RINO or Conservative: Who Scores Best?

1/15/08 | Dwar

[DWar]

If Fred Thompson or Duncan Hunter don't "make it" and it becomes necessary to vote while holding my nose and puking, I tried to devise a rational way to determine which RINO (Republican In Name Only) would make me the least ill. I identified my top issues and prioritized them based on:

• How immediately an issue could impact the nation- Immediate, Urgent, Serious
• The power of an issue’s negative impact on the nation- Devastating, Powerful, Strong and
• Once implemented the likelihood an issue could ever be changed- Unchangeable, Changeable.

It seemed rational that issues like being conquered by illegal immigrants or losing the war, being more immediate, potentially negative and unchangeable, were more critical than even important issues like Gay Rights or Healthcare. Therefore issues that are more immediate, more negative and that were relatively unchangeable were more highly prioritized.

I’ve spent weeks researching and analyzing the candidates’ quotes and votes. I have watched every debate more than once and spent dozens of hours on numerous websites including http://www.ontheissues.org/default.htm, to make some judgments about their level of conservatism.

Taking into consideration the, "If their lips are moving, they're lying" factor, I marked a candidate lower if I thought their stated position was shaded like with Huckabee on Taxes, McCain on Immigration, Romney on Gay Rights or Giuliani on Guns. They were marked down a bit even if their position today sounds rock solid conservative.

Consideration was also given to whom their past constituencies were. They are all politicians and in past statements or votes they sometimes had to speak or vote in a way that is a little less than straight forward than they might have liked. Like every smart husband has to do when his wife asks,”Do these pants make my rear end look fat?” The way he answers depends on who his wife is; Eva Longoria or Rosie O’Donnell.

I included two categories usually not even considered, as the first and second in importance; Stability of Personality and Electability. While excitement, passion and a certain impulsiveness may be desirable in a candidate, stability and deliberativeness are necessary in a president. An unstable personality in a president would be a disaster waiting to happen.

In addition, none of the conservative political agenda has any hope of being followed with Hillary or Obama in the White House. Therefore electablity is not a sacrifice of conservative principle but rather the most important of conservative principles. Winning and getting something, is better than losing and getting nothing. Even Reagan wasn’t “Reagan” (the size of both the government and the budget grew) but it was important for conservatism that he won.

The ranking scale range is:

• Conservative = 10
• Conservative tendencies = 8
• Moderate or Unreliable = 5
• Liberal tendencies = 2
• Liberal = 0

I separated and subtotaled the top 10 and the top 20 from the total to see how the candidates compare on the most important issues as opposed to the total. If a candidate scored in the middle on the total of issues but the highest on the top 10, I might want to support him.

In the interest of full disclosure I have taken multiple candidate preference quizzes. They always come out with my order of preference being Hunter and Thompson numbers 1 & 2 with the others in various positions depending on the quiz. My desire is for the most conservative candidate who is also electable to win the nomination.

This is a work in progress. Adjustments to the matrix are made regularly as other issues come to my attention, issues rise or fall in importance or candidates appear to change positions.

As of now the order of most conservative to most liberal are:

On the top ten issues:

• Thompson- 95/100
• Hunter- 93/100
• Romney-92/100
• Giuliani- 81/100
• Huckabee- 60/100
• McCain- 49/100

On the top twenty issues:

• Hunter- 190/200
• Thompson- 181/200
• Romney- 173/200
• Giuliani- 146/200
• Huckabee- 119/200
• McCain- 117/200

On the totality of issues (33):

• Hunter- 315/330
• Romney- 292/330
• Thompson- 279/330
• Giuliani- 241/330
• Huckabee- 203/330
• McCain- 190/330

Feedback is welcome.

Candidates Side by Side Comparison

Issue	Immediacy	Negativity	Changeability
				Giuliani	Huck	Hunter	McCain	Romney	Thompson
1- Stability of Personality	Imminent	Devastating	Unchangeable	8	8	10	5	10	10
2- Electablity	Imminent	Devastating	Unchangeable	8	5	2	10	8	5
3- Illegal Immigration	Imminent	Devastating	Unchangeable	5	2	10	0	10	10
4- War in Iraq	Imminent	Devastating	Unchangeable	10	10	10	10	10	10
5- War on Terror	Imminent	Devastating	Unchangeable	10	5	10	5	10	10
6- SCOTUS appts	Urgent	Devastating	Unchangeable	10	5	10	2	10	10
7- Guns & 2nd Amend	Urgent	Devastating	Unchangeable	0	10	10	0	5	10
8- Business/infl/rec	Imminent	Powerful	Changeable	10	8	10	5	10	10
9- Lower Taxes	Imminent	Powerful	Changeable	10	2	10	2	10	10
10- Iran	Urgent	Devastating	Changeable	10	5	10	10	10	10
Top 10 Total				81	60	92	49	93	95
11- Pro-Life	Urgent	Devastating	Changeable	0	10	10	10	8	8
12- Healthcare- gov run	Urgent	Devastating	Unchangeable	10	5	10	8	5	10
13- Soc Sec	Urgent	Devastating	Unchangeable	10	10	10	10	10	8
14- Internet Neutrality	Urgent	Devastating	Unchangeable	10	0	10	10	10	10
15- Internet Tax	Urgent	Devastating	Unchangeable	10	0	10	10	10	10
16- Kyoto Treaty	Urgent	Devastating	Changeable	10	8	10	10	10	10
17- Global Warming	Urgent	Devastating	Changeable	0	0	10	0	5	8
18- Energy Indy	Urgent	Powerful	Changeable	8	8	10	5	10	10
19- ANWAR Drilling	Urgent	Powerful	Changeable	5	10	10	0	10	10
20- Globalism & Free Trd	Urgent	Powerful	Changeable	2	8	8	2	2	2
Top 20 Total				146	119	190	117	173	181
21- Military Strength	Urgent	Powerful	Changeable	10	10	10	10	10	10
22- Guantanamo	Urgent	Powerful	Changeable	10	0	10	0	10	10
23- Waterboarding	Urgent	Powerful	Changeable	10	0	10	0	10	10
24- Tax Reform	Urgent	Powerful	Changeable	10	10	10	8	10	8
25- Gay Rights	Serious	Powerful	Unchangeable	0	10	10	5	8	8
26- CFR & 1st Amend	Serious	Powerful	Changeable	0	0	10	0	10	0
27- Crime	Serious	Strong	Changeable	10	5	10	10	10	10
28- Education	Serious	Powerful	Changeable	5	5	5	5	5	5
29- Death Penalty	Serious	Strong	Changeable	10	10	10	10	10	10
30- Tort Reform	Serious	Strong	Changeable	10	8	10	5	10	5
31- School Vouchers	Serious	Strong	Changeable	10	10	10	10	10	10
32- Federalism	Serious	Strong	Changeable	5	8	10	5	8	10
33- Affirmative Action	Serious	Strong	Changeable	5	8	10	5	8	2
All Issues Total				241	203	315	190	292	279
			Conservative= 10
			Conservative tendencies= 8
			Moderate or Unreliable=5
			Liberal tendencies= 2
			Liberal= 0

[kevao]

And most of them aren’t even “good”.

[DWar]

Thanks for your input.

I find it interesting that on the one hand you excoriate me for considering electability important,

"Your second mistake is to put electability into the list of conservative qualities. A person is as electable as the voters decide."

On the other hand you allow yourself to use the same criteria in judging whom YOU will support as you clearly prefer the most conservative candidate you can get but will not support Keyes. If as you say Keyes is the most conservative then why are you not supporting him?

Could it be the electability factor?

"Alan Keyes is probably the only candidate more conservative than Hunter. However, he is the most unelectable candidate running."

In a world where I alone get to chose, Hunter would be my first choice. Since I live in a world populated by other thinking people I must cooperate with others to make any progress. Please see my tagline and post # 141

[Onerom99]

Keep defending your big spending liberal.

[pissant]

Yes, but it is a separate animal than the medicare prescription drug plan the GOP passed, I believe. HSAs are good. Prescr. drugs, not so good.

[calcowgirl]

Good approach. I disagree a lot with your results though. By including so many categories regarding defense/WOT and business, your results are heavily skewed in favor of candidates whose strengths lie in those categories (i.e. Giuliani). I also don't think things like "electability" should be a factor in saying whether someone is more or less of a RINO.

I have to take strong exception to your giving Giuliani a "10" on SCOTUS appointments. His record is of appointing liberal judges. He has said that Presidents choose justices who think like them. His mention of "strict constructionists" should give little relief as the author of Roe v. Wade (Blackmun) was a "strict constructionist" and judicial activist who helped advance some of the most destructive laws of our time.

That said, here are some categories I included in a similar analysis:

• Property rights
• Stem-Cell Research
• LOST
• Small Gov
• Sovereignty
• Corruption/Other
• Border enforcement
• Amnesty
• Family/Marital
• Health/Age

[DWar]

"With a Democrat Senate, perhaps one that is fillibuster proof, Giuliani's appointments will be just as liberal as Obama's, or he won't have any. "

Except for the facts that:

• Stevens is 87
• Ginsburg is 74,
• Kennedy & Scalia are 71,
• Breyer 69
• Souter 68

Someone will likely die and the American public will not allow the seat to go unfilled and Giuliani is on the record committing to appointing "Strict Constructionist judges" in the model of Scalia and Roberts.

"As to the war in Iraq, I think it will end with Bush's presidency regardless of who is elected, Republican or Democrat. "

About Iraq.
In reality the war in Iraq is over. What's left is the rebuilding of the indineous security forces and that's progressing well. The odds of the next president withdrawing ALL forces from Iraq are about the same as they were for the president who followed Harry Truman withdrawing ALL forces from the very unpopular Korean War in 1952. By the way we still have about 40,000 service personnel there.

[DWar]

"Of course, Romney’s positions are based on his rhetoric, not his record."

Of course. All politicians positions are based upon their rhetoric. Perhaps you'd rather have a McCain who in the past has supported:

• McCain-Finegold Campaign Finance Reform,
• McCain Kennedy Illegal Alien Amnesty,
• Gun checks and assault weapons ban,
• Every tax increase proposed and,
• Afirmative Action

And opposed:

• Tort Reform,
• Drilling in ANWAR,
• Guantanamo and,
• Waterboarding.

He is very consistent, too because he still holds these positions.

It's just a question. You might find these positions appealing. None of them are conservative positions, that's all. The question is do you think McCain will become more conservative even though he holds a tight grip to his liberal ideas or is it wiser to trust someone who espouses more conservaive ideas today, like a Giuliani or Romney even though they once held some liberal ones?

[DWar]

"Remain true to yourself."

If I were 100% true to my self I could only vote for myself for president. Being "true to yourself" also involves being successful. You can be so faithful to every single principle you hold that you never win anything and therefore never get anything you value. There must be a measure of cooperation and compromise for political success to occur. They key is knowing how much coperation is valuable and how much is counter productive to conservative principles. See my tagline.

[Mr. Brightside]

Once you get past Thompson or Hunter, there are not many good choices.

As one person stated, it is like preferring diarrhea over vomiting.

I prefer vomiting and have nothing against those who prefer diarrhea.

[DWar]

"I would flip the free trade numbers upside down, since I think free trade is inherently conservative and good for us as a country."

I used to feel the same way about free trade. I almost think that its no longer an issue that has any political meaning since most all Democrats and Republicans support it. It seems only the far right and far left, the Paulites and Kuchinichites have problems with it. Personally I just think it need to be equitable; a level playing field for each nation. I need to do some further research into this issue.

"And I would quibble quite a bit with your “electability” ratings. McCain only gets a ‘10’ there if the only people allowed to vote are the media."

McCain's high electability rating has to do with his national electability against a Democrat. He consistently leads in the polls in this regard.

[DWar]

The post was in response to a question about the changeabiity versus the unchangeability of an issue. The question was whether I had considered the issue changeable or unchangeable through the efforts of far future presidents or immediately succeeding administrations.

So the question is, Is the direction of an issue, having been once decided, succeptable to influence by succeeding presidencies to change. And is it likely that this influence could be successful or not. For example, gay rights legislation, having been once enacted will likely never be changed.

[freekitty]

That’s going way overboard. That’s not what I meant. Being true to yourself is doing the right thing.

[Calpernia]

Ok, then past the govtrack link to the legislature you are referring to.

[xjcsa]

I used to feel the same way about free trade. I almost think that its no longer an issue that has any political meaning since most all Democrats and Republicans support it. It seems only the far right and far left, the Paulites and Kuchinichites have problems with it. Personally I just think it need to be equitable; a level playing field for each nation. I need to do some further research into this issue.

I became completely convinced in college, in large part through reading Thomas Sowell, that free trade is good for both parties. I'm also convinced that when it's not "fair", it really only hurts the country that's trying to play dirty (aside from actual theft/piracy issues).

McCain's high electability rating has to do with his national electability against a Democrat. He consistently leads in the polls in this regard.

You're right from an "objective" by-the-polls analysis. I just don't think the polls would hold up through a campaign.

[DWar]

I understand your frustration.

Wasn't it Jefferson who said,"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants?"

I hope we're not at that point.

[calcowgirl]

I'm also convinced that when it's not "fair", it really only hurts the country that's trying to play dirty

How?

[publiusF27]

Never-the-less I did take the flip flop factor into consideration and ranked a candidate lower han his stated position if his past statements or votes seemed to be inconsistent with his position today.

And yet I notice Rudy got high marks in the area of judicial appointments on your chart.

In a February 2000 interview on Meet the Press, Rudy said that Congress should pass a law saying, among other things, that citizens should have to prove they have a need for a handgun before being allowed to own one. He went on to add that he had advocated that position for 20 years.

I know, I know, he says he has come around on guns. Perhaps. Still, where did he think Congress got that kind of power? The only answer I can think of is an expansive view of the commerce clause, which doesn't bode well for the judges he might appoint, IMO.

[DWar]

My answer to you was based on memory. I did a quick look at my research and found that it wasn't an increase in taxes but a reduction of benefits (by indexing them to increases in the CPI instead of ot the increase in wages) that prompted the 8 instead of a 10 for Soc Sec.

As I said before, perhaps that should be balanced by the idea that SS needs some kind of "salvation" and Fred's proposal might be a part of that. However, this proposal, too, is only a bandaide. I'll think about that one.

[DWar]

"Well done, young freeper."

Thanks for the "young" part!

[DWar]

At quick glance, Romney deserves a hell of a lot less thn 5 for health care.

I thought so,too at first. Originally I had him at 2. Then I began to read more about his ideas.

It looks to me like, even though his plan is comprehensive, it seems to be paid for by the free market and is policy holder controlled. It is far from Government RUN Healthcare like Hillarycare would be.

Thanks for the reminder. I need to look at it more closely but didn't have time for this first publication of the comparison. I'll look at it more in depth before the next posting.