Posted on 09/27/2014 6:56:32 AM PDT by cotton1706
Political pollsters have a tough job. They have to create formulas to determine if the person they are interviewing is likely to vote, and it is within this calculation that their reputations are made.
Typically, those who are likely to vote in an off-year election are pretty set. They are the people who always vote in elections — with some motivated by specific issues.
In a wave election, the number of those motivated by specific issues escalates, changing the electoral landscape as the candidates who are beneficiaries of this increased participation sweep to victory.
The 2014 election is rapidly looking like something new and different. Democrats are reportedly demoralized by the failed Obama administration and general fatigue.
Republicans, in an orgy of expectations, believe the key to taking the Senate was getting "electable" candidates nominated.
And get them nominated they did.
The establishment got their candidates. Now they're looking at a potentially disastrous election where their chosen ones dramatically underperform all reasonable expectations, the result of attacking their own party's base to cement primary victories.
One state party chairman has privately bemoaned that social conservatives in his state openly question why they should bother voting at all. Given the national party's desire to kick them out of the big tent to make room for a hoped-for influx of pot smoking hipsters, who can blame them?
Across the nation, Tea Party conservatives question the wisdom of being tied to a Republican Party that wants them to just shut up and vote for whomever the establishment decides, and it is this indecision on whether to vote at all that is at the heart of the GOP's polling woes.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.investors.com ...
And no, its not because they do not think they can win.
You are most certainly supporting Democrats. That is indisputable. In a two party system, political power devolves on one or the other, so make a choice and quit pretending that you can do otherwise. The third party voters and the stay at home crowd are not players and they are largely ignored by the political class.
Your solution to a Republican Party dominated at the national level by Republican politicians that you don’t like is to proclaim that supporting them is worse than supporting Democrats. Let’s run with that notion. Please convince us that another two years, six years, forever with the likes of Obama, Reid, and Pelosi is a better alternative than winning the fight within the Republican Party. We can win that fight, we can never win with the Democrats in charge.
That’s a good plan within the Republican Party and it’s a plan that’s working. It does not apply when Democrats are a part of the equation.
95 percent of elected Republicans including folks like Marco Rubio and Paul Ryan and so on aren’t real conservatives.
The 95 percent group in the GOP either fake or repudiate conservatism.
We need a party like UKIP over in England to deal with the Republican Party once and for all.
It's attitudes like yours that encourage Republicans to continually run candidates like John McCain and Mitt Romney, who refused to fight for anything or stand up for conservatism, thus giving us two terms of BO. And let's not forget Bob Dole, who couldn't even beat the biggest and most scandal-ridden scum bag in history up until the arrival of BO.
I voted for all those losers BTW. But no more.
If you are only going to support 5% of the Republican party politicians, which translates to about 2% of the overall total, you are not serious about gaining political power. That group of people are never going to win at the national level and rarely at the state level. The Communists have done it with Obama and his followers, but they lied about who they were, what they were going to do, and what the outcome would be. I don’t think that plan will work for conservatives.
A new party is certainly an option, but very difficult to pull off. It has happened very rarely in our history. Better success has been achieved through changing an existing party. 40% of the country self identifies as conservatives, twice the number of liberals and more than those who say that they are moderate. Conservatives should dominate the Republican Party, but it won’t happen with people just sitting in a corner and pouting.
It is most critical when Democrats are part of the occasion.
The mere fact that the GOPs are now worried about losing because of the lack of conservative votes proves the effectiveness of the plan.
Republicans will never again be a conservative party as long as the so-called conservatives keep voting for the RINOs -- a strategy which usually brings us Democrat victories anyway, or useless Republicans who didn't know what to do with a majority when they had it ten years ago.
Can you say:
?
Your premise is flawed, I reject it.
Actually, your “moderate” GOP party policy supports Democrat rule.
The GOP is not advocating any conservative ideas at the Federal level. There is not even a national campaign disseminating any GOP platform, much less a conservative one. It’s not my job to convince someone to support a party that doesn’t exist, that’s your position.
I am saying that supporting conservative candidates, and ONLY conservative candidates will eventually turn the GOP.
You are advocating a failed policy that has been PROVEN to lead to Democrat victory and the destruction of the party. Your strategy differs from the Rove big-tent appeasement policy how?
Your policy has lead to a Party dominated on the national level by traitors, cowards and Quislings, and yet, somehow, this same policy will magically lead to a conservative majority? Let me put it as bluntly and slowly as possible.
VOTE ONLY FOR CONSERVATIVE CANDIDATES.
VOTING FOR A LIBERAL GOP CANDIDATE US WORSE THAN VOTING FOR A DEMOCRAT.
Anyone can make an assertion. That's all that liberals do. So if you think my premise is flawed, either say why or stay silent.
For extra bonus points, let's hear your premise about how voting for Mike Huckabee (or whomever), Mitch McConnel and John Boehner saves the country.
They stand for getting themselves elected and staying in power.
Not sure what else to be honest.
How is it flawed?
The progressive agenda is for an ever-tightening noose around the American people. Central control of everything that used to be local. Unlimited immigration. Blending of the US with Mexico. Love of Islam. Hatred of energy self sufficiency. Hatred of self sufficiency of any kind. Education that indoctrinates the young. Modern morality, not timeless values. Lip service to religious freedom while destroying it. A welfare state. Abortion on demand. Centralized health care and control of what care you can have. A progressive tax code thousands of pages long that punishes those who oppose you and rewards your friends. The notion of the Constitution as a quaint guidepost, a starting point for where we came from a long time ago, not as the rules that have to be followed today. That's crazy to them.
The GOPe differs with the Democrats on these things only along the margins. 33 percent or 38 percent tax rate. This or that tax credit. How many illegals to allow to stay. How quickly they can vote. The extent of environmental regulations. Whether we should house terrorists in Gitmo or try them in NY. Whether Catholic nuns have to pay for abortions. But on the big picture, they do not differ. The march of history is always, always to be in the progressive direction. Those, like us, who want to roll back the leviathan, who recognize that beginning with Wilson and FDR, the Feds, and continuing through to the present, the Federal government has broken free from the shackles of a limited government that the Constitution imposed and has imposed itself on the states that created it, are not of the same party or belief system as the progressives. So, whenever we pop up our heads, whether it is the movement of WF Buckley, Goldwater and Reagan, which was tamped down by the Bushes, or whether it is the Tea Party that arose in the wake of the earthquake caused by election of a true believing marxist, the progressives on both sides, Democrat and Republican, respond with vigor and viciousness.
Republicans never attack Democrats with the malice that they show towards conservatives. They argue with them. They fight us. They hate us. We are the people in "we the people" and they hold that document and us in contempt. They know, in their hearts, that "we the people" are the ones who can stop them if we act in time, and so they are erecting the leviathan (and bringing in new Americans) so that there will come a time when they can't be stopped.
Thus, I disagree that anything that happens in 2014 will cause the GOPe to enlist the support of conservatives in 2016. They would rather join the other side than allow that--which is what many of them would do if forced to choose between a Ted Cruz or a Hillary Clinton. If you don't want to be stuck with Romney or Jeb Bush in 2016, you better figure out another plan than staying home in 2014. That may be the best strategy for 2014 (I am all for letting McConnell and Lindsey lose, even if it means the Senate), but we still need to figure out the next step. And I have been convinced for a while that working through the GOP will not get us where we want to go.
No pouting here, just no votes for RINO’s and writing in names of conservatives instead.
I’m waiting for the new party to emerge that will get my vote.
America needs its Nigel Farage.
That’s certainly true in the Pennsylvania governor’s race.
You are either an outright liar or an incredible fool. Who was the last president to run a truly conservative campaign? Maybe you don’t remember Reagan. But he seemed to pick up a little more than 2% of the popular vote.
And actually, I’d you had any idea of the modern political landscape, you would understand that Obama won by energizing his base. And as much as you may want to say he lied, Obama has been pretty open to stating his progressive agenda. He lies and obfuscates from a policy and operations standpoint, but his leftist goals are there for everyone to see.
The failed theory of the middle ground is trapping the GOP in history. Your base is what wins elections, not the mushy middle. Reagan poached an entire nation from progressive Democrats by giving middle America a vision that it could support.
The GOP is squandering the greatest opportunity it has ever had. Why? They would rather maintain the status quo and keep party control out of conservative hands. You obviously support that agenda 100%.
The best part about the rants like yours is that they only make sense to the small set of angry voices who advocate this approach. You’ve convinced each other, but that’s as far as it’s going to go.
Remember the 2012 Republican Convention, when Romney banned Sarah Palin, who should have been the keynote speaker.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.