Posted on 01/09/2015 7:04:41 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
It's all very simple: the Republicans lost Florida in the 2012 presidential election by 0.88. If conservatives stay at home in 2016 in the same numbers as they did in 2012, then there is no chance of the GOP winning. If conservatives are advised by Governor Palin (unlike in 2012) and Mark Levin to either stay home or vote third-party, then it is impossible to see how Florida could be won by, for example, Jeb Bush.
However, for argument's sake, if, because of Bush's Florida connection and a bad economy, Florida is won, then Ohio (-2.98%), Virginia (-3.88%), and Colorado (-5.36%) also have to be roped-in. The road to 270 Electoral College votes is extremely difficult under the most optimal of circumstances; utter realism indicates that it is impossible with the slightest bleeding off of actual or potential votes from 2012.
What Ralph Nader did for Al Gore's hopes in 2000 would be a pinprick compared to the mountain a Republican nominee would face with a conservative base doing a de Blasio back-turn. There is no comparison with Reagan's 1980 victory, even though there was Republican John Anderson, running as an independent, who got 6.6% of the vote. This is because a Republican won't win both New York and California, as Reagan did, for the foreseeable future.
If the Republican nominee is an establishment figure, a Bush or a Christie, then he has to face the question of his relationship with Governor Palin. Mitt Romney didn't have her as part of his campaign or even have her address the Republican Convention (at which she was the star just four years earlier) in 2012. What did that avail him? There is, of course, no way to determine if the millions of potential GOP voters who stayed home might have turned out...
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Damn right. Unless, of course, they're spineless cowards that bow to the GOP.
BUMPITY BUMP. Well said.
There is one place where I think I disagree -- he says, "The ball is in the Establishment's Court, not Palin's or Levin's ...."
Well, yeah, until the Republican presidential nominee is determined. I think it's woefully unrealistic to think the Establishment GOP protocol and hierarchy is going to turn around in less than two years to suddenly reflect "the base" and nominate an actual limited government conservative.
Once the nomination is determined, and if it goes as it probably will and a RINO functional Democrat-Republican is put forth as the desperate "alternative" to the eeeeeeeevil Democrat, the ball is most decidedly going to be in Palin's and Levin's court.
Or Mike Hucklechuckle.
LOL!! Excellent question!
Dragged with a chain—if you aske me-—We must be in the drivers seat!
Love your tagline!
I shamelessly stole it from another freeper.
isn't it appropriate?
Perot’s Party must be Changed! Dump the Anti-Gun, Pro-abortion stuff! It could be pre-empted into something else.
I promise there will never be a Jeb Bush President. We’ve had enough of the Bushes.
I agree. Men shed blood for my right to vote. Not voting is a dereliction of duty except where you are forced to vote for a wicked element either way (as in CA's governor's race between Brown and Kashkari, two leftists, one in the Republican party; either way my vote would have been construed as endorsement of it); then my duty as a Christian is to withhold my elemental endorsement, my vote, from that agent.
Voting is a leadership function, and God WILL hold Christians accountable for the part they play.
That is fundamentally why I refused to vote for Romney in 2012. I knew God would hold me accountable if the bastard won. I voted third-party instead as a means to vote to diminish the popular mandate of whichever amoral leftist won, Romney or Obama.
In the past few months, for every FReeper who stands on the side of "any Republican is better than a Democrat and I'm going to keep on voting that way," there are about 1.8 FReepers who say, "Forget that loser's game." However, most FReepers either don't say one way or the other, or are too ambiguous to tell whether in the voting booth, they're willing to snub both the Republican and the Democrat.
In 2012, folks sure voted the same way I read them on FR, which was about 1.5 "screw Romney and the Donkey he rode in on" to every 1 "Romney's not as bad as Obama -- I'm voting for him." Romney lost. GOOD.
“Mexican gang.” That’s good, descriptive and accurate.
No, it would lead to a Hillary plurality, the OPPOSITE of a landslide. A third-party bid like Perot's would protect us from any landslide for a leftist.
The so-called "popularity" of Bill Clinton was and is a MEDIA MYTH, because both times he was elected, the "landslide" was in the opposite direction -- a clear majority of Americans opposed him. It AIDED conservative elements in the Republican party. Most Americans opposed Clinton BOTH TIMES he was elected, thanks to Perot and the LACK of "landslide." We can only hope that the same would happen with Hillary. It would be a lot better than a real majority landslide for a functional leftist like Romney. That would be MUCH more dangerous, destructive, and poisonous.
I voted for a plurality in 2012, and if the GOP nominates, as it probably will, another functional Democrat in 2012, I will once again vote for a plurality. Because landslides for functional leftists are very, very ill advised.
But we are not talking about revolution. We are talking about our responsibilities as Christians participating in a system which we intend to retain, and which we resolve to reform and restore.
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////
You are delusional if you don’t see that a revolution is taking place right before our eyes and both parties are complicit. The rino’s words may say reform, but there actions say something far different.
The sooner you understand that the 2016 vote will go even worse than 2012 if another rino is the candidate and begin spreading the word in your rino circles then the better the chance of an actual conservative winning the primary.
Conservatives are the base of an inverted pyramid.
BRILLIANT observation!
Indeed. But the whole system is upside down anyway.
True I hope, but as well, for Palin and especially Levin and especially our beloved Rush, really the pioneer, to stand with us and say for us, "This is where my listeners stand because this is where I stand," would be to make it official, in a way. As long as Rush, Levin, and Palin urge me to vote for Romney, they can take a hike. Aren't they listening to themselves, I wonder?
All I know is that I'd love it if they cast off the Republican yoke.
Dear Lucian, voting for Romney endorsed his square-left standing public record on abortion and the homosexual agenda (Gay Youth Pride, homosexual adoption). Those were only two of many reasons to firmly and rightly reject Romney for the depravity he represents. If you are a Christian, you know this. So if you voted for him, you voted out of FEAR of the Democrat.
You gave way to a base impulse and voted for an amoral statist bastard. Be grateful that he LOST. I am.
California has 55 electoral votes.
Edward Everett Hale (1822-1909), his great-nephew, is perhaps best known for the novel The Man without a Country.
Edward Everett (1794-1865), uncle of Edward Everett Hale, was the Constitutional Union candidate for Vice President in 1860, President of Harvard College, and the featured speaker at the dedication of the Gettysburg National Cemetery in 1863.
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.