The recent results in Miss and LA would seem to at least not contradict your supposition

Of course recent results in Kentucky and most importantly Virginia comletely undermines it

neo - in Virginia, at least northern Virginia where I live conservative Democrats defeated liberal Republicans. What is the lesson?

I, for the first time voted for a Democrat. He's one of my neighbors and was running for Delegate (thats like the House of Representatives.) Sadly, he lost. Why did I vote for him? Well,
I've known him for years.
He's a good guy.
He stuck up for the Cub Scouts when an idiot liberal PTO member tried to destroy them.
And he is more conservative on many issues especially gun control than the Republican he ran against.

I also voted for the Republican Sheriff who had to run as an Independent because he lost at the convention. He was endorsed by the NRA as the best candidate. We have county conventions here to pick many candidates. And frankly, they don't always result in the best choices - kind of like caucuses.

So what is the lesson? The lesson is to go conservative and ignore party affiliation. Almiranta correctly identified the risk. That you loose the ability to set the agenda if you're not in control. But, if they aren't doing what you want anyways.... what have you lost?

That's a good mantra

problem is the GOP nationally have lost their conservative ways.

Not conservative fiscally, governmentally or foreign policy wise. The only things they still have is social policy. This is why up here in the Northeast the Yankee Republican has disappeared

Its sad that dems are more conservative in many cases then Repubs what the hell is wrong with them

Its sad that dems are more conservative in many cases then Repubs what the hell is wrong with them

Posted by: neologizer

They are thinking for themselves instead of trolling the web looking for a brain. Neo you really need a new line of thought do you ever have a happy thought in that head of yours or is your BDS so bad now that you have lost that ability?

Geraghty from the article: The party will need good candidate recruitment, message discipline, a clear, unifying agenda, and a bit of good luck.

How are those things going so far?

The party will need good candidate recruitment, message discipline, a clear, unifying agenda, and a bit of good luck.

Or Hillary as the opposing candidate.

Will Republicans cling to what little hair Rudy has as he charges towards the 2008 election? It looks like Pat Roberston is willing to hold his nose and vote for a pro choice and gay marriage candidate.

plainjane: It looks like Pat Roberston is willing to hold his nose and vote for a pro choice and gay marriage candidate.

Isn't that amazing? Even when other, more principled alternatives are still available, "better than Hillary" is good enough for ole' Pat. An interesting bit of message discipline that. I'm beginning to think neocon's right -- the GOP's only hope is Hillary.

Rico -

Isn't that amazing? Even when other, more principled alternatives are still available, "better than Hillary" is good enough for ole' Pat.

It is amazing. But the movement conservatives are not just coalescing around Giuliani because he's "better than Hillary".

No, this phenomena is indicative of a more basic truth about the toadies who follow Bush, and who now seem poised to leap to Giuliani. All of this culture war BS and foaming at the mouth over "family values", etc, was always just window dressing. It was just a useful distraction to obsess over, or to lend some semblance of an ideology to their movement.

You'd think Giuliani would be pure poison with the Bible-thumping, evolution-denying, assault rifle-toting, Ricky Santorum/Pat Robertson set. After all, Rudy not only endorsed gay marriage, shacked up with a gay couple, and is pro-choice - but also is on his 3rd marriage, and is for gun control. So how is it that he's leading the pack of trogs vying for the Republican nomination? Answer: Rudy provides what this "movement" is really about: worship of an authoritarian personality.

Yes, they will look away at Rudy's stances on a whole host of cultural issues because he's posturing as the warrior who will bomb Iran the quickest.

He's the guy who peddles in brutality, and they love it. He's another guy who knows virtually nothing about the world, and is proud of it. He deals in paranoia and fear - the ignorant bully who'll vindicate all the scared little white guys who got beat up in high school, or who otherwise were miserable failures. They'd love for him to bring them another thrilling round of "shock and awe", so they can feel some vicarious pride in being citizens of an imagined warrior nation... instead of the pathetic bed-wetters they really are. They are the ilk who confuse ignorant aggression with patriotism.

The movement conservatives are not about conservatism, family values, or any of those other distractions masquerading as a coherent ideology. The core conservative principles of Barry Goldwater were discarded long ago in favor of corporate welfare and big government. And the fact that so many Republicans have turned out to be closeted gays, and that they are willing to embrace Giuliani, shows that movement conservatism has little real use for all that "values voters" nonsense. What they really crave is a "strong leader".

This movement is a cult that at its core worships belligerent authoritarianism. That is what unites them. That's what brings a Giuliani into alignment with a Pat Robertson.