Earlier this week, I was the speaker at a meeting of the Tustin Area Republican Assembly, a chapter of the California Republican Assembly, located in the heart of conservative Orange County. As part of my presentation, I took the opportunity to survey the audience of around fifty people as to whom they were supporting for President. I ran through the names — Giuliani, Romney, McCain, Paul, Huckabee. It was easy to see that the vast majority of the folks in the room did not raise their hands for any of the candidates. So I asked the group about that. From the feedback I received, it was clear that to the overwhelming majority of this group of core Republican activists, none of the candidates were conservative enough. Fault was found with each one.
But while I think that the activists in this club are representative of many conservatives, they certainly are not representative of all conservatives. So, of those conservative activists who have endorsed candidates, who are they supporting? To be honest with you, as I talk and e-mail with people all around California (and I do a lot of that), it literally runs the gamut. Which is to say that there is no one candidate to whom conservatives who do endorse are flocking.
When I talk to these who have endorsed, and ask them why they are supporting their candidate, I typically follow up by asking about a shortcoming (from a conservative perspective) of their candidate of choice, so that I can ask them why, taking that into account, they are supporting this person. I do this because I am genuinely curious. Everyone has their "Achilles Heel" — McCain is "bad" on illegal immigration — Romney has changed his views on major policy issues which always is suspicious — Rudy has always been a moderate on social issues — Huckabee has a terrible record on taxes as Arkansas Governor — Ron Paul is so isolationist so as to district people from absorbing his other views.
**There is more – click the link**
January 25th, 2008 at 12:00 am
We can but hope at this point that no candidate get a majority of delegates and that the convention is brokered, and maybe, just maybe, a good darkhorse candidate can be found.
I can hope, can’t I?
January 25th, 2008 at 12:00 am
Too many conservatives are looking for a clone of Ronald Reagan. Stop the search. You only get one Ron Reagan every generation. The root cause of the problem in selecting our candidate falls on the shoulders of Pres George W. Bush. His failure to pick a running mate in 2004, willing to step up after his term expires, has left a huge void where we had the upper hand. A V.P. who would have access to all of the domestic and foregin policy decison as well as four years of free media exposure has been blown by staying with Dick Cheney. That, and the expansion of government under his term, along with his illegal immigration policy has truly hurt our conservative base.
This is the first year in which I have not issued a voter guide. It’s a challenge to keep Republicans engaged when some of us are not leading with enthusiasm for a single candidate we can unite behind. What does that say about Nov.
Best regards,
Larry Gilbert
January 25th, 2008 at 12:00 am
I for one am sick and tired of everyone claiming to be the heir of Ronald Reagan. Not one of them is. If one was he’d be the nominee already. As Larry points out above, you only get one per generation, and we were lucky to get him at precisely the right time, to reinvigorate the GOP, strengthen America’s optimism and stare down the Soviet Union and lay the groundwork for its demise.
Secondly, I too am quite surprised that so many core activists are STILL either undecided or less than solid in support of their preffered candidate if they have one. From my experience, nearly 80% of not more of the people I know who’ve been involved in politics almost always point to the Goldwater candidacy and/or reading “The Conscience of a Conservative” as pivotal factors in their political life. Some even point to the fight between Bob Taft and Ike years before Goldwater vs. Rocky as their watershed. To my mind the candidate that best reflects such an ideology is Ron Paul (and no, it is not “isolationism” in his approach to foreign policy – its non-interventionism). How about a hands-off federal government and letting the states decide issues that the Consitution as strictly interpreted leaves to their discredtion? What a concept!
And yet, there’s hesitation on behalf of many to embrace his candiacy, and if these surveys are to be believed (and I’ve no cause to not do so) there’s hesitation to embrace anyone. This should all be quite troubling – we are a party STILL trying to find our way.
Ron Paul – In your heart you know he’s right.
January 25th, 2008 at 12:00 am
Jon,
Thanks for the great job you do with the FlashReport — I read it every day.
By next week the choice for California conservatives will be between McCain and Romney. McCain authored McCain-Feingold, voted against the Bush tax cuts, led the Gang of 14, voted against drilling in ANWR, and angrily fought for McCain-Kennedy on immigration. Gov. Romney is, as National Review described him, a “full spectrum conservative,” whose record in Mass. stands in stark contrast to the liberalism of New York Times-endorsed John McCain.
This is not a close call. California conservatives will support Gov. Romney as having the vision, values, vigor,intellect and temperment to lead our party,take the fight to the Clintons, and be our next President.
January 25th, 2008 at 12:00 am
This will be my sixth Republican Presidential primary and I have yet to vote for the eventual nominee.
Again this year I have a feeling I will cast my vote of principle for the right candidate and not the one who is going to win.
Run Ron Run!