The Battle For The Soul Of The Republican Party

8 Responses to “The Battle For The Soul Of The Republican Party”

1. Ben writes
   July 12th, 2009 8:59 pm

   Why didn’t Ramsey mention the hike in the tax on cable television that he passed in 1999?

2. Matt Collins writes
   July 12th, 2009 10:39 pm

   To further expand on this topic the Republican Party has by-and-large lost its way. The TNGOP has done a better job than most of the rest of the GOP however if the Party doesn’t follow a more limited-government platform it will continue to lose many elections in the future, at least on a national level.

   Supporting candidates who advocate big-government solutions does not result in a winning strategy. Given it’s recent history The Republican Party is not going to gain any credibility among voters until it undergoes a transformation and actually adheres to principles of limited / Constitutional government.

   DISCLAIMER: My opinions are my own and do not represent the DCRP/TNGOP/RLC/CFL/WTN etc..

3. Matthew Hurtt writes
   July 13th, 2009 7:13 am

   I’m going to agree with Matt here. Not only because we share the same first name, but also because he makes a very valid point. This last election cycle (really, the last two), we’ve seen the GOP splinter between social conservatives (Mike Huckabee and the South), constitutional conservatives (Ron Paul-esque types), and fiscal conservatives (a significant %age of the GOP voter base).

   It’s important to go through periods of growth and change. I don’t think that the GOP should lay claim to the Christian voters, because I think many people who are religious trend Democratic in their voting/belief. Does that make them Godless? Hardly. My grandmother (a Democrat) told me that after the 2006 election cycle, she felt like a heathen because of the way Republicans painted the Dems. Is that fair? No.

   I’m less socially conservative than many Tennesseans, and in my candidate of choice (for whatever office), I am looking for someone who’s fiscally conservative… fiercely so.

   A majority of conservative Tennesseans (both Republican and Democrat) are looking for someone in the style of Mike Huckabee - as far as social issues are concerned.

   Collins makes an excellent point, and I think sometimes he’s made the whipping boy of the Paul group, but it’s because he shares his opinion - just like anyone else here.

   It’s ironic that national Republicans dismissed Ron Paul and others as “crazy” and “ridiculous” (among many other things) when the national GOP is faltering at the federal level. People don’t want to play the blame game anymore. People want to move onward and upward, and I think that manifests itself in folks like the Campaign For Liberty, who seek to extend liberty to all sectors of the American public.

   I could go on, and I suppose I could make this a blog post of my own. All that said, Collins - you’re a good man for putting your neck out there and saying what needs to be said.

4. kosh iii writes
   July 13th, 2009 7:59 am

   “limited government platform” ??? You have to be kidding me. The GOP has spent years piling massive debt up, Reagan, Bush41, Bush43.
   And the GOP wants MORE government control of our personal lives, especially the most intimate aspects: i.e. sex and love.

5. Matthew Hurtt writes
   July 13th, 2009 8:07 am

   kosh iii -

   Did you not read what Collins wrote? Let’s expand your quotation:

   however if the Party doesn’t follow a more limited-government platform it will continue to lose many elections in the future, at least on a national level

   Collins suggests that - at present - the GOP at th federal level is NOT minding the fiscal restraint. Please, if you’re going to make an argument, argue against something someone has said, not some point you’re trying to make out of something that hasn’t been asserted. No one here said the national GOP has been fiscally conservative. Your straw man is terribly constructed.

   Argument #FAIL

6. kosh iii writes
   July 13th, 2009 9:30 am

   The GOP has NEVER followed a limited government plan. Yeah, they talk big about it, but their actions have always expanded government control.
   I am not talking just about fiscal policy, which we all can agree is expansionist, but social policy which is and always has been to take away/deny liberty. All components of the GOP are anti-freedom when it comes to this issue.

7. Matt Collins writes
   July 13th, 2009 12:43 pm

   Kosh -

   You make good points. However if the GOP returned to a more Robert Taft, Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan*, Ron Paul platform it would begin to offer voters a real choice between Democrats and Republicans in the ballot box.

   By and large both parties increase government. By and large both parties trample the Constitution. By and large both parties raise governmental spending and taxes. By and large both parties involve us in needless foreign affairs. By and large both parties vote to restrict liberties and freedoms. There is very little difference between them when viewed through the lens of big vs little government and if the Republican Party adapted a truly limited-government / Constitutional platform, and then strictly adhered to it, it would be a winning strategy.

   *Yes Reagan personally was of this nature but for the most part didn’t govern by these principles unfortunately.

8. Robert writes
   July 13th, 2009 2:00 pm

   Ben goes by David Mansouri in real life. He is not one of the many liberal Bens who post here. He works for the Stache over at Wampdavidian HQ.