There are a lot of elitist republicans who still feel the only eligible people for public office are graduates of the ivy league. The centrists feel that the ivy league is full of idiots and don’t want to vote for them. The GOP has this quaint idea that the nominees for office should be the next one in line. Not who is electable but who’s turn it is i.e. Bob Dole.

The GOP is always calling me and inundating me with mail asking for money. When they call I tell them when the GOP gets a spine then I might contribut to them, otherwise not. And the pundits on our side (sorta) do nothing for our cause. I have toyed with the idea of becoming an independent but why bother. I will never ever vote for a democrat and as far as I am concerned that is the only other choice.

“However [political parties] may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.” George Washington

I agree with much of that article, but the truth is the centrists don’t flip flop. When insulted for not being as pure as the purists they move on. That is clearly indicated by the fact the independents are growing and neither party is – people are fed up with the partisans.

Just came across this and it makes my point about Afghanistan:

The American people are growing increasingly wary. In a new CNN/Opinion research poll, fully 54% of respondents now say they oppose the U.S.-led fight against the Taliban and their Al Qaeda allies. Those are striking numbers, and a serious warning to the Obama administration.
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2009/08/17/2009-08-17_obama_must_learn_from_vietnam_gen_wesley_clark_gives_the_president_advice_for_af.html?print=1&page=all

I, of course support our efforts in Afghanistan (as I did in Iraq). I just wish Gen Wesley Clark (author of above article) was as supportive of Bush as he is trying to be for Obama.

AJ, the Iraq War was a major issue for the Dems against the Repubs in 2008. Go back and listen to them on the campaign trail. I don’t think it was Bush’s policies either, I think Americans were simply war weary and not seeing Iraq progress move fast enough.

Obama may fall into the same scenerio with Afghanistan in 2010.

We disagree on the immigration issue still. If Repubs screwed up the immigration issue so badly that they lost elections in 2008 due to it, then why have they been more trusted on the immigration issue consistently since February 2009? Nothing has happened on immigration this year to change anything.

And, then there is this:

70% of Voters Say Gaining Control of Borders is More Important Than Legalizing Undocumented Workers (8/14/09)
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/most_recent_videos2/politics/70_of_voters_say_gaining_control_of_borders_is_more_important_than_legalizing_undocumented_workers

Americans clearly wanted “border security” first. Even McCain had to admit that before he ran for President. And, while 70% say “border control” is main priority; the importance of a pathway to citizenship is more evenly divided (52% important/ 41% not important/7% unsure).

Other than that, I agree with you that the country is “center right” and you would think a “center right” coalition could be successful. I still think the Repubs have a message problem, but there has been some improvement. I think they could learn from Palin’s recent approach on this aspect. She comes out and says it fearlessly in plain English, sticks by it, and handles rebuttles with lightning speed. As a matter of fact, they could learn from some of those knowledgable town hall people also.

And, yes, tone of conversation matters. But, you can’t reign everyone in.

You can’t just blame W’s fortunes on the “true conservatives” who abandoned him. W got stamped with the “failure” moniker because, before the selfish “true conservatives” abandoned him, the “moderates” threw him overboard.

You could tell when this happened by listening to Mort Kondrake on Fox, or reading him in Roll Call. A lot of other centrists followed suit. They were the ones who started screaming “incompetent!” before the conservatives were (including the “true conservatives”).

The reason Obama is getting high marks on wars and policies Bush implemented, whereas Bush was pilloried for actually instuting those policies (and being honest and forthright to boot, in marked contrast to Obama’s leadership style as Commander-in-Chief), is because people have short memories, they had already been posioned against Bush the last time anybody polled them on these subjects, and, frankly, because the public is fickle.

I am not going to come in here and defend the “true conservatives”. I read a whole bunch of conservative websites daily, and most of them, and most of the conservative commentators, display a thinly-veiled contempt, if not an outright hostility towards Bush. They blame him for all of the right’s failures, while never even considering that the right may have failed him, in essence punishing him for being an honest and honorable man in a profession marked by its dishonesty.

However, those moderates, those centrists, were the first ones to stab him in the back. The Chuck Hagels and Colin Powells and Richard Armitages provided ballast to the charges and complaints the leftist fever swamps were developing from 2002 onward. Both camps are deserving of my animosity, at least. They combined are the reason that a truly good man is commonly and casually referred to on almost a daily basis as a disaster of epic and historical proportions.

I’ve always felt this is kind of a cop-out to say, but a pox on both their houses. They are the failures, not Bush.