Jim Robinson
Posted on 02/15/2012 5:18:58 PM PST by BroJoeK
Looking at the original field of candidates, how conservative are these folks, really?
Well, it's hard to measure governors -- Huntsman, Perry and Romney -- since they faced different legislatures.
For example, even though Romney vetoed hundreds of Massachusetts Democrat run Legislature's bills, he signed others, most famously, Romney-care, which neither Perry's nor Huntsman's legislatures ever passed.
But members of Congress can be measured statistically and compared, so here it is:
Of course, these are based on statistical measures, and might be disputed on a case-by-case basis.
So, who really are the most conservative Senators and Congressmen -- as of the 111th Congress?
Senators:
Congressmen:
As of the 111th Congress there were no -- zero -- Republican Senators or Congressmen less conservative than the most "moderate" of Democrats.
None of them are solid conservatives of course.
Solid conservatives don’t want to run for these jobs.
We just have to get as close as we can.
I guess it depends on the definition of “conservative” on many subjects
Anymore of this crap like this article and I wanna just get the attitude “who is going to crash us the quickest so we can get over this crap and start re-building”
Personally I want Newt or Santorum, but Ron Paul would be a better re-set button than Obama (it would be “quicker” ) and Romney would be a slow agonizing painful death by a thousand cuts as the car heading for the cliff is slowed down from 80mph to 40mph and we still end up going over the cliff we just end up screaming in agony LONGER....
Newt and Santorum “seem” better but as we all know politicians have the bad habit of changing their spots once they get sworn in. I think they need to check the bibile they swear Presidents and congresscritters in with, there is probably hidden needles that inject them with liberal looney juice.....
If it were even 75% of the time it would be a miracle.
This is from another FR thread. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2815398/posts
1998 was the last year that Gingrich, Paul and Santorum were all in Congress. Gingrich’s annual and lifetime ACU ratings were better than both of the others:
(100% = perfect conservative voting record)
100% - Gingrich: Annual 1998 ACU Rating (90% Lifetime Rating as of 1998)
88% - Paul: Annual 1998 ACU Rating (88% Lifetime Rating as of 1998)
84% - Santorum: Annual 1998 ACU Rating (83% Lifetime Rating as of 1998)
Source: http://www.conservative.org/ratings/ratingsarchive/1998/98houseratings.htm
I’m voting Republican. If Lucifer himself has an R by his name, he’s got my vote. Yes, a bad choice, but better than the devil we have now.
Say it. Say that if Mitt buys the nomination that you'll vote for him.
I don’t think Paul has any talent at leading the legislative branch to do his bidding does he?
I don't get why this keeps getting repeated. '98 was Newt's last year in congress...what makes that year more significant than others?
It's like saying Hank Aaraon's last year in Major League Baseball was 1976. He only hit 10 homeruns that year and Willie Stargell hit 20.
It's a cherry picked snapshot and means only that Stargell had a better year...THAT YEAR.
If you want to truly compare apples to apples, i.e. overall lifetime stats, that's fine. Newt's lifetime ACU rating is 90%. He edges out Santorum at 88.1%.
Yes, I'm perfectly willing to admit Newt has a (marginally) higher lifetime score from the ACU. similarly, Rick has higher lifetime scores from the NRA and GOA. I think it's also fair to consider, when comparing ACU ratings, that Newt (again at 90% lifetime) was a representative from a safe conservative district. Rick (again 88.1% lifetime) was a Senator from a swing state. Rick's lifetime rating, BTW, is two points higher than Fred Thompson.
Of course these results are defined according to whatever the statistician defines as being “conservative”.
Right now, some gridlock would suit me just fine.
My opinion would be different if I thought the GOP had the desire to repeal things like Obamacare, No child left behind, Medicare Part D, the Patriot Act, Sarbanes/Oxley, etc. Maybe encourage domestic energy production. I just don’t see it happening.
I’ll say it. I’ll vote for Romney before I’ll vote for Obama. I wouldn’t send him money or work for him though.
I think it might be interesting to see the conservative revolutionary of 1994 as a Speaker, get a chance to lead another conservative revolution as head of the Executive Branch.
A historical conservative leader in the White House, matched with the historical tea party legislative gains creating Republican control of the Congress and Senate, might be the conservative version of the 1930s, or 1960s leaps in radical change, except this time, for the good guys.
[ I don’t think Paul has any talent at leading the legislative branch to do his bidding does he? ]
That alone makes him better than obama, he can basically be a roadblock president which nothing gets done and kinda slows down a WHOLE lot more than mittens.
See post 16, the last thing that I want to see with us controlling the entire government, is inaction, someone who would simply kill time until the left regained power, I would want quick, radical, massive, steamrolling action.
Yes...I find it a bit hard to believe...Gingrich as Speaker abstained on most votes (as do other Speakers)....although I’d be shocked if his ACU rating were as low as 42, or Michele Bachmann’s as low as 80.
(Yes, there are many other indexes besides ADA/ACU).
Been there seen that! I remember when the GOP had total control and that was when they brought us much of the legislation that I mentioned. They proved ineffective on the things that needed changed. They only supported things that their benefactors wanted. Sorry, but I have lost faith in them. They will never let the Tea Party gain critical mass. It is too big a threat to their way of life. Remember the last election where they actively sabotaged Tea Party Republicans? It cost them the senate, but a dem controlled senate was less of a threat than tea party influence in the party. They will sabotage any decent conservative tea party candidate so that they can force another Giuliani, McCain or Romney on us. That’s my $0.02.
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.