Yes. It quite clearly indicates how someone like you can leap to the conclusion that Miers is not a conservative. Grab onto a few pieces of the puzzle and ignore the bigger picture. In the case of the Freeper poll, you completely ignore the fact that 40% of Freepers haven't even made up their mind yet. Despite that, you confidently declare the "conservative party" fractured. Lets push your logic to the limit. Lets say 5% of Freepers are for and 5% against with 90% undecided. According to your logic, that means the party is "fractured". I mean, that is a 50/50 split. We're doomed.
"Incidentally, who is this "Conservative party" you referenced?"
Well, see that is the problem with joining a thread very late and not reading enough of it to make a useful contribution. It is kind of like jumping into the end of a discussion and blurting out a point that was already made hours ago. I suggest you read the whole thread. Your question has already been addressed.
No, I pretty clearly identified those as "swing voters" in my analogy above. Perhaps you should go back and reread my comments.
Despite that, you confidently declare the "conservative party" fractured. Lets push your logic to the limit. Lets say 5% of Freepers are for and 5% against with 90% undecided. According to your logic, that means the party is "fractured". I mean, that is a 50/50 split. We're doomed.
Sorry, but this extreme example doesn't work. It isn't 5%-5%; it's 35%-27%. The two are not the same, no matter how much you wish they were.
Well, see that is the problem with joining a thread very late and not reading enough of it to make a useful contribution. It is kind of like jumping into the end of a discussion and blurting out a point that was already made hours ago. I suggest you read the whole thread. Your question has already been addressed.
I have read from the top of the thread. But perhaps I missed your definition of "conservative party" - please provide the comment in which it was made.