The Conservative Party (a REAL party)

[nate895]

Since the Libertarians and Constitutionalists are really constituencies of what should be a much broader coalition party. Neither of them have the slightest hope of gaining seats outside of a proportional system. If both of them could be combined with independent conservatives/libertarians/constitutionalists to fight for their shared beliefs, since they are all very similar, then they can really gain some traction. That is the problem with most third parties, they become so Gestapo-like in their enforcement of the platform, down to the letter, that they are unable to fight for what is really important. Another thing both parties lack is money. If a new party was able to get the majority of both parties aboard (which would probably kill the CP entirely), they could have two and a half million dollars at their disposal without much effort, as opposed to around two million for the LP, and three-quarters of a million for the CP. If they could then harness the power of the Ron Paul fund raising might, they'd have enough money to win a few seats in the House and Senate to give liberty a larger voice in DC.

We need at least three people per state to help in organization in the initial phase, one can serve as the temporary chairperson, and the other two can serve as temporary committeemen/women. As soon as we can get somewhat organized in enough states to both theoretically win the electoral college vote and win the majority in the House and Senate we can call our first convention (hopefully early next year) to organize the national party and form the national committee.

Post if you are willing to help, your state, and/or any opinions you might have.

Edit: New York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts have Conservative Parties. In New Jersey it appear to be able to be taken over easily, and NEw York looks too hard with 40,000+ members, and I am unsure of Massachusetts.

State (EV)- number of necessary spots filled
people who have filled them

Alabama (9)-0/3
Alaska (3)-0/3
Arizona (10)-0/3
Arkansas (6)-0/3
California (55)-1/3
Kombayn
Colorado (9)-0/3
Connecticut (7)-0/3
Delaware (3)-0/3
District of Columbia (3)-0/3
Florida (27)-0/3
Georgia (15)-0/3
Hawaii (4)-0/3
Idaho (4)-0/3
Illinois (21)-0/3
Indiana (11)-0/3
Iowa (7)-0/3
Kansas (6)-0/3
Kentucky (8)-0/3
Louisiana (9)-0/3
Maine (4)-0/3
Maryland (10)-0/3
Massachusetts (12)-0/3
Michigan (17)-0/3
Minnesota (10)-1/3
gjvrieze
Mississippi (6)-0/3
Missouri (11)-0/3
Montana (3)-0/3
Nebraska (5)-0/3
Nevada (5)-0/3
New Hampshire (4)-0/3
New Jersey (15)-1/3
JosephTheLibertarian
New Mexico (5)-0/3
New York (31)-0/3
North Carolina (15)-0/3
North Dakota (3)-0/3
Ohio (20)-0/3
Oklahoma (7)-0/3
Oregon (7)-0/3
Pennsylvania (21)-0/3
Rhode Island (4)-0/3
South Carolina (8)-0/3
South Dakota (3)-0/3
Tennessee (11)-0/3
Texas (34)-0/3
Utah (5)-0/3
Vermont (3)-0/3
Virginia (13)-0/3
Washington (11)-2/3 (haven't spoken to any fellow Paulites as of yet outside the home)
West Virginia (5)-1/3
Gin
Wisconsin (10)-0/3
Wyoming (3)-0/3

[Flash]

Great idea! There has been the idea floating around to merge the Libertarian/Constitution party, I managed to find this site recently:
http://libertyparty.org/
You should probably contact these people too.

[nate895]

Great idea! There has been the idea floating around to merge the Libertarian/Constitution party, I managed to find this site recently:
http://libertyparty.org/
You should probably contact these people too.

They look good. The reason why I picked the "Conservative" Party though was that it would get several people from outside the current "liberty movement," such as the three million who supported Pat Buchanan in '92, and others who aren't inclined to vote for a "Liberty" Party without talking to them about it. Conservative party would get party affiliation simply from the name. Look at the American Independent Party in CA. There is no way they have that many subscribers to their beliefs in that state.

[RoamZero]

Why stop at just merging those two parties? Why not fold them in with the Republicans to help continue the fight to take back the GOP?

[nate895]

Why stop at just merging those two parties? Why not fold them in with the Republicans to help continue the fight to take back the GOP?

You guys can focus on that. This would include all disenfranchised conservatives, as long as they would sign a statement of principles for membership. Something like "I support the Constitution as a binding document and do not support any measure by the Federal beyond what is allowed by the Constitution of the United States."

[Captain America]

other countries have parties that band together to acomplish the goal of gaining a minority. i hope with all of the being that is what the BIG news is going to be later this week

[nate895]

other countries have parties that band together to acomplish the goal of gaining a minority. i hope with all of the being that is what the BIG news is going to be later this week

The difference is that most of those countries have either proportional systems (which I advocate here on a state-by-state basis) or they have really small constituencies for their national assemblies. UK Constituencies are about as large as a legislative district in my state.

[ChickenHawk]

Third party members tend to be uncompromising. It's their way or the highway. Anyone that disagrees with them are shills for the NWO and should be thrown in jail for treason. Not likely these kinds of people are going to get together and find common ground even if there is substantial amounts of it.

[nate895]

Third party members tend to be uncompromising. It's their way or the highway. Anyone that disagrees with them are shills for the NWO and should be thrown in jail for treason. Not likely these kinds of people are going to get together and find common ground even if there is substantial amounts of it.

The leaders might be uncompromising, but I believe most of the members would still be able to separate themselves from the party if they see a principled coalition party. I just want to experiment with it and see if we can get this thing together. I think if we can get to be a "major-minor" party by next Presidential Election, the LP and CP might unite behind it.

[kombayn]

I like the idea. You should talk to minor 3rd parties in states with ballot-access for the next election. Get affiliations too. The Conservative Party could become it's own Unity brand for LP/CP members to jump-ship. There are many options available if you look into it.

[Gin]

I think it's a great idea.... Count me in for WV.. It would give the true Conservatives a place to go.. I think it would pull from across the spectrum... especially after this current election being such a sham... no one wants either party really.. but alot of folks believe they don't have a choice... A Conservative Party would give them that choice.

[nate895]

I think it's a great idea.... Count me in for WV.. It would give the true Conservatives a place to go.. I think it would pull from across the spectrum... especially after this current election being such a sham... no one wants either party really.. but alot of folks believe they don't have a choice... A Conservative Party would give them that choice.

Thank you, and bump.

[nate895]

I like the idea. You should talk to minor 3rd parties in states with ballot-access for the next election. Get affiliations too. The Conservative Party could become it's own Unity brand for LP/CP members to jump-ship. There are many options available if you look into it.

We would talk to local/state affiliates of the LP and CP, as well as members as soon as we can get organized, and if we can prove that we can raise money and be more successful than they are.

[nate895]

bump

[kombayn]

We would talk to local/state affiliates of the LP and CP, as well as members as soon as we can get organized, and if we can prove that we can raise money and be more successful than they are.

That's awesome. I know the Constitution Party of Montana doesn't have an affiliate, neither does the Natural Law Party's in Michigan & Mississippi or the Louisiana Taxpayers Party and what about the Reform Party in Kansas or the other 3 Reform Party's? Plus, I'm sure the Independent Greens of Virginia Party would be interested, they'll do anything for press. You also have the American Independent Party in California who may break its allegiance to the Constitution Party as its national affiliate. Anyone know how to become an official National party? I would have to do more research but if you can get 20 affiliations to go with brand new Conservative Party, that I think would work out well. I don't see the Libertarian Party or Constitution Party merging together anytime soon, but I could see a lot of disenfranchised members of the Party's jumping-ship to a TRUE Conservative Party. You can also put me down as a delegate or whatever for the State of California.

[nate895]

That's awesome. I know the Constitution Party of Montana doesn't have an affiliate, neither does the Natural Law Party's in Michigan & Mississippi or the Louisiana Taxpayers Party and what about the Reform Party in Kansas or the other 3 Reform Party's? Plus, I'm sure the Independent Greens of Virginia Party would be interested, they'll do anything for press. You also have the American Independent Party in California who may break its allegiance to the Constitution Party as its national affiliate. Anyone know how to become an official National party? I would have to do more research but if you can get 20 affiliations to go with brand new Conservative Party, that I think would work out well. I don't see the Libertarian Party or Constitution Party merging together anytime soon, but I could see a lot of disenfranchised members of the Party's jumping-ship to a TRUE Conservative Party. You can also put me down as a delegate or whatever for the State of California.

In order to become a national party, a national party committee must hold a national convention and support several candidates in several states for House and Senate. In order to form a national party committee, you need to open a bank account in the committee's name, have a treasurer, and submit paperwork to the FEC. I was hoping that someone in the Virginia/Maryland/DC area could officially form the national committee because that would make it easier to hire consultants who know their shit and when we eventually get enough money to move in with the big boys at the Watergate Complex, we might get press coverage (especially if we pick up seats in Congress and a few Governor's mansions in 2010).

The Montana CP would be a good place to start. The Natural Law Party wouldn't go for it. I am not sure about the Reformers, but I think AIP would have at least a 50/50 shot at affiliation, but we couldn't count on them.

[kombayn]

In order to become a national party, a national party committee must hold a national convention and support several candidates in several states for House and Senate. In order to form a national party committee, you need to open a bank account in the committee's name, have a treasurer, and submit paperwork to the FEC. I was hoping that someone in the Virginia/Maryland/DC area could officially form the national committee because that would make it easier to hire consultants who know their shit and when we eventually get enough money to move in with the big boys at the Watergate Complex, we might get press coverage (especially if we pick up seats in Congress and a few Governor's mansions in 2010).

The Montana CP would be a good place to start. The Natural Law Party wouldn't go for it. I am not sure about the Reformers, but I think AIP would have at least a 50/50 shot at affiliation, but we couldn't count on them.

Yeah I figured as much about the Natural Law Party. Anyways, I got your PM and I'll start looking into starting the party. Hell I'll run under that banner for Mayor of my City. :) But I think affiliations are key to a National movement. We'll have to start discussing a platform. Maybe take the Boston Tea Party internet approach to building the party up.

[nate895]

Yeah I figured as much about the Natural Law Party. Anyways, I got your PM and I'll start looking into starting the party. Hell I'll run under that banner for Mayor of my City. :) But I think affiliations are key to a National movement. We'll have to start discussing a platform. Maybe take the Boston Tea Party internet approach to building the party up.

What we should do is form preliminary charters/platform/rules online and then get an official convention to gather and make everything official.

[nate895]

Bump

[nate895]

One last bump for the day

[nate895]

If Ron Paul doesn't unite the right-wing third parties tomorrow,we need to.

[Knightskye]

No mergers.

[nate895]

No mergers.

I said to unite these factions behind one party. If those parties continue their operations despite an already successful third party's existence who has taken their membership, that is their choice.

[Grimnir Wotansvolk]

The word conservative has been hopelessly tarnished, you'll make NO headway using it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49oZDvTKXv0

[nate895]

The word conservative has been hopelessly tarnished, you'll make NO headway using it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49oZDvTKXv0

Edit: Just because Lew Rockwell says something doesn't make it true. Simply from the fact that someone has stolen the name and used it for their own purposes, doesn't mean that I should rename my philosophy. If I do that, it is merely giving them a victory. This is a fight for the conservative movement, and I am not backing out of it just because a man who is smart, and yet doesn't vote, tells me to.

Anyway, conservative would make tons of headway.

The latest poll I could find, late 2005, had conservatives at 36%, "moderates" at 41%, and liberals at 18%.

Generally, things like that don't change much. Also, if you had money you could make clear your distaste for the war and other so-called "conservative" policies.

[Craig_R]

you do know that the Libertarian party was started by conservatives disenfranchised with the Republican party, right?
You must also know that the Constitution party was started by Libertarians disenfranchised by the Libertarian party right?

It seems adding yet ANOTHER party is exactly what is NOT needed. Unity of "third" parties would go a long way, however, all these different parties were started for a reason.

It would seem effort to bring the Republican party back to its conservative roots would probably bring the rest back into the fold.

[nate895]

you do know that the Libertarian party was started by conservatives disenfranchised with the Republican party, right?
You must also know that the Constitution party was started by Libertarians disenfranchised by the Libertarian party right?

It seems adding yet ANOTHER party is exactly what is NOT needed. Unity of "third" parties would go a long way, however, all these different parties were started for a reason.

It would seem effort to bring the Republican party back to its conservative roots would probably bring the rest back into the fold.

The GOP cannot be retaken. I do know of the history of the third parties, and the CP was formed after Howard Philips distaste of the GOP as well. He didn't join the LP because of differences on several social issues.

If a new party can demonstrate strength and win a few seats in the House and Senate, most of the CP and LP will quickly fall into the party.

What you need to win a few seats and governor's mansions is money. All third parties currently lack it, but I believe that if this one could raise enough it can win offices throughout the country.

[nate895]

Well, since RP didn't do anything really major, actually uniting any of the third party efforts, I think we will have to go about that effort ourselves.

[nate895]

This party can develop rules to keep opportunists like Barr from interfering with the future of the movement, and since the LP has been taken over by Glenn Beck-types, who are half on are side, half-not, we can make a party that is fully on our side, and reclaim the conservative title while we're at it. Let's set out to convert the masses, not vote for their shills.

[heavenlyboy34]

No mergers.

+1111 Competition between schools of thought on liberty keeps us strong. :D Parties are silly, anyways. The only point of using the party system is to work within the system to bring reform.

[nate895]

+1111 Competition between schools of thought on liberty keeps us strong. :D Parties are silly, anyways. The only point of using the party system is to work within the system to bring reform.

The party system is the only way to unite us in the absence of Ron Paul. Ron Paul is the only thing keeping things together at this point, and we need something for when he eventually retires to rally behind, and since retaking the GOP is futile, and the CP and LP are tarnished and unsalvageable as brand names and cannot our several factions, a new party with Ron Paul's basic philosophy is the only way to unite us.

[nate895]

Someone to work in Minnesota!

[kombayn]

//

[nate895]

bump

[Grimnir Wotansvolk]

You must also know that the Constitution party was started by Libertarians disenfranchised by the Libertarian party right?The constitution party was formed by religious wingnuts who can't stomach real freedom

[nate895]

The constitution party was formed by religious wingnuts who can't stomach real freedom

Not all Constitutionalists are that way. Anyway, we can get them to vote for freedom, as evidenced by their support for Ron Paul. If you cannot compromise and let everyone agree to abide by the US Constitution and then go back to their state to govern that state the way they see fit, the movement will never go anywhere.

[Flash]

I'm just wondering, are there other right-wing parties besides the Constituionalists and Libertarians that could be united into this new party as well?


I think we will have to go about that effort ourselves.

Why not? Some of the biggest things like the money bomb happened purely on grassroots efforts alone.

[nate895]

I'm just wondering, are there other right-wing parties besides the Constituionalists and Libertarians that could be united into this new party as well?



Why not? Some of the biggest things like the money bomb happened purely on grassroots efforts alone.

Yes, there is the conservative wing of the Reform Party (nearly defunct), the America First Party, Independent Conservatives, and numerous others that can be incorporated. None have a lot of ballot access or much of a money base besides the LP, CP, Reformers, disenchanted Republicans, and Independent Conservatives, but every little bit helps.

Edit: For a nearly complete list of political parties and descriptions go to: http://www.politics1.com/parties.htm.

The reason I was lamenting that we had to do it ourselves is that Ron Paul putting it together would mean that it would get immediate press, money, and loads of support. As it stands now, we need to go around to each Ron Paul site and try to get as many recruits as possible. If anyone has an account at the Daily Paul, I'd like for them to put this up there if they'd like to help.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

I'll serve in New Jersey

[nate895]

I'll serve in New Jersey

Thank you, but I have found a problem which I didn't know about before. It appears that there is already a Conservative Party in New Jersey, and there is one in New York and Massachusetts as well. There is nothing filed with the FEC for anything on a National basis, which is what I was looking for originally, so it doesn't appear that there is a National party, and if there, we have to race them to file with the FEC first.

Anyway, you need to come up with a different name for the New Jersey party or attempt a takeover, which would appear to be easy on the account that there are 45 members in the entire state of New Jersey, behind everyone but the Natural Law Party.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Thank you, but I have found a problem which I didn't know about before. It appears that there is already a Conservative Party in New Jersey, and there is one in New York and Massachusetts as well. There is nothing filed with the FEC for anything on a National basis, which is what I was looking for originally, so it doesn't appear that there is a National party, and if there, we have to race them to file with the FEC first.

Anyway, you need to come up with a different name for the New Jersey party or attempt a takeover, which would appear to be easy on the account that there are 45 members in the entire state of New Jersey, behind everyone but the Natural Law Party.

How about we go by the name and we [I] take over the state organization as we enter the recruiting stage? I'll research it and I'll cordinate a takeover effort with new NJ recruits.

[nate895]

How about we go by the name and we [I] take over the state organization as we enter the recruiting stage? I'll research it and I'll cordinate a takeover effort with new NJ recruits.

Sounds like a good idea to me. Eliminates bureaucratic junk most of the rest of us will have to go through.

[nate895]

After digging, I have found a national Conservative Party organization, with a state party affiliate in Massachusetts. It is a new organization that appears to have popped up, since it was nowhere on my Google searches I did before, but is now 5 on the list. Since it has not filed with the FEC, held a National Convention, and is called the American Conservative Party (I had intended to file it as the Conservative Party of the United States), there appears to be a need to file as soon as we can figure out what we are doing. Their forum activity indicates they have fallen into line with the GOP due to Palin, so we have a few months to move before they will even start to think of filing.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

After digging, I have found a national Conservative Party organization, with a state party affiliate in Massachusetts. It is a new organization that appears to have popped up, since it was nowhere on my Google searches I did before, but is now 5 on the list. Since it has not filed with the FEC, held a National Convention, and is called the American Conservative Party (I had intended to file it as the Conservative Party of the United States), there appears to be a need to file as soon as we can figure out what we are doing. Their forum activity indicates they have fallen into line with the GOP due to Palin, so we have a few months to move before they will even start to think of filing.

hmm. NJ? Or Mass?

[nate895]

hmm. NJ? Or Mass?

Just Massachusetts considers itself an affiliate, New Jersey's party doesn't have a website, so it is possible with that one as well. Nationally, they are barely organized and haven't posted anything on their forum in a week, though the front page is littered with short blog posts.

[Josh_LA]

Oh yes, just what we need, a new 3rd party wannabe.

Forget the efforts of American Conservative Union, Pat Buchanan's America First Party and Council of Conservative Citizens.

[Scotso]

I have a real problem with the use of "Conservative" and what it implies. Just the name alone will dictate how some people view the party.

On the Nolan Chart, Conservatives are defined as people who believe in strong economic freedoms but not social ones. I'm a libertarian, I believe in strong freedoms in both.

[nate895]

I have a real problem with the use of "Conservative" and what it implies. Just the name alone will dictate how some people view the party.

On the Nolan Chart, Conservatives are defined as people who believe in strong economic freedoms but not social ones. I'm a libertarian, I believe in strong freedoms in both.

Nolan Chart is not the end all, be all, on political definitions. It really depends on what type of conservative you are. Conservatism is broadly defined as conserving something. Fiscal conservatives want to conserve money, cultural conservatives (AKA social conservatives) want to conserve the traditional social structure, and American Conservatives want to conserve the original ideals of America, which is limited-government libertarianism. We would define ourselves as American Conservatives (AKA Constitutional conservatives).

Of course in other countries this is different. Conservatism in the former Soviet Union, for example, would be a communist philosophy, or wanting a return of the Tsar. In China it would be a return to nationalist government from before the communist revolution, or return to the old days of the Imperial monarchy. Every country has different breeds of conservatives, that is why it is dumb to lump them into one basket.

[Flash]

I think it would be a good idea to invite some Blue Dog Democrats who seem to hold some pretty Conservative views.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Conservative+Democrats&btnG=Google+Search

[nate895]

I think it would be a good idea to invite some Blue Dog Democrats who seem to hold some pretty Conservative views.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Conservative+Democrats&btnG=Google+Search

Everyone will be welcome as long as they will agree to abide by the Constitution of the Federal government in Federal office, and their state Constitution in state office.

[sailor]

They look good. The reason why I picked the "Conservative" Party though was that it would get several people from outside the current "liberty movement," such as the three million who supported Pat Buchanan in '92, and others who aren't inclined to vote for a "Liberty" Party without talking to them about it. Conservative party would get party affiliation simply from the name. Look at the American Independent Party in CA. There is no way they have that many subscribers to their beliefs in that state.

But it could also have other problems... "Conservative" label brings its own baggage. There will be some people instantly opposed to you because of it. Others will dissmiss you out of hand and will never consider listening to you. You will have a hard time explaining how are you different from the Republicans to most people. Most people mostly think of cultural and morality issues when it comes to conservativism and Republicans have got that pretty well covered. And with an old label like that it may be harder to appear fresh and get grassroots enthusiasm really taking off. People will work their nuts for a programme they really belive in. But could be less enthusiastic about a watered down, compromise, big-tent deal.

Just some food for thought, don`t let it discourage you. And good luck!

[nate895]

But it could also have other problems... "Conservative" label brings its own baggage. There will be some people instantly opposed to you because of it. Others will dissmiss you out of hand and will never consider listening to you. You will have a hard time explaining how are you different from the Republicans to most people. Most people mostly think of cultural and morality issues when it comes to conservativism and Republicans have got that pretty well covered. And with an old label like that it may be harder to appear fresh and get grassroots enthusiasm really taking off. People will work their nuts for a programme they really belive in. But could be less enthusiastic about a watered down, compromise, big-tent deal.

Just some food for thought, don`t let it discourage you. And good luck!

I took that into consideration, but the label "conservative" according to the polls is not viewed unfavorably by the majority of Americans, whereas "liberal" is, and libertarian, like it or not, is associated with liberal. With money, we can get out the message that we are real, American Conservatives, not neocon globalist liberty-haters, which would improve the label tremendously.

[sailor]

It would seem effort to bring the Republican party back to its conservative roots would probably bring the rest back into the fold.

But the Republican party doesn`t have conservative roots to begin with. It just became a refuge for conservatives around the time of the great society.

[sailor]

Since it has not filed with the FEC, held a National Convention, and is called the American Conservative Party (I had intended to file it as the Conservative Party of the United States), there appears to be a need to file as soon as we can figure out what we are doing. Their forum activity indicates they have fallen into line with the GOP due to Palin, so we have a few months to move before they will even start to think of filing.

Good thinking. Conservative Party of the United States is a better name than American Conservative Party. It gives out the whole federalist decentralising wibe right away.

[nate895]

Good thinking. Conservative Party of the United States is a better name than American Conservative Party. It gives out the whole federalist decentralising wibe right away.

Yeah, I hate any national party with the term "American" in front of it. It really makes it seem like we are truly one nation, and there is no other "American" nation, which of course, there are dozens of others.

[The_Orlonater]

What about us Liberals?

[Havax]

The name Conservative party has too much of a stigma to begin with, terrible idea.

The LAST thing we need is to further divide the small # of people who share a liberty philosophy of constitutional adherence and limited government into another party. This is where Ron Paul has done an absolutely terrible job. His supporters are not evenly divided between Baldwin and Barr where neither will get a significant number of votes.

The plan should be to merge the two parties or have some sort of system where the CP and LP endorse one or the other during primary season. This would concentrate the maximum amount of votes for a 3rd party and make it more and more of a chance each year that a 3rd party candidate can actually be elected.

There is no better time now than to promote 3rd party as our economy is going to be in chaos and people will realize the R's and D's have no solutions other than band-aids on broken legs.

[nate895]

What about us Liberals?

As explained in a previous post, American Conservative=Classical liberalism/libertarianism.

[nate895]

The name Conservative party has too much of a stigma to begin with, terrible idea.

The LAST thing we need is to further divide the small # of people who share a liberty philosophy of constitutional adherence and limited government into another party. This is where Ron Paul has done an absolutely terrible job. His supporters are not evenly divided between Baldwin and Barr where neither will get a significant number of votes.

The plan should be to merge the two parties or have some sort of system where the CP and LP endorse one or the other during primary season. This would concentrate the maximum amount of votes for a 3rd party and make it more and more of a chance each year that a 3rd party candidate can actually be elected.

There is no better time now than to promote 3rd party as our economy is going to be in chaos and people will realize the R's and D's have no solutions other than band-aids on broken legs.

This party would be a combination of those two parties. Conservative Party is a good idea since it would have almost 40% of the voters already identifying with it, and more than half have "favorable" views of conservatism.

[The_Orlonater]

As explained in a previous post, American Conservative=Classical liberalism/libertarianism.

How the hell is that possible?

Most of you paleo-cons disagree with us classical liberals on social issues.

Some of you a protectionists, some of you don't support gay marriage and that the state shouldn't intervene in marriage, and you guys are probably pro-life too.

They're two different things. I'm not insulting anybody or anything.

Eh, I'll just start a "Liberal Party," if the LP tanks.

[nate895]

How the hell is that possible?

Most of you paleo-cons disagree with us classical liberals on social issues.

Some of you a protectionists, some of you don't support gay marriage and that the state shouldn't intervene in marriage, and you guys are probably pro-life too.

They're two different things. I'm not insulting anybody or anything.

Eh, I'll just start a "Liberal Party," if the LP tanks.

American Conservatism (as opposed to paleoconservative) would be the conservation of the values that America was founded upon, the values of liberty and natural rights, AKA classical liberalism/libertarianism. I am pro-life, but that is entirely consistent with our founding principles, but I don't support state intervention in marriage at all, and I am not a protectionist, my favorite subject on here is economics, so that would be weird if I disagreed on one of my main issues.

[The_Orlonater]

American Conservatism (as opposed to paleoconservative) would be the conservation of the values that America was founded upon, the values of liberty and natural rights, AKA classical liberalism/libertarianism. I am pro-life, but that is entirely consistent with our founding principles, but I don't support state intervention in marriage at all, and I am not a protectionist, my favorite subject on here is economics, so that would be weird if I disagreed on one of my main issues.

Eh, we are switching words every century.

[nate895]

Eh, we are switching words every century.

But we're talking about the true root of the word. The word conservative means someone who subscribes to the philosophy of conservatism. The philosophy of conservatism is different depending on the adjective you place in front of it. In Russia, conservative can well be defined as a communist, but in America, an American Conservative is anyone who believes in conserving the ideals of America. Of course there is also Cultural conservatism, fiscal conservatism, and other forms of conservative, but they are different since they aren't using the same adjective, though they generally agree on most issues with a regular-old American Conservative.

[The_Orlonater]

Conservatism is a social stance. It's revolved around choices based by religion, cultural, or national views.

So American Conservatism is conserving Classical Liberalism?

Eh, we should've sticked with Liberal.

[nate895]

Conservatism is a social stance. It's revolved around choices based by religion, cultural, or national views.

So American Conservatism is conserving Classical Liberalism?

Eh, we should've sticked with Liberal.

Problem with liberal: most people don't like liberal. Go consult a poll, many more people like conservative than liberal.

[The_Orlonater]

Problem with liberal: most people don't like liberal. Go consult a poll, many more people like conservative than liberal.

What the hell is long wrong with Liberal? Great Liberals influenced Ron Paul a lot.

People can recognize neo-conservatism, but not social liberalism/neo-liberalism.

[nate895]

What the hell is long wrong with Liberal? Great Liberals influenced Ron Paul a lot.

People can recognize neo-conservatism, but not social liberalism/neo-liberalism.

I'm saying it isn't a politically viable name. Conservative is proven and can win elections, and has the world over. More than two times the amount of people who identify as "liberal (18% at last available poll)" identify as "conservative (37%)" and when you factor in favorability ratings, conservatives still come out on top.

[heavenlyboy34]

Nolan Chart is not the end all, be all, on political definitions. It really depends on what type of conservative you are. Conservatism is broadly defined as conserving something. Fiscal conservatives want to conserve money, cultural conservatives (AKA social conservatives) want to conserve the traditional social structure, and American Conservatives want to conserve the original ideals of America, which is limited-government libertarianism. We would define ourselves as American Conservatives (AKA Constitutional conservatives).

Of course in other countries this is different. Conservatism in the former Soviet Union, for example, would be a communist philosophy, or wanting a return of the Tsar. In China it would be a return to nationalist government from before the communist revolution, or return to the old days of the Imperial monarchy. Every country has different breeds of conservatives, that is why it is dumb to lump them into one basket.

Would this inherent diverse view of "conservative" not lend itself to creating splits in the party-with some trying to dominate over others? (as has happened in the other major 3rd parties)

[The_Orlonater]

What kind of poll was it? Nowadays, "liberalism" is socialism.

[nate895]

Would this inherent diverse view of "conservative" not lend itself to creating splits in the party-with some trying to dominate over others? (as has happened in the other major 3rd parties)

They agree on almost all issues, in fact fiscal conservatives are nearly 100% in line. With cultural conservatives, we can tell them that we are living their issues up to the states (where they belong), and if they don't like it, they can GTFO. There will always be infighting, but that is human nature. If you gather a hundred people in a room, they will disagree on something, wind up fighting over it, and then they will come out and blame it on someone else.

[nate895]

What kind of poll was it? Nowadays, "liberalism" is socialism.

And it would take a lot longer to get that label away from "liberal," a lot longer than it would take for conservatives to separate from the pro-war label.

[The_Orlonater]

And it would take a lot longer to get that label away from "liberal," a lot longer than it would take for conservatives to separate from the pro-war label.

I thought most people thought being conservative is being pro-war.

[nate895]

I thought most people thought being conservative is being pro-war.

That would be weird with the polling data (I can't find the poll right now, I'm digging though). The data would suggest, that while conservative popularity has gone down, they are still viewed favorably by the majority of the country, which is anti-war, which would either suggest that they aren't pro-war, or they know that isn't what being a conservative is about.

[The_Orlonater]

That would be weird with the polling data (I can't find the poll right now, I'm digging though). The data would suggest, that while conservative popularity has gone down, they are still viewed favorably by the majority of the country, which is anti-war, which would either suggest that they aren't pro-war, or they know that isn't what being a conservative is about.

Well, it's most people I talk too.

But then again I live in Chicago.

[nate895]

But then again I live in Chicago.

I live outside Portland, Oregon, and I do know "conservative" isn't the majority around here, but I do know that it is in the mid-40% range, I'd guess (favorability, not identified). If you live within a city, or in certain suburbs, you will have more liberals than conservatives, but you leave the city and there are NO liberals.

[The_Orlonater]

I live outside Portland, Oregon, and I do know "conservative" isn't the majority around here, but I do know that it is in the mid-40% range, I'd guess (favorability, not identified). If you live within a city, or in certain suburbs, you will have more liberals than conservatives, but you leave the city and there are NO liberals.

Heh, that's pretty true.

[nate895]

I finally found a poll:

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=548 (http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=548)

It's old, but this particular statistic hasn't changed much in 30 years, so I think it's pretty accurate.

[nate895]

Heh, that's pretty true.

I used to live in the country, and I did a poll of my third grade class for 2000:

14: Bush (:o one was me)
1: Harry Browne
4: Gore
1: Nader, so I guess there was at least one liberal

[The_Orlonater]

I used to live in the country, and I did a poll of my third grade class for 2000:

14: Bush (:o one was me)
1: Harry Browne
4: Gore
1: Nader, so I guess there was at least one liberal

I'd consider Nader a modern socialist leaning liberal.

[nate895]

I'd consider Nader a modern socialist leaning liberal.

So would I. The good and bad thing about liberal is that it can be anything you want it to be except conservatism. The good and bad thing about conservatism is that it can't be anything but a very narrow definition, depending on which type you subscribe to.

[The_Orlonater]

So would I. The good and bad thing about liberal is that it can be anything you want it to be except conservatism. The good and bad thing about conservatism is that it can't be anything but a very narrow definition, depending on which type you subscribe to.

We still switched vocabulary terms.

Anyway, are you going to make this party?

[nate895]

We still switched vocabulary terms.

Anyway, are you going to make this party?

If I can get enough people by the end of the year. If not, I'll just sit back and watch, run as a Republican for State House in 2010, and hope the LP or CP emerge as a force to be reckoned, a new party forms and gains traction, or we take over the GOP by some miracle of God.

[The_Orlonater]

I might run in 20.

I'll run as a dem, though.
A lot of things can change in 12 years, though.

[nate895]

I might run in 20.

I'll run as a dem, though.
A lot of things can change in 12 years, though.

Do it when you're 18, I might be. It sure as heck would be fun, and if I got elected, it would help pay for college.

[The_Orlonater]

Do it when you're 18, I might be. It sure as heck would be fun, and if I got elected, it would help pay for college.

You have to be 25.

[nate895]

You have to be 25.

State House, not US House, in my state you have to be a qualified voter, no more, no less.

[The_Orlonater]

State House, not US House, in my state you have to be a qualified voter, no more, no less.

No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.

[nate895]

No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.

Section 7, Washington State Constitution:


SECTION 7 QUALIFICATIONS OF LEGISLATORS. No person shall be eligible to the legislature who shall not be a citizen of the United States and a qualified voter in the district for which he is chosen.

I am a US Citizen, last I checked, and I will be qualified to vote.

[The_Orlonater]

Section 7, Washington State Constitution:



I am a US Citizen, last I checked, and I will be qualified to vote.

I took that from the U.S. Constitution.

[nate895]

I took that from the U.S. Constitution.

Which only talks about Representatives to the United State House of Representatives, I am talking about my state legislator's lower chamber.

[The_Orlonater]

Which only talks about Representatives to the United State House of Representatives, I am talking about my state legislator's lower chamber.

Oh, you're running for your state's? I wanted to run for the US. Lol

[nate895]

Oh, you're running for your state's? I wanted to run for the US. Lol

State House for a few years, simply because I have nothing better to do and my friends are putting me up to it. Then I'll leave the state and go become an Austrian Economist at the Mises Institute, or at a university somewhere.

[The_Orlonater]

Yeah, maybe I should do my state's.Illinois is such a communist state.

[nate895]

Yeah, maybe I should do my state's.Illinois is such a communist state.

I used to have an uncle who lived in Naperville, he said taxes were ridiculous, and he went into South side one time (my family made that mistake on a trip, won't be doing that again), he got his tires changed at a street light.

[nate895]

bump