Posted on 12/05/2011 2:58:45 AM PST by grassboots.org
In an obvious effort to get conservatives to warm up to the idea of moderate Mitt Romney as the GOP nominee for president, talk show host Michael Medved does a little jujitsu move against election facts. As I have shown elsewhere, in every presidential election since 1972, GOP candidates do better when they are seen in greater contrast with the Democratic nominee. This was never more true than in 2008, and though Medved admits that John McCain was a moderate, he implies that the GOP would have won if they had nominatedsomeone even more moderate than McCain. This is pure poppycock. Medved confuses things by mixing apples and oranges, facts and fallacy.
Apple I: Some moderate Senate candidates did better in liberal states than McCain did.
Orange: It is irrelevant that moderate candidates did better than McCain in liberal states like Maine and Vermont. We are not a liberal country.
Apple II: Moderates won in conservative states in which McCain lost.
Orange: Lindsey Graham did win in conservative South Carolina, but not by that much (58 to 42%), considering that his opponent only spent $15,202 compared to the $6.5M spent by Graham, and of whom Graham said
"Almost no one knows my opponent," Graham said. "The Democrats really didn't field a — make a serious challenge — in terms of trying to find an opponent for me."Apple III: McCain’s problem was not among conservatives, who showed up in big numbers, but rather among moderates, who voted for Obama
Orange: While it is true that Obama won the moderate vote and conservatives showed up in droves, Medved assumes wrongly that self-attesting moderates are more likely to vote for the moderate candidate. This is to misunderstand who moderates are. They are a swing vote...
(Excerpt) Read more at caffeinatedthoughts.com ...
Say NO more. It’s Med-Douche! If McCain hadn’t chosen Palin he would have lost in a tidal wave!
MICHAEL MEDVED: (D, Clinton plant)
I still like Sarah.
Before I vote for Mitt, I will write in my mother-in-law’s name...and god help the democrats if she wins.
I despise Medved’s smarmy RINO attitudes.
My great joy is that no one listens to his radio show.
My great sadness is that it reflects the GOP power structure.
What’s you mother-in-law’s name? - That’ll make at least two votes.
Medved’s missing the changed dynamic since Obama took office.
It’s one thing for the Democrats to ignore their shellacking in 2010 and, for that matter 2011, at the polls, another for those who claim to be Republicans to fail to see the new world we are in.
The country is in a foul mood. Anger and fear pervade.
If conservatism could ever win, it’s now.
I like listening to Medved only because of his vast knowledge of American History and his ability to shred a Liberal caller by pulling out facts without a second of thought. But when it comes to his moderate political leanings, he makes me ill. Despite the fact that he makes his home in the Northwest, he is an Ivy League Northeastern big city Republican of the same cloth as Charles Krauthammer. Medved loved John McCain, but said choosing Sarah Palin was the reason McCain lost. He never could warm to the thought of Sarah Palin being in D.C.
With Mitts he reminds me of a chimpanzee lovingly picking bugs out of the fur of another chimpanzee who happens to have a blow dried head of hair and radioactively bleached teeth.
I saw Chimp Mitts on Fox last night. No even once did he suggest that anything in the federal government be eliminated. He even defended No Child Left Behind. He just thinks it could be run a little better. ( By his Ivy League elitist and self-anointed self, of course.)
How long do you think those callers were on hold before getting to talk to Medved? Hm? You could shred a liberal, too, given a few commercial breaks and a powerful search program.
Do you think he might just possibly select the callers based on his most recent research? Medved? Absolutely!
All of these talk show hosts instruct their call screeners as to which callers will be accepted or rejected. And...”Hard Breaks” are used to the talk show host's advantage.
I really love Medved’s show because he actually allows liberal loons to take the stage and make complete fools of themselves.
Perfect is the enemy of good.
You have different parties so a choice can be offerered to the public. You don't want Tweedeldee Mitt and Tweedledum(b) Obama as your choices.
Yeah, Medved’s a tool. I used to really like him. Then McCain was the nominee in 2008 and Medved seemed to throw all reason out the window in order to declare him some kind of Ultimate Candidate. Ever since then, I can’t stand the sound of him.
The difference between the two though is Medved is and has been actively using his program to sell Mitt. Where Beck is saying “Dang, if this is what it comes down to, I will select a business man over a Washington Insider any day.
I often enjoy Michael’s radio show, but for a guy who’s so smart, he sure gets his facts wrong from time to time. Yeah, he’s been pushing Mittens from the beginning but that’s only because in his heart he’s an establishment big government moderate. Michael is even afraid to use the word “socialist” when discussing the Marxist Ubama!
Just change the station when Medved gets stupid. That’s what I do.
A few weeks ago Medved tried to excuse Romney’s coomunist healthcare law as something from long ago, “back in 2002”. Romney, of course, signed his communist healthcare plan into law in 2006, which is not so long ago. That’s the way Medved gets his facts wrong, and the problem is that it may be deliberate.
If I vote down state in Illinois early in the morning I can go to Chicago and vote some more and get that total up to 10 or 12. Maybe more!
Nicely done, driftless2
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.