Moderates Bush, Christie Pulling Away in Polls

nodoginnafight

No Party Affiliation
Dec 15, 2008
11,755
1,070
175
Georgia
Obviously this is very early and a lot can happen, but there is a noticeable gap between the two front-runners and the rest of the field.

Are moderate Republicans really gaining back control of the party? Some other signs - like moderate Republicans blocking a couple of symbolic votes that the right wing took for granted as routine - seem to indicate they may. Or at least they are trying to.

The far right had hoped that the midterms would provide them with a mandate, but it appears the opposite has happened. Republicans won majorities, but it looks like it was moderate Republicans who won the mandate.

Will the far right get on board and contribute to governing and directing the country? Or will they continue to demand "my way or no way"? Does a mandate matter to them or is it all about obstructing anything that didn't come from them?

Moderates obviously have the numbers - and the mandate - but can they get all the votes they need?
 
the closer to center for the RW candidates the more independent/moderate votes they get. I mean seriously, who wants some crazy dweeb running the country other than other crazy dweebs? Sorry all you RINO hater dupes, it is what it is, and you're not it.
 
"300,000 come to Anti-Abortion Rally in D.C."

Actually, it's an anti-privacy rights demonstration.

And their time and energy would be better spent coming up with a way to end the practice of abortion that comports with the Constitution and its case law.

the closer to center for the RW candidates the more independent/moderate votes they get. I mean seriously, who wants some crazy dweeb running the country other than other crazy dweebs? Sorry all you RINO hater dupes, it is what it is, and you're not it.

Well not enough people want a crazy dweeb to elect one - that's for sure.

When you look at the numbers - the GOP has maxed out on their far right vote in both of the last two elections. But they've lost the moderate vote big time.

That's why they lost. A Republican hasn't won the White House without getting at least 45% of the moderate vote as far back as they've been charting it.
 
January of 2007 and Rudy Guilliani was leading the polls. January of 2011 and Rick Perry was the GOP presumptive nominee in polling.

Just wait. The loony faction has yet to be heard. Give 'em time and enough rope and before you know it, Presto! Chango! and someone like John Kaschich will be leading the polls. Or Li'l Ricky Santorum, or Michelle Bachmann, or Sarah Palin, or John Thune.

Sweating out polling 22 months before Election Day is a fool's game.
 
CrusaderFrank is spot on, the GOP needs to nominate as their standard bearer a no doubt conservative, someone who will never compromise his ideological position to achieve pragmatic results. Someone who calls everyone who disagrees with him (or her) an idiot and has a very excellent record as a fiscal conservative.

See here for evidence of fiscal conservative policy:

NJ debt downgraded for fifth time under Christie NJ.com

Remember, it's never what a politician says, it's what he or she has done and its impact.
 
Only a moderate Republican is capable of winning
 
January of 2007 and Rudy Guilliani was leading the polls. January of 2011 and Rick Perry was the GOP presumptive nominee in polling.

Just wait. The loony faction has yet to be heard. Give 'em time and enough rope and before you know it, Presto! Chango! and someone like John Kaschich will be leading the polls. Or Li'l Ricky Santorum, or Michelle Bachmann, or Sarah Palin, or John Thune.

Sweating out polling 22 months before Election Day is a fool's game.

R's are getting a jump on this election. They're sticking their retards out early ---- jeb and christie.
 
the closer to center for the RW candidates the more independent/moderate votes they get. I mean seriously, who wants some crazy dweeb running the country other than other crazy dweebs? Sorry all you RINO hater dupes, it is what it is, and you're not it.
Yes that certainly accounts for President McCain, the Republican whom most Democrats said they would vote for.
 
"300,000 come to Anti-Abortion Rally in D.C."

Actually, it's an anti-privacy rights demonstration.

And their time and energy would be better spent coming up with a way to end the practice of abortion that comports with the Constitution and its case law.

the closer to center for the RW candidates the more independent/moderate votes they get. I mean seriously, who wants some crazy dweeb running the country other than other crazy dweebs? Sorry all you RINO hater dupes, it is what it is, and you're not it.

Well not enough people want a crazy dweeb to elect one - that's for sure.

When you look at the numbers - the GOP has maxed out on their far right vote in both of the last two elections. But they've lost the moderate vote big time.

That's why they lost. A Republican hasn't won the White House without getting at least 45% of the moderate vote as far back as they've been charting it.

exactly.
 
the closer to center for the RW candidates the more independent/moderate votes they get. I mean seriously, who wants some crazy dweeb running the country other than other crazy dweebs? Sorry all you RINO hater dupes, it is what it is, and you're not it.
Yes that certainly accounts for President McCain, the Republican whom most Democrats said they would vote for.

I see a similar situation....

10ynozq.jpg
 
the closer to center for the RW candidates the more independent/moderate votes they get. I mean seriously, who wants some crazy dweeb running the country other than other crazy dweebs? Sorry all you RINO hater dupes, it is what it is, and you're not it.
Yes that certainly accounts for President McCain, the Republican whom most Democrats said they would vote for.

I didn't mention any names, especially McGoo.
 
January of 2007 and Rudy Guilliani was leading the polls. January of 2011 and Rick Perry was the GOP presumptive nominee in polling.

Just wait. The loony faction has yet to be heard. Give 'em time and enough rope and before you know it, Presto! Chango! and someone like John Kaschich will be leading the polls. Or Li'l Ricky Santorum, or Michelle Bachmann, or Sarah Palin, or John Thune.

Sweating out polling 22 months before Election Day is a fool's game.

I'm not sweating the polls - I'm looking at them.
I do think that the far right could all get behind one of their options who are splitting votes right now and maybe support a candidate through most of the primary process (like Huckabee did against McCain) but I don't think a far righty can win the GOP nomination, and certainly not the general election.

So how does the far right react to this? With their typical "low tolerance for frustration toddler" routine?
 
If the ideological purge of the Republican party is thorough, the 2016 nominee should reflect the outlook of the victors. That nominee should be a reactionary of the first order. Incapable of forming the word 'compromise' in his mouth. Unyielding in his zeal to roll back reforms and regulations and taxes on the rich. He should be ready, willing and able to send American troops into every fray he sees as a real threat to American interests at home and abroad. He should do everything in his power to repress the freedoms and rights of any group of Americans he sees as unworthy of freedom and rights. Groups like Muslims, homosexuals, immigrants and the poor.

Nominate such a man. Assure us of his bona fides as White, male and American born. Send us such a man to vote for as President of the United States of America.

And when the results are in, and the Democrat landslide is complete, sit down and shut up because every right thinking American will run screaming away from such a candidate.
 
If the ideological purge of the Republican party is thorough, the 2016 nominee should reflect the outlook of the victors. That nominee should be a reactionary of the first order. Incapable of forming the word 'compromise' in his mouth. Unyielding in his zeal to roll back reforms and regulations and taxes on the rich. He should be ready, willing and able to send American troops into every fray he sees as a real threat to American interests at home and abroad. He should do everything in his power to repress the freedoms and rights of any group of Americans he sees as unworthy of freedom and rights. Groups like Muslims, homosexuals, immigrants and the poor.

Nominate such a man. Assure us of his bona fides as White, male and American born. Send us such a man to vote for as President of the United States of America.

And when the results are in, and the Democrat landslide is complete, sit down and shut up because every right thinking American will run screaming away from such a candidate.


well, there's always that.

:rolleyes:
 
Ronald Reagan - "an extremist" ??

Yeah, OK.

"It is indisputable that Reagan was vastly more moderate, at least in terms of how he actually governed, than today’s GOP. At the risk of being pedantic, here is a partial list of Reagan’s actions that would have him expelled for treason to conservative principles if he were running for president today.

• As a Hollywood actor, Reagan had been the head of a labor union, the Screen Actors Guild, and was proud of the higher pay and benefits he negotiated for his members. As president, he praised labor unions, saying, “Collective bargaining…has played a major role in America's economic miracle. Unions represent some of the freest institutions in this land. There are few finer examples of participatory democracy to be found anywhere.”

• Franklin D. Roosevelt was Reagan’s political hero and he voted for him for president 4 times. As president, he said, “F. D. R. was an American giant, a leader who shaped, inspired, and led our people through perilous times.”

• As governor of California, Reagan signed into law the largest state tax increase in history up to that time. It increased California taxes by a third, including an increase in the top income tax rate. There were other tax increases as well, which raised the top rate to 11 percent from 7 percent when he took office, a 57 percent increase.

• Also as governor, Reagan signed into law California’s first law permitting legal abortion – at the behest of his two most conservative advisers, Ed Meese and Lyn Nofziger. On other social issues as well, Gov. Reagan was far more progressive than his image. For example, he authorized conjugal visits for prisoners for the first time in the state and broadened environmental protection."

- See more at: Why Ronald Reagan Would Not Lead Today s GOP The Fiscal Times

Why Ronald Reagan Would Not Lead Today s GOP The Fiscal Times
 

Forum List

Back
Top