“Yeah, Barker13…I am baffled too!”

And how are YOUR kidneys?

KIDDING! KIDDING! Just being a wiseass – not being mean spirited! (*CHUCKLE*)

Yes, Marcus… (*STICKING TO THE WISEASS THEME*)… I’ve noticed that you baffle easily.

(*SMILE*)

“Over at TheNextRight.com…”

See… (*SERIOUS TONE*)… maybe that’s the problem! While I’m reading the WSJ and Financial Times and sourcing the Think Tanks, you’re hanging at TheNextRight.com

(*SHRUG*)

“…some Hispanic guy just lamented that Tom Tancredo…”

“Some Hispanic guy…???” “…Tom Tancredo…???”

Yep. This might be the source of your bafflement my cyberfriend! (*SMILE*)

“What on Earth makes you think that an even less compromising, more exclusive message…”

“Less compromising?” DEFINITELY! Say what you mean, mean what you say… follow through… talk the talk but also walk the walk! Yep… “less compromising” sounds like sound advice to me.

As to “…more exclusive message…” I’m not sure where you’re going there. *MY* message is inclusive in the sense that it’s nationalistic, it’s color blind, it’s based upon what I defend as basic fairness and it strives for effectiveness. (*SHRUG*)

Re: Mlindroo // Jul 19, 2009 at 5:10 pm –

“So is there any conservative leader in 1995-2006 that meets the “BarkerConservative” test then? Dick Armey perhaps?”

I’ve mentioned Armey. I’ve mentioned Gingrich. I’ve named names all over the site and the archives back me up. (*SHRUG*)

All human beings (and particularly politicians I’d guess) are flawed. As I noted to Brutus recently, anyone who agrees with *ME* 100% of the time is obviously nuts. (97.4% of the time… that person is BRILLIANT!)

(*HUGE FRIGG’N GRIN*)

Perhaps you and Sinz are just so used to folks who WON’T provide details and who AREN’T intellectually consistent that my honesty and forthright statements just throw you both off.

(*SMILE*)

BILL

“Which states that McCain-Palin did not win would be receptive to such a more conservative, Limbaugh/Palin-type message?”

All of ‘em. (*SHRUG*)

“Would that message play in New York?”

Giuliani…??? (*SNORT*) You do remember him… right? And though Pataki is and was a corrupt piece of… (well, we’ll leave my full review of the Pataki administrations for another day)… recall that when the race was Cuomo vs. Pataki – Pataki running as a red meat conservative on the issues of the death penalty and taxes – Pataki won and indeed served three terms… each re-election campaign “sounding” like a conservative.

D’Amato…??? (*SMILE*) Again… while certainly I could write reams contrasting D’Amato’s talk to D’Amato’s walk, certainly old Alfonse was seen by most as a conservative and often appeared on conservative talk radio.

“What I find baffling is that the only states that voted for McCain-Palin were the most conservative states in the Union, like the Deep South, Idaho and so on.”

McCain was NOT a conservative. Bush was NOT a conservative. The RINO Congresses were NOT conservative Congresses in the sense of fiscal conservatism. Obama caught the imagination of the nation. The media basically held Palin’s head underwater as far as the perception of the “average only vaguely aware” voter was concerned. I’ll never get what’s so “baffling” to you, Sinz.

(*SHRUG*)

“Yet you think that a more conservative message would appeal to states that voted for Obama??? Why???”

SInz. (*SIGH*) (*SMILE*) (*EXHALE*) Your nonsense is all over the site and the archives – as is my brilliant and insightful commentary.

(*HUGE FRIGG’N GRIN*) (*GIVING SINZ A FRIENDLY PUNCH TO THE SHOULDER*)

Seriously… asked and answered… probably several hundred times! (*WINK*)

BILL

> Hastert? He’s probably the least RINO-like. In fact, he was pretty conservative.
> The problem was… he either wouldn’t or couldn’t control (shut down)
> the corruption and other ethical lapses within the GOP House caucus.
[…}
> Frist did an even worse job than Hastart of keeping the big
> spenders of his caucus under control.

So is there any conservative leader in 1995-2006 that meets the “BarkerConservative” test then? Dick Armey perhaps?

MARCU$

> What I find baffling is that the only states that voted for McCain-Palin were the most
> conservative states in the Union, like the Deep South, Idaho and so on. Yet you think
> that a more conservative message would appeal to states that voted for Obama??? Why???

Yeah, Barker13…I am baffled too!
Over at TheNextRight.com, some Hispanic guy just lamented that Tom Tancredo quite likely was responsible for the McCain collapse in the Gary metropolitan area which cost him Indiana in the end.

What on Earth makes you think that an even less compromising, more exclusive message will return Republicans to power again…?

MARCU$

Which states that McCain-Palin did not win would be receptive to such a more conservative, Limbaugh/Palin-type message?

Would that message play in New York? Washington State? Ohio?

What I find baffling is that the only states that voted for McCain-Palin were the most conservative states in the Union, like the Deep South, Idaho and so on. Yet you think that a more conservative message would appeal to states that voted for Obama??? Why???

……….The argument, of course, which I agree with, is that this is much more deep seated than a personality like Palin. The Palinophiles are never going to be convinced but it was obvious she was a major drag on the ticket, her unfavorables were in fifties and when was the last time a VP was a campaign issue (Henry Wallace?). The notion that Palin is going to morph into a Judge Judy conservative media personality seems entirely credible so it’s looks like both the Republican right and the Democrats are going to be disappointed in 2012. But all this focus on personalities is masking huge demographic/cultural shifts that are not working in the Republican’s favor…. these have been extensively catalogued. Despite Bush’s victories and Republicans holding onto both houses until 06 it’s plausible the drift against them started in the 90’s. Bush actually lost the popular vote in 2000 as everyone knows so the election was essentially a draw….in 2004 despite incumbency, patriotic ardor which was working for him(why else the ludicrous reporting for duty shtick from Kerry), and a huge and very succesful GOV campaign focussed on evangelical conservatives, he only eeked out the narrowest re-election victory since Wilson in ‘16…………In house and senate the trend has basically been against Republicans ever since the mid 90’s and their senate losses over the past two elections (14 or 15 if you include Specter) have been awful. In a way I think the house is actually worse because all these seats, democrat and republican are gerrymandered to death, and they STILL lost what were basically Republican citadels which (whatever all these exit polls say) show that a hell of a lot of Republicans and Republican leaners actually switched sides. Whether some switch back depends on how well Obama governs but the mold has been broken. If Obama’s support holds up, and I see no reason why it shouldn’t even with all the excitement about relatively small drops from the polling stratosphere, the GOP is really close to a precipice and seems fairly oblivious of it.

“Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani and Arnold Schwarzenegger all managed to win elections in deep Blue territory after all.”

True. And of those three the only one whom I would unreservedly point to as being a successful conservative (in *my* definition of libertarian leaning conservatism) executive whose actions left his city/state better off and on a trajectory to stay better off than before he took office is Giuliani.

“Aaarrrnnnooold…???” (*SNORT*)

Romney? I admit, I don’t know enough about his nuts and bolts Massachusetts governing record to make a set in stone judgment, but I tend to fear that his signature “RomneyCare” creation will end up a disaster for the state. (*SHRUG*)

BILL

Barker13 responded:
> Sure. The “cool” factor.

The point here is that young voters tend to keep supporting their political party, e.g. Reagan was popular with young voters in the 1980s and this particular demographic remains an important source of GOP votes. So if Obama is even moderately successful, the vast hordes of young urban, latino and black voters enrolled by the Obama’08 campaign will most likely continue to favor Democrats.

> absent Palin (or another “movement type” conservative) McCain would have done even worse with
> conservatives!

It is difficult to measure Palin’s impact. If you check the state polls, it seems she helped a bit in deep red states but she made no difference at all in key swing states. McCain’s poll numbers improved a bit after the GOP convention but the battleground state numbers did not move in his direction. I think this is because “the Base” certainly loved her, but she did not win over many women or independents.

McCain’s critics on the right claim “the Maverick” should have been able to win the independent vote anyway, but I disagree. He would have needed to campaign as a radically different Republican for this to happen, e.g. by choosing somebody like Mike Bloomberg as his running mate while stressing checkbook issues at every opportunity rather than Iraq, small government and low taxes. If the public face of your campaign is a controversial nephyte cultural warrior from Alaska who is adored by GOP evangelicals, it’s rather difficult to promote yourself as a radical departure from the G.W. Bush years. ..

> But I also note in support of my analysis that – according to YOUR figures which YOU provide -
> “78% of self-described conservatives voted for McCain.” Hmm… doesn’t that translate to: “22% of
> self-described conservatives DIDN’T vote for McCain”?

Keep in mind that Bush “only” won 83% of the conservative vote in 2004, though … you apparently assume there is a vast reservoir of untapped conservative potential out there and McCain/Palin did a poor job persuading these people to vote for them. I just don’t see any evidence for it: the G.W. Bush get-out-the-vote effort was very good in 2004, yet it was only enough for a 285-255 victory against a rather unappealing opponent.

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1023/exit-poll-analysis-2008

MARCU$

Fair enough.

(*NOD*)

So… Sdspringy has referred to Otto as a “Talking Points Machine.”

I propose from now on instead of using the term “troll” to describe Otto, we simply refer to him as “TPM.”

All in favor….

(*LAUGHING OUT LOUD*)

BILL

“In response to a post indicating that the Republican conservative base is simply too small, you write, “Well… if that’s true then we’ll never see another Republican president.” Isn’t that Frum’s whole point, and the whole point of his NewMajority website?

The difference is that I want to address this by increasing the size of the conservative base while Frum (apparently) wants to decrease it.

I want the GOP to be more “conservative” in the sense of supporting the message of the Limbaughs and the Palins. Frum would like the Limbaughs and Palins to disappear. (*SHRUG*) Or so I infer.

I believe that it was the corrupting of conservatism (the hypocrisy, the double dealing, the corruption of Republican politicians) that hurt the GOP, the move away from “Barker conservatism” (libertarian leaning nationalistic conservative) that hurt the GOP; Frum believes that “rigid” adherence to principle as applied to governing is a problem rather than a solution. (*SHRUG*)

“…today’s republican party…”

Neither Frum nor myself are thrilled with “today’s Republican Party.” However, we seem to have far different ideas about which direction today’s Party should be headed in, should go towards. (*SHRUG*)

Here… maybe this will help, Tonymas:

*MY* voting record:

Reagan (loved Ronnie!)
Reagan (loved Ronnie!)
Bush (never thrilled with Bush; ending up largely hating Bush)
Perot (Bush had betrayed Reagan conservatism)
Dole (lesser of two evils; I was a Forbes supporter during the primaries)
Bush (never thrilled with Bush; again, a Forbes supporter during the primaries)
Bush (lesser of two evils)
Barr (protest vote; couldn’t stomach McCain; feared Obama would become… er… what’s he’s become)

How does Frum’s record compare to mine? I don’t know… ask him… perhaps he’ll respond.

How’bout you… you care to get specific about who you’ve supported and opposed – who you like and don’t like?

“…many of these fiscal conservatives are socially liberal…”

They are…??? Like who…??? Would you mind fleshing out this claim and providing some citation? I’m sincerely not following you here. (*SHRUG*)

(Hey… if you provide the names and context you’re referring to I’ll gladly share my reaction individual by individual.) (*WINK*)

“…well educated…”

Hmm… (*SMILE*) I’m certainly well educated. Frum is certainly well educated. (*SMILE*) You might have to flesh out what you’re trying to get at with that one too. (*WINK*) (*CHUCKLE*)

“I just don’t see how a polarizing figure like Palin…”

(*SMILE*) “Polarizing.” I like that!

How old are you? (I’m 47.) Was Nixon a “polarizing” figure? How’bout Reagan? Gingrich? How’bout Andy Jackson? Abe Lincoln? Teddy Roosevelt? FDR? Know much about Truman? (*CHUCKLE*)

Listen, Tonymas… you say what you believe and you believe what you say; the chips will fall where they may. I believe that properly – AND SINCERELY – articulated conservative principles and policies can win elections.

“There is no reason why a fiscally conservative, business friendly, deficit busting, pro-growth republican candidate couldn’t win elections. But to do so, this candidate would have to jettison some of the hard line social conservative issues.”

Not to be “difficult” or argumentative, but there’re lots of undefined general “descriptives” thrown in those two sentences. When you give me specifics – policy specifics – I’ll gladly address them. Who knows… perhaps we’ll be simpatico far more often than not. Let’s hope so! (*WINK*)

“I would have to agree with Frum that Sarah Palin just doesn’t do much to fill this void in the type of leadership I (and many others) would enthusiastically support.”

OK. Perhaps your mind will be changed over the next couple years. Perhaps not. (*SHRUG*) Hey… where we agree we agree, where we disagree we disagree. Let’s keep the dialog going.

BILL

* PS – Where in Northern California?