Poll Shows Leftist Liberal Republican Nominee Likely to Split GOP

Free Republic ^ | today

[azhenfud]

Just as the title says.

[misterrob]

I don't buy your logic but if social conservatives want to sit the election out then that is their choice.

They can then STFU when we get another RBG on SCOTUS.

[OMalley]

Rudy may be the lesser of the two evil in the short term, but probally worse long term.

While I have always hit the R and probally will again in 08, I am starting to understand alot of what Im hearing in Wyo.

If we elect Rudy, we will never ever get another true conservative. We will essentially have told the party that this is what we want (liberal R's).

I dont even want to have to think about Rudy vs Hillary yet. Im going to do all I can to support my candidate and vote for him in the primaries and hope for the best:)

[Zack Attack]

The Conservatives didn't leave the Republican party. The Republican part left them.

So true. So true.

[jonrick46]

This is a tactic to sow division in the Republican base. This is an easy tactic because many are easily giving into this method. And, if we are not careful it will work and we will lose the 2008 Presidency.

[Antoninus]

But if you think the poll is useful, then go right ahead with your bad self!

It's useful to a point. Just don't read too much into it. That it's an accurate reflection of sentiment on FR is pretty obvious. That FR is a microcosm of the GOP as a whole is certainly debatable.

[b9]

My principle is 100% pure and very easy to follow:

HILLARY MUST NOT BE PRESIDENT.

Big, bold BUMP

[NorCalRepub]

LOL....any poll on a blog, forum, news channel etc are bogus and without much merit...idiotic as you say...small sample size plus it is hardly random.....haha....this is less scientific then my 3rd grade science project....which was lame anyway....

[Constitution Day]

I will certainly agree with that.

[azhenfud]

I would've missed it if I hadn't scrolled WAAAAYYY down....;-)

[Antoninus]

Support Rudy - get Hillary.

That would be a great tag line.

[b9]

It is irresponsible to treat the general election as if it were a primary.

Irresponsible, selfish, and suspect.

[Antoninus]

I will certainly agree with that.

It is interesting, though, that Rudy's polling in the mid-30s on FR and in the state polls that pop up. I reckon that's also about where he'll poll nationwide on election day if (God forbid!) he gets the nomination.

[Unmarked Package]

My emphasis added:

"And since most of us here know, at least the member poll, is a pretty good cross section of conservatives, you might not be able to take it to the bank but I bet it's pretty darn close."

I know eight people personally who operate popular conservative blogs on the web and are grassroots organizers in touch with a broad cross section of Republican voters (not bloggers) in their communities on a frequent basis (three of the eight people are in conservative Texas). They all have a distinct impression that Free Republic is ultra-conservative and often avoid FR based on extremism they see here. I wouldn't be so sure that we represent a "pretty good cross section of conservatives" or that FR poll results and opinions of frequent contributors expressed here translate well to reality in the elections.

[Beagle8U]

"It is irresponsible to treat the general election as if it were a primary"

Are you going to go door to door and explain to everyone that stayed home that they were acting irresponsibly?

Why will that change anything? What would the campaign motto be if that was the choices? Its a much smaller steaming pile, so, eat up! ?

[SoCalPol]

Many of the Rudy bots are making sure that if not him then then dem will be voted in as their vanity threads like the one last night are dividing republicans.
I will always vote republican but have no respect for these people who hate the republican party so much that they wish to divide it.

[Mia T]

bump

The appearance of this poll so early in the game must mean hillary knows she will be trounced by Rudy.

• Vote for a strict constructionist and you get strict-constructionist judges.
  
  
• Vote for a strong leader and you win the war on terror.
  
  
• Vote 3rd party, stay home, vote for the nomination of a nobody loser, and you are helping to elect the Stalinist proximate cause of 9/11.
  
  
• Help to elect the Stalinist proximate cause of 9/11 and you get dead babies, dead citizens, a dead Constitution... the death of democracy....
  
  
• And not accepting the consequences of your own vote is the first step on this road to death.
  
  

  STALINIST RISING?
  HILLARY CLINTON ABUSE OF POWER
  (WHERE IS THE UNREDACTED BARRETT REPORT ANYWAY?)
  
  

  

[azhenfud]

No offense taken.

I realize the limited scope of the poll. However, you're active in the political spectrum as well as I. We as well as other politically active FReepers have probability to influence others either for the GOP nod, or against. Some will be repulsed by the in-fighting without ever judging the candidate(s). Odds are if the spectrometer is broken, the results will be poor.

That's all I'm trying to say.

[brydic1]

I believe history tells us that Americans tend to vote against any political party they believe have fouled up. I also think that if they perceive that the conservative party has fouled up they will vote for the liberal party and if they decide to vote for a liberal they will vote for the party perceived to be the most liberal. Therefore the nomination of a liberal republican is a waste of time. I also think it is in the American temperament to change philosophies when a political party fouls it nest. All this debate about who republicans nominate is a waste of time if this administration continues to foul up. No republican can be elected, period.

If Bush can not get his act together in the next 12 months, we are in for a leftist government for at least 4 to 8 years. When they in turn foul up and I am convinced that they will, the republicans will be welcomed. We must be sure to give them a conservative to vote for. I know this a pessimistic scenario but I believe it is accurate

[Soul Seeker]

Ford, a moderate/slash liberal couldn't win election. Reagan, a Conservative won in two landslides. Bush 41, moderate, won on Reagan's coattails, but not with the same landslide. He lost four years later standing on his own. '92 house Republicans embraced conservative philsophies and re-took the House. Dole, a moderate, couldn't take out a Liberal disguised as a moderate that got less then 50% of the national vote. That means a Republican MODERATE that everyone says is our key to conservative victory...and how twisted is that rational? had 51% of the vote up for grabs and he barely got in the low '40 percentage. Republicans PLUS newt go native and in '98 Reps lose seats in the house. G.W.B. comes along preaching 'compassionate conservatism' and barely manages to squeak out a victory due in large part to hatred of Clinton as well as enough of the pro-life block (those that didn't jump after the DUI broke) to get four years in office. in 2002 they run a conservative campaign around Homeland defense, judges, and tax cuts and pick up seats. in 2004 G.W.B. runs a conservative CAMPAIGN and largely due to the pro=defense block and the conservative movement as a whole interested in judges gives us a comfortable majority. In 2006 after abandoning practically every conservative promise in practice, they try to cut corners and fake out conservatives by bringing up measures at the last minute that a) they knew wouldn't pass (marriage amendment) or b) they had no intention of enforcing (border).

Some conservatives, like myself, reluntantly vote for them at the end and probably staved out a worse defeat then would have occured by doing so. But I did NOT defend republicans nor spend months before the election doing anything but bashing them. think I'm alone in that? hardly. What the Republicans did in effect was KILL their most powerful PR tool by killing their base's enthusiasm to get them elected. So even if some of the base turned out, those blue dogs certainly did NOT and swung to the Dems. After all, the only ones getting any positive press were the Dems. from their own supporters..but that's more then the Reps were getting from theirs. nor did the reps deserve positive press.

Now we're hearing only a liberal republican can win. tell me how, cause history does NOT validate your argument. FACT: only when conservatives are motivated for Republicans enthusiastically do they win. no, the party can't win only with conservatives. But conservatives are their best PR unit that surpasses the MSM and without them they are DOA.

If anyone thinks Rudy will get better press from the MSM because he is a Liberal, go research how they savaged Ford. They WILL bring up every liberal position he supports over and over until the glossy good feelings of his performance on 9-11 for conservatives are stripped away and they will have a very difficult time supporting Rudy the Liberal politician in the end, rather then rudy the 9-11 mayor. and don't think those moderates are exactly okay with a man in drag, no matter how squishy they are on other topics. this is a visual society and that image is going to be competing with 9-11 tape equally.

Can Rudy win the election? Sure. he cn win the primary and he can win the election, though it'll be tougher then some of you "pragmatists" think. But I doubt hd's be elected to a second term if he did. 41 wasn't, and Ford couldn't win election after a couple years governing from the left. the only two to win twice were either a) conservative or b) campaigned as conservative.

While I'm not opposed to limiting, unofficially, our choice for president to a single four years to avoid a second termer from screwing us after they win...it won't happen. That means IF we folded and supported Rudy that in 2012 we'd have a Liberal democrat in the W.H. following a 2008 liberal republican. I'd rather try to get a conservative in 2008, and if we fail, wait till 2012 for another shot at a conservative prez then get stuck with at least eight years of two liberal presidents.

[b9]

Great graphic on your home page.