Results 1 to 10 of 13

Hybrid View

  1. #1 "Fiscal Conservative" = Social LIBERAL 
    Beaten Last Dead Horse
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    538
    First, I would like to say there is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting to cut taxes and reduce the size of government.

    But I'm sick and tired of those politicians who run TV and radio ads that claim they're a strong "Fiscal Conservative." 9 out of 10 times, this means the candidate is also pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, pro-amnesty for illegals, pro-affirmative action, etc. They would be better off calling themselves tax-cutting Democrats.

    I only vote for REAL conservatives. If a socially liberal "Fiscal Conservative" wins the Republican Primary, I will usually either vote the candidate down in the general election, or sit out the election altogether. I have already voted against Doug Forrester when he ran for NJ governor, and I don't apologize. Forrester was a social liberal, just like Corzine, so it really didn't matter to me who won that election. I was also angry at how badly Bret Schundler's record got smeared during the Republican Primary that year.

    So, if the Republicans want to win local and statewide elections this year, they had better knock off the "Fiscal Conservative" nonsense, and nominate REAL conservatives to solidify the base and defeat the Democrats in the fall.
     

  2. #2  
    Senior Member FeebMaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    1,008
    Quote Originally Posted by mike128 View Post
    So, if the Republicans want to win local and statewide elections this year, they had better knock off the "Fiscal Conservative" nonsense, and nominate REAL conservatives to solidify the base and defeat the Democrats in the fall.
    Real conservatives are all about "Fiscal Conservative" nonsense. Scratch the surface of most of them and you basically have your standard dirty, government worshiping commie.

    There's like five guys in the entire country who call themselves conservative and actually want smaller government.
     

  3. #3  
    Senior Member LibraryLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    3,748
    Oh boy, look who's back. CU's own little megalomaniac throwing around his imaginary power and vacuous threats.

    How's that worked for you so far, mike?
     

  4. #4  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    193
    Too many closet populist/protectionist in the GOP, that might be what you mean by socially liberal.


    Or is it that anyone who does not push religion on others or tout their Christianity as a qualification for public office is to you a socal liberal?
     

  5. #5  
    Senior Member Space Gravy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    The South
    Posts
    1,435
    The trick is getting a "Real" Conservative to win a general election when they rarely win their primary.

    The top 3 in the GOP primary could hardly be called "Real" conservatives.
    2009 CU Pro Football Pick'em Champ
     

  6. #6  
    Beaten Last Dead Horse
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    538
    Quote Originally Posted by Space Gravy View Post
    The trick is getting a "Real" Conservative to win a general election when they rarely win their primary.

    The top 3 in the GOP primary could hardly be called "Real" conservatives.
    Ronald Reagan was the last REAL Conservative President. He won two LANDSLIDE victories, despite authoring a book called, "Abortion & the Conscience of the Nation" back in 1983, shortly before he began his re-election campaign back in 1984.

    This nonsense that Republicans have to be more 'moderate' to win in the general election is just that -- nonsense! Just look at 2006. The bulk of the Republicans who lost in the 2006 general election were those beloved 'moderates' that the country club wing of the Republican Party loves so much. The base was abandoned, so they either stayed home, or voted the Republican 'moderate' candidates down.

    Republicans only win when they stand on both social and fiscal conservative principles. Selling out on principles to win more elections only angers the base. And there aren't too many conservatives left in the Republican base that are stupid enough to fall for the "lesser of two evils" and the "nowhere else to go" campaign rhetoric anymore.
     

  7. #7  
    I'm hyper. Lanie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,794
    Quote Originally Posted by mike128 View Post
    First, I would like to say there is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting to cut taxes and reduce the size of government.

    But I'm sick and tired of those politicians who run TV and radio ads that claim they're a strong "Fiscal Conservative." 9 out of 10 times, this means the candidate is also pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, pro-amnesty for illegals, pro-affirmative action, etc. They would be better off calling themselves tax-cutting Democrats.

    I only vote for REAL conservatives. If a socially liberal "Fiscal Conservative" wins the Republican Primary, I will usually either vote the candidate down in the general election, or sit out the election altogether. I have already voted against Doug Forrester when he ran for NJ governor, and I don't apologize. Forrester was a social liberal, just like Corzine, so it really didn't matter to me who won that election. I was also angry at how badly Bret Schundler's record got smeared during the Republican Primary that year.

    So, if the Republicans want to win local and statewide elections this year, they had better knock off the "Fiscal Conservative" nonsense, and nominate REAL conservatives to solidify the base and defeat the Democrats in the fall.
    And yet conservatives sometimes ask me why I mostly consider the social issues and not the fiscal ones when it comes to being a conservative? Because I know the definition of conservative has changed.
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •