Note:
Question to Thompson does not address a (RINO) policy position.
Right, the independents should have their own primary.
I realized this, but haven’t much thought about it. Bringing it to the forefront gives me hope Fred can win this nomination and put these moderate rino’s in the basement!
“The value of the early primaries is diminished enormously by the crossover votes. They preclude the determination of a consensus candidate. But they do enable the media to spin an imaginary consensus around the early winners and around the issues the media – not Republican voters — believe are most important.”
Worth repeating.
I don't know if SC prevents people from voting in both primaries--if so, Democrats there who care about their own nomination process would have waited to vote next Saturday.
Even if Thompson hasn't officially quit, I don't think he has a chance after his poor showing in SC (a weak third, almost coming in fourth), but he might be able to blunt Huckabee's appeal in the South if he stays in until after Super-Duper Tuesday.
The basic problem is that the only two true conservatives, Hunter and Thompson, flopped as campaigners, so we are left with candidates who are conservative on some issues and liberal on others. Do we make do with half a loaf or get a dangerous leftist who considers conservative views beyond the pale and conservatives as the enemy? That's what we'll have if Hillary or Obama wins in November.
(I'm giving Romney the benefit of the doubt--he sounds conservative now but I have no idea what he actually believes other than that he should be President.)
If the party can punish states for moving their primary “too early”, why can’t it punish them for allowing cross-over voting?
Alternatively, why not just declare an end to the Stalinist practice of giving special consideration to Iowa and New Hampshire, and proceed towards and actual democratic primary system?