person you can tell it can't be done. It can be done. And a lot faster than people who think otherwise believe.

 

That's the Fah-RAY-ed I've come to know and love.

[corbe]

    Please help make it happen Sen. Cruz(C)* and talk to your buddy Sen. Lee.

* Conservative Party

[Free Vulcan]

Probably.

Perhaps(?) equally important would be finding ways to use the money they raise more effectively.

I don't know how much the POTUS candidates spent this time around.  Last time I was hearing near a billion each, so let's call it $630 million.  That's $10 per vote.  But not really.  Most people are going to vote on party, so the real question, IMO, is how much the candidates spent for every voter that they were able to convince to vote for them.  Now that $/vote number is much larger.

And I happen to think most of that is wasted anyway.  How many times per day do you have to see the same ad?  How many fliers do we throw away with the rest of the junk mail?  I'm not by any means an expert here -- but then if I was people would be paying me for my opinion, which just might be to keep giving me more money to advise you on spending what's left, kind of like your broker, I don't care if you buy or sell, just do something so I get a commission.

I think Trump is probably a case in point.  Between twitter and manipulating the media, I bet he ran a pretty darn tight campaign (except when paying himself and family).  President Twitter?  I wouldn't be surprised if that takes off once the history books are written.

There has indeed been a huge shift the last couple of years in campaign advertising. It's one of the reasons I quit politics because the upper muckys in the majority fund and even the party at times wouldn't see it.

Even so, that's an opportunity, if someone is willing to get out in front and take advantage of that shift.

[bigheadfred]

It is nearly impossible to get your name on the ballot in Texas as an independent!  And that is not by accident!

@libertybele

Texas had their voter ID law struck down again. Argue that the restrictions against independents getting on the ballot is, in essence, the same thing. Voters are being discriminated against because the person they want to vote for isn't, or wasn't,  allowed on the ballot.

[libertybele]

@libertybele

Texas had their voter ID law struck down again. Argue that the restrictions against independents getting on the ballot is, in essence, the same thing. Voters are being discriminated against because the person they want to vote for isn't, or wasn't,  allowed on the ballot.

I saw that and they are in the process of redrawing some of the voting districts in various different parts of the country.

[Bigun]

@libertybele

Texas had their voter ID law struck down again. Argue that the restrictions against independents getting on the ballot is, in essence, the same thing. Voters are being discriminated against because the person they want to vote for isn't, or wasn't,  allowed on the ballot.

The rogue judge who struk down the voter id law will get her wings clipped big time on appeal.  The ballot access matter is something entirely different and needs to be challenged in court.

[bilo]

Now after 600 posts, virtually NO discussion about ADMITTING TO THE PISS POOR JOB, of convincing Voters, of the need for MORE CONSERVATIVE POLICIES AND OFFICE HOLDERS.

key words: CONVINCING, VOTERS

What is the point, of a new vessel to house the same old shortcomings? A smaller vessel, with less money and fewer members?

Common sense is not common any more. Too many "true conservatives" are logic and math challenged.

There's a problem with the convincing voters argument that we can gain greater control by just convincing people we are correct in our beliefs and they should join us. Politics today has devolved into identity politics. People on the left value themselves based on their political beliefs so when you try to show them the error in their beliefs they don't perceive it as a well reasoned argument. They view it as an attack on them. It's why they respond with such hysterics. They can't be reasoned with.

The good news is there are a majority of people who don't buy into liberal identity politics. It's the corruption of the politicians we elect that has to be stopped. The only way I know we can do that is making them feel the repercussions of lying and cheating and the way to do that is to not vote for them.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

@truth_seeker

What is the point, of a new vessel to house the same old shortcomings? A smaller vessel, with less money and fewer members?

Common sense is not common any more. Too many "true conservatives" are logic and math challenged.

I don't understand it either.  The problem isn't the label.  The problem is a lack of enough conservative-minded voters to win primary elections, then win the general elections.  Collins, Murkowski, and the rest of the moderates win because there aren't enough conservatives in their states to knock them out in the primary.  And if there aren't enough conservatives to win even the GOP primary, how can there possibly be enough to beat both the D's and the R's in a general election?

[bigheadfred]

The rogue judge who struk down the voter id law will get her wings clipped big time on appeal.  The ballot access matter is something entirely different and needs to be challenged in court.

I can see how there have to be restrictions on ballot access to keep a Brazilian people being on the ballot.

Are write-ins allowed?

[bigheadfred]

@truth_seeker

I don't understand it either.  The problem isn't the label.  The problem is a lack of enough conservative-minded voters to win primary elections, then win the general elections.  Collins, Murkowski, and the rest of the moderates win because there aren't enough conservatives in their states to knock them out in the primary.  And if there aren't enough conservatives to win even the GOP primary, how can there possibly be enough to beat both the D's and the R's in a general election?

People, at this point, don't seem to have a viable alternative to either a D or an R. I'm suggesting there is a way. Get some of the big league people already in DC on board. Give US an alternative. Give us a choice. I see a uniparty now. And they don't do anything. So what harm can it do to have a different voting block? How do you know what people will do if they have a choice? I know what they do if they don't feel they have a choice. They do nothing.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

People, at this point, don't seem to have a viable alternative to either a D or an R. I'm suggesting there is a way. Get some of the big league people already in DC on board. Give US an alternative. Give us a choice. I see a uniparty now. And they don't do anything.

But unless you consider all Republican politicians as indistinguishable from each other (Ted Cruz = Susan Collins), voters do have a real choice in the primaries.  Putting a different letter after their name doesn't change the choice.

So what harm can it do to have a different voting block?

Because by forming that different voting block, you're automatically conceding all the votes that are to the left of your candidate.  Conservatives generally win elections when 1) the conservatives are a majority in their state GOP, and 2) the overall GOP (not just conservatives) is a majority in in that state.  But that is not the same as saying conservatives are a majority in the overall electorate.  By forming a third party, you're guaranteed to be losing some votes to the Republicans, that might otherwise go to the conservative who is now running as a third party.  And that is only going to make it that hard to beat out the Democrat, who won't be worried about vote splitting to his/her left.

To put it differently...wouldn't we all have been thrilled if Bernie had decided to run as a third party candidate, and siphoned off votes from Hillary on the left?  I doubt we'd have been sweating out the returns on November 8 -- we'd have been celebrating by noon. That's the flip side of what you're advocating.

[bigheadfred]

But unless you consider all Republican politicians as indistinguishable from each other (Ted Cruz = Susan Collins), voters do have a real choice in the primaries.  Putting a different letter after their name doesn't change the choice.

Because by forming that different voting block, you're automatically conceding all the votes that are to the left of your candidate.  Conservatives generally win elections when 1) the conservatives are a majority in their state GOP, and 2) the overall GOP (not just conservatives) is a majority in in that state.  But that is not the same as saying conservatives are a majority in the overall electorate.  By forming a third party, you're guaranteed to be losing some votes to the Republicans, that might otherwise go to the conservative who is now running as a third party.  And that is only going to make it that hard to beat out the Democrat, who won't be worried about vote splitting to his/her left.

To put it differently...wouldn't we all have been thrilled if Bernie had decided to run as a third party candidate, and siphoned off votes from Hillary on the left?  I doubt we'd have been sweating out the returns on November 8 -- we'd have been celebrating by noon. That's the flip side of what you're advocating.

I know. I'm a dreamer. And I'll dream on until the nightmare intrudes and has to be dealt with. That is the reality. We are rushing headlong into a nightmare. One that you can't wake from.

[roamer_1]

I don't understand it either.  The problem isn't the label.  The problem is a lack of enough conservative-minded voters to win primary elections, then win the general elections.

@Maj. Bill Martin
That ain't right. Every man-jack of em preach conservatism  from the stump.
What it is is gullible voters swayed by populism and believing in promises without any guarantee.

[Bigun]

I can see how there have to be restrictions on ballot access to keep a Brazilian people being on the ballot.

Are write-ins allowed?

@bigheadfred

Yes.  But you must be on the list of approved write ins for any votes fot you to count.

[Jazzhead]

@truth_seeker

I don't understand it either.  The problem isn't the label.  The problem is a lack of enough conservative-minded voters to win primary elections, then win the general elections.  Collins, Murkowski, and the rest of the moderates win because there aren't enough conservatives in their states to knock them out in the primary.  And if there aren't enough conservatives to win even the GOP primary, how can there possibly be enough to beat both the D's and the R's in a general election?

Yes, of course.   I suppose in certain areas of the country,  a conservative could run successfully in a third party.   I recall that Evan McMullin was polling very well in Utah (although the perception that he couldn't win persuaded most of his supporters, on election day, to vote for one of the major party candidates, especially since the implications of that election were national.)   Could McMullin run for a Senate seat and win as an independent?   I don't see why not, just like Bernie's won as an independent several times in hyper-liberal Vermont.   

But in the vast majority of the country,  conservatives aren't in the majority,  and need the vehicle of the Republicans to assemble the coalition needed for victory.  It all boils down to your objective.  If it's to win elections, gain political power and effect political change,  working through the GOP and the resources and ballot access it provides is essential.   If it's to make an abstract statement, a declaration of purity and principle, with no objective to actually gain office, then sure,  shout yourself silly as an independent candidate or voter.   The knowledge that you're irrelevant will set you free.   

That's what INVAR wants -  he seeks to be holier than thou.  He's on a self-styled mission from God,  and in that context wants to destroy the GOP without a care in the world for the real-life consequences.   His motivation's the most selfish of all - he's somehow convinced himself that purity of essence will keep him from becoming worm food.   

[Jazzhead]

@Maj. Bill Martin
That ain't right. Every man-jack of em preach conservatism  from the stump.
What it is is gullible voters swayed by populism and believing in promises without any guarantee.

It's tough to be a conservative in today's world.  Advocating the reform of entitlement programs is a tougher sell than handing out free stuff and paying for it with OPM.    Advocating free trade and self reliance is a tougher sell than blaming one's lack of a job on the Chinese or the Mexicans.   

The sea-change in perspective in the last fifty years has hurt conservatism.  We used to be a melting pot, now we're a mosaic.   We used to check our cultural identities at the door in the desire to become un-hyphenated Americans.  Now even some conservatives have been seduced by the allure of identity politics.   Social conservatives whine about prejudice and persecution,  and now it's getting so ridiculous that some are advancing the absurd premise of "white nationalism". 

I understand the self-satisfaction of ideological purity.   But the American experiment is about community sown and cultivated from the secular values of hard work, self-reliance, tolerance, opportunity and capitalism.   For me, those values are relentlessly promoted and best advanced by the grand center-right coalition represented by the Republican Party.  I have no use for those who want to take their marbles and play in the political corner.         

 

[libertybele]

I can see how there have to be restrictions on ballot access to keep a Brazilian people being on the ballot.

Are write-ins allowed?

Some states allow write-ins, but from my understanding there are limitations. 

[libertybele]

It's tough to be a conservative in today's world.  Advocating the reform of entitlement programs is a tougher sell than handing out free stuff and paying for it with OPM.    Advocating free trade and self reliance is a tougher sell than blaming one's lack of a job on the Chinese or the Mexicans.   

The sea-change in perspective in the last fifty years has hurt conservatism.  We used to be a melting pot, now we're a mosaic.   We used to check our cultural identities at the door in the desire to become un-hyphenated Americans.  Now even some conservatives have been seduced by the allure of identity politics.   Social conservatives whine about prejudice and persecution,  and now it's getting so ridiculous that some are advancing the absurd premise of "white nationalism". 

I understand the self-satisfaction of ideological purity.   But the American experiment is about community sown and cultivated from the secular values of hard work, self-reliance, tolerance, opportunity and capitalism.   For me, those values are relentlessly promoted and best advanced by the grand center-right coalition represented by the Republican Party.  I have no use for those who want to take their marbles and play in the political corner.         

If one identifies themselves with the principles upon which this country was founded and adheres to the Constitution, it isn't difficult at all being a conservative in today's world. If one cannot stand up for those principles and the Constitution and feel they need to give in to political correctness, then they should join the party on the left.  The Republican party no longer represents me.  There are a select few left in Congress who are conservative and I will continue to support them.  I'll continue to take my marbles and play in the corner as I don't feel that the very principles upon which this country was founded, nor the Constitution is negotiable.

[Smokin Joe]

It's tough to be a conservative in today's world.  Advocating the reform of entitlement programs is a tougher sell than handing out free stuff and paying for it with OPM.    Advocating free trade and self reliance is a tougher sell than blaming one's lack of a job on the Chinese or the Mexicans.   

The sea-change in perspective in the last fifty years has hurt conservatism.  We used to be a melting pot, now we're a mosaic.   We used to check our cultural identities at the door in the desire to become un-hyphenated Americans.  Now even some conservatives have been seduced by the allure of identity politics.   Social conservatives whine about prejudice and persecution,  and now it's getting so ridiculous that some are advancing the absurd premise of "white nationalism". 

I understand the self-satisfaction of ideological purity.   But the American experiment is about community sown and cultivated from the secular values of hard work, self-reliance, tolerance, opportunity and capitalism.   For me, those values are relentlessly promoted and best advanced by the grand center-right coalition represented by the Republican Party.  I have no use for those who want to take their marbles and play in the political corner.         

What is the point of having laws if we aren't going to uphold them? Ideological purity as you demean it is nothing but calling for the Government to conform to its own rules. Anything less is unacceptable, The sooner people who are willing to dispense with the law of the land realize that is the path to anarchy, the better.

[skeeter]

@libertybele @Smokin Joe 

[roamer_1]

It's tough to be a conservative in today's world. 

No, it's not. It's a way of life, and it's the truth. 

The sea-change in perspective in the last fifty years has hurt conservatism.

No, again, not true. If that were so, Republicans would be selling themselves as progressive. They are not. They sell themselves as far right as they can to get into office. It's a damnable lie, of course, for most of them... But that's what they do.

I understand the self-satisfaction of ideological purity.   

There is no self-satisfaction, so you don't know what you're talking about. I didn't create the principles I adhere to - I merely follow them because they are true. It is a way-of-life, in the end, A simple, self-reliant, and humble way. There is no self-satisfaction in adhering to truth. But there is confidence, and faith, and peace.

But the American experiment is about community sown and cultivated from the secular values of hard work, self-reliance, tolerance, opportunity and capitalism.   For me, those values are relentlessly promoted and best advanced by the grand center-right coalition represented by the Republican Party.

Absolutely incorrect. Less the Goldwater wing, the Republican party stands for nothing more than 3rd-way socialism, at best, according to their actions as a party.The paucity of principled thought, and the dichotomies raised therein, are absolutely insurmountable. One cannot be pro-capitalism and pro big-government at the same time. They are diametrically opposed and do not exist in the same space.

I have no use for those who want to take their marbles and play in the political corner.         

Piss on politics. I couldn't care less for your spineless coalitions, so bent upon ceding truth to falsity. Nothing is new under the sun. The path y'all are on is well worn, and predictable in it's end. You go ahead. Join the masses and beat your damn drum, right down into the valley of destruction. It's gonna be a partay!

Me, I will  stay on the rocky way, the way less traveled, and mourn the destruction of what could have been from far away.

The only thing that baffles me is your insistence that I join you in tearing down all that I love. It isn't going to happen. I know where your road goes.

[txradioguy]

No, it's not. It's a way of life, and it's the truth. 

No, again, not true. If that were so, Republicans would be selling themselves as progressive. They are not. They sell themselves as far right as they can to get into office. It's a damnable lie, of course, for most of them... But that's what they do.

There is no self-satisfaction, so you don't know what you're talking about. I didn't create the principles I adhere to - I merely follow them because they are true. It is a way-of-life, in the end, A simple, self-reliant, and humble way. There is no self-satisfaction in adhering to truth. But there is confidence, and faith, and peace.

Absolutely incorrect. Less the Goldwater wing, the Republican party stands for nothing more than 3rd-way socialism, at best, according to their actions as a party.The paucity of principled thought, and the dichotomies raised therein, are absolutely insurmountable. One cannot be pro-capitalism and pro big-government at the same time. They are diametrically opposed and do not exist in the same space.


Piss on politics. I couldn't care less for your spineless coalitions, so bent upon ceding truth to falsity. Nothing is new under the sun. The path y'all are on is well worn, and predictable in it's end. You go ahead. Join the masses and beat your damn drum, right down into the valley of destruction. It's gonna be a partay!

Me, I will  stay on the rocky way, the way less traveled, and mourn the destruction of what could have been from far away.

The only thing that baffles me is your insistence that I join you in tearing down all that I love. It isn't going to happen. I know where your road goes.

Well done sir.  Well done.

[Mom MD]

I think that's what the moderates and those who dislike social conservatives fail to understand.  Those of us who are social conservative/religious do not see politics as the ultimate end.  We answer to a higher power and hold to ultimate truth.  For us the end game is not to win the next election, it is to stand firm and hear the "well done" when we finally stand in front of our maker.  All else is a distant second.

@roamer_1
@txradioguy

[Bigun]

The fact that we have the government we have today and that it is of our on choosing is a testament to how far we have fallen from the principles of our founding!

I got caught up in the politics game for a very long time thinking that I, and other like minded individuals, could change the Republican party from within.  That worked here in Texas to some extent but on the national level it has been a complete and utter failure and I'm done with it!

[roamer_1]

I think that's what the moderates and those who dislike social conservatives fail to understand.  Those of us who are social conservative/religious do not see politics as the ultimate end.  We answer to a higher power and hold to ultimate truth.  For us the end game is not to win the next election, it is to stand firm and hear the "well done" when we finally stand in front of our maker.  All else is a distant second.

@Mom MD
Absolutely right! But one can leave the Father aside (as it were), and simply study history and do the math.That the math coincides with the Father's way should not surprise anyone, but the math is the math.

People are better off with little government. Always. All it requires is a good and moral, self-reliant people. And those people, without governance, is where prosperity lives... Where justice abounds. Where there is true kindness, tolerance, and charity.

Liberty has responsibilities. Freedom has consequences.

@txradioguy