Here's the key, troll-boy.
You gave the game away here:
Since it seems like you are really determined to talk primary strategy, mine is exactly what William F Buckley said: vote for the most conservative candidate that CAN win.
This is code speak for "vote for Weepy Boner, vote for RINOs, because shut up."
McCain lost *despite* Palin -- after having dropped his campaign to run to DC to "solve the fiscal cliff" (that is, go spelunking). The mood of the voters was VERY anti-DC, so McCain's running to DC was EPIC FAIL.
Then he compounded it by saying in public of Obama, "You have nothing to fear from this man as your President" (which is codespeak for "slurp, slurp").
But remember? He was electable.
Then there was Romney whose butt-boys were instrumental in knifing Palin in the back from within the GOP, giving "bipartisan" cover to the Dems who were scared to death of her conservative-but-libertarian-leaning, Federalist, populist message, which was exactly right for the times.
The same Romney who went on to carpet-bomb conservatives in the Primaries; the same Romney who twisted the knife by changing primary rules in Virginia and elsewhere to eliminate other candidates.
But this was all OK, because he was "electable" -- because, you know, he wasn't one of those rabidly pro-life, fanatical, Tea-Partiers -- no, he was the wise, measured, sensible alternative, who could give reach-arounds reach across the aisle to Dems, just as he had as the Governor of Massachusetts.
And what happened outside of your autofellatory fever-dreams?
Reality, that's what.
TV ads where he was literally accused of MURDER -- over a women who was the wife of an employee of a company he *used* to own, lost her health insurance from *another* company, YEARS later.
"You didn't build that"
"Binders full of women."
Women of my acquaintance, with Master's Degrees, telling me with a straight face that if Romney were elected, contraception would be outlawed (they'd never heard of Griswold v. Connecticut, it seems).
Jabba the Crowley, the impartial, objective moderator, running interference for Obama MID-DEBATE, hiding behind her own skirts (as a woman) enabling her to snipe from behind cover.
Yeah, running to the left sure was electable.
Because, you know, leftists are fair-minded, and just, and are willing to work with Republicans, if only they'll just give up any core principles and bend over learn to "work together".
Unlike those racist bigot homophobe slutty gun nut stay-at-home-moms like Sarah Palin.
How's that hopey-changey stuff working out for you now, dipstick?
Oh, one other thing: you're lying about Akin. He wasn't the first choice -- there was a three-way race (fomented by RINOs like you in concert with the Dems, in order to discredit and marginalize conservatives).
Troll.
That quote is from William F Buckley you dope. What it means is obvious, in the primaries vote for the most conservative candidate that CAN win. Which means you don't vote for idiots like O'Donnell and Angle.
Why do you keep posting your analysis of elections. Politically you are one of the most ignorant posters here, why would I want to read what you think about that?
Oh, one other thing: you're lying about Akin. He wasn't the first choice -- there was a three-way race (fomented by RINOs like you in concert with the Dems, in order to discredit and marginalize conservatives).
What on earth are you babbling about? Akin was the first choice of enough social conservatives including Mike Huckabee (who campaigned for him) that he won. There was no conspiracy you dimwit. Steelman was the Tea Party candidate and Brunner the "establishment" entry. The socon's got the candidate they wanted and Akin, predictably, said something idiotic and imploded - which was exactly why the Claire and her goons wanted him to win.
Once again, so maybe the information can leak into your tiny skull of mush, 2010 was NOT a "throw all the bums out on both sides" election. It was a throw all the Democrats out election. You jumped in this thread making claims that were simply not true, and have since posted a bunch of incoherent blather that demonstrates you need to do a whole lot more listening and whole lot less talking.