Free Republic
Browse · Search
GOP Club
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

If Republicans nominate a strong conservative, it could hurt them on Election Day. A lot.
The Washington Post's Monkey Cage ^ | September 25, 2015 | Matthew Atkinson and Darin DeWitt

Posted on 09/25/2015 2:49:27 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet

In June 2014, Senator Ted Cruz told The New Yorker’s Jeffrey Toobin this:

It is amazing that the wisdom of the chattering class to the Republicans is always, always, always ‘Surrender your principles and agree with the Democrats. That’s been true for my entire lifetime. The chattering classes have consistently said, ‘You crazy Republicans have to give up on what you believe and become more like Democrats.’ And, I would note, every time Republicans do that we lose.

Cruz went on:

And what does the entire D.C. Republican consulting class say? ‘In 2016, we need another establishment moderate!’ Hasn’t worked in four decades. ‘But next time will be the time!’

To Cruz, the logic is simple: more moderate Republicans have lost some presidential elections, so the party should nominate someone less moderate. It’s an unsurprising view from a guy who is on the conservative flank of the party and is now a presidential candidate.

It’s also a view that is largely wrong. Political science research shows that ideological moderation actually is rewarded at the ballot box in House elections and presidential elections. The same thing is true in the 2016 presidential race. In fact, we estimate that in 2016, the electoral penalty for choosing a true believer rather than a moderate is a 23-percentage point decline in the probability of winning the general election....

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Ohio; Texas; Campaign News; Issues; Parties; Polls
KEYWORDS: 2016election; cruz; election2016; gop; johnboehner; ohio; polls; speakerboehner; speakerjohnboehner; tedcruz; texas; uniparty
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-54 last
To: 2ndDivisionVet

Yeah, just like it hurt Ronald Reagan in 1980 and 1984 Mega sarcasm.


41 posted on 09/25/2015 4:38:17 PM PDT by American Constitutionalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

John Bonehead ?

Catlynn Pelosi, John Bonehead is a Nancy Pelosi with female parts.


42 posted on 09/25/2015 4:44:08 PM PDT by American Constitutionalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
If Republicans nominate a strong conservative, it could hurt them on Election Day. A lot

Well, hell, any fool knows that. Look at the landslide victories the moderate Republicans have given us since '92!

43 posted on 09/25/2015 4:52:16 PM PDT by Fightin Whitey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: digger48
Plenty of people are going to stay home if they don't like the Presidential nominee as well as not liking the new Speaker of the House. No matter what we are doomed. The democrats are going to win anyway. They have resurrected more people to vote than anyone else. They are the masters of voter fraud. To top it off many of today's millenials aren't too bright and will vote for whomever promises them the most free stuff.
44 posted on 09/25/2015 4:57:27 PM PDT by LottieDah (If only those who speak so eloquently on behalf of animals would do so on behalf of the unborn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: LottieDah

Democrats can’t steal House seats. With the House and a strong Speaker, the Democrat agenda CAN be stopped.


45 posted on 09/25/2015 5:04:09 PM PDT by digger48 (ars)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Romney and McCain didn't exactly inspire Christians to vote (although Palin helped Mccain some). An outspoken Christian like Cruz could increase the turnout significantly.

What went wrong in 2012? The case of the 4 million missing voters

46 posted on 09/25/2015 5:06:02 PM PDT by DrewsDad (Environmental Extremism Eventually Endangers Everyone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

In retrospect this is hilarious, because the liberal pundits were certain that for the Republicans to nominate Ronald Reagan “would destroy the Republican party”. His biggest opponent was H.W. Bush, who derided Reagan’s conservatism, and called Reagan’s platform to cut taxes, yet increase revenues, while cutting government, “voodoo economics”.

H.W. Bush never truly believed in Reagan or conservatism, but was happy to ride on his coattails. Then, when he got elected on a promise of “Read my lips, no new taxes”, he then agreed with the Democrats to raise taxes.

I don’t think anyone here would say that H.W. Bush was better for the Republican party than was Reagan.


47 posted on 09/25/2015 5:21:48 PM PDT by yefragetuwrabrumuy ("Don't compare me to the almighty, compare me to the alternative." -Obama, 09-24-11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yefragetuwrabrumuy

Yep, bringing in Bush guaranteed that the Reagan Revolution would not last beyond Reagan’s Presidency.


48 posted on 09/25/2015 5:23:31 PM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Man, I am SO GLAD Matthew Atkinson and Darin DeWitt have the BEST INTERESTS of the Republican party in their hearts and minds!

Thank you SO MUCH Matthew Atkinson and Darin DeWitt for caring soooo deeply as to give such WONDERFUL analysis and advice to the Republican party.

Matthew Atkinson and Darin DeWitt are such modern day HEROES for helping us see that conservatives are soooo wrong and people like Linseed Grayed Ham and Juan McInsane are the TRUE solution for victory.


49 posted on 09/25/2015 5:27:34 PM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

A lot depends on moderate how?

On social issues extremes are at best a wash (what you gain from your base you lose from others) and more likely a negative (the loss of moderates and rage of the other side overwhelms the gain in your base). This applies to liberals too, but is worse for conservatives (thank you movies, tv and academia).

On economic issues there is probably more room for ‘extremes’ especially on the conservative side. This is the reverse of social issues. Extreme liberals will tend to lose more from the others than they gain from their base. Where Republicans do tend to lose out is in pushing free-trade as a god; a little scepticism here would not be a bad thing.

On foreign policy it is moderation for the win. The public may like a strong military but their taste for war is not unlimited. Outside of a narrow part of the base, I can’t see Carly’s don’t-talk-to-Putin-but-prepare-for-war proposal really enthusing people. Again outside a narrow base, Ron Paul’s peace-through-libertarian-non-aggression is not entirely appealing (although it probably has more support than militarism). In 2000 George Bush promised a strong military but a ‘humble’ foreign policy, nothing wrong with that.

As Trump has shown ‘extremism’ regarding immigration is a winner, even if he backtracked a bit with his “big beautiful door” comment. Hey Donald the problem is not legality, it’s numbers (sadly, mentioning demographics might fall into the camp of ‘too extreme’).


50 posted on 09/25/2015 5:29:13 PM PDT by evilC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

President Bob Dole “moderate establishment candidate”
President John McCain “moderate establishment candidate”
Ronald Regan “lost due to conservative values”
George W Bush “lost due to conservative values”

Yep, that moderation works every time! /sarcasm


51 posted on 09/25/2015 11:15:51 PM PDT by cpdiii (DECKHAND, ROUGHNECK, GEOLOGIST, PILOT, PHARMACIST, LIBERTARIAN The Constitution is worth dying for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
I'll be getting my political opinion from tbe WaPost from here on out.
52 posted on 09/26/2015 10:06:50 AM PDT by Attention Surplus Disorder (This space for rent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
It’s also a view that is largely wrong. Political science research shows that ideological moderation actually is rewarded at the ballot box in House elections and presidential elections. The same thing is true in the 2016 presidential race.

Chortle!
Yeah..is that why Barack Obama, by far the most extreme of far left extremist of extremists ever to have run for president won TWICE, and is that why the Republican Party won their two biggest victories in the House in 2010 and 2014 by running on a solidly conservative platform to repeal Obamacare and dismantle Obama’s far left agenda? /sarcasm off.
Beware of the Washington Post when they come bearing gifts. Whenever, the Washington Post, unapologetic and notorious Obama water carriers, and Obama propagandists turn round and offer “advise” to Republicans on how to win, the Republicans need to run as fast and as far away from that “advise” as possible, and do the exact opposite of what that “advise” entails.

53 posted on 09/26/2015 7:08:12 PM PDT by SmokingJoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmokingJoe

FDR, also a left-winger, won FOUR times.


54 posted on 09/26/2015 7:09:52 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet (TED CRUZ. You can help: https://donate.tedcruz.org/c/FBTX0095/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-54 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
GOP Club
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson