Palin Hints At Independent Conservative Movement

Aaron,

I agree completely. I kept hearing in 2000 how "scared" Democrats were of John McCain, only to abuse him like a redheaded stepchild in 2008. If someone feels they have good ideas, they should run, but neither the Democrats nor the Republicans should try being something that they are not.

But the thing is, Dems didn't gain power until Republicans ran a moderate.

And paired him with an extreme conservative.

McCain would have done better if the GOP hadn't alienated the moderate and left leaning republicans by their pandering to the extreme right.

What moderate and left leaning republicans? It is a class that does not exist. Why pander to it?

What moderate and left leaning republicans? It is a class that does not exist. Why pander to it?

It used to exist. What was Lincoln? What about the existing log cabin republicans? What about me? Even though I have always been an independent, the GOP of the early '80's was much more in line with me on issues than it is now.

If what you say is true, the GOP is doomed. You may, however, be mistaken. What would someone like Olympia Snowe be, if not a moderate republican?

Well then there's your argument: Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins comprise the entire moderate republican wing. It used to encompass Lincoln Chafee but he's wondered off the reservation. Prominent company indeed! None of these people is renowned for his or her principles only their propensity to compromise.

I do not believe you belong among this company of whimpering appeasers. You're more of a classical libertarian.

I do not believe you belong among this company of whimpering appeasers. You're more of a classical libertarian.

I concur.

As an outside observer, I say that the GOP of today sits way farther to the right than it ever has, in MY lifetime, anyway.

I think you are, perhaps, being a little hard on Snowe and Collins. I can't find too many politicians of ANY flavor that I would consider renowned for their principles. Of course, it is my feeling that you don't get to that level of government without a little whoring.

As an outside observer, I say the Democratic Party sits way farther to the left than it ever has, in MY lifetime, anyway.

I think perhaps Jim wasn't hard enough on Snowe & Collins. They are not conservatives, they are rinos. (or perhaps rhinos.....their horns can be brutal when used to gore true conservatives)

Lincoln Chaffee is a good man, I'd even go so far as to say Chaffee is honorable, but he's no conservative. As son of the late John Chaffee, he was heir apparent to his late father's seat. The late Senator Chaffee too was a good man, perhaps even honorable, but he was a rino. (no "h")

I am not ashamed of being conservative and make no apologies for it. I am, however, ashamed of what my party has become. I am more than a little astounded that conservatives (who are not in power) take the brunt of bashing when they are no further from center than the ubra-liberal socialists (who hold the power) are.

I think when all is said and done, the Obama administration may prove to be the best thing to happen to the GOP since Jimmy Carter. Carter has somewhat redeemed himself through his humanitarian efforts. I can't imagine Obama doing anything selfless ever so I doubt any redemption will be found for the "O".

If Palin is what brought McCain down and he lost moderate (whatever that is) votes and that is what cost him the election, why did his poll numbers jump 11% when he announced her in Dayton and why, at least via the polls, stay as close to Obama as he did?

Perhaps you can answer that question next month.

I say that the GOP of today sits way farther to the right than it ever has, in MY lifetime, anyway.

Who in your lifetime was a republican to the left, RC? Chuck Lindsey? Nelson Aldrich Rockefeller (poor Stephanie's going to get a complex)? Dwight Delano Eisenhower? Chief Justice Earl Warren? Teddy Roosevelt?

Eisenhower might have leaned left. The rest of that made-up class stumbled and fell to the left. Maybe I'm wrong but I figure most republicans belong to the true-believer class that wants smaller government, balanced budgets, and greater personal responsibility. I know I do. I would love to test the numbers but cannot think of a truly objective way to do it beyond an election...

Too late. Some poor souls have multiple personalities, I have multiple complexes. lmao

If Palin is what brought McCain down and he lost moderate (whatever that is) votes and that is what cost him the election, why did his poll numbers jump 11% when he announced her in Dayton and why, at least via the polls, stay as close to Obama as he did?

Polls, smolls... it is what happened during the voting that mattered. how did that go again...?

I am not ashamed of being conservative and make no apologies for it. I am, however, ashamed of what my party has become. I am more than a little astounded that conservatives (who are not in power) take the brunt of bashing when they are no further from center than the ubra-liberal socialists (who hold the power) are.

If you look at political parties across the whole globe, I believe you will find that the democrats are, on average, about middle of the spectrum of "right and left".

In other words, I do not believe your statement has much merit.

Surely you're not speaking of those holding the power in Washington, are you?

Who in your lifetime was a republican to the left, RC? Chuck Lindsey? Nelson Aldrich Rockefeller (poor Stephanie's going to get a complex)? Dwight Delano Eisenhower? Chief Justice Earl Warren? Teddy Roosevelt?

Depends what you mean by "left".

Look at somebody like Goldwater, who was in my mind, what a republican should be. A true small-government conservative but appalled by the influence of the religious right on his party, in other words, he was to the left (or at least centrist) on civil liberties.

Oh, and since when do we, in America, feel the need to compare ourselves politically to the rest of the globe? Why not examine politcal parties throughout our own history? We're talking about the United States of America, not the People's Republic of China or the European Union.

Surely you're not speaking of those holding the power in Washington, are you?

Taken as a whole and compared with political parties around the world, the US Democratic party falls in about the middle of the spectrum of right to left.

Are those "holding the power in Washington" to be considered "true" democrats? I don't know.

Oh, and since when do we, in America, feel the need to compare ourselves politically to the rest of the globe? Why not examine politcal parties throughout our own history? We're talking about the United States of America, not the People's Republic of China or the European Union.

Surely individual issues like health care and how to approach criminal justice and the problems associated with combining religion and government are ubiquitous and present everywhere in the world. Looking at political parties across the globe and where they stand on these issues is educational.

Does America have one spectrum defining "left to right" and the rest of the world have another? Seeing as how this country has had a communist party AND a nazi party, I think you will find that this is not the case

Your argument of "why should we care how our political parties compare to other political groups across the world" smacks of jingoistic elitism.

I didn't ask you if those in power in Washington are "true" democrats. Democrats elected to put Obama at the top of their ticket. He had several opponents, they selected him. The Democrats in the House elected Nancy Pelosi to be their leader. I think it is crystal clear they are "true" democrats.

No, I'm asking you to answer this question: Do you think those people...Obama, Pelosi, Reid & Co., to be "about the middle of the spectrum or right to left"?

No, I'm asking you to answer this question: Do you think those people...Obama, Pelosi, Reid & Co., to be "about the middle of the spectrum or right to left"?

I do not consider them to be.

I also do not know if they are typical democrats.

Oh you can bet your eye teeth I'm an elitist. I am proud to be an American. I am proud to be a citizen of the greatest nation in recorded history. As far as the "jingoist" label you wish to attach that's a crock of horse shit and you know it.

Who is building up troops in Afghanistan? It sure as hell isn't Stephanie Butcher. Who was elected based on the promise of bringing our troops home and instead has actively engaged yet another nation into the insanity called the "war on terror"? That wasn't me. It wasn't my candidate.

Furthermore, GWB and the GOP aside, the Democrats have held control of the purse strings for an very long time and could choose to simply end funding for the empire building but time and again they rob American taxpayers and borrow from our enemies further weakening our nation in their never ending quest to "spread democracy".

Based upon the 230 year history of my nation and the fact that my countrymen from the birth of America have enjoyed far greater liberty than people from other lands and other times. I'm proud that Americans have a higher standard of living and I'm bursting at the seams with pride that my nation produced Edison and Bell and Thoreau and King and the little girl kicking ass in tennis.

You betchya I'm an elitist, Terry. Just remember the woman you accuse of "jingoism" is the same woman Aaron and others have accused of isolationism.

TerryRC wrote:If Palin is what brought McCain down and he lost moderate (whatever that is) votes and that is what cost him the election, why did his poll numbers jump 11% when he announced her in Dayton and why, at least via the polls, stay as close to Obama as he did?

Polls, smolls... it is what happened during the voting that mattered. how did that go again...?

You were the one who posted the fallacy that Palin brought McCain down. The ONLY way to demostrate her effect on his campaign is via the polls. And they show that she brought support to his campaign. Had he chosen a "moderate" like Joe Lieberman, the loss would have been much worse.

You were the one who posted the fallacy that Palin brought McCain down. The ONLY way to demostrate her effect on his campaign is via the polls. And they show that she brought support to his campaign. Had he chosen a "moderate" like Joe Lieberman, the loss would have been much worse.

Palin made all but the most rabidly anti-liberal part of the GOP wince. You don't think that the Palin scandals didn't hurt McCain all through the month of October?

Do a little research and you have Obama gaining double digit leads over McCain by the last week in October.

How you can say that Palin didn't bring McCain down, and with a straight face, no less, is beyond me.

If you want to tell and repeat lies about someone and then claim it was their fault for their loss ....... then that is your right of free speech.

Dishonest, disengenuous and dastardly ..... but still your right of free speech.

The last two Republicans who went out of their way to run as moderates were Bob Dole and John McCain.

And if the Republican primary electorate is dumb enough to nominate another "moderate" in 2012, that candidate will fair about as well as Dole and McCain did.

You need to go back and check the polls. Palin gave McCain a lift and kept him in the race in the early fall. I say it with a straight face because it's the plain and simple truth.

You don't see it due to your deep seated hatred for her because of her religion.