How to avoid another RINO nominee? Eliminate primaries.

info please ^ | 2008 | Republican Party

[Brookhaven]

Iowa

Rebublican Caucus Results: Mike Huckabee 34.3%, Mitt Romney 25.3%, Fred Thompson 13.4%, John McCain 13.1%, Ron Paul 10.0%, Rudy Giuliani 3.5%, Duncan Hunter 0.4%

New Hampshire

Rebublican Primary Results: John McCain 37.2%, Mitt Romney 31.6%, Mike Huckabee 11.2%, Rudy Giuliani 8.6%, Ron Paul 7.6%, Fred Thompson 1.2%, Duncan Hunter 0.5%

Michigan

Rebublican Primary Results: Mitt Romney 38.9%, John McCain 29.7%, Mike Huckabee 16.1%, Ron Paul 6.3%, Fred Thompson 3.7%, Rudy Giuliani 2.8%, Duncan Hunter 0.3%

South Carolina

Republican Primary Results: John McCain 33.2%, Mike Huckabee 29.9%, Fred Thompson 15.7%, Mitt Romney 15.1%, Ron Paul 3.7%, Rudy Giuliani 2.1%, Duncan Hunter 0.2%. South Carolina broke Republican National Committee rules by holding an early primary, and the RNC plans to strip the state of half of itss delegates to the national convention.

Nevada

Rebublican Caucus Results: Mitt Romney 51.1%, Ron Paul 13.7%, John McCain 12.7%, Mike Huckabee 8.2%, Fred Thompson 7.9%, Rudy Giuliani 4.3%, Duncan Hunter 2.0%

Florida

Rebublican Primary Results: John McCain 36%, Mitt Romney 31.1%, Rudy Giuliani 14.6%, Mike Huckabee 13.5%, Ron Paul 3.2%, Fred Thompson 1.2%, Duncan Hunter 0.1%

Maine

Rebublican Caucus Results: Mitt Romney 52%, John McCain 21%, Ron Paul 19%, Mike Huckabee 6%

Alabama

Rebublican Primary Results: Mike Huckabee 41%, John McCain 37%, Mitt Romney 18%, Ron Paul 3%

Alaska

Republican Caucus Results: Mitt Romney 44%, Mike Huckabee 22%, Ron Paul 17%, John McCain 16%

Arizona

Republican Primary Results: John McCain 47%, Mitt Romney 34%, Mike Huckabee 9%, Ron Paul 4%

Arkansas

Republican Primary Results: Mike Huckabee 60%, John McCain 20%, Mitt Romney 13%, Ron Paul 5%

California

Republican Primary Results: John McCain 42%, Mitt Romney 34%, Mike Huckabee 12%, Ron Paul 4%

Colorado

Republican Caucus Results: Mitt Romney 59%, John McCain 19%, Mike Huckabee 13%, Ron Paul 8%

Connecticut

Republican Primary Results: John McCain 52%, Mitt Romney 33%, Mike Huckabee 7%, Ron Paul 4%

Delaware

Republican Primary Results: John McCain 45%, Mitt Romney 33%, Mike Huckabee 15%, Ron Paul 2%

Georgia

Republican Primary Results: Mike Huckabee 34%, John McCain 32%, Mitt Romney 30%, Ron Paul 3%

Illinois

Republican Primary Results: John McCain 47%, Mitt Romney 29%, Mike Huckabee 17%, Ron Paul 5%

Massachusetts

Republican Primary Results: Mitt Romney 51%, John McCain 41%, Mike Huckabee 4%, Ron Paul 3%

Minnesota

Republican Caucus Results: Mitt Romney 42%, John McCain 22%, Mike Huckabee 20%, Ron Paul 16%

Missouri

Republican Primary Results: John McCain 33%, Mike Huckabee 32%, Mitt Romney 29%, Ron Paul 4%

Montana

Republican Caucus Results: Mitt Romney 38%, Ron Paul 25%, John McCain 22%, Mike Huckabee 15%

New Jersey

Republican Primary Results: John McCain 55%, Mitt Romney 28%, Mike Huckabee 8%, Ron Paul 5%

New York

Republican Primary Results: John McCain 51%, Mitt Romney 28%, Mike Huckabee 11%, Ron Paul 6%

North Dakota

Republican Caucus Results: Mitt Romney 36%, John McCain 23%, Ron Paul 21%, Mike Huckabee 20%

Oklahoma

Republican Primary Results: John McCain 37%, Mike Huckabee 33%, Mitt Romney 25%, Ron Paul 3%

Tennessee

Republican Primary Results: Mike Huckabee 34%, John McCain 32%, Mitt Romney 24%, Ron Paul 6%

Utah

Republican Primary Results: Mitt Romney 90%, John McCain 5%, Ron Paul 3%, Mike Huckabee 1%

West Virginia

Republican Convention Results: Mike Huckabee 52%, Mitt Romney 47%, John McCain 1%, Ron Paul 0%

Kansas

Republican Caucus Results: Mike Huckabee 60%, John McCain 24%, Ron Paul 11%, Mitt Romney 3%

Louisiana

Republican Caucus Results: Mike Huckabee 43%, John McCain 42%, Mitt Romney 6%, Ron Paul 5%, Rudy Giuliani 1%

Washington

Republican Caucus Results: John McCain 26%, Mike Huckabee 24%, Ron Paul 21%, Mitt Romney 17%

District of Columbia

Republican Primary Results: John McCain 68%, Mike Huckabee 17%, Ron Paul 8%

Maryland

Republican Primary Results: John McCain 55%, Mike Huckabee 29%, Ron Paul 6%

Virginia

Republican Primary Results: John McCain 50%, Mike Huckabee 41%, Ron Paul 5%

Washington

Republican Primary Results: John McCain 49%, Mike Huckabee 22%, Ron Paul 7%

Wisconsin

Republican Primary Results: John McCain 55%, Mike Huckabee 37%, Ron Paul 5%

Ohio

Republican Primary Results: John McCain 60%, Mike Huckabee 31%, Ron Paul5%

Rhode Island

Republican Primary Results: John McCain 65%, Mike Huckabee 22%, Ron Paul 7%

Texas

Republican Primary Results: John McCain 51%, Mike Huckabee 38%, Ron Paul 5%

Vermont

Republican Primary Results: John McCain 72%, Mike Huckabee 14%, Ron Paul 7%

Mississippi

Republican Primary Results: John McCain 78.9%, Mike Huckabee 12.5%, Ron Paul3.9%

Pennsylvania

Republican Primary Results: John McCain 72.7%, Ron Paul 15.9%, Mike Huckabee 11.3%

Indiana

Republican Primary Results: John McCain 77.6%, Mike Huckabee 10%, Ron Paul 7.7%

North Carolina

Republican Primary Results: John McCain 73.5%, Mike Huckabee 12.1%, Ron Paul 7.8%

West Virginia

Republican Primary Results: John McCain 76%, Mike Huckabee 10.3%

Kentucky

Republican Primary Results: John McCain 72.3%, Mike Huckabee 8.2%

Oregon

Republican Primary Results: John McCain 85.1%, Ron Paul 14.9%

Puerto Rico

Republican Primary Results: John McCain 90.8%, Mike Huckabee 4.8%

New Mexico

Republican Primary Results: John McCain 85.9%, Ron Paul 14.1%

South Dakota

Republican Primary Results: John McCain 70.1%, Ron Paul 16.6%

[Allegra]

If anything we need to front load with conservative “fly over states”.

Let's let the two biggest states go first...Alaska and Texas. :-)

[longtermmemmory]

I would prefer gradual primaries to assure retail campaigning. and Iowa and NH is in with the rest of the states. They really need to get over themselves.

[Atlas Sneezed]

2. Start the primaries in states in order of degree of McCain’s win to the worst loss.

---

I don’t know if that’s your idea, but it’s brilliant!

Start with Oklahoma, Wyoming, Utah, ALASKA, Idaho, Alabama, based on this year’s results.

Then LA, KY, NE, TN, KS, MS, WV, TX, SC, GA, ND, SD.

Let’s see how many RINOs and “it’s my turn” candidates survive closed primaries in all those states.

Let NH, IA, FL, etc. weigh in after the field has been narrowed to a few good conservatives.

[MeanWestTexan]

It is my idea, and it is brilliant.

;-)

Have the order change based on results every election cycle.

[CowboyJay]

I like your idea best :)

I don’t see why states that vote republican in the general about once every 50-60 years get any pull when it comes to the party nomination.

[Atlas Sneezed]

Exactly.

And you could do an interesting pattern, such as 1 the first week, the next 2 the following, then 4, then 8, then 16, then 19, and you’re done. Six different primary dates, maybe two weeks between each. No big money needed at the outset, so good candidates can build funding momentum.

Of course, the RINOs who run the RNC will have a million reasons why it can’t be done.

Some would say that maybe giving GOP voters in OH, PA, and FL a say helps make sure they vote for the candidate. That hasn’t worked out too well so far.

Your idea has merit. Spread it around. Write a column for the Washington Times!

[Question_Assumptions]

Democracy means that you don’t always get what you want and while the alternatives may seem attractive when one loses, the alternatives generally turn out to be far worse in the long run. The way for conservatives to win in the primaries is the way Ronald Reagan won, to have clear conservative principles and communicate them to the people directly instead of assuming that the self-evident correctness of conservative principles will persuade people. One of the main reasons why Sarah Palin became a drag on the ticket with some (and I personally heard from quite a few people who mentioned her as a reason to not vote for McCain) is that nobody bothered to explain her achievements in Alaska to any detail, leaving it looking like she did nothing but try to ban books and fire her ex-brother-in-law. We can’t assume the American people are going to get it and let the left in academia and the mainstream media control the information that the American public gets.

If the American people were just going to magically “get it”, they’d have gotten it already. We need to explain ourselves and convince people rather than trying to do an end-run around democracy.

[PapaBear3625]

For example, Sarah Palin was a very strong candidate. Most Americans (thank the MSM promoting RINOs) (many FReepers where promoting her 6 months before McCain picked her) didn't know of the America's most popular Governor before McCain picked her.

I would like to see conservative Talk Radio take a bigger role. Look at what Oprah's sit-down with Obama did for him in Jan 2007.

I'd like for Rush, Hannity, Laura, etc, to profile potential conservative candidates well ahead of 2012. Like starting now. Let them come on the show and chat with the public. Within a short time, somebody would emerge from the pack as being somebody who generates passion.

[rightwingextremist1776]

They already have one for them...it's called the Democrat party...

[PapaBear3625]

The RNC needs to put forth a rule: The Republican Nominating Process is a contest of Republicans, for Republicans. You must be a registered Republican in order to participate.

Remember Operation Chaos? Where lots of R's switched to being registered D in order to vote for Hillary?

The requirement should be "registered R as of one year prior"

I might even be in favor of an Internet primary/fundraiser:

If you are a registered Republican, you get a card in the mail with a login ID.

You can donate up to $100 to the candidate of your choice, and you can do it at any time in a 6 month window. You can donate multiple times to different candidates at different times, as long as you stay under the limit.

You can see how much any candidate has received up to this point.

At the end of the time window, whoever has the most donations(votes) is the nominee, and gets the entire pot to campaign with.

It thus limits the voting process to Republicans who have some commitment to the Party.

[Valpal1]

Palin is not exactly a boomer, born in 64 this is where the boom ended and Gen X began. Many of us born in the mid 60’s consider ourselves a “lost generation” because we do not fit comfortably into either the Boomers or the Gen-Xers and identify with neither. Palin came of age in the Reagan era and does not identify with the Boomer generation.

Bush and Clinton (Gore and Kerry) are all quintessential boomers.

Obama (b. 1961) is at the tail end of the Boomer generation and his associations with the radicals of 60’s (when he was an oblivious eight year old) cements his identification with that generation. He’s their last gasp (I hope and pray) at their failed revolution.

Those that come after, the X, Y and Z generations know we have been handed the sh*tty end of the stick.

[PapaBear3625]

The solution to the primary system is to hold every state’s primary on the same day. Make the candidates campaign like they will for the general election.

Weaknesses of that include the candidates must campaign nationally (and have the FUNDS to campaign nationally), and that it does not allow an opportunity for the weakest candidates to drop out.

In a 6-person field, we might find the winner to be somebody who got a plurality of 20% but who is HATED by 80% of Republicans, while the next guy who got 18% would have been accepted by everybody.

[ansel12]

Census Bureau-boomers are those born in the years 1946 to 1964 generation X starts in 1965.

Palin is a boomer.

[ansel12]

“Obama (b. 1961) is at the tail end of the Boomer generation and his associations with the radicals of 60’s (when he was an oblivious eight year old) cements his identification with that generation. He’s their last gasp (I hope and pray) at their failed revolution.”

---

If you mean William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, they are John McCain’s ‘silent generation’, they are not boomers.

[Valpal1]

Being born in 42 and 44 might make them physically members of the silent generation, but they self identify with the Boomers. Some put the Silent Generation as ending in 42 or 43.

Generational models only model trends in populations and the cut off dates or inclusion dates are general toward a cohort as a whole and cannot be applied to an individual specifically.

When you look at Ayers and Dohrn they are Boomers, not by their birthdates, but by what they chose to do with their lives and by the cohort trend they self identified with.

Obama and Palin can both be considered as young tail end boomers or old beginning of the new trend Gen Xers by their birth dates. But it is by their lives and what they have chosen to self identify that you can see which group they should be placed in, irrespective of their actual birth dates.

[ansel12]

Quit reading the minds of people that you don’t even know.

Quit making up your own definitions, boomers are 1946 to 1964, use the real dates and quit trying to make some childish argument.

The census bureau defines boomers.

[A CA Guy]

If the party has the option to only have registered Republicans vote in the Republican primaries, that would be a good start.
Forget about ostracizing the independents.

In states where cross over is mandated, that is a bigger issue.

[Valpal1]

The census bureau is run by government bureaucrats, hello? I suppose you think that makes them codified into law on stone tablets.

Generational cohort trends are just that - trends.

FYI - the census bureau has been known to change the dates on their classifications within living memory. The boomer cutoff used to be 1960 and 61-84 was Gen X.

And if you can't figure out that Obama identifies with the impulses and politics of 60's radicalism and that Palin identifies with the can-do independence of Reaganism, then your arteries have hardend a tad too much.

Here's a fun read on the subject.

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/brainiac/2008/04/final_words_on.html

Have a great day.

[ansel12]

If we all just make up definitions and people like you start reading minds, describing how various public figures internally identify with various generations that they are not of, then it becomes impossible to answer any idiot that starts throwing the word boomer around.

This reminds me of a (young) blogger that I like, posting a picture of the Chicago Seven and starting a thread about them and their boomer ways and Ayers and Dohrn. None of them were boomers and their birth dates went all the way back to 1915.

[Valpal1]

I’m sorry you are unable to discern the difference between group trends and actual individual behaviors that can be used to perceive group characteristics and individual ones, respectively.

The census bureau bases its classifications on birthrate demographics only, whereas social science and marketing bases their respective groupings on cultural/historical events and trends.

The census bureau doesn’t recognize a “silent generation” at all but rather has early and late cohorts a of Baby Bust I. The Silent Generation is from a social science or marketing generational model.

From either social science or a marketing model it is obvious that Ayers, the Weather Underground and the Black Panther movement are all Boomer generation icons, not Silent Generation regardless of the abitrary demographic decisions of the census bureau which is counting babies, not cultural/historical people trends.

Palin’s birthdate is on the leading edge of the Baby Bust II demographically and the cusp between the Boomer generation and Generation X. Her clear outspoken patriotism, belief in self reliance and America as a force for good in the world clearly separates her from the cynicism of the Boomers and places her firmly as a Reaganite Gen Xer.

You certainly are a blowhard in your allegiance to bureaucratic definitions though! How’s that working for ya? Just wait till they define your medical benefits based on their statistical models of most reasonable benifits for the greatest number at the least cost. Woo hoo!