Comments on: Thomas Kuchel – Strong Defense And Civil Rights http://www.frumforum.com/thomas-kuchel-strong-defense-and-civil-rights Building a conservatism that can win again Fri, 12 Mar 2010 18:56:06 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Manfredo http://www.frumforum.com/thomas-kuchel-strong-defense-and-civil-rights/comment-page-1#comment-48999 Manfredo Mon, 16 Mar 2009 15:09:24 +0000 #comment-48999 This article makes no sense even on its own terms. We hear about a conservative uprising against the "moderate" Kuchel in 1968. Mr. Kabaservice then jumps ahead 20 years to to point out that the GOP has not elected a senator from CA since 1988 (a seat lost in a special election in 1992, the year which began the GOP's descent in CA). We are meant to somehow connect the two. So, what happened between 1968 and 1992? The GOP won CA in every Presidential election--even Ford carried the state. They won U.S. senate elections in 1976, 1982 and 1988., and gubernatorial elections in 1970, 1982, 1986, and 1990 (and would go on to win again in 1994). Whatever the merits of the actions against Kuchel in 1968, it's pretty clear that the effort didn't hurt the party one darn bit. The following 20-25 years were among the best of times for California Republicans. Are we supposed to imagine that it was the anti-Kuchel movement in 1968 which lead to the state turning left in the 1990s? That's an awfully long germination period. This article makes no sense even on its own terms.

We hear about a conservative uprising against the “moderate” Kuchel in 1968.

Mr. Kabaservice then jumps ahead 20 years to to point out that the GOP has not elected a senator from CA since 1988 (a seat lost in a special election in 1992, the year which began the GOP’s descent in CA). We are meant to somehow connect the two.

So, what happened between 1968 and 1992? The GOP won CA in every Presidential election–even Ford carried the state. They won U.S. senate elections in 1976, 1982 and 1988., and gubernatorial elections in 1970, 1982, 1986, and 1990 (and would go on to win again in 1994).

Whatever the merits of the actions against Kuchel in 1968, it’s pretty clear that the effort didn’t hurt the party one darn bit. The following 20-25 years were among the best of times for California Republicans.

Are we supposed to imagine that it was the anti-Kuchel movement in 1968 which lead to the state turning left in the 1990s? That’s an awfully long germination period.

]]> By: HollywoodBill http://www.frumforum.com/thomas-kuchel-strong-defense-and-civil-rights/comment-page-1#comment-46334 HollywoodBill Fri, 13 Mar 2009 18:12:55 +0000 #comment-46334 About the only "conservative initiative" that has passed in recent years is Prop8 and that only got through in 2008 with a 4 point margin. In 2000 it had a 13 point victory. Eventually there will probably be enough generational replacement for it to p by the the elecorate. And for the third time in 5 years Californians defeated an initiative that the religious zealots keep putting on the ballot and that would make minors have parental notification before an abortion. No social conservative Republican has won statewide since 1986. California tends to the libertarian wing of the GOP rather than the revival Tent Republicans of the South. Thankfully. About the only “conservative initiative” that has passed in recent years is Prop8 and that only got through in 2008 with a 4 point margin. In 2000 it had a 13 point victory. Eventually there will probably be enough generational replacement for it to p by the the elecorate. And for the third time in 5 years Californians defeated an initiative that the religious zealots keep putting on the ballot and that would make minors have parental notification before an abortion. No social conservative Republican has won statewide since 1986. California tends to the libertarian wing of the GOP rather than the revival Tent Republicans of the South. Thankfully.

]]> By: Graf http://www.frumforum.com/thomas-kuchel-strong-defense-and-civil-rights/comment-page-1#comment-50560 Graf Fri, 13 Mar 2009 18:03:51 +0000 #comment-50560 jjv, I seem to recall that Nixon said in his 1962 race against Brown that he would run an independent campaign and endorse no one else on the Republican ticket. There was a long tradition in California, rightly or wrongly, of GOP candidates running their own campaigns and not getting involved with others. Nixon always blamed his defeat not on moderates but on the conservative supporters of Joe Shell, w sat on their hands and apparently preferred to have a liberal Democrat elected. jjv, I seem to recall that Nixon said in his 1962 race against Brown that he would run an independent campaign and endorse no one else on the Republican ticket. There was a long tradition in California, rightly or wrongly, of GOP candidates running their own campaigns and not getting involved with others. Nixon always blamed his defeat not on moderates but on the conservative supporters of Joe Shell, w sat on their hands and apparently preferred to have a liberal Democrat elected.

]]> By: jjv http://www.frumforum.com/thomas-kuchel-strong-defense-and-civil-rights/comment-page-1#comment-50197 jjv Fri, 13 Mar 2009 16:54:11 +0000 #comment-50197 You do not note that Kuchel failed to back Richard Nixon over Pat Brown in 1962 for Governor. Why did the moderate not support a moderate against a liberal? Do we see a reason why his kind lose? Further, he supported Rocky over Goldwater, thus making enemies. Liberal Republicanism has lost in California to, but conservative ballot measures have won. Conservatism is more popular, aparently, than anybody with the name "Republican>" left or right. You do not note that Kuchel failed to back Richard Nixon over Pat Brown in 1962 for Governor. Why did the moderate not support a moderate against a liberal? Do we see a reason why his kind lose? Further, he supported Rocky over Goldwater, thus making enemies. Liberal Republicanism has lost in California to, but conservative ballot measures have won. Conservatism is more popular, aparently, than anybody with the name “Republican>” left or right.

]]> By: HollywoodBill http://www.frumforum.com/thomas-kuchel-strong-defense-and-civil-rights/comment-page-1#comment-47097 HollywoodBill Thu, 12 Mar 2009 13:11:40 +0000 #comment-47097 Sorry, RepMpls, no one is going to fight for the right to be a Republican. In California, the pathway was proven again with the reelection of Arnold. The revival Tent Republicans cannot win statewide and haven't done so since 1986, Believe it or not Arnold ran as a fiscal conservative and a social moderate, following the Pete Wilson template. Wilson is a rare Republican who actually beat DiFi. In California, no social conservative has a snowball's chance of a statewide victory. Eventually, the national party will get tired of losing and quit putting up candidates that the public will not accept. But right now, the electorate is not buying whatever the GOP is selling except in the South. And let's face it, Dr Pepper is a regional product with limited national appeal. Sorry, RepMpls, no one is going to fight for the right to be a Republican. In California, the pathway was proven again with the reelection of Arnold. The revival Tent Republicans cannot win statewide and haven’t done so since 1986, Believe it or not Arnold ran as a fiscal conservative and a social moderate, following the Pete Wilson template. Wilson is a rare Republican who actually beat DiFi. In California, no social conservative has a snowball’s chance of a statewide victory. Eventually, the national party will get tired of losing and quit putting up candidates that the public will not accept. But right now, the electorate is not buying whatever the GOP is selling except in the South. And let’s face it, Dr Pepper is a regional product with limited national appeal.

]]> By: RepMpls http://www.frumforum.com/thomas-kuchel-strong-defense-and-civil-rights/comment-page-1#comment-44222 RepMpls Thu, 12 Mar 2009 10:46:23 +0000 #comment-44222 I honestly see it like this, we will lose in 2010 and 2012 and until parts of this party realize that a base of 40 million is not enough, when the other side can get 70 million votes. plan and simple they don't think they need moderate reps, and they will continue to push them out. I am pretty silent on this topic because i know they only way they will realize the truth is with more loses, and with the changing demographics there will be more loses. look at the left blogs, they are all laughing at themselves waiting for Steele to get kicked out because he admitted he is pro-choice. Our Party is so narrow focused they really believe we would kick out the leader of the RNC because he only agrees 98% on everything and not 100%. and you know what? they are probably right. Our party does not like moderates. and we moderate reps have to actually fight for the "right" to be in this party. I honestly see it like this, we will lose in 2010 and 2012 and until parts of this party realize that a base of 40 million is not enough, when the other side can get 70 million votes.

plan and simple they don’t think they need moderate reps, and they will continue to push them out. I am pretty silent on this topic because i know they only way they will realize the truth is with more loses, and with the changing demographics there will be more loses.

look at the left blogs, they are all laughing at themselves waiting for Steele to get kicked out because he admitted he is pro-choice. Our Party is so narrow focused they really believe we would kick out the leader of the RNC because he only agrees 98% on everything and not 100%.

and you know what? they are probably right. Our party does not like moderates. and we moderate reps have to actually fight for the “right” to be in this party.

]]> By: Rhampton http://www.frumforum.com/thomas-kuchel-strong-defense-and-civil-rights/comment-page-1#comment-40601 Rhampton Thu, 12 Mar 2009 01:11:22 +0000 #comment-40601 "Sen. Kuchel, I'd like you to meet Sen. Specter. It seems that he will soon have a lot of time on his hands, and will be in need of a friend. -- What was his offense, you ask? That he fairly represented the interests of a moderate state by being a moderate Republican. -- Yes, yes, you do know something about that, don't you?" “Sen. Kuchel, I’d like you to meet Sen. Specter. It seems that he will soon have a lot of time on his hands, and will be in need of a friend. — What was his offense, you ask? That he fairly represented the interests of a moderate state by being a moderate Republican. — Yes, yes, you do know something about that, don’t you?”

]]>