Are Conservatives Cracking Up?
One of my readers suggested that, no matter who the Republican nominee is, the 2008 GOP primary will be marked by a tear between social conservatives and fiscal conservatives. Social conservatives have looked at Rudy Giuliani leading the national polls for much of the year, and asked in disbelief to their coalition partners, ‘how can you support that guy?’ Now fiscal conservatives, and perhaps hawks, are looking at Huckabee and asking the same question to social conservatives.
This reader contended that even if some consensus nominee wins, both factions will look at the other with greater suspicion. “Yeah, we’ve been through a lot of fights together since the 1970s, but how can I trust them as allies when they were eager to give the nomination to that guy?”
This leaves me confused as to what kind of conservative I am, because I’m sitting in the middle and asking both of these questions. If you really think about it they are the same question. How can you support a liberal for the nomination? This question is even more frustrating when we have solid conservatives to choose from. Fred Thompson or Duncan Hunter would do just fine. They are candidates that both factions of the party could rally behind, but for some reason my fellow evangelicals have been enamored by the Baptist preacher image. My criticisms of Huckabee have nothing to do with him being an evangelical, but about him being a liberal. Don’t get me started on Rudy.
The title question however was whether or not conservatives are cracking up, and will this vetting process leave a tear between the national security conservatives and the social-cons. I think that is a bit of a stretch. First of all this assumes that the national security conservatives don’t care about conservative social issues, and that social conservatives don’t care about national security. Of course this isn’t true, and assuming both sides won’t wake up to support a candidate they can both get behind is selling conservatives short on their intelligence. Rudy is in a free-fall, and the Huckaboom is about starting to reverse. The only way we will crack is if either of these nominees get the nomination. That isn’t going to happen. Either Fred will pull in from behind, or enough folks will hold their nose with Romney as a fallback.
The bottom line is that all this division is normal in a primary season, and nothing to sound alarms over. Once the process cools down, and conservatives make their pick, most likely they will unite to beat the Democrats. Lets just keep in mind that it will be hard for some folks to motivate themselves to get to the voting booths if they don’t see much difference between the candidates running…so please, lets not pick a liberal.
A commenter at Hot Air sums up some of my frustration well:
I’m sick of hearing folks whine about not being able to get behind a candidate they believe in because they aren’t “electable†for some arcane reason or another. Quit betraying your values due to the shifting winds of the popularity contest du jour commonly referred to as a poll. They are worthless. Stand behind the candidate who best represents your values. We make candidates electable.
Email This
Posted by Jay on December 20, 2007 7:54 pm
» Filed Under News, Politics As Usual
Trackback URL:
- Ace of Spades HQ: The Coming Conservative Crack-Up ?...
- Asking The Question » An Ol’ Broad’s Ramblings pinged this post.
- Asking The Question pinged this post.
Comments
33 Responses to “Are Conservatives Cracking Up?”
-
-
-
Affiliations
The Giants
Advertise
-
-
Our Store
- Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
-
- More blogs about the ACLU
Syndicate Me
No, it’s not. The debate is usually over which candidate is a better match for all of the factions. This is about which faction will win out.
Don’t kid yourself; conservatism is changing in front of your very eyes.
Even if you are right it leaves me on neither side. Neither side will win this. It won’t be Huckabee or Rudy. If it is either of them, it will be changing into liberalism before my very eyes.
The GOP has abandoned the platform, leaving its constituents in the dust.
That’s why I want a refund…I am a registered Republican, but I do not want any of these repugnitards “representing” me because it’s not just ridiculous arcane reasons.
Each representative has about ONE REDEEMING QUALITY.
That’s not enough.
You’re right, but do you really think Fred doesn’t have liberalism in his platform? The only difference is that he sprinkled it evenly throughout whereas the others clearly disavowed one of the conservative factions.
I understand why you find that more palatable, but I’m honestly not sure which approach is worse long-term.
THE GOP FIELD SEEMS MEDIOCRE NOW.
BUT IN THE FALL OF 08 – WHEN COMPARED TO THE DEM NOMINEES – IT WILL SHINE.
I HAVE BEEN SAYING FOR A LONG TIME THAT I WOULD NEVER VOTE FOR BUSH AGAIN – UMLESS HE RAN AGAINST A DEM.
HECK: HE RAN AGAINST GORE AND KERRY AND WAS CLEAR BETTER CHOICE.
THE NEXT GOP NOMINEE WILL SIMILARLY LOOK GREAT COMPARED TO ANY DEM.
I WOULD EVEN HAPPILY VOTE FOR MCCAIN RATHER THAN A DEM.
BUSH HAS GOVERNED LIKE HE RAN: like a lib; too patient on global jihad.
i would prefer a conservative.
but would settle for another lib hawk like bush.
What does it mean to have an (R) after your name anyway? I’m a fiscal hawk and I can’t figure out just why I’ve been bothering to vote all these years. When the Republicans had congress, they spent money like crazy, just slower than the Democrats would have.
If the nominee isn’t Fred, then I’m going to seriously consider leaving the party and registering as an independent. If the nominee is Romney, that move is assured.
I may end up voting the same way in the end, but I won’t be in the party any more.
…and I’d rather drink piss than eat s***. What’s your point?
I take the opposite approach. I’m very willing to take my vote elsewhere as a demonstration that I won’t accept mediocrity. Then, I increase my activism within the party to show that I’m here and willing to help as soon as they offer serious candidates.
Yes we are split now, looking for a REAL Conservative. I think Fred is the one, but you can be sure that we will pull together before the elections and defeat either Clinton, Obama, or Edwards. Bet on it
Congrats, Debbie. You’ve just explained why we’re doomed to the death spiral. You just keep right on accepting progressively worse candidates…
Chemo-therapy is an effective weapon when applied appropriately.
Well, let me put it this way: we are all looking for that perfect candidate, that next Reagan, and we are expecting way, way, way too much out of people who are politicians, people who, as Will Rogers once said, we would not invite over for dinner.
I think on the GOP side, we are all waiting to see how it shakes out. We seem to have issues with every candidate, but, are we really going to like everything a candidate stands for? Face it, we know we have lots of issues with W, such as spending and illegal immigration, and, back in 2000, did he really excite any of us? But, it was a choice between electing a Dem or a Republican.
And that is much what it will come down to again. Do we want Obama, Edwards, or Shillary in office?
Looking at those 3, the libs like their choices less then we do. Clinton? Most are against her, when they admit it. Obama and Edwards are the “not clinton” candidates. Sure, some folks are fired up, but most are not.
Conservatives will go along just fine. Where we need to smack the GOP around is in Congress, the bunch of weak knee’d pansies.
I love Will Rogers, but let me get this straight… you’re willing to vote for someone with whom you disagree greatly and still vote for someone you wouldn’t invite to dinner?? If you’re going to sacrifice some of your core principles, at least find someone of sound character.
Yes, he did. He was a bit weak on the fiscal front, but he generally ran on a strongly conservative platform. Didn’t govern by it, but he ran on it.
You think we can make serious compromises on the single most important office and have any credibility with congressional candidates?
Once you’ve demonstrated the willingness to sell out, you’ll be taken to the woodshed endlessly. You either stick to your guns and define what conservatism is to you or you sit back and meekly accept whatever RINO is offered to you.
Ha…we will rally around the candidate? I guess that is true if you exclude me. If Rudy OR Romney get the nomination then the Republican party will NOT get my vote in the general election. I will vote 3rd party. What happens if a Democrat wins office? Well…guess next time Republicans should field a better candidate. Vote for slop and you will be supplied with more slop…
I don’t think that Tancredo’s 1% of “likely” (as if we’re to take their word for it) voters is enough to make or kill any campaign.
Fred is the ONLY Conservative across the board candidate in this race. Duncan Hunter has the credentials but didn’t take this campaign seriously enough to mount an effective run.
Fred has the legs if he can hold out for the later races.
I sure hope all you who will not vote enjoy the SOCIALISM that the Democrat Party will reign down on us….I sure know that you all who refuse to vote because someone is not to your liking certainly worked in 06…right?
I cannot believe you people would give up the congress and the Presidency to people who treat the soldiers who have protected this great country like murderer’s. Just today Jim Moran D of VA said our greatest generation of military men and woman were committing genocide in Iraq and that is why it is quiet. I am sure some of you have called some of the Democrats traitors but I am calling you traitors if you allow these people to hold the Commander in Chief title over these brave men and women.
This is bigger than yourselves so get over yourselves.
Personally, I’m concerned about electing a true conservative, not a Christian. I am a Christian myself, but focussing on whether someone is “born again” or not just isn’t relevant when it comes to evaluating someones degree of conservatism… look what GWB’s evangelical principles got us.
I want a conservative. Fred is that.
Thing is, if we vote for Rudy or Huck we are voting for liberals anyway…whats the difference?
Jeff Molby commented,
Jeff, you kid yourself to think that it is. It’s the same as it has been since the 19th century when R.L. Dabney labeled it correctly:
As to your comments about Fred Thompson, have you actually read his statements on issues or the white papers available at Fred08.com? If you have not, then your comments are nothing but speech from ignorance. If you have and still do not understand that Thompson is the only serious (or even sane) candidate who has articulated a Constitutional understanding of the proper role of the Federal government (the first requisite of anyone laying claim to a conservative mantle) and has clearly articulated sound, conservative policy on every issue (save taxation: his tax proposal is, frankly, stupid–surprising for someone who gets nearly everything else right), then perhaps you didn’t read his statements very carefully.
Of course, he is still a politician *spit* and the nature of the beast is to do exactly as Bush did in 2000: run on a platform and then allow “political reality” to plow the platform under. Gives ‘em deniability, but reserves their place in hell.
But of the field of those running, Fred’s the ONLY one the Founders would be likely to invite home for dinner. And that, to me, is more important than who I might want to invite into my home.
David, I agree entirely with Dabney’s quote*. It absolutely disgusts me that conservatives constantly yield ground to progressives. I absolutely disgusts me that there’s a new line drawn in the sand every two years. I will reserve my vote for only those candidates that identify a line from the past and seek to move towards it, for such a candidate is the only one capable of holding the present line, let alone undoing any of the damage.
Yes, I have read much of Fred’s platform. Show me one, just one**, significant policy that Fred wants to rewind the clock on.
*When I said it was changing in the disgusting way it always has, save for the occasional Goldwater-Reagan.
**Besides Roe, which everyone “opposes”, yet no one actually changes.
Ludicrous. The Founders could never imagine a Federal government like the one proposed in Fred’s platform, even if he managed to enact any of it.
He wants to “streamline” this, “improve” that, and “create incentives” for those. The Founders, on the other hand, got 2/3 of both houses and 3/4 of all states to pass the 10th amendment.
Fred is the least revolting of the MSM’s darlings, but the Founders would find his entire vision of government disgusting.
Yes, ‘06 worked well. In the meantime, the gridlocked Washington has wasted far less money and usurped far less power than it did from 00-06.
‘06 also sent a message to the RNC. They haven’t heard it yet, evidenced by the trash they support for this election, but another “thumping” or two and they’ll start backing real conservatives.
I don’t think conservatives are cracking up at all. The GOP, RNC has become a nest of rino’s many more then conservatives, sad but true. Why else would they jump on “we have to support Rudy he is the only one that can beat Hillary” right from the start.
A true conservative would never have said that nor thought that way. The only true conservatives running are Hunter and Thompson. Everyone else in the GOP is a rino in various degrees.
I was told Hunter cannot win he is too conservative and this was said to me by a supposedly conservative blogger. And the freaky thing is it was said to me at the very onset of everyone getting in the race for President. Did that person even try to give Hunter a chance…..NO. Sad but true.
I am not impressed at all with any of the others running so this election is going to be one I am very concerned about for our country. If we don’t have a true conservative to vote for and get them elected, the future for America looks dim on almost every level. I realize the America I grew up in will never be back again and that breaks my heart. But as long as we have the RNC and GOP only pushing their rino’s at us and as long as there are no term limits to kick out the rino’s there is no way to hold on to what is left of a once great country.
I am for Hunter or Thompson and have been so from the beginning. That will not change no matter what a rino says.
The one thing we can count on is our military and thank God for them.They sure as heck deserve better then a rino or an evil democrat in office.
I look at it this way. No matter who you back, who you like, Or whatever. It all comes down to who is better to protect America and be fair on his decisions that affect & in the best interest for the people.
But the parties have changed. Democrats are more for protecting interest outside of the country instead of in the country. They are more likely to bow down to a threat instead of fighting. What happened to the party is liberals toke it over completely.
Republicans are strong and will stand up and fight for values and there more like Superman in the movies when the bad guys would try to harm the people Superman would do whatever it takes to protect them no matter what. Liberal Democrats are just like the bad guys.
The republican Party as have changed because we have members in the party who are not sure if they are republicans as you see on there political views. We need to clean house in the party and put out the trash that is stinky up the party.
Other Factors are 90% of the media is run by Liberals and the people only get liberal information. And that is poisoning the people because they don’t get the truth on issues going on in the world.
Would you mind if I ask your age and what characteristics you remember of “that” America?
And just so everyone knows, Jeff Molby is Jay’s pet troll. He has no blog or website of his own, spouts liberal talking points, and generally makes himself a living hemorrhoid. So take what he writes with a grain of salt and ignore the fact that he is using someone else’s soapbox to spout his myopic view of the world.
In other words, ignore the POS
Ahh, my dear friend Gribbit… how I’ve missed thee. I’m glad to see you’re still focusing on the issues.
Have a merry Christmas.
Well, it’s good to see that Jeff can (falsely) assert he’s “read much of Fred’s platform”… even though his subsequent comments prove that 1) he has not or 2) he’s an out and out liar or 3) he doesn’t have the mental horsepower to understand such things as,
In the statement above–and its expansion at the link, Thompson out-Reagans Reagan and becomes the ONLY modern candidate to seriously ponder moving the U.S. back toward the Federalism of the Framers. (Yes, by my inclusion of the word “seriously” I am deliberately removing the nutjob, Paul, from my considerations.)
Jeff, either get some facts on your side or continue opening your mouth to remove all doubt as to your nature.
Your choice.
Well, I’m not sure that conservatives are cracking up — but I’d say that the Republican Party IS.
The National GOP used to be the party of conservatives, but it is no longer. So I think the “crack up” is because there’s a lot of people who consider themselves conservatives who cannot find a party to support.
There are plenty who support the Democrats and plenty of others who agree with Republicans — but none of those are conservatives. So yes, there’s a breakup — and I think in the end it will benefit Democrats and socialism, at least in the short term.
I don’t. I just do not see the GOP cracking up. We are in a momentary state of flux, where we are demanding conservatism from our elected leaders, but, we all know that they are, for the most part, not going to act that way.
We saw the same thing recently with the Democrats. Their base is all riled up, too, and they are very unhappy with their elected leaders and candidates.
The choice is either voting for a republican who is not perfect and will only give us some of what we want, or voting for a democrat (or not voting), and getting none of what we want. And actually getting a lot of what we do not want.
We will never agree fully with 99.9% of what elected officials stand for or do. That is life. It has been going on for as long as politics has existed, and will continue. The difference now is that we have multiple outlets to express ourselves that we never had. Would we have been able to have this conversation 20 years ago?
Reagan was as close as we got, but what would have been the conversation had we had these forums when he gave those illegals amnesty?
I’m very aware that he speaks a good game on Federalism, but you haven’t addressed the challenge offered in #21.
Name one federal program he would abolish in his crusade to return power to the states.
I am old enough to remember a similar GOLDWATER crack-up – with much emphasis on electability and Holy-Grail-TRUE-Conservatism then, too.
Mitt Romney talks about the three-legged stool – fiscal, social and military conservatism, and how they are interdependent. BUT – no one leg or faction is better than or has veto power over the others. #14, Streamliner, has a pretty typical attitude – “What happens if a Democrat wins office? Well…guess next time Republicans should field a better candidate.”
To me, such a person is not a Republican and is barely a conservative. That kind of take-my-ball-and-go-home attitude has no place in GOVERNANCE, which is, after all, the end result of politics. The horse race is less important than the result, and many lose sight of that.
In MY experience, social conservatives are more likely to sit on their hands and give liberal Democrats a victory if they can’t find somebody more Catholic than the Pope. Fiscal and Defense conservatives tend to be more pragmatic, as they are interested in government instead of morality.
All three factions need to arrive at a consensus, and support a nominee – it is too dangerous to do otherwise.
Conservatism is in a self-imposed crisis. We staked too much of a claim into the evangelical vote instead of sticking to our roots (guns, tax cuts, freedom, military dominance, fear of government involvement). Unfortunately, none of the candidates have it all. Thompson doesn’t want it, Huckabee is a backwards liberal and Rudy is an authoritarian. McCain and Romney are the only palatable choices. Stop worrying about abortion, start worrying about communists taking the White House. Support Romney and McCain. All this talk about Romney being a liberal is insane. He ruled a liberal state, of course he had to fall back on some issues. McCain, like every Senator, had to make deals to avoid filibusters by the DNCCCP. They are, at heart, conservatives.
I dunno, Teach. The factions, at least from what I see, in the Republican Party right now are far apart. Sure, one faction or the other is going to win. The question remains is what the other faction will do.
For example, say Rudy gets the win. What will the abortion foes do? Will they hold their nose and stay Republican, or will they try to find another home like the Constitution Party?
Or what if Huckabee wins — what will the fiscal conservatives do? Will they join or form the taxpayer’s party?
I’ll tell you, I’d LOVE to see both parties split so there’s more than two choices in elections — and so the Congress has NO majority but instead has to build factions!
Indeed. Unfortunately, you won’t see that until we pass some election reform.
Under the current system, the candidates that build the largest coalition prior to the election will win every time. If you want to put an emphasis on post-election coalition-building, you have to toss out the “plurality voting” nonsense.
See “Approval Voting” for the simplest way to make it happen.
The Bottom line is that we all have different views but one thing is we are all human Living on this speck of sand in the massive universe . Humans do what they do best and that is to destroy one another instead of how to survive life’s challenges. When we are died does it matter if we was a republican or a democrat.
No. We will never work together as history has shown!