What Can Conservatives Do Now With the GOP?

Reader Comments

Back to blog

i`m your permanent reader now

Chubby Latina Women of AL 6:31PM March 03, 2010

я вот что скажу: благодарю! а82ч

adjuct of AL 9:12PM February 22, 2010

i'm gonna make my own site about it

Bypenear of AL 9:14AM December 12, 2009

I think they are all right but really they should be treated like vegans at a bar-b-que. Tolerate them as part of the family but largely ignore their viewpoints. Not that evangelicals don't have valid arguments, but it's irrelevant to the current problems of our country and problems of moderate voters. I mean we have more serious issues than abortion and gay marriage like war and the economy. And on those to issues (war/economy) the Republicans need to get off their tired you-know-whats and think of better solutions. Staying the course and lowering taxes has been a stable since Bush got into to office and look where it got us! So a makeover is needed bad. To appease evangelicals all you have to do is say you promote "family values" and seek a true "compassionate" use of government (Bush did not live up to such a promise). And to appease moderates all you have to do is make sure your candidate doesn't say things like "God's plan" and doesn't draw that certain American element of uncultured Mid-Westernism (Think West Virginia - not to knock on W.Virginians but just use of example in terms of state perceptions). The G.O.P. was on the right track in needing a person seen as having Western values like McCain as opposed to Southern Strategy values. But they need to go further and the candidate should stop trying to court the people stuck in their tent (Are the neocons and social conservatives going to go anywhere?). GOP leaders need to continue to "litmus test" their candidate just like Obama was in Iowa and McCain was in New Hampshire. And again ignore the evangelicals if you want to stay relevant among a more secular generation.

Charles Tansley of OH 5:31PM November 13, 2008

Well the old axiom "moderation in all things " is the sirens call to the "line in in the sand" crowd .But consider that it's a required part of the grieving process to second guess - what Republicans don't seek is advice from Democrats on how best to regroup.

John Patrick of TX 8:49AM November 11, 2008

I don't vote for a PARTY,I vote for the person,and yes I voted for Kennedy in my Heart,because I was too young to vote in the Election of 1960.I have made mistakes in other Election's,like

Reagan and his trickle down"Reagan/nomics"I voted for O'Pea-

nut Head,excellent choice for me,and I voted for Clinton,good choice for me,except he couldn't keep his thingy in his pants,

but at LEAST we had some money in the VAULT when he left ofice and I voted for KERRY instead of BUSHY POO.I know KERRY had issues,but this BUSH has been sooGODDAMN BAD,he will go down as the worst representative of the USA that has ever happened to USA,for 200 years!!!I HOPE the HISTORY BOOKS assinaste BUSH,by

taking him out of every book and literature in PRINT!!!I also hope that BUSH lives to be at least 130 years in excellent health,and able to see and understand what history and the people of this great COUNTRY think of him!!!I am not mean and viscious but others are calling for BLOOD of this less than a CREEP,and I don't blame them either,evea his wife is dropping him off her SOCIAL CALENDAR--POOSSST!!!I love my COUNTRY dearly,

and I love GOD,who created this world and us people!!!I personally don't know anything good about O'Bama except he is an amazing ORATOR,much like HITLER was of OLD!!!The test of time

will give the US,a GO TO HELL,or maybe we can THRIVE,if the

"NEWBIE" does all the wonderful and miracules things he has promised to GET ELECTED,personally I think HE is the TAX and Spend Fool that "HE says HE is not"It is more than likely we will be in the MIDDLE of Socialism like the rest of the world.

HELL,that O'Bama person hasn't even stopped collecting the MILLLIONS more money,the election is over and you WON--WHAT do you now need more CHUMP CHANGE???Something is wrong and we may have a person who cheats when HE thinks no-one else is looking!!

I believe in FAIRY TALES,usually from small children's books,but

we must watch some people who MAY think they are MORE privleged

than regular FOLK!!!I have FUN with WORDS,but this is serious

things being discussed,and folks,just because we ELECTED a BLACK MAN to office doesn't mean we let him take the PIGGY BANK

home to put it in his personal BANK ACCOUNT,that money was raised from what I understand,was to go for the ELECTION not for

PERSONAL WEALTH!!!O'Bama has his own wealth,now become the PRESIDENT you promised--YOU know in your twisting of words to get yourself into the HIGHEST OFFICE in the USA!!!Be Honest like

you know"HONEST ABE"Or maybe I can't tell a lie,I cut the Cherr Tree down,better not cut trees down on your 4 year watch with US.I LOVE MY COUNTRY and you BARACK OBAMA,best love it toooo!!!

I know you say that you aren't a ISLAMIC Fool,and going to REV

WRIGHT'S church who preaches down with AMERICA,with your attendance of 20+ years,and being married in the same church,and

both of your children born and baptized in the same church,now

after admiting the REV Wright is your"SPIRITUAL MENTOR"NOW GOD!

Fred E Harris (NANDO) of CA 12:00AM November 11, 2008

I know a place where the conservatives can take the GOP and shove it.

ProudtobeanAmerican of GA 9:18PM November 10, 2008

That's an interesting idea; here's a hypothetical. What if Barack Obama governs from the center-right, balances the budget, nominates reasonable center-left judges, cuts government waste, finds a reasonable mix of government and market-based solutions for healthcare, practices a Realist/Pragmatic foreign policy, doesn't take Barney Frank's advice to cut the military by 25%, and takes a middle-of-the road stance on social/cultural issues??

For sure, the far left of the liberal base would not exactly be happy -- possibly angry enough to break away from Obama? Then what about the social conservative base; would they be all that's left of the Republicans???

Joe of VA 6:18PM November 10, 2008

For this former Reagan Republican, the GOP needs to take a clear and unbiased look at their platform and their past performance in Presidential office and realize that the truth of the past 30+ years does not match the rhetoric.

Small government? Fiscally conservative? Look at the data from the Federal Budget office--not since Nixon has the national debt been reduced during a Republican administration. (http://zfacts.com/p/318.html)

It would also be good for the GOP to again stand for ethics and morality. It's been quite some time since that has been the case--since before Nixon. While it is true that both parties have had their challenges, Nixon, Reagan and W have all been pretty impressive in their disregard for the Constitution and the role of International law. Yes, Clinton had Monica. But Nixon had Watergate, Reagan had Iran/Contra, and Bush has Guantanamo, Domestic Spying & the Iraq War. Which would any thinking person choose?

The GOP also needs to admit that trickle-down economics only provides benefits to most Americans when there are high quality jobs here in the US for the trickle to impact. Though I do feel that raising the living standard of the world is a noble goal, we need leadership that is interested in the best for all Americans, not just Wall Street, the Military/Industrial Complex, and the oil industry. Again, it has not been since Nixon that the Republican Party has been even close to this.

The GOP needs to get back to their roots--and their roots go much deeper that Gingrich and Reagan! Lincoln cared about this country, this ENTIRE country. It would be nice the same could be said of the Republican party of the 21st Century. There still is time to change and it will all begin with a cold hard look at their performance and not their rhetoric.

Brian of OH 4:41PM November 10, 2008

The biggest problem is that when we hear "back to our roots" ... it is really two different messages.

If it is coming from the moderates in the Republican Party it means a return to the bedrock traditional philosophy with the party of Lincoln but if that phrase is being uttered by the more recent vintage of neo-Republicanism.. evangelical... Government involved in religion and culture conservatives.. it means something very different.

It used to be that the right-wingers were kept under some sort of reasonable control ...but now.. it's clear ...the party is being held hostage to right-wing litmus-test politics.

In much of the rest of the world there is a sharp dividing line between fiscal conservatives and social conservative.. that dividing line as sharp or sharper than the line between Dems/Liberals/Progressives/Labor - and Conservatives.

Perhaps that is where the Republican Party is headed... so.. HEY.. does this mean we're going to be a THREE Party system now?

COOL!

LarryG of VA 12:14PM November 10, 2008

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

Back to blog

Bonnie Erbe

Bonnie Erbe

Bonnie Erbe is a contributing editor at U.S. News & World Report and hosts PBS's weekly news analysis program, To the Contrary with Bonnie Erbe. She also writes a weekly syndicated newspaper column for Scripps Howard News Service.

advertisement

Robert Schlesinger

Get God Out of the Gay Marriage Debate

The government shouldn't tell churches who they should marry, but neither should churches tell the government which marriages it can recognize.

Concordia Ship Disaster

The Costa Concordia luxury cruise ship keeled over after it ran aground off the coast of Italy.

advertisement