Hey, DWar, who I don't have much at all post contact with here at FReeperville, did an elaborate comparison of McCain vs. Romney earlier this week at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1960746/posts [see post #31 of that thread].
Now DWar assigned each candidate 0, 2, 5, 8 or 10 points re: 11 separate issues under security & defense; another 11 another fiscal; another dozen under "social values"; and then 4 sub-topics under "personal qualities."
Of his 38 comparisons, I immediately took issue with 3 just on a first-glance basis & told DWar that...but he said he took 3 weeks researching it...and when you add up his totals he was way pro-Romney...Romney came out on top over McCain 103-50 on security; 106-68 on fiscal; 97-69 on social values; and 33-31 on the other.
My point I'm getting to? Here, DWar's heavily slanted Romney eval (339 for Romney; 217 for McCain) still had the pair in a dead 5-5 tie on pro-life issues.
IOW, even objective folks who heavily research the issues & heavily side with Romney concede there's really no difference on the two pro-life wise.
Here, Huckabee's "points" on pro-life issues would swallow up both Romney & McCain together, and so it's quite ironic you accuse me of "destroy[ing]...our pro life message." Seven, to first have a pro-life message, ya gotta have a pro-life messenger, and when you look at Romney's comments on post #598 & #623...the GOP has no such messenger in Romney (or McCain for that matter...when push comes to shove, McCain would probably do the right thing...but as Rick Santorum has said, McCain is no leader on pro-life or any social issue)!
When I began my research I personally preferred first Hunter and then Thompson but it looked like neither was going to be able to get the nomination. Creating the first chart was for me an honest attempt to find out who was the next most conservative candidate who was also electable.
I searched numerous websites to come up with a list of issues most Conservatives generally found to be important. I then spent days and dozens of hours researching each candidate's current positions, ratings by watchdog groups, voting record and past positions.
If their position on an issue seemed to be within the accepted bounds of Conservatism I rated them a 10. If their watchdog rating, voting record or past position seemed less conservative than their currently held position I down graded them to an 8 or even a 5.
For example Romney's current position is strongly pro-life, normally a 10. But because his watchdog rating, record as a governor and past positions were much less than conservative he went first to an 8 and the to a 5. Even though he proclaimed a change of heart on the issue and I think it would be political suicide to change back, his past makes him much less reliable, in my view and the 5 is justified.
Another example would be McCain on Illegal Immigration. As the cosponsor of McCain-Kennedy amnesty for Illegals he started with a 0 on this issue. He now says he has heard the voice of the people and will "fix" the borders FIRST. It's what comes after the FIRST that worries me. So because he says his position is a strong one now I upgraded him higher than a 0. Because it seems to not be a heartfelt change but rather a reluctant one I upgraded him to only a 2. The link to the Original Thread which details the methodology I used is here:
I received literally scores of responses from FReepers with complaints and suggestions. I spent an additional 5 or 6 days researching their concerns and created a Revised RINO Chart also linked here:
Revised RINO Chart. It also is preceded by some explanation.
After Hunter and Thompson withdrew I added Hillary and Obama for comparison. That revision is posted below.
Keep in mind there is no way to "scientifically" determine who is the more conservative. That decision is always subjective. Who is or is not a Conservative depends on two things. One, each individual's idea of what a true Conservative believes. Two, It also depends on what the candidate ACTUALLY believes and of course that's the most difficult thing to determine and the purpose of these charts.
Lastly, some have looked at these charts without reading any of the background and concluded that I am a Romney supporter because he came out quite conservative on the total and subtotals. That is simply not the case. I worked as diligently and as unbiasedly as I was trained to do in graduate school. (I have 2 masters and 2 doctoral degrees.) I researched each one issue at a time and didn't know how things would add up until I actually did the addition.
I do NOW tend to favor Romney but only because he DID come out more conservative than the remaining candidates. I did not begin this exercise as his supporter. In addition I did these charts to prove nothing to you. I did them for my own benefit and have posted them only because I thought others might like to see them.
Most Recent RINO Chart ( Including Democrats )
| Conservative= 10 | ||||||
| Conservative tendencies= 8 | ||||||
| Moderate or Unreliable=5 | ||||||
| Liberal tendencies= 2 | ||||||
| Liberal= 0 | ||||||
| . | ||||||
| Issue by Category | Giuliani | Huck | McCain | Romney | Hillary | Obama |
| SECURITY & DEFENSE | ||||||
| - Illegal Immigration | 2 | 5 | 2 | 8 | 2 | 2 |
| - War in Iraq | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 2 | 0 |
| - War on Terror | 10 | 5 | 5 | 10 | 5 | 0 |
| - Iran | 10 | 5 | 10 | 10 | 5 | 2 |
| - Border Fence | 10 | 5 | 5 | 10 | 5 | 5 |
| - ANWR Drilling | 5 | 10 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0 |
| - US Sovereignty (LOST) | 5 | 10 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 0 |
| - Military Strength | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 2 | 0 |
| - Guantanamo | 10 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0 |
| - Waterboarding | 10 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0 |
| - Energy Indy | 8 | 8 | 5 | 10 | 5 | 5 |
| . | ||||||
| SECURITY & DEFENSE TOTALS | 90 | 68 | 52 | 103 | 26 | 14 |
| . | ||||||
| . | ||||||
| FISCAL ISSUES | ||||||
| - Business/infl/rec | 10 | 5 | 5 | 10 | 2 | 2 |
| - Lower Taxes | 10 | 2 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 0 |
| - Spending Cuts | 8 | 5 | 10 | 8 | 0 | 0 |
| - Healthcare- gov run | 10 | 5 | 8 | 8 | 0 | 0 |
| - Soc Sec | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 0 | 0 |
| - Internet Neutrality | 10 | 0 | 10 | 10 | 0 | 0 |
| - Internet Tax | 10 | 0 | 10 | 10 | 0 | 0 |
| - Kyoto Treaty | 10 | 8 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0 |
| - Global Warming | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0 |
| - Tax Reform | 10 | 10 | 8 | 10 | 0 | 0 |
| - Tort Reform | 10 | 8 | 5 | 10 | 0 | 0 |
| . | ||||||
| FISCAL ISSUES TOTALS | 98 | 53 | 68 | 106 | 28 | 29 |
| . | ||||||
| . | ||||||
| VALUES ISSUES | ||||||
| - SCOTUS appts | 8 | 8 | 2 | 8 | 0 | 0 |
| - Guns & 2nd Amend | 0 | 10 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 0 |
| - Pro-Life | 0 | 10 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 0 |
| - Gay Rights | 0 | 10 | 5 | 8 | 0 | 0 |
| - CFR & 1st Amend | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0 |
| - Crime | 10 | 5 | 10 | 10 | 2 | 2 |
| - Education | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| - Death Penalty | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 |
| - School Vouchers | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 0 | 0 |
| - Federalism | 5 | 8 | 5 | 8 | 0 | 0 |
| - Affirmative Action | 5 | 8 | 5 | 8 | 0 | 0 |
| - Property Rights | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 0 | 0 |
| . | ||||||
| VALUES ISSUES TOTALS | 63 | 92 | 69 | 97 | 17 | 18 |
| . | ||||||
| . | ||||||
| PERSONAL QUALITIES | ||||||
| - Stability of Personality | 8 | 8 | 5 | 10 | 10 | 10 |
| - Electablity | 8 | 5 | 10 | 8 | 8 | 8 |
| - Consistency | 8 | 5 | 8 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| - Leadership | 10 | 5 | 8 | 10 | 10 | 10 |
| . | ||||||
| PERSONAL QUALITIES TOTAL | 34 | 23 | 31 | 33 | 34 | 35 |
|
|