Check out some similar questions!

excon · May 7, 2009, 07:12 AM

Hello Republicans:

You're in trouble. Let me see if I can help. You're looking for a solidly conservative message, and a solidly conservative messenger. But, you don't have to be a Democrat to get the love. You've got Ron Paul!

In 1989, I fell in love with Rush Limbaugh. I thought he was the greatest thing since sliced bread. As long as he was talking libertarian stuff, he had me...

Then he started on his lock 'em up, and bomb 'em hate talk, and it hasn't stopped. Being a libertarian, I couldn't wait till he to around to some of the social issues I was concerned about. I absolutely KNEW Rush would be for an end to the drug war... I was wrong. I absolutely KNEW that he'd change his tune when he, himself got popped for drugs... But, nooooo.

On the other hand, you've got this guy who DOES exhibit solid compassionate conservative values... He just doesn't believe in bombing people or putting 'em in jail if they smoke pot.

His message resonates. Wassa matter you?

excon

speechlesstx · May 7, 2009, 07:34 AM

OK, buckle your seat belt. I could live with Ron Paul as Prez, he'd darn sure beat another 4 years of Obama. How do you get him past his crazy uncle image? Can he overcome the "newsletter" controversy? Talk about the "party of no" now, how badly is he going to be crucified by the left as the GOP nominee?

excon · May 7, 2009, 07:51 AM

Hello Steve:

The fact of the matter, it doesn't have to be him. The problem you've got is he's the ONLY one singing that tune. He can't reform the party from the top. It has to reform itself from the bottom. And, you've got NO young Ron Pauls. I don't know why.

Yes, I do. The coalition with the Religious Right, has twisted Republican policies toward God, guns and gay's and away from smaller government and limited spending.

Back to basics, they say.

excon

tomder55 · May 7, 2009, 08:04 AM

My only problem with him is he is weak on national defense and naïve about foreign policy in general . His isolationism and the libertarian take on that is what keeps them from moving beyond the fringe

Edit... there are also unresolved and unsatisfactory answers about possible antisemitism .

spitvenom · May 7, 2009, 08:12 AM

Ron Paul was my first pick but he got destroyed by McCain so Obama was second on the list. Actually I know a lot of people who would have voted for Ron Paul.

excon · May 7, 2009, 08:36 AM

Hello again,

I guess my point to Steve was, why is Ron Paul the only one? Yes, he has weakness's, but not in his message. It's because he looks like your Uncle. That's why he didn't win. But, his MESSAGE is solid, state of the Art, Republican. Tom doesn't like him because it doesn't exhibit the bomb 'em out of existence mentality that is crippling the Republicans today.

Look, I know you Republicans aren't going to take my advice. But, you need somebody to counter the Limp one. You really are looking silly with HIM at the head of the table.

excon

spitvenom · May 7, 2009, 08:39 AM

Yeah and now Rush is ripping apart Colin Powell. Even encouraging Powell to switch to the D.

tomder55 · May 7, 2009, 08:54 AM

Powell says the country wants more taxes and bigger government . That sounds Democrat to me.

speechlesstx · May 7, 2009, 09:01 AM

Yep, Powell's comment tom is referring to is definite Democratic sound. And coming from a guy who endorsed Obama he may as well make the switch.

excon · May 7, 2009, 09:27 AM

Hello again:

Yup. And, the Republicans get purer and purer, and smaller, and smaller. But, I was talking about going the other way. Guess that's not happening.

excon

tomder55 · May 7, 2009, 09:28 AM

Tom doesn't like him because it doesn't exhibit the bomb 'em out of existence mentality that is crippling the Republicans today.

Wrong . He has a quaint 19th century view of America's role in the world. He thinks we can retreat to fortress America and pull up the draw bridge. It isn't happening . We tried that twice last century and got dragged into world affairs .

tomder55 · May 7, 2009, 09:32 AM

And, the Republicans get purer and purer, and smaller, and smaller

Where have the lefty's retreated from their core principles ? Why isn't anyone asking them to moderate ? They are the flavor dujur right now so they have attracted a few more people. That too will change when the inevidible disaffection with their policies in action plays out.

What is the core principle of a moderate Republican ? Um for a good example see Benedict Arlen . He has switched parties twice for expediency .

excon · May 7, 2009, 09:45 AM

Originally Posted by tomder55

Where have the lefty's retreated from their core principles ?

Hello tom:

Since the Democrats comprise lots of people who DON'T subscribe to their core principles, I'd say they did it yesterday, and lots of yesterdays.

The big tent principle is a principle lost on you. It's not on the Dems. Your loss. Too bad.

excon

ETWolverine · May 7, 2009, 10:06 AM

Ron Paul is an isolationist loon. He cannot win as long as that is his position.

The funny thing is that he KNOWS that, and he still isn't changing that position. That's because he's standing on PRINCIPALS. His principals are, to him, more important than winning the election.

THAT is what the Republican party needs to see. We don't need a larger tent. Our tent is plenty big, and anyone can enter than tent if they so desire. But the supports for that tent are the principals upon which Conservatism stands. Eliminate the tent posts, and the tent collapses.

McCain ran as a "big tent" inclusive Republican and lost.

Obama ran as a tax-cutting Conservative and WON.

In fact, if you look at the 2006 and 2008 election cycles, Republicans who triangulated toward the center generally lost against Dem candidates that ran to right of the Reps.

People keep talking about Reagan's "Big Tent" as if Reagan was a centrist. Reagan didn't win by being a centrist and compromising on Conservative values. He ran as a hard-right candidate.

Reagan's "big tent" was not about moving to the left of his conservative values to make the party more attractive. It was about explaining to the man in the street why those Conservative values were good for him and his family.

Our big tent hasn't gotten smaller because we've moved to the right. It's gotten smaller because we haven't been able to explain why our positions are good for main street. Once it is explained in a way that the man on the street can understand, they generally end up inside the big tent. That was Reagan's great gift... he was the Great Communicator.

The positions themselves are fine. It's the lack of decent message-carriers that is hurting us.

Elliot

speechlesstx · May 7, 2009, 10:19 AM

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

The positions themselves are fine. It's the lack of decent message-carriers that is hurting us.

Yep.

speechlesstx · May 7, 2009, 10:34 AM

I know the latest mantra is the GOP is dead but the reports of our premature death are somewhat exaggerated.

excon · May 7, 2009, 03:12 PM

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

It's gotten smaller because we haven't been able to explain why our positions are good for main street. Once it is explained in a way that the man on the street can understand, they generally end up inside the big tent.

Hello:

You don't have to explain it. You have to demonstrate it. And, you did - with distasterous results.

I know, I know. You'll say the dufus didn't really represent the conservative view - but that even makes it worse...

Fool the man on the street once, shame on him... But, you ain't going to fool him twice. The more you try, the further away from the levers of power you become. We could be seeing the beginning of a 50 year Democratic reign.

excon

tomder55 · May 7, 2009, 03:29 PM

Yeah that's what Carville's new book says... the same type of stuff Rove was saying about the Republicans once.

Republicans ruled from around 1900 to 1932 except Wilson . The Dems ruled from 1932 to 1968 except for Ike. Then the Republicans ruled 28 out of the next 40 years . These type of things are cyclical .

I think buyers remorse woll come sooner than later... about the time the bills come due for the Democrat excesses.

The electorate punished the Republicans for acting like Dems. Now they get to see real fiscal irreponsibility in action . The Republican would be wise to take their beating now rather than fall into the trap of being Dem lite again.

excon · May 7, 2009, 03:36 PM

Originally Posted by tomder55

I think buyers remorse woll come sooner than later .......about the time the bills come due for the Democrat excesses.

Hello again, tom:

Your stuff has been repudiated... You expect the Democrats stuff to be repudiated in short order.

Then, not having changed one stripe, you think America will forget how badly you screwed the pooch...

Do you really? More right wing dreams.

excon

galveston · May 7, 2009, 04:09 PM

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, tom:

Your stuff has been repudiated... You expect the Democrats stuff to be repudiated in short order.

Then, not having changed one stripe, you think America will forget how badly you screwed the pooch....

Do you really? More right wing dreams.

excon

The way you do go on!

From what you say, Obama must have won by a landslide. Well, that just wasn't so. McCain was the second weakest possible Rep to put up, and Ron Paul would have been better than McCain if not for his isolationist stance.

The Republican leadership has been hearing from the grassroots about that! I called my senator and complained about the way the primaries are run, I didn't even get to help choose the Rep candidate. You know, even though I am not anybody important, I got a phone call about the subject. Seems a lot of us were saying the same thing.

I think any one of several possible candidates we could have nominated would have beaten Obama.