The GOP demands Jeb Bush

[The Rabbi]

Yup, we need another Bush. W took the country to its knees and Jeb would finish the job. But he won't win. The far right will not support him. He is too ready to compromise.

We haven't invaded Iraq in a while

We need a Bush to do that

Where have you been? We just invaded both Iraq and Syria.
Obama has sent troops to more countries than Bush ever dreamed of.
It's funny watching libs weigh in on the GOP race. It's like monkeys handicapping the Kentucky Derby.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Jeb is one of the few Republicans who is strong enough to shake off the bat shit crazy wing of the party and embrace the middle

The country will support a right leaning populist president.
Strong on military and foreign policy. Strong on fiscal responsibility. Moderate on social policy.

I agree

And Jeb can fill that role. The others cant

I have to be frank here. I am not looking for a right wing door slamming, hard core conservative for president. That's counter productive. And one who would fail in his sworn duty to represent ALL Americans.
Once again, I will support and vote for a GOP or even a democrat candidate that is more statesman than politician and one who fits the criteria I described above.

Jeb is really not that bad. He's a solid moderate, and not a bible thumper.

If the GOP runs a Tea Party candidate they'll not take back the white house.

If the GOP takes the senate back in November, and don't get the white house back too...we're all in for nothing getting done in Washington from 2014-2020

and that's why I can't see the RW winning the Senate... this country is tired of do nothing politicians

No...The only people who are upset with so called do nothing politicians are far left liberals who view the federal government as some sort activist entity assembled to satisfy the whims of the liberal establishment.
Liberals are even pissed off at the very people for whom they voted because the demands of their various agendas have not been met.
BTW, the RNC is not going to permit a so called "Tea Party" candidate to achieve the nomination.
Amazingly, you people do not realize that in 2008 Mc Cain was served up like a roast suckling pig with and apple in it's mouth.
Michael Steele( who was chair of the RNC) assumed that there was no possible way the country was going elect a democrat.
There is a rift now in the RNC between establishment republicans who have in my opinion, grown too comfortable and complacent. They are satisfied with mediocrity. They are too frightened to take a stand on anything. Hence the need for a new wing of the GOP. That being the Tea Party....
Of course seeing the Tea Party as a threat that may very well upset the democrat apple cart, liberal operatives in the media as well as politicians set out to vilify the Tea Party.
Liberals have made egregious errors. One, they failed to accomplish the goals of their agendas. Two, in some aspects of social policy, they have pushed the country so far into the black hole of political correctness and the politics of identity and of course, the race card, there is now strong push back. Some refer to it as backlash.
There is a desperate need to allow the pendulum to begin the swing back toward the right. There is an imbalance now. It is ruining the country.

So many needless words - just to say you're batshit crazy.

You are as useful as tits on a bull

 

[thereisnospoon]

Jeb is really not that bad. He's a solid moderate, and not a bible thumper.

If the GOP runs a Tea Party candidate they'll not take back the white house.

If the GOP takes the senate back in November, and don't get the white house back too...we're all in for nothing getting done in Washington from 2014-2020

and that's why I can't see the RW winning the Senate... this country is tired of do nothing politicians

No...The only people who are upset with so called do nothing politicians are far left liberals who view the federal government as some sort activist entity assembled to satisfy the whims of the liberal establishment.
Liberals are even pissed off at the very people for whom they voted because the demands of their various agendas have not been met.
BTW, the RNC is not going to permit a so called "Tea Party" candidate to achieve the nomination.
Amazingly, you people do not realize that in 2008 Mc Cain was served up like a roast suckling pig with and apple in it's mouth.
Michael Steele( who was chair of the RNC) assumed that there was no possible way the country was going elect a democrat.
There is a rift now in the RNC between establishment republicans who have in my opinion, grown too comfortable and complacent. They are satisfied with mediocrity. They are too frightened to take a stand on anything. Hence the need for a new wing of the GOP. That being the Tea Party....
Of course seeing the Tea Party as a threat that may very well upset the democrat apple cart, liberal operatives in the media as well as politicians set out to vilify the Tea Party.
Liberals have made egregious errors. One, they failed to accomplish the goals of their agendas. Two, in some aspects of social policy, they have pushed the country so far into the black hole of political correctness and the politics of identity and of course, the race card, there is now strong push back. Some refer to it as backlash.
There is a desperate need to allow the pendulum to begin the swing back toward the right. There is an imbalance now. It is ruining the country.

So many needless words - just to say you're batshit crazy.

Facts really kick the living shit out of you. eh "two dogs *******"

 

[thereisnospoon]

I guess the primaries are over before they started. The GOP decided they want Jeb Bush. For all you conservatives out there, I guess the choice is being made for you. The GOP will spend it's mass fortune to push Jeb and slander anyone else running.

No, no. Don't try to say that you can still vote for someone else in the primary. The GOP doesn't care that you want Cruz, Paul, Walker, or Christie. All the GOP has to do is claim that Jeb is the only option if you want to beat Hillary, get their pundits (Hannity, Limbaugh, Fox news) to repeat it, and you conservatives will eat it up. It's already started. Seemingly out of nowhere, interviews and news stories about Jeb are popping up everywhere. Some pundits are already spouting the line "Only option against Hillary". Jeb has been meeting with Republican leaders and republican donors. The primary is just a dog and pony show now.

The GOP has already made the choice for you.



(Now I get to sit back, watch conservatives deny this, and still get proven right in time)

I demand you pull your head out of your backside. Unless you have straw polls or any other kind of polling data, stop posting, before you hurt yourself.

No, you dont get it. This board has become the fact free zone. All it takes is a headline in Politico, HuffPo or Rachel Maddow and they're all screaming like banshees. Even if they cant read beyond the headline.

It's called fighting fire with fire.

And you keep bringing knives to gunfights.

 

[thereisnospoon]

it was in today's news. do try to get over it, simpering spoon...

Well if you want to believe this 'stuff' qualifies as news just because it hit the blogs, then have at it.
Anyone with a reasonable amount of intelligence gives this nothing more than a passing glance.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Jeb is one of the few Republicans who is strong enough to shake off the bat shit crazy wing of the party and embrace the middle

The country will support a right leaning populist president.
Strong on military and foreign policy. Strong on fiscal responsibility. Moderate on social policy.

Substitute "non-interventionists" for "Strong on military and foreign policy" and the great majority of the country will support that.

Not posting to you. Please do not respond to my posts.
We're done. Don't respond....

 

[thereisnospoon]

Jeb is really not that bad. He's a solid moderate, and not a bible thumper.

If the GOP runs a Tea Party candidate they'll not take back the white house.

If the GOP takes the senate back in November, and don't get the white house back too...we're all in for nothing getting done in Washington from 2014-2020

and that's why I can't see the RW winning the Senate... this country is tired of do nothing politicians

No...The only people who are upset with so called do nothing politicians are far left liberals who view the federal government as some sort activist entity assembled to satisfy the whims of the liberal establishment.
Liberals are even pissed off at the very people for whom they voted because the demands of their various agendas have not been met.
BTW, the RNC is not going to permit a so called "Tea Party" candidate to achieve the nomination.
Amazingly, you people do not realize that in 2008 Mc Cain was served up like a roast suckling pig with and apple in it's mouth.
Michael Steele( who was chair of the RNC) assumed that there was no possible way the country was going elect a democrat.
There is a rift now in the RNC between establishment republicans who have in my opinion, grown too comfortable and complacent. They are satisfied with mediocrity. They are too frightened to take a stand on anything. Hence the need for a new wing of the GOP. That being the Tea Party....
Of course seeing the Tea Party as a threat that may very well upset the democrat apple cart, liberal operatives in the media as well as politicians set out to vilify the Tea Party.
Liberals have made egregious errors. One, they failed to accomplish the goals of their agendas. Two, in some aspects of social policy, they have pushed the country so far into the black hole of political correctness and the politics of identity and of course, the race card, there is now strong push back. Some refer to it as backlash.
There is a desperate need to allow the pendulum to begin the swing back toward the right. There is an imbalance now. It is ruining the country.

I disagree with almost everything you've posted, except how the GOP won't nominate a Tea Party candidate.

The overall hope I sense in your position reminds me of that from whom predicted Romney by a landslide.

A new wing of the GOP even further to the right, done ala Tea Party style, will simply put greater distance between swing voters and growing diversity

Ok. Why? Expand and explain why and how it is you disagree.
Not asking you to prove negatives.
I simply want to see your reasons why you disagree. Also, please note and elaborate on any factual errors you claim exist in my post.

 

[auditor0007]

Jeb is really not that bad. He's a solid moderate, and not a bible thumper.

If the GOP runs a Tea Party candidate they'll not take back the white house.

If the GOP takes the senate back in November, and don't get the white house back too...we're all in for nothing getting done in Washington from 2014-2020

If Jeb were to win, it would not be the end of the world. I think he would be at least as good as his father whom I did like. Still, if Hillary runs, which she will, I just don't see any way that the Republicans are going to win, even if they ran Jesus himself. Of course, Jesus would almost certainly be a Democrat.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Jeb is one of the few Republicans who is strong enough to shake off the bat shit crazy wing of the party and embrace the middle

The country will support a right leaning populist president.
Strong on military and foreign policy. Strong on fiscal responsibility. Moderate on social policy.

I don't see how he makes it through the primaries.

He who?....I was not referring to Jeb Bush. I was stating in general terms as to the type of GOP candidate would be most likely to win the general election

 

[thereisnospoon]

From a GOP strategy perspective, they shouldn't give a crap about what evangelicals and Tea Partiers want...they'll vote Republican no matter what. So you get candidates like Romney and Bush, instead of Cruz or Paul

Democrats will vote democrat. If republicans don't like a candidate they just don't vote at all.

I haven't seen any numbers on that...but it doesn't sound right to me.

We always hear that Republicans vote in higher percentages than Democrats do....I dunno. I'm inspired to look into that. Can you think of any examples where Republicans didn't like their Presidential candidate, and turned out in fewer numbers as a result? I can't. Maybe Barry Goldwater, or Bob Dole?

yep...2012. polling studies estimated that 3 million fewer GOP voters went to the polls than in 2008.
The data concluded that Romney being a Mormon would not get the Christian Rightist vote. Those who take their beliefs to such a high level that they incorporate their religion into every aspect of their being. These far right Christians are judgmental to the point of distraction. Normally, they are not an influential voting bloc. By staying away, they helped give Obama a second term.

 

[toxicmedia]

Jeb is really not that bad. He's a solid moderate, and not a bible thumper.

If the GOP runs a Tea Party candidate they'll not take back the white house.

If the GOP takes the senate back in November, and don't get the white house back too...we're all in for nothing getting done in Washington from 2014-2020

and that's why I can't see the RW winning the Senate... this country is tired of do nothing politicians

No...The only people who are upset with so called do nothing politicians are far left liberals who view the federal government as some sort activist entity assembled to satisfy the whims of the liberal establishment.
Liberals are even pissed off at the very people for whom they voted because the demands of their various agendas have not been met.
BTW, the RNC is not going to permit a so called "Tea Party" candidate to achieve the nomination.
Amazingly, you people do not realize that in 2008 Mc Cain was served up like a roast suckling pig with and apple in it's mouth.
Michael Steele( who was chair of the RNC) assumed that there was no possible way the country was going elect a democrat.
There is a rift now in the RNC between establishment republicans who have in my opinion, grown too comfortable and complacent. They are satisfied with mediocrity. They are too frightened to take a stand on anything. Hence the need for a new wing of the GOP. That being the Tea Party....
Of course seeing the Tea Party as a threat that may very well upset the democrat apple cart, liberal operatives in the media as well as politicians set out to vilify the Tea Party.
Liberals have made egregious errors. One, they failed to accomplish the goals of their agendas. Two, in some aspects of social policy, they have pushed the country so far into the black hole of political correctness and the politics of identity and of course, the race card, there is now strong push back. Some refer to it as backlash.
There is a desperate need to allow the pendulum to begin the swing back toward the right. There is an imbalance now. It is ruining the country.

I disagree with almost everything you've posted, except how the GOP won't nominate a Tea Party candidate.

The overall hope I sense in your position reminds me of that from whom predicted Romney by a landslide.

A new wing of the GOP even further to the right, done ala Tea Party style, will simply put greater distance between swing voters and growing diversity

Ok. Why? Expand and explain why and how it is you disagree.
Not asking you to prove negatives.
I simply want to see your reasons why you disagree. Also, please note and elaborate on any factual errors you claim exist in my post.

No...The only people who are upset with so called do nothing politicians are far left liberals who view the federal government as some sort activist entity assembled to satisfy the whims of the liberal establishment.

You've simply demonized Democratic politicians. Why would they not push the Democratic agenda? They were elected by a majority of their constituents based on the platform they ran on, which happens to be "liberal".

Liberals are even pissed off at the very people for whom they voted because the demands of their various agendas have not been met

This is what I hear from Fox/Drudge/Rush/Breitbart/etc...and I don't deny Obama has left some Democrats disappointed about certain issues. But the left as a whole, is far from being pissed off enough at Democrats to vote Republican in November or 2016, or at least not in significant numbers.

BTW, the RNC is not going to permit a so called "Tea Party" candidate to achieve the nomination.

I agree

Amazingly, you people do not realize that in 2008 Mc Cain was served up like a roast suckling pig with and apple in it's mouth.
Michael Steele( who was chair of the RNC) assumed that there was no possible way the country was going elect a democrat.

I'm probably not what you've prematurely decided I am, when you referred to me as "you people". I didn't vote for Obama in 2008. At the same time, I recognized early on that Sarah Palin was a huge mess that the GOP can't be caught cleaning up to this date. I loved McCain before he ran for President. McCain didn't lose the election, so much as Obama won it. Or more accurately, Axlerod and Jarret beat the pants off of Schmidt and Wallace.

There is a rift now in the RNC between establishment republicans who have in my opinion, grown too comfortable and complacent. They are satisfied with mediocrity. They are too frightened to take a stand on anything. Hence the need for a new wing of the GOP. That being the Tea Party....

The Tea Party has no history running this country successfully, so they are an unknown. When swing voters go to the voting booth, they are turned off by instability, uncertainty, and in some cases inexperience.

Of course seeing the Tea Party as a threat that may very well upset the democrat apple cart, liberal operatives in the media as well as politicians set out to vilify the Tea Party.

My opinion is that the DNC and liberal media would love to see the GOP nominate Ted Cruz or Rand Paul, based simply on how they poll against Hillary. I'm quite baffled by why anyone would buy the notion that the Democratic Party is afraid of the Tea Party. None of the liberals I know are afraid of the Tea Party, but I keep hearing righty media say that. It's probably all for your benefit.

Liberals have made egregious errors. One, they failed to accomplish the goals of their agendas. Two, in some aspects of social policy, they have pushed the country so far into the black hole of political correctness and the politics of identity and of course, the race card, there is now strong push back. Some refer to it as backlash.

Only from people who didn't vote Democratic in the first place, but the swing voters I know, myself included, will not vote Republican simply because evangelicals or Tea Partiers are upset about racial issues or political correctness.

There is a desperate need to allow the pendulum to begin the swing back toward the right. There is an imbalance now. It is ruining the country.

The pendulum swinging back to the right is completely unremarkable. It always swings back, that's just gravity.

As for factual corrections...I couldn't find any facts in your post, it was all opinion

 

[toxicmedia]

Jeb is really not that bad. He's a solid moderate, and not a bible thumper.

If the GOP runs a Tea Party candidate they'll not take back the white house.

If the GOP takes the senate back in November, and don't get the white house back too...we're all in for nothing getting done in Washington from 2014-2020

If Jeb were to win, it would not be the end of the world. I think he would be at least as good as his father whom I did like. Still, if Hillary runs, which she will, I just don't see any way that the Republicans are going to win, even if they ran Jesus himself. Of course, Jesus would almost certainly be a Democrat.

I find my eyes glazing over when someone says "it's still too early to tell", but...it's still too early to tell.

Having said that...my instincts are telling me that when 52% of voters get to the voting booths in 2016, the old mental snapshots of Hillary in the white house all those years will drive their need for stability by calling on memories of simpler times. And especially with women voters.

 

[Silhouette]

I guess the primaries are over before they started. The GOP decided they want Jeb Bush. For all you conservatives out there, I guess the choice is being made for you. The GOP will spend it's mass fortune to push Jeb and slander anyone else running.

No, no. Don't try to say that you can still vote for someone else in the primary. The GOP doesn't care that you want Cruz, Paul, Walker, or Christie. All the GOP has to do is claim that Jeb is the only option if you want to beat Hillary, get their pundits (Hannity, Limbaugh, Fox news) to repeat it, and you conservatives will eat it up. It's already started. Seemingly out of nowhere, interviews and news stories about Jeb are popping up everywhere. Some pundits are already spouting the line "Only option against Hillary". Jeb has been meeting with Republican leaders and republican donors. The primary is just a dog and pony show now.

The GOP has already made the choice for you.



(Now I get to sit back, watch conservatives deny this, and still get proven right in time)

The Bush name is a shitstain on anyone running. Those middle voters will NEVER line up to vote Bush [Cheney] again. Never ever ever. So by running Bush, all they're doing is preaching to the choir....and gambling quite dangerously...possibly handing a clear victory over to whatever LGBT tool the dems are forced to run.

 

[The Rabbi]

Jeb is really not that bad. He's a solid moderate, and not a bible thumper.

If the GOP runs a Tea Party candidate they'll not take back the white house.

If the GOP takes the senate back in November, and don't get the white house back too...we're all in for nothing getting done in Washington from 2014-2020

If Jeb were to win, it would not be the end of the world. I think he would be at least as good as his father whom I did like. Still, if Hillary runs, which she will, I just don't see any way that the Republicans are going to win, even if they ran Jesus himself. Of course, Jesus would almost certainly be a Democrat.

I find my eyes glazing over when someone says "it's still too early to tell", but...it's still too early to tell.

Having said that...my instincts are telling me that when 52% of voters get to the voting booths in 2016, the old mental snapshots of Hillary in the white house all those years will drive their need for stability by calling on memories of simpler times. And especially with women voters.

Because women are simple minded?
Hillary reminds every man of his ex wife. She brings nothing. She repeats the same old pablum, but not as glitzy or believable as Fauxcohontas Warren. She is ersatz. Warren at least has the virtue of being a genuine commie simp pinko. Conviction will beat out fraud every day.

 

[rightwinger]

Yup, we need another Bush. W took the country to its knees and Jeb would finish the job. But he won't win. The far right will not support him. He is too ready to compromise.

We haven't invaded Iraq in a while

We need a Bush to do that

Where have you been? We just invaded both Iraq and Syria.
Obama has sent troops to more countries than Bush ever dreamed of.
It's funny watching libs weigh in on the GOP race. It's like monkeys handicapping the Kentucky Derby.

I love to watch conservatives struggle with equivalencies as they try to equate Obamas military strikes to Dessert Storm and Iraqi Freedom

See? Obama did it too!

 

[Rikurzhen]

From a GOP strategy perspective, they shouldn't give a crap about what evangelicals and Tea Partiers want...they'll vote Republican no matter what. So you get candidates like Romney and Bush, instead of Cruz or Paul

Democrats will vote democrat. If republicans don't like a candidate they just don't vote at all.

I haven't seen any numbers on that...but it doesn't sound right to me.

We always hear that Republicans vote in higher percentages than Democrats do....I dunno. I'm inspired to look into that. Can you think of any examples where Republicans didn't like their Presidential candidate, and turned out in fewer numbers as a result? I can't. Maybe Barry Goldwater, or Bob Dole?

yep...2012. polling studies estimated that 3 million fewer GOP voters went to the polls than in 2008.
The data concluded that Romney being a Mormon would not get the Christian Rightist vote. Those who take their beliefs to such a high level that they incorporate their religion into every aspect of their being. These far right Christians are judgmental to the point of distraction. Normally, they are not an influential voting bloc. By staying away, they helped give Obama a second term.

Don't ever, EVER, rely on liberal media "analysis" of what the Right is doing. NEVER, EVER.

Here's Pew's analysis of the polling data on Evangelical voting:

There was considerable speculation during the 2012 primaries about the strength of support for Mitt Romney among white evangelical Protestants. A Pew Research Center analysis of exit poll data finds that white evangelical Protestants voted for Romney with as much enthusiasm as his other supporters did. In addition, white evangelical Protestants voted as heavily for Romney as they did for the GOP candidates in 2008 and 2004, and they made up about the same share of the electorate as they did in the two previous elections. . .

Another way to gauge voter enthusiasm for Romney’s candidacy is to compare his support with that for the GOP candidates in the 2008 and 2004 elections. Analysis of exit poll data from prior elections shows that, nationwide, voter support for Romney among white evangelical Protestants was the same as for George W. Bush in 2004 (79% for both GOP candidates). And Romney won more of the white evangelical Protestant vote than John McCain did in 2008 (73%).
​

As for your analysis that they're not an influential voting block, I beg to differ. One measure of influence is how large a share of a group's vote can be directed to one party. By this measure blacks are an influential group to Democrats because they direct 95% of their votes to Democrats. Using this measure, how influential are the evangelicals to Republicans?

In 1982, exit polls showed an even 50-50 split of self-identified "born again" voters between Republican and Democratic candidates. That shifted to a 2-to-1 split favoring Republicans in the later '80s and throughout the 1990s. Even when some exit polls shifted the question to ask whether voters were "members of the religious right," two-thirds of such respondents supported Republican candidates. In 2004, "born again or evangelical" voters voted 3-to-1 for Bob Dole. In 2008, Democrats rebounded somewhat, with Obama receiving 29 percent of "born again/evangelical" support to John McCain's 71 percent. To put a four-to-one margin in perspective: It's the same percentage of self-identified Republicans who voted for George H. W. Bush in 1988.

Exit polls in Indiana highlight how evangelical voting in the Hoosier State has shifted since 2008. Four years ago, the economic conditions helped Obama win Republican states like Indiana. Only two-thirds of evangelicals (69%) voted for McCain. This year, evangelicals made up less of Indiana's electorate (35%, down from 41%). But they were significantly more Republican, with 79 percent backing Romney.

In the Indiana Senate race, evangelicals were comparatively less supportive of Republican Richard Mourdock (70 percent) and more supportive of pro-life Democrat Joe Donnelly (32 percent).

In Ohio, Romney had a more difficult time convincing evangelicals to support him. In 2008, McCain received 71 percent of evangelical votes in Ohio. Exit polls this year don't show much change, with 68 percent of evangelicals voting for the Republican ticket.

The high water mark for evangelical support for Romney was in Mississippi. Half of the voters in Mississippi were white evangelicals (up from 43 percent in 2008). Of these, 96 percent said they voted for Romney. In comparison, 94 percent of African-Americans in the state voted for Obama.
​

Do you really want to cast to the wind a group which votes 79-20 for Republicans?

And which constitutes 23% of all voters?

At a time when young Millennial are transitioning towards more religion in their lives?

Millennials have traditionally leaned left politically. They overwhelmingly voted Obama into office both in 2008 and 2012, the majority support legalized marijuana, increasing the minimum wage, and taxing the rich. And although recent surveys show that millennials are increasingly growing disillusioned with politics regardless of party affiliation, there continues to be more millennials registered as Democrats than Republicans.

Now, however, a growing number of millennials are rethinking their Democratic viewpoints.

And this shift happens once they start families. In fact, similar to a sitcom plot, today’s millennials are transforming from having more in common with the hippie anarchist from Occupy Wall Street to now relating more with the pragmatic business executive.

Moreover, this means in the coming years, there’s going to be millions of young conservative viewpoints seeking representation. . . .

Millennials parents are also expressing more fundamental conservative values. Once millennials become parents those that identify themselves as “conservative evangelical Christians” jumps from 9.6% among non-parents to 32.9% among parents, reports FutureCast.
​

None of this should really be news to anyone. It's long been known that people become more conservative as they mature out of their youthful liberalism and that religion takes on important meaning when kids enter the famiily.

Look at this chart - if you cast off Evangelicals in order to make room for some other demographic, which one is larger and more loyal? And you who's writing this comment, an Atheist that's who, and I believe that it's utter madness to be going down the path of casting off a pillar of the conservative coalition.

 

[Rikurzhen]

yep...2012. polling studies estimated that 3 million fewer GOP voters went to the polls than in 2008.
The data concluded that Romney being a Mormon would not get the Christian Rightist vote. Those who take their beliefs to such a high level that they incorporate their religion into every aspect of their being. These far right Christians are judgmental to the point of distraction. Normally, they are not an influential voting bloc. By staying away, they helped give Obama a second term.

Those missing white voters where the white non-evangelical working class. They pay their taxes, they're upstanding, they like Republican values, but they were turned off by Romney equating them with Democratic deadbeats, as takers. They saw Romney, surprisingly not Obama, as a stooge of the big bankers. That's who stayed home.

 

[rightwinger]

yep...2012. polling studies estimated that 3 million fewer GOP voters went to the polls than in 2008.
The data concluded that Romney being a Mormon would not get the Christian Rightist vote. Those who take their beliefs to such a high level that they incorporate their religion into every aspect of their being. These far right Christians are judgmental to the point of distraction. Normally, they are not an influential voting bloc. By staying away, they helped give Obama a second term.

Those missing white voters where the white non-evangelical working class. They pay their taxes, they're upstanding, they like Republican values, but they were turned off by Romney equating them with Democratic deadbeats, as takers. They saw Romney, surprisingly not Obama, as a stooge of the big bankers. That's who stayed home.

More likely, white evangelicals refused to show up for a Mormon

 

[Rikurzhen]

yep...2012. polling studies estimated that 3 million fewer GOP voters went to the polls than in 2008.
The data concluded that Romney being a Mormon would not get the Christian Rightist vote. Those who take their beliefs to such a high level that they incorporate their religion into every aspect of their being. These far right Christians are judgmental to the point of distraction. Normally, they are not an influential voting bloc. By staying away, they helped give Obama a second term.

Those missing white voters where the white non-evangelical working class. They pay their taxes, they're upstanding, they like Republican values, but they were turned off by Romney equating them with Democratic deadbeats, as takers. They saw Romney, surprisingly not Obama, as a stooge of the big bankers. That's who stayed home.

More likely, white evangelicals refused to show up for a Mormon

I'm going to assume that you started with the bottom comment before you read the comment right above it.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I have to be frank here. I am not looking for a right wing door slamming, hard core conservative for president. That's counter productive. And one who would fail in his sworn duty to represent ALL Americans.
Once again, I will support and vote for a GOP or even a democrat candidate that is more statesman than politician and one who fits the criteria I described above.

It's interesting to listen to people who will choose a president based on more than just the party they are from.

However do you consider the potential impact of a president on, say, future of relations with Islam and the US? Bush did so much irreparable damage to relations, and all for the good of the Republican Party but detrimental to the people of the USA, and other pro-US countries like those in Europe.
How much do you think another Republican would just ramp up the anti-Islam rhetoric again to get support by "being tough" and yet causing problems?