Posted on 09/24/2012 7:05:17 PM PDT by neverdem
You just have to look at Ted Cruz in Texas to see how a run-off election helps conservatives. Both he and Dewhurst had in the 40s, but Dewhurst was higher. In the run-off between them, Dewhurts only gained 1 point while the rest went to Cruz, giving him the win.
If a run-off had been held in the presidential election in 1992, Bush most likely would have become president, with the same kind of results.
Allowing a candidate who gets under 50% of the vote to win is not democracy, because it’s possible that over 50% of the people would NEVER have voted for him.
I think an “instant runoff” ballot is probably the best way to go. A simple question asking who your second choice is if your first choice is not among the finalists is easy to understand.
In a more accurate system, you might grade or score every single candidate on the list, but that’s probably too much for the voters to handle. Plus with grading you could have the odd result of one candidate who was NOBODY’S first choice win, if he gets all B scores, while the other candidates ended up with a lower average based on lots of A and below C scores. An instant runoff ballot would eliminate that “B” candidate from the running because only the top choice is counted in the first round.
It’s not the “GOP elite”, it’s EVERYBODY. I volunteer at our local republican office and everyone that walks in wants to rant about what Romney should be doing differently.
Funny thing, though, everyone thinks they’re far more brilliant than Romney’s campaign managers, but it seems they are all brilliant in very different ways.
“More Ads On TV!!!”
“Less Ads on TV!!”
“Go after Obama harder and meaner!!!”
“Stop sounding negative, just run positive messages!!!”
“Stop all the ugly yard signs!!!
“You’re out of signs? Doesn’t he want to WIN?!?”
“I can’t believe he said THAT!”
“Dammit, he should be saying THAT everyday!!!”
“Pay More Attention to PA if he wants to win!!!”
“He needs to FORGET about PA, he’s an idiot to waste time here!!!”
Oddly enough, these folks never want to actually volunteer their time to help us LOL
.
Yeah, we think a whole lot of you too.
Perfect response Nana! Perfect!
Name’s not bub, I watched Palin’s April 15 2011 speech in Madison. She gave every indication that she was running. he last line to obama was “Game on” She was speaking to a hockey savvy crowd who knew the meaning and power of that phrase. Where’d she go? As we said on the Lower East Side where I grew up, She punked out.
Conservatives are disgusted.
I’m not voting this year because I won’t vote for someone who has no core principles.
We’ll probably get Obama for another four years, no thanks to the GOP elite that foisted Mitt Happens upon us.
Sorry to say, you nailed it. I almost bought that DVD, it was a major letdown. Then when Cain was getting hit with some real cheap shots, Palin was happy to slip one between his ribs. I saw Romney beat Gingrich in FLA up close, he beat him bad in the debates. The man is disciplined and know what it takes to reach a goal. He is also a problem solver. He will win this and will lead our Country to greatness and prosperity!
Which color kewpie doll would you like? And do you prefer the Partaga or the Macanudo?
Hold on, hoss -- weren't you paying attention? The GOP-e encouraged every conservative they could, to jump in. They knew what would happen: The conservatives would split up the available money that would back a conservative (there's about enough money out there, said a "pro" pundit about this time last year, to sustain ONE "insurgent" [real conservative] candidacy), and by succeeding in tempting Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, and Herman Cain all to jump in, eclipsed any chance that anyone to the right of Romney might have to attract enough funding to really challenge the GOP-e's boy.
By which I mean, any conservative candidate who could win -- like, oh, say,
SARAH PALIN.
Anyone like her.
These so called “professional” pundits in DC and NYC are getting on my last nerve.
They are nothing more than DIVAS...who believe their opinions matter.
I’ve got news for them...they don’t matter whatsoever.
Peggy Noonan...I’m looking at you.
“Nobody says Romney has to be re-elected.”
the way it’s looking Romney won’t be elected and if that’s the case, there will probably never be another election.
This certainly rings true. It is my opinion that, in less than ten years, ALL the talking heads (Kristol, York, Noonan, Hume, Rove, Krauthhammer et. al. included) will be about as relevant as the buggy whip.
The current rules are absurd, and guarantee a bad result. Personally, I would eliminate primaries altogether (we are suffering, being destroyed even, by an excess of democracy), but, failing that, I would do the following:
1) First primary not before April 1, last primary 14 days before the convention.
2) Qualify primary voters: Registered as a party member for the last two election cycles. No one else votes.
3) Require that, if no candidate wins 67% of the votes by qualified primary voters, that delegates be awarded proportionally. (Runoffs are impractical given the calendar).
4) Require 67% of seated delegates to be nominated.
5) In addition to elected delegates, seat at least 1/3 of elected Republican officeholders from every state, chosen by Republican governor if there is one, by the senior elected official if not.
The entire process has become a charade.
Goldstate, I think Romney is awful, too. But we have to get Obama out of there, and unfortunately the only way to do that now is to vote for Romney.
Don’t forget, if we get rid of Obama, we also get rid of Hillary and the whole anti-American, anti-Israel, pro-Muslim Third World cabal, and that is what people are ignoring when they announce that they’re not going to vote for Romney.
Will Romney’s appointments be any better? Well, they can’t be worse, and I think the fact that enough pressure was put on him to make him pick a conservative, Ryan, for VP shows that conservatives have some clout. Romney wants to be President simply because he wants to be President, and always has; but he doesn’t want to be President so he can destroy the US, unlike Obama. So I think we have to look at the issue, not so much of Romney himself, but of the changed composition of the government once we get rid of Obama.
This has been very hard for me, too, because of all the candidates, he was the one I least wanted, and it’s still hard for me to believe that he got in. And all the liabilities he had are still a problem: no plan, no vision, liberal, not very articulate, yet at the same time unwilling to let anyone else make the case for why Obama must be evicted from our White House. However, he is what we have, and the important thing is to throw out Obama.
I said to my wife the day after the election in 2008 that Gitmo will NOT be closed after obama’s first term. I also said Romney will get the nomination for 2012, fwiw. If Romney loses, paul Ryan will be the nominee in 2016. It never ends with the GOP.
So what are we going to do about it?
Please read up on some GOP history. There were 8 candidates in the 1980 primaries. Only one of them was named Ronald Reagan. The other 7, from Andersen to Baker to Bush were all, in today’s political lexicon GOPe s. Did powerful conservatives somehow convince all 7 to run so Reagan could grab the nomination? And if the current group that ran this year are so easily manipulated how could any of them merit support?
” One gets the feeling that the GOP-e care more about destroying the conservative wing of the party than winning the election.”
Your feelings are accurate.
He will win this and will lead our Country to greatness and prosperity!
_______________________________________
Ki8d a guy would have to be a m,an of “greatness and prosperity” to do that...
Willard is a low life when it comes to a level o0f greatness...
and as for prosperity ???
Beloved I wish above aqll else that you prosper AS YOURE SOUL PROSPERS...
Willard doesnt have a prosperous soul...
He has nothing to give to our country to inspire ...
nor is he a leader...
All he is is the last candidate standing...
But not through gteatmess, prosperity, integrity or bravery..
But bercaise he stabbed the better men in the back...
including Michele Bachmann, a much better man than Willard...
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.