New Hampshire GOP poll (presidency)

[konradv]

A Paul/Christie or Christie/Paul ticket?

If that happens, I'll have to vote Democrat again.

are you THAT stupid?

Well, he said he was a Republican.

 

[JoeB131]

"McCain didn't split the conservative vote" was misconstructed by me, yes.

The conservative vote split among the so called "conservatives" allowed McCain to take the nomination, yes.

The conservative vote in 2016 will have far less impact in the national election than in 2008.

Rand has to appeal to the middle.

Again, the only two Republicans who have won in the last 40 years are the ones who were unapologetically conservative.

The losers have been the ones who "appealled to the middle"- McCain, Romney, Dole.

Appeal is a factor, but so is intensity.

I don't think Rand Paul can win because he's crazier than batshit. I could see a conservative like Kascich or Walker winning pretty easily, though, in both the primaries and general election.

 

[Katzndogz]

Romney didn't lose because he was a moderate. He made the decision to focus his campaign on jobs. He was under the mistaken impression that the public was interested in going to work. What the public really wanted was free obamaphones.

The question isn't which republican will win the next presidential election. The question is whether democrats can overcome the damage that obama is doing. Is not only obama, but the democrat brand being destroyed?

 

[kiwiman127]

Romney lost the moderate voting bloc, which was the largest voting bloc in the 2012 election. Romney's problem was that he tried to appeal too much to the far right. What he said obviously had a serious effect on moderates. They didn't trust him when he tried to paint himself as a moderate.
Does anyone have a better analysis to why Romney failed so badly with the moderate voters?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Romney didn't lose because he was a moderate. He made the decision to focus his campaign on jobs. He was under the mistaken impression that the public was interested in going to work. What the public really wanted was free obamaphones.

The question isn't which republican will win the next presidential election. The question is whether democrats can overcome the damage that obama is doing. Is not only obama, but the democrat brand being destroyed?

Not at all. The Dems are doing quite well for themselves as the last six elections have shown.

The GOP was destroying its brand and loyalty for catering far too much to the far right and reactionaries.

The continued out reach to Hispanics, women, other minorities, etc., will help rebrand the Republicans into a winning party.

 

[JoeB131]

Romney lost the moderate voting bloc, which was the largest voting bloc in the 2012 election. Romney's problem was that he tried to appeal too much to the far right. What he said obviously had a serious effect on moderates. They didn't trust him when he tried to paint himself as a moderate.
Does anyone have a better analysis to why Romney failed so badly with the moderate voters?

I don't buy that.

Romney actually WON independents, which would imply he had no problem with "moderates".

Romney's problem was a lot more simple.

The election of 2012 was either voting for or against Obama. There was never a point where anyone was actually voting for Romney. (Except the Mormons, maybe.) And now one ever beat an incumbant by being "Not that Guy".

Not Kerry, Not Dole, Not Mondale, Not George McGovern.

No one had an emotional investment in Romney, really.

 

[dcraelin]

It really didnt even seem like Romney was trying. I think his son later came out and said something along those lines. That he didnt care.

It worked out that he was a benefit to Obama by scaring off better Republican candidates and eliminating some among those that did run in the primaries. Santorum and Gingrich and Paul would have been better candidates against Obama. Paul was even polling better in head to head matchups if I remember right.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No reactionary candidate - Santorum, Gingrich, Paul, or any of that forgettable lot - could have ran within 3% points of where Romney finished.

 

[JoeB131]

No reactionary candidate - Santorum, Gingrich, Paul, or any of that forgettable lot - could have ran within 3% points of where Romney finished.

Actually, I think any one of those guys would have gotten EXACTLY what Romney got.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Oh, no, not at all. Many of the mainstream GOP simply would not have voted for either candidate.

 

[JoeB131]

Oh, no, not at all. Many of the mainstream GOP simply would not have voted for either candidate.

And a lot of people who wouldn't vote for Romney because he was a Mormon Douchebag might have given Santorum (or whoever) a look.

Truth to be told. Obama vs. Santorum, I'd have voted for Santorum. Yeah, he's a bit of a religous whack, but he understands working folks.

Same with Gingrich. Kind of a creep, but he gets that the recession has really been hell on working folks.

Romney's idea of a recession is he can't buy a new Dressage Horsie.

Seriously, guy, the GOP could do itself a LOT more good if it got right with working people than if it dumped the religious crazies.

ZBecause the Religious crazies ain't going away, and there are just as many on the left.

 

[JakeStarkey]

JoeB, you always lose this argument, so "no more once more" for you, too.

 

[JoeB131]

JoeB, you always lose this argument, so "no more once more" for you, too.

Guy, you were the one who insisted up and down the Weird Mormon Robot was going to win.

How'd that work out for you again?

Not only did he FAIL to decrease the influence of the crazies of the party, but the crazies can honestly say with a straight face, "Romney wasn't a real conservative, that's why he lost!"

 

[dcraelin]

"Truth to be told. Obama vs. Santorum, I'd have voted for Santorum. Yeah, he's a bit of a religous whack, but he understands working folks.

Same with Gingrich. Kind of a creep, but he gets that the recession has really been hell on working folks."

Don't forget Paul, he probably wouldve lost some republicans but made up for it with independents. I believe some polls actually showed him winning against Obama.

New Hampshire BTW should not be the starting point of presidential campaigns. It is an unrepresentative state. Beginning states should have demographics similar to the whole country. Iowa is alot better than NewHampshire but should also give other states a chance.

 

[JoeB131]

"Truth to be told. Obama vs. Santorum, I'd have voted for Santorum. Yeah, he's a bit of a religous whack, but he understands working folks.

Same with Gingrich. Kind of a creep, but he gets that the recession has really been hell on working folks."

Don't forget Paul, he probably wouldve lost some republicans but made up for it with independents. I believe some polls actually showed him winning against Obama.

New Hampshire BTW should not be the starting point of presidential campaigns. It is an unrepresentative state. Beginning states should have demographics similar to the whole country. Iowa is alot better than NewHampshire but should also give other states a chance.

I try to forget the Pauls, because they are whackadoodle LiberTARDians who only survive because the Koch brothers keep sending them money.

I also think that neither NH nor IA are representative of the country as a whole.

 

[JakeStarkey]

JoeB, you always lose this argument, so "no more once more" for you, too.

Guy, you were the one who insisted up and down the Weird Mormon Robot was going to win. How'd that work out for you again? Not only did he FAIL to decrease the influence of the crazies of the party, but the crazies can honestly say with a straight face, "Romney wasn't a real conservative, that's why he lost!"

Whatever, Joe. You said he could not be nominated and asked if you had pulled that out of your ass, you got real snarky for a long, long time because I was right on the primaries.

If the reactionaries could not beat him in the primaries to get the nomination, then they would have done even more poorly than Romney against your guy, Obama.

Common sense.

 

[JoeB131]

JoeB, you always lose this argument, so "no more once more" for you, too.

Guy, you were the one who insisted up and down the Weird Mormon Robot was going to win. How'd that work out for you again? Not only did he FAIL to decrease the influence of the crazies of the party, but the crazies can honestly say with a straight face, "Romney wasn't a real conservative, that's why he lost!"

Whatever, Joe. You said he could not be nominated and asked if you had pulled that out of your ass, you got real snarky for a long, long time because I was right on the primaries.

If the reactionaries could not beat him in the primaries to get the nomination, then they would have done even more poorly than Romney against your guy, Obama.

Common sense.

ANY WARM BODY would have gotten the exact same number of votes as Romney did.

I got snarky because I knew nominating this asshole would be a fucking disaster for the GOP.

And it was.

An absolute fucking disaster. How fucking incompetent do you need to be to LOSE against an incumbant with 8% unemployment and $4.00 a gallon gas?

But the establishment, they were going to attack anyone who ran against him, and they did.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yup, you were snarky, and, yup, you were wrong, and, yup, the far righties would have done worse than Romney.

Your hatred for Mormonism unbalances your thinking is the problem.

You are a religio-cultural weirdo like 2d Amendment, a millennial whiner of monumental proportions about how everybody on the left is out to get him personally.

Balance, guy, balance.

 

[JoeB131]

Yup, you were snarky, and, yup, you were wrong, and, yup, the far righties would have done worse than Romney.

Your hatred for Mormonism unbalances your thinking is the problem.

You are a religio-cultural weirdo like 2d Amendment, a millennial whiner of monumental proportions about how everybody on the left is out to get him personally.

Balance, guy, balance.

Guy, nominating Romney was a fuckup.

Why aren't you owning it?

Frankly, I predicted that most of the right would turn on him the minute he lost, and they have.

Because he was an awful candidate.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Sure, Joe. You need to own it.