‘Protest’ Votes & Other Ways to Lose A Congressional Majority
Yesterday, the first caller on Rush’s show was fuming mad at Republicans on immigration. She said we all should ‘unregister’ as Republicans. She hinted that staying home and ‘casting a protest vote’ was the next logical step.
Not only can’t I agree with her, I can’t stand that notion. Let me explain:
1. Staying home on the basis of the immigration bill is assinine. Is immigration the only thing motivating you to vote? If it is, shame on you. Ronald Reagan started the move towards getting a logical, thoughtful judiciary a main goal of his administration. We’re now within reach of realizing that goal. Registering a protest vote is the difference between Justice O’Connor and Chief Justice Roberts. It’s the difference between letting the tax cuts lapse and extending them. Still think it’s smart to register a protest vote?
2. A third of something is better than half of nothing. If D’s control the budget process and the judicial confirmation process, then how will the protest voters react? Will they think “They got my message” or will they wake up and realize that their stubbornness and shortsightedness has led to far more ruin than a Republican majority would’ve?
3. Staying home affects state legislative races, too. Here in Minnesota, staying home means that Democrats set the agenda, stifling the will of the people on a range of issues from raising taxes to throttling Minnesotans’ right to determine the definition of marriage. These are huge issues. The stakes couldn’t be higher.
Those are just some of the considerations that single issue voters better take into consideration before they stay home and ruin our conservative coalition. We’ve fought hard for alot of things, including the judiciary, taxes, national security and social values.
Are there ‘warts’ in this coalition? Of course. But we change that by challenging the Chuck Hagels and Linc Chaffees in primaries, not by staying home from general elections. That’s how we keep winning. And winning is still the best thing in conservative politics.
UPDATE:
Michelle Malkin: Amnesty: Dead For Now
Technorati Tags: Midterm Elections, Primaries, GOP
Cross-post at LetFreedomRingBlog
April 7th, 2006 at 12:19 pm
I’d like to agree but I can’t. While I’d like to think the primaries are a viable option for change, I don’t believe they are for a second. The party money plays an awfully big role in selecting candidates.
Also, if your only means of holding a candidate or party accountable is to vote tham out what exactly do you gain by keeping them in office if they refuse to listen?
Yes, I overall support Republicans, but I refuse to go with any party that is willing to sell us out as baldly as they have over immigration.
I’m truly sorry if that messes up “Republican” gains, but I’ve never claimed to be a Republican. Much like the title of this blog I am a proud Conservative who is noticing a decided lack of Conservatism in the Republican party.
April 7th, 2006 at 4:54 pm
That whole scene of these Congressmen announcing a huge agreement, only to get intense opposition after people actually started reading the 500 pages, was discusting. Apparently the plan was for the controlling leadership (Sen. Frist) to get the thing passed, before anyone read it, while everyone was hurrying off to their 17-day vacation.
Tom DeLay was one of the few people to say anything articulate on the topic this week, and he has resigned. Gee, illegal immigrants can use a five year old phone bill to prove they’ve been here 5 years. And Frist’s new best friend Bush still refuses to allow a wall. How can anyone vote for any of these clowns?
April 8th, 2006 at 8:18 am
“I am a proud Conservative who is noticing a decided lack of Conservatism in the Republican party”
I’ve been saying that since 2000 and every time I do people get pissy with me….
April 8th, 2006 at 9:19 am
Ya mean Republicans are supposed to be conservative? Dang, I shore missed that one!
Except for a war (warranted and just) and a couple of decent SC appointments (whose appointments were resisted by the donkeys for purely political reasons, not ethical), I just can’t see a whole bunch of difference between most the donkeys and most the elephants. They’re both neck deep in red ink, they’re both up to their behinds in ethical violations (maybe not legal violations, but ethical), and the only important thing on either agenda is how to get re-elected, not what is right for the continuation of our once-great nation.
Gary, you and I have discussed this before. I agree having a Frenchy (or worse, a Shylock Edwards) make any appointment to the SC would be disastrous for decades, but I also remember what my old drunk Hungarian uncle used to say: Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
Tell us, do we want to get socially and fiscally raped by a RINO, or by a donkey? I personally don’t see a whole bunch of difference, it’s still rape. And right now the RINOs are chortling to themselves that we don’t have a whole bunch of choice.
April 8th, 2006 at 10:52 am
Illegal alien bill shelved, but there’s every ch..
Well now, that was fast.
It’s really irritating how the Senate was basically trying bait the public with their stupidity.
As Michelle Malkin warns, if the public lets down its guard, this nonsense will come back. Realizing this, that’s why it’…