Where things stand.

William Kanninen WKanninen at AOL.COM
Thu Feb 15 00:58:06 MST 1996


Dennis Putnam wrote:

<<I think you omitted what is probably THE most important factor:    >>

 << 5) Can the candidate beat Clinton?>>

I believe that my factor #<< 3)  The electability of the candidate.>> covers
that point.

He continued: <<In my opinion that is the goal that is paramount. If Clinton
wins it will>> <<be the end of the conservative opportunity because the
congressional majority>>
<<will also likely be lost and a veto-proof majority will be impossible.>>
SNIP
<< However, I reiterate that, other than Lugar, any one on the list would be
better than>>
<<Clinton.>>

Better for the country in the short term yes, but we have seen in the
Eisenhower, Nixon,
Ford, and Bush administrations that Congressional conservatives are unwilling
to oppose liberal and centrist positions of a GOP President.  If a centrist
GOP candidate is elected President, the conservatives in Congress will cease
to push for a conservative agenda, and the conservative movement will be in
the same position it was in when Eisenhower, having defeated the conservative
Taft for the nomination, ended all pretense of the Republican party as the
conservative party.  To see what this was like, read the early issues of
National Review at your library.  If we are to lose 45 years of establishing
a potential conservative majority, and have to wait until the year 2040 to
see another opportunity, I will be in no position to participate.  The
country can survive 4 more years of Clinton, even with a re-established
Congressional Democrat majority (which is demographically unlikely).  I do
not think this would be the case if a Dole-Powell 12 years leaves this
country with no political conservative movement.



More information about the Rushtalk mailing list