• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

College GOP chairman resigns, joining Democrats

danarhea

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,602
Reaction score
26,256
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The chairman of the Mississippi Federation of College Republicans has resigned his post and "will be changing my party affiliation to Democrat in the next few days."
Evan Alvarez resigned his post this morning, which was made public by a release sent out by MFCR with a copy of his resignation. In the letter, he says that tea party activists have too much of a voice in the party, "and because of that, the platform of the Republican Party has shifted too far to the right in my opinion." In a separate email to me, he says he has already begun talking with Democrats about joining their party.
Click to expand...

A sign of the times. The extremist elements in the GOP are driving some of the mainstream members away. So much for the big tent The Republican Party used to have.

Article is here.
 
danarhea said:
A sign of the times. The extremist elements in the GOP are driving some of the mainstream members away. So much for the big tent The Republican Party used to have.

Article is here.
Click to expand...

The article has failed to indicate to me any reason why anyone should care more about this turncoat than any other who chooses to switch party affiliations in either direction.
 
danarhea said:
A sign of the times. The extremist elements in the GOP are driving some of the mainstream members away. So much for the big tent The Republican Party used to have.

Article is here.
Click to expand...

Because of the extremists that have seized power within the GOP, I too am having a hard time remaining registered as a Republican. However, the way to effect change and prevent the destruction of the party is not to abandon it. That's the only reason that I haven't jumped ship already. Also, if I ever do leave the GOP, it will not be to join any other party, especially the Democratic party given that they think it's okay to ignore the Constitution as long as it benefits their agenda.

I'm a Goldwater Republican. Unfortunately, it appears that we are a dying breed.

And, if the Democrats think that all this bad discourse within the GOP helps them, they need to put the corks back in the champagne bottles and look at the latest polls regarding Obama and Congress.

The country is moving away from the two major parties en masse. The June 5-8 Gallop records show that 24% consider themselves Republican, 28% consider themselves Democrats and, 46% consider themselves Independents. In the same poll, the independents were asked which party they lean more toward, and of those 46% of voters - it was dead even - 44% Republican and 44% Democrat, which leaves 22% of Independents (a full 10% of registered voters) that do not even lean toward either party.
 
the guy seems naive. he is giving up and switching parties.
 
Luftwaffe said:
How exactly does that constitute as being naive?
Click to expand...

he seems to be unaware. did he not understand the environment that existed when taking the post?

i can understand resigning a position but switching parties because of the situation?
 
Beaudreaux said:
Because of the extremists that have seized power within the GOP, I too am having a hard time remaining registered as a Republican. However, the way to effect change and prevent the destruction of the party is not to abandon it. That's the only reason that I haven't jumped ship already. Also, if I ever do leave the GOP, it will not be to join any other party, especially the Democratic party given that they think it's okay to ignore the Constitution as long as it benefits their agenda.
Click to expand...

Of course, it is those who you label as “extremists” who stand for the values that set the Republican party apart from and above the Democratic party. Remove them from the Republican party, and all that will be left will be just another version of the Democratic party calling itself “Republican”.
 
Bob Blaylock said:
Of course, it is those who you label as “extremists” who stand for the values that set the Republican party apart from and above the Democratic party. Remove them from the Republican party, and all that will be left will be just another version of the Democratic party calling itself “Republican”.
Click to expand...

Ummmm... No.

Do some reading regarding Barry Goldwater, and you'll see why I said no. There's hardly anything that I believe in that even comes close to what the Democratic Party believes. From fiscal issues to social issues. Also, the difference between what I believe and what the right wing extremists believe is that I do not believe in hating anyone just because they're different than me, discriminating against anyone for any reason, or denying any other citizen of this country the exact same rights that I have under the Constitution. Additionally, unlike the extremist, I believe in the entire Constitution, not just the parts that agree with my opinion or position.

So, again.... no.

And to help save you some time looking up Goldwater, here's one quote that describes this discussion very clearly:

Berry Goldwater quote

Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.
.....
The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom.... I'm frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in 'A,' 'B,' 'C,' and 'D.' Just who do they think they are?... I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of "conservatism."
Click to expand...
 
Beaudreaux said:
Ummmm... No.

Do some reading regarding Barry Goldwater, and you'll see why I said no. There's hardly anything that I believe in that even comes close to what the Democratic Party believes. From fiscal issues to social issues. Also, the difference between what I believe and what the right wing extremists believe is that I do not believe in hating anyone just because they're different than me, discriminating against anyone for any reason, or denying any other citizen of this country the exact same rights that I have under the Constitution. Additionally, unlike the extremist, I believe in the entire Constitution, not just the parts that agree with my opinion or position.

So, again.... no.

And to help save you some time looking up Goldwater, here's one quote that describes this discussion very clearly:
Click to expand...

My first presidential vote went to Barry Goldwater back in 1964. The third tenet of a traditional conservative is: Small Government - Keeping government out of a citizens private business and lives. Barry, the supposedly father of modern day conservatism also was in favor of keeping government out of abortion, it is strictly up to the woman. Also, back then gay marriage wasn't even thought of, but gays in the military was. Barry was quoted either back in 1963 or 64, "You do not have to be straight to shoot straight."

Goldwater is sort of a political mentor to me.
 
Perotista said:
My first presidential vote went to Barry Goldwater back in 1964. The third tenet of a traditional conservative is: Small Government - Keeping government out of a citizens private business and lives. Barry, the supposedly father of modern day conservatism also was in favor of keeping government out of abortion, it is strictly up to the woman. Also, back then gay marriage wasn't even thought of, but gays in the military was. Barry was quoted either back in 1963 or 64, "You do not have to be straight to shoot straight."

Goldwater is sort of a political mentor to me.
Click to expand...

Amen.

As I read more and more about Goldwater, I find that my opinions and feelings about issues is nothing new at all - that Goldwater got there a long time before I did. In fact, it was about ~25 years ago, at a local Republican party meeting, that when I gave my opinions about a number of issues (many of which were in contrast to the others there), that one of the men in the meeting asked if my name was Barry Goldwater. I knew who Goldwater was of course, but had not really read anything about him, until after that night.

We sure need another Goldwater to rise up within the party, and quickly.
 
mtm1963 said:
the guy seems naive. he is giving up and switching parties.
Click to expand...

I do not know if I would call it naive, but I agree with the giving up part. Stay and fight for what you believe in.
 
Beaudreaux said:
Ummmm... No.

Do some reading regarding Barry Goldwater, and you'll see why I said no. There's hardly anything that I believe in that even comes close to what the Democratic Party believes. From fiscal issues to social issues. Also, the difference between what I believe and what the right wing extremists believe is that I do not believe in hating anyone just because they're different than me, discriminating against anyone for any reason, or denying any other citizen of this country the exact same rights that I have under the Constitution. Additionally, unlike the extremist, I believe in the entire Constitution, not just the parts that agree with my opinion or position.:
Click to expand...

Those who you label as “extremists”, for the most part, do not believe in any of the things that you say you do not believe in. One has to wonder why you claim any allegiance to the Republican party, when you resort to such ridiculous and obviously-false Democrat-created stereotypes of those who actually stand for Republican values.

220px-Edgar_Allan_Poe_daguerreotype_crop.png
 
Last edited:
Beaudreaux said:
Amen.

As I read more and more about Goldwater, I find that my opinions and feelings about issues is nothing new at all - that Goldwater got there a long time before I did. In fact, it was about ~25 years ago, at a local Republican party meeting, that when I gave my opinions about a number of issues (many of which were in contrast to the others there), that one of the men in the meeting asked if my name was Barry Goldwater. I knew who Goldwater was of course, but had not really read anything about him, until after that night.

We sure need another Goldwater to rise up within the party, and quickly.
Click to expand...

A fiscal conservative and a social liberal. At least that is how one would look at Barry today. I have heard quite a few of today's conservatives say Barry wasn't a conservative at all, he was a Libertarian. To that I say he was a traditional conservative vs. today's neo-conservatives.
 
I can see the headlines now:

"College Student Changes Mind"
 
danarhea said:
A sign of the times. The extremist elements in the GOP are driving some of the mainstream members away. So much for the big tent The Republican Party used to have.

Article is here.
Click to expand...

Extremist elements? When did standing for the rule of law, constitutional first principles, fiscal responsibility and personal responsibility make a person an extremist?

This is getting old. So this yahoo in Mississippi has decided to changed his affiliation. Big whoop! If he can't muster up the basics of the Republican party he should have done it a long time ago.

Mississippi has a lot of problems of corruption brought to light over their latest run off election between two Republican candidates. Cochran is a big government guy known to bring home the bacon. McDaniels, a former state senator ran on a platform that is akin to what Republicans claim they believe such as fiscal responsibility, stopping corporatism from replacing capitalism, a smaller federal government, lower taxation and demanding amnesty laws already on the books be honored. The elites in the Republican party who often compromise those principles may be in for a world of hurt as the scandal of paying for Democrats to vote for Cochran unfolds.

Glad to see this young chap change his party affiliation to Democrat. At least then he can be honest with himself of what he believes. Why have two parties when so many are willing to compromise their core beliefs?
 
Perotista said:
A fiscal conservative and a social liberal. At least that is how one would look at Barry today. I have heard quite a few of today's conservatives say Barry wasn't a conservative at all, he was a Libertarian. To that I say he was a traditional conservative vs. today's neo-conservatives.
Click to expand...

HE was a fiscal conservative, and by today's GOP standard, would be called a social liberal. However, he wasn't socially liberal, but rather a social pragmatist. And as for Libertarian, in certain ways, yes, but not the way Libertarians today define that term. He was a strict Constitutionalist, which could be mistaken for a Libertarian today. He was also for lessening the Federal governments impact on Americans. He once said:
I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution, or that have failed their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is "needed" before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later be attacked for neglecting my constituents' "interests," I shall reply that I was informed that their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can.
Click to expand...
 
From reading the transcript of Alvarez's letter, it seems that his loss in what amounted to a sort of power struggle precipitated things. He accuses the individual of breaking rules, but appeared unwilling to accept that the impeachment process had its own rules and that the desired outcome was not attainable within that framework. Justice requires respect for principles and process.

Moreover, even as the Tea Party was dealt a defeat in the Senate runoff vote and in most of the contested primaries nationwide, he chose to abandon the GOP at a time when the mainstream Party has begun to roll back the Tea Party's influence. Capitulation in the face of a Tea Party defeat amounts to pretty odd timing. Hence, the power struggle seems the more likely explanation for his resignation and announced departure from the GOP.

Clearly, there are issues and economic conservatives, for instance, need not be cowed by those who claim conservatism demands an anti-immigrant position (something Alvarez complained about). Instead, economic conservatives can point to Reagan conservatism--a successful model that grew the conservative movement--and argue that conservatism does not require a rejection of balanced solutions that secure the border and treat undocumented immigrants in a humane fashion. Reagan carried out Reagan conservatism in office. Pretenders to the Reagan throne so to speak i.e., talk show hosts such as Hannity or Levin, do not have greater authority to speak for Reagan conservatism than the late President did through his speeches and decisions. That willingness to fight for principle, in my opinion, would have been the more courageous course.

Nevertheless, it appears that Alvarez has made an impulsive choice, almost certainly on account of losing his power struggle of sorts, not only to leave the GOP but join the Democrats. That outcome suggests either his GOP affiliation was never strong to begin with (he could have switched to independent for example) or is too insecure for a leadership position to the extent that outcomes that cut against him (something most leaders face at one time or another) easily break him. The latter seems to be the more likely scenario given the Tea Party's recent string of defeats.

Anyway, that's my read on the situation.
 
Beaudreaux said:
HE was a fiscal conservative, and by today's GOP standard, would be called a social liberal. However, he wasn't socially liberal, but rather a social pragmatist. And as for Libertarian, in certain ways, yes, but not the way Libertarians today define that term. He was a strict Constitutionalist, which could be mistaken for a Libertarian today. He was also for lessening the Federal governments impact on Americans. He once said:
Click to expand...

That is exactly the Barry I campaigned for and voted for.
 
donsutherland1 said:
From reading the transcript of Alvarez's letter, it seems that his loss in what amounted to a sort of power struggle precipitated things. He accuses the individual of breaking rules, but appeared unwilling to accept that the impeachment process had its own rules and that the desired outcome was not attainable within that framework. Justice requires respect for principles and process.

Moreover, even as the Tea Party was dealt a defeat in the Senate runoff vote and in most of the contested primaries nationwide, he chose to abandon the GOP at a time when the mainstream Party has begun to roll back the Tea Party's influence. Capitulation in the face of a Tea Party defeat amounts to pretty odd timing. Hence, the power struggle seems the more likely explanation for his resignation and announced departure from the GOP.

Clearly, there are issues and economic conservatives, for instance, need not be cowed by those who claim conservatism demands an anti-immigrant position (something Alvarez complained about). Instead, economic conservatives can point to Reagan conservatism--a successful model that grew the conservative movement--and argue that conservatism does not require a rejection of balanced solutions that secure the border and treat undocumented immigrants in a humane fashion. Reagan carried out Reagan conservatism in office. Pretenders to the Reagan throne so to speak i.e., talk show hosts such as Hannity or Levin, do not have greater authority to speak for Reagan conservatism than the late President did through his speeches and decisions. That willingness to fight for principle, in my opinion, would have been the more courageous course.

Nevertheless, it appears that Alvarez has made an impulsive choice, almost certainly on account of losing his power struggle of sorts, not only to leave the GOP but join the Democrats. That outcome suggests either his GOP affiliation was never strong to begin with (he could have switched to independent for example) or is too insecure for a leadership position to the extent that outcomes that cut against him (something most leaders face at one time or another) easily break him. The latter seems to be the more likely scenario given the Tea Party's recent string of defeats.

Anyway, that's my read on the situation.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree that the decision may have been impulsive and that his affiliation may not have been strong. College is a time of discovery, experimentation, and growth, and while students may be very mature in some ways, for example, academically, they aren't yet fully grown. Switching parties because you're butt-hurt doesn't demonstrate what I'd call "maturity."
 
Perotista said:
My first presidential vote went to Barry Goldwater back in 1964. The third tenet of a traditional conservative is: Small Government - Keeping government out of a citizens private business and lives. Barry, the supposedly father of modern day conservatism also was in favor of keeping government out of abortion, it is strictly up to the woman. Also, back then gay marriage wasn't even thought of, but gays in the military was. Barry was quoted either back in 1963 or 64, "You do not have to be straight to shoot straight."

Goldwater is sort of a political mentor to me.
Click to expand...

Goldwater was also a staunch conservationist who believed that God made man a steward of the earth, and we must take care of it. Today he would be called an "Evul Leebral" by some, because of that belief.
 
Last edited:
College GOP Chairman Resigns, Joins Democrats?


OH really?

File this one under "Who Gives a FU5$?"
 
danarhea said:
Goldwater was also a staunch conservationist who believed that God made man a steward of the earth, and we must take care of it. Today he would be called an "Evul Leebral" by some, because of that belief.
Click to expand...

This is why I have always said you can't say such and such a politician or elected official from that era would be a Republican or Democrat today. The lines are way too blurred. Back then the voting wasn't so much party line as it was regional.
 
danarhea said:
A sign of the times. The extremist elements in the GOP are driving some of the mainstream members away. So much for the big tent The Republican Party used to have.

Article is here.
Click to expand...

your take away is pretty comical. You claim the GOP is no longer the big tent party because people are being driven away.

The problem is nobody is being driven away, what is actually happening is the party that used to be in charge is losing, and they are taking their ball and going home. If that mentality is considered a big tent mentality, good riddance.
 
this college kid must have been a super important Republican to deserve his own thread.


as far as i'm concerned, he left one party and joined up with the same party.
 
Beaudreaux said:
Because of the extremists that have seized power within the GOP, I too am having a hard time remaining registered as a Republican. However, the way to effect change and prevent the destruction of the party is not to abandon it. That's the only reason that I haven't jumped ship already. Also, if I ever do leave the GOP, it will not be to join any other party, especially the Democratic party given that they think it's okay to ignore the Constitution as long as it benefits their agenda.

I'm a Goldwater Republican. Unfortunately, it appears that we are a dying breed.

And, if the Democrats think that all this bad discourse within the GOP helps them, they need to put the corks back in the champagne bottles and look at the latest polls regarding Obama and Congress.

The country is moving away from the two major parties en masse. The June 5-8 Gallop records show that 24% consider themselves Republican, 28% consider themselves Democrats and, 46% consider themselves Independents. In the same poll, the independents were asked which party they lean more toward, and of those 46% of voters - it was dead even - 44% Republican and 44% Democrat, which leaves 22% of Independents (a full 10% of registered voters) that do not even lean toward either party.
Click to expand...

Sadly, Goldwater would be called a RINO nowadays. Especially with his support for gay marriage, and his disdain for the fundamentalist religion wing of the party.

I've been cleaning up my house, and going through old closets. I found a signed 8 1/2 by 11 color photo of Goldwater, along with a letter that was sent to him and a reply. I think it was from a co-worker of my father's. He was a good man, didn't mess around. Nixon should have picked him as Agnew's replacement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom