so if the conservatives detach themselves from the gop, move right, and take the gop with them, where do the moderate republicans go? some will follow right, and some won’t, meaning you’ve just shrunk the gop, making it harder to win elections.

Most moderates will be left where they’ve always been, stuck in the middle deciding to vote between two opposing political philosophies. I personally believe that when conservatism is presented head to head against liberalism, people will choose conservatism. Unfortunately, there have been few true conservative choices out there since the GOP moved to the mooshy center.

Let me give you a simple example of two contrasting political views, one conservative and one liberal to prove my point.

Let’s look first at the economy, since it will likely be the number one issue next year.

We all know that the economy is turmoil!

Conservative principals and philosophy dictate in this situation that we trim the fat and overspending from our budget to reduce government spending and reduce taxes as necessary then pass those savings on to the people so that they may us those funds in their daily life, purchasing items and services that will help give jobs to others and restart the system.

The liberal Philosophy says that our response as a nation to this economic turmoil should be borrow and print HUGE sums of money (on a scale that the nation has never seen before), have the government buy a few major industries that are failing then throw piles of money around at various pet political projects to help jumpstart the economy through government job growth.

I personally think that people in their daily lives can relate much more easily to the Conservative philosophy in this case. I think that when faced with economic hardship in their own homes, most people would take on the approach of conserving their resources first. I would hope that few would take the risk of barrowing huge sums of money with no legitimate prospect of being able to pay it back, simply to maintain their quality of life during hard economic times.

In short, liberalism is literally gambling with our future as a nation. Given the choice of voting with over-tax and over-spend Liberals or voting for the secure economic principals of conservatism, moderate Republicans will always reject liberalism and stay with the GOP, even under conservative leadership.

Ultimately, if conservatives retake control of the GOP, the moderates will be stuck choosing between two philosophies, and will likely choose the one closest to their own. Just as Conservatives for years have been forced to vote for “centrist” candidates like McCain, now moderate conservatives will have to embrace their roots or find a home in a third party.

Of course, when we say something is spin we imply that there is a certainly level of dishonest in a statement. I have merely given you my honest assessment of the contest, as I trust you have. Unfortunately, I don’t understand fully you statement about the seat being traditionally held by Republicans for a century.

I suppose that one might be able to argue that it is evidence of rising support for liberalism just as the same argument has been made about the rise of conservatism in the New Jersey contest that Dems lost. Of course there is one major difference. To make such an argument, you must also then abandon the argument that Dems didn’t win of the own accord in NY but were given the seat by default as a result of internal struggles in the Republican ranks.

While I have long been independent from party alliances and have regularly voted with alternative candidates, I wonder on a personal level whether you could ever imagine voting against the Democratic Party if you felt that its core principals were being threatened or had been lost. Could you vote for a Democrat to represent you even if they held a large number of opposing views to you? Stop for a moment and imagine if Dick Cheney moved to Logan, registered as a Democrat and by some miracle earned his Party’s nomination for a congressional bid. Could you vote for Dick Cheney simply because he is now a Democrat or would you give your vote to the third party candidate that more closely matches your beliefs, even if the vote would be essentially thrown away and there was absolutely no chance of winning? I guess what I am asking is; do you vote your principals before party or visa versa?

There is no way to spin that.

We certainly are each seeing the results of last weeks elections through our own rose colored glasses. It certainly is true that much like a football game, regardless of what happened on the field during the contest, it’s always better to come up with the win. Of course, the end result of this contest for a single congressional seat has little or no effect on the make up of Congress. Still, in this case it is impossible to ignore the fact that conservatives were not just willing but able to back a relatively unknown conservative candidate and in little more than a month force the liberal Republican from the race.

If by “lost in the woods” you would have meant that the Republican Party is undergoing a major reconfiguration, then I would have agreed. Regardless, the metaphor simply doesn’t fit. To me the term would have been more applicable when the Republican Party held both the Congress and the Presidency, abandoned its core philosophical principals and began spending like Democrats. Using my description of being Lost in the Woods, I would say that they are at least for now, trying to find their way home.

By your definition, the Democrat Party is certainly lost in the woods as they try to push through a Health Care bill that the majority of Americans reject and worse are being so underhanded that they are trying to do it before anyone can even read it. Also, there is a reason they want to do this thing on Saturday. Saturday is they day that the fewest number of people follow the news, guaranteeing the least amount of coverage and hopefully for Dems the least outrage.

While I truly understand why you might see this particular Congressional contest a success, I would argue that it is far better for Republicans to be having this battle now than waiting until 2010 and again wondering where all the strong conservative candidates are to oppose the Democrats. Now is the time to weed out the weak candidates in the mold of McCain and support true conservatives who can make a clear distinction philosophically between Democrats. If in 2010 we have a load of, Tax and Spend Democrats being opposed by Free Market economic conservatives, there simply will be no contest in my opinion.

While you may not see this particular election as a success for Republicans, I promise that conservatives see it as an overwhelming victory. I promise you that the message to the Republican leaders is loud and clear. If they put up true conservative candidates, they will receive the backing of core conservatives and defeat Democrats hands down as they did in Virginia and New Jersey. If they continue to support up liberal candidates like Scozzofava, they will lose! It’s that simple!

So Republican leaders need to decide if they will stay with the apathetic moderates and abandon and concept of a clear cohesive message or go with true “uber” conservatives, whose message is loud and clear and a certainly the most politically motivated group in the country today.

As far as a steak dinner, that certainly would be delicious, but it might be a fools bet for both of us. There are a huge number of factors from the wars in Iraq / Afghanistan to Gitmo Detainees and above all the Economy that will play a huge role in the upcoming elections. If any of these go further south, Democrats may find themselves fighting to hold together their own party let alone win elections. Of course, the opposite may be true if against all odds the Dems can claim success in any of these categories. As for now, it looks like Unemployment will top 10% right around Christmas. Maybe Obama should try blaming Bush again! It just might work one more time.

Regardless, maybe we could order up some prime corn fed beef from Nebraska to watch the returns over next November.

so if the conservatives detach themselves from the gop, move right, and take the gop with them, where do the moderate republicans go? some will follow right, and some won’t, meaning you’ve just shrunk the gop, making it harder to win elections.

this ties back to the michael steele big tent versus the ideological purity/no party unity discussion that was swirling around the bloghive when steele was in town recently. but the thing is, and i hate to say this, steele was right. the right wing of the gop can push the party as far right as it wants, it will only lose elections because of it. don’t believe me? look up club for growth’s track record in terms of election results. they’ve made some democrats happy.

I’d say that’s a pretty good sign that if wingnuts continue to become candidates, it’s not so delusional to assume (which I do) that Democrats will hang onto the House majorities in 2010, and the White House in 2012.

“In the woods” type of “lost” in politics refers primarily to a party lacking favor with a majority of people in the country. The party identification polls imply that the GOP hasn’t won many over, and in fact is losing support like a sinking ship loses rats.

Doubling down on uber-conservative TEA party attendee candidates would be the best thing the GOP could do… for DEMOCRATS. So of course I’m all for it.

We’ll have to wait and see who’s prediction is right, of course, but I’m willing to wager an expensive steak dinner, at least, that the delusion lies in those who think the GOP just needs to get MORE socially conservative, and MORE repetitious in the “Rhetoric of the Reagan Republican.” Especially when that delusion is displayed declaring it as a brilliant strategy on a post about a race in which the conservative just lost to the Democrat.

I see party politics as part of an on going democratic process where various factions via for control and try to influence others to their side. This is a good process for the GOP whose numbers and support have been steadily dwindling since Bush began to betray his stated conservative principals.

I believe that it is a serious mistake for liberals to believe that the GOP is simply lost in the woods and thus pose no threat in 2010 and 2012. While some may see the current process in the GOP as disarray, I see it as a very rapid reorganization of forces and principals. Conservatives are essentially cleaning house in the GOP. While it is certain that there are liberal Republicans who will make a stand against this movement, I believe that ultimately the GOP will move back to the right to give this conservative uprising a home rather than continue to see their numbers diminish and their funding dry up.

The question now is; how long are Democrats going to remain delusional about a perceived mandate following last year’s election to fundamentally transform all of society and continue to spend our nation into oblivion? While Obama certainly ran a slick campaign in 2008, the American Idol effect simply won’t be there in 2010 and 2012. People won’t be voting to simply be part of “history.” They will be voting for or against the effectiveness of the Democratic Party and any attempt to blame our problems on the past administration will become laughable.

While it may be fun to poke a stick at conservative groundswells like the Tea Party, failure on the part of both Republicans and Democrats to take these movements seriously, could end up being like trying to ride out hurricane Katrina in a one story home behind an ancient levy.

I’m sure Scozzofava knows what I’m talking about! This race has shown that Conservatives are willing to detach themselves from a particular party if necessary to preserve their principals. I have to imagine that there are many Republicans and even a few Democrats, both sitting and preparing to run for office that took a hard lesson from this race. Even the GOP ended up for the first time in its history, campaigning for a non-GOP candidate by running ads during the contest in support of core conservative principals, even though they had no horse in the race.

The GOP certainly isn’t moving to the center as predicted by many, but instead conservatism is on the rise.

Finally, all this talk about fractures in the GOP should certainly be weighed against the fact that the Dems have full control of both houses as well as the presidency but still have not been able to put together their promised Health Reform Bill. One would think that if there was so much cohesiveness in the Democrat Party that they would have outlawed all private medical insurance by now and we would all be receiving our health care coverage from Obama’s favored Single Payer System. So, where are the complaints about the Dems being lost in the woods? It’s all political rhetoric.

Personally, the longer the Dems try to minimize groups like the Tea Party and are content to sit back and make jokes, the more they will be blindsided in upcoming elections.

Scott Stanzel, a publicity consultant who was a White House spokesman under Obama’s Republican predecessor George W. Bush, said the party erred in picking Scozzafava.

“They didn’t understand the mood of the party, the people at the grassroots,” he told AFP. “Mr Hoffman, I would argue, is more reflective of the broad majority of Republicans.”

This is all because the teabagger Hoffman is too stupid to fill out the necessary paper work for a primary. These teabaggers are good at showing up to protest but still can’t figure out the electoral process.

I know the obama followers want to believe the Republicans are falling apart, I would argue in contrast that the democrats are headed for disaster. Especially with how this Health Care Bill is coming together and how it is being done.

It will be interesting to see if the split causes Owens to win (I have little doubt that he will receive less than 50% of the vote) or if either Scozzafava or Hoffman is able to come out on top. Even if Owens wins it will be interesting to see who does better out of Scozzafava and Hoffman – and by how much.