Way Wrong Attitude, but Can You Blame ‘em
Posted by Andy on May 31st, 2006
I just got this email.
I guess I am not welcome anymore at the conservative table since I supported the Twins Stadium and am a conservative. Best of Luck and I will be saving my money and my time since I am not pure enough to be part of the party anymore.
That is exactly what this new attitude of all or nothing will cause if people continue to attack any Republican who dares stray from the rigid Party platform.
If we cannot disagree on any issue, what does that say about our chances? Not good.
Sphere: Related Content
May 31st, 2006 at 7:18 pm
“Way Wrong Attitude, but Can You Blame ‘em”
Good Point!
This is a common reflex to a position that we may disagree with.
I would argue that engaging in the political process is a better way to express this disagreement. For example, Jeffers would have been better off filing as a Republican candidate for State House or State Senate. She would have then been able to debate her views from a credible position within the Republican political process.
May 31st, 2006 at 8:19 pm
I agree completely with both Andy and Rob.
This I’m going to take my ball and go home attitude from the party purists will do nothing but put a bunch of socialists in charge of our future. It is no different than those on the left who are trying to force Joe Lieberman out because he is not lib enough or those who think Hillary is “too mainstream”.
To whoever sent that email. Don’t let the voices of the vocal few (or many) get you down. While I side with those who believe the stadium should have gone to referendum or even be shot down altogether, I’m not about to throw away support for a Governor or any conservative or even center-right candidate who has done much more good than harm. The only alternative (other than in dreamland) is one that will do much more harm than good. I will stand and speak out to support you and others who see the big picture.
I’ve disagreed with every candidate I’ve voted for on at least one or two major issues and a host of minor ones. I will never find a candidate that suits my taste completely, but the GOP offers the closest alternatives and the best hope. I’m willing to forgive a few faults if it means advancing some of the ideals I care about. Not all of us are so rigid. You are not alone.
May 31st, 2006 at 8:41 pm
The thing is guys, both sides are doing it! I have had numerous discussions (ok I spent more time listening to the other guys railing) with those who were AGAINST the stadium and because they didn’t get THEIR WAY on the stadium issue, they are just going to stay home and not support anyone who championed the stadium (Governor Pawlenty for example). There is a lot of “all or nothing” thinkers out there.
LL
May 31st, 2006 at 8:48 pm
For example, Jeffers would have been better off filing as a Republican candidate for State House or State Senate.
Or still yet, she would have been better off registering as a Republican if she wanted to seek the Republican endorsement. But we all know she didn’t do that. http://www.cfboard.state.mn.us/campfin/rpdetail/rp16384.html Of course, like you said, if she wanted to be a Republican, a city or county race might have been a better platform for her until November.
And Heck! There’s a conservative table now? Where do these people come from???? On one side we’ve got people complaining because the “party” doesn’t accept everyone, and on the other side we get people whining because the “party” lets to many people who don’t adher to the platform in. Why can’t people just realize that the party is what your put into it. If you are a conservative and bail out, not participate, and stop donating money, the party will get more moderate, not more conservative. And if you are a moderate and stop participating and donating money the party gets more conservative, not more moderate.
For those who haven’t figured it out yet, the Republican table is a mirror. It only reflects those who have chosen to step up to it and make a place. It doesn’t reflect the values and ideas of those who have quit participating because they don’t care anymore.
Brent
May 31st, 2006 at 9:02 pm
LL,
Yes you are correct, and I don’t mean to be accusatory. I only am desparately calling/hoping for some common sense and wisdom.
There are indeed a lot of all or nothing thinkers out there, and unless that changes, the outcome will be nothing. All is an unrealistic option — for now. Hopefully, that will change in the near future.
On fiscal subjects I doubt there are many more conservative than I am. However, I’m smart enough to know that it would be stupid in this state to support a candidate whose views were in line with mine rather than a main-stream or even moderate conservative.
May 31st, 2006 at 9:02 pm
Good point Brent, the Republican Party will make decisions by those who participate in the process.
Hope to see everyone at the convention tomorrow.
May 31st, 2006 at 9:03 pm
Brent,
WELL SAID!!!
May 31st, 2006 at 11:06 pm
I’m another conservative who supported the stadium bill. As I told TPaw today at his St. Cloud visit, most people think that Minnesota without the Twins & Vikings is like Minnesota without the Missisissippi or without 10,000 lakes.
I respect those that disagree with me on that but there’s a practical side to this, too. Had the Twins and/or the Vikings left with a Republican governor and legislature, the GOP would be the minority party in Minnesota for a generation.
People love hating on the Twins & Vikings after each loss but they’d take it out of peoples’ hides if they let them leave.
May 31st, 2006 at 11:45 pm
I would’ve supported the stadium bill had we found some way of taxing Wisconsonians and illegal immigrants to pay for it.
June 1st, 2006 at 9:19 am
It’s funny; when I got involved with Replublican Party activism in the 80’s, we were replacing party leaders because they supported heinous things like the “right” of a woman to kill her unborn baby. Now we’re throwing leaders out because of relatively minor things like stadium referendums and who they are supporting for Congress. I fear we are heading towards a very pure …… and minority party. On second thought, I guess that’s not so funny……
June 1st, 2006 at 10:56 am
Nordeaster - you and I are coming from the same exact spot! We need a little common sense to take over the base so that we can get some work done.
Brent - well said! Those that withdraw from the process will loose their say in the process. It’s very simple.
Someone told me this yesterday…Political Parties exist to represent a political AGENDA, not a political philosophy and there’s a HUGE difference between the two. That again is something that the all or nothings need to remember. Yes the parties should be at least influenced by the philosophy (that is what the party platform is supposed to be for) but the bottom line is that that Party’s sole job is to get people who subscribe to the philosophy elected - that is the agenda!
June 1st, 2006 at 11:04 am
And 0% of your agenda/platform/philosophy gets in if you don’t put together a big enough coalition to win and a candidate who will appeal to 51% of the voting public.
June 1st, 2006 at 11:10 am
Nord, you ought to know a thing or 2 about how standing on your principles 100% with out budging works. You live in (ahem) Northeast Minneapolis, and are represented my Chairman Mao or Stalin I think.
You would never be able to get Phil Krinkie (??? or someone on the far right) elected, but maybe, the correct moderate Republican could make a serious race out of it.
Sometimes you gotta give a little in order to get.
June 1st, 2006 at 1:26 pm
Agreed Andy - which again is a warning that needs to go to the “all or nothing” folks. I got a chance to talk to T-Paw back in February (at a fundraiser for SD35 reps Mike Beard and Mark Buesgens) and I asked him POINT BLANK about the cigarette fee/tax. He said that until we can get a rock solid majority in both the House and the Senate, we are going to have to compromise! Something that the all or nothings want nothing to do with!
See you at the Convention!
LL
June 1st, 2006 at 4:05 pm
Lady, After TPaw compromised & signed into law the ‘health fee’, lots of people were upset with TPaw, though they weren’t threatening to walk out on him. At that point, I said that the right response wasn’t to rebel against TPaw but to use it as motivation to get more R’s elected to the House & Senate.
It’s time for conservatives to apply President Bush’s policy on Iraq to our elections: STAY THE COURSE. You don’t win by taking the Murtha route.