Jump to content

Primary 2012


Rheo

Recommended Posts


  • <p>
     
    Romney to Get Secret Service Protection, Campaign Says

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ouch, that is horrible. This is why I hate sound bites. I understand what Romney is saying (and to be fair Newt's done this sort of thing too) but man, the other side will be brutal during the regular election.

 

BTW, I thought Newt's speech last night was his best of this campaign. That said, I'm still in Mitt's camp. I live in a Blue state and have a lot of middle of the road friends. They can stomach Mitt, but they absolutely can't stand Newt.

 

Ironically, the one guy that seems to rally both my liberal, conservative and middle of the road friends is Ron Paul. If he somehow got the nomination, seriously, he would win the plurality of everyone I know.

 

The Northwest is very weird.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What Mitt Romney's victories have in common: a low Republican turnout. Terrific news for Barack Obama

 

The New York Times's election and polling analyst, Nate Silver, has done some number-crunching using the exit poll data from the four states that voted in January and finds that there is a pattern. In Iowa the number of self-identifying Republicans was down by 11%, in New Hampshire 15% the reduction was 15% while in Florida overnight it was 16%.

Romney, of course, won New Hampshire and Florida and came within 34 votes in Iowa.

The exception is South Carolina, which Newt Gingrich won a week and a half ago, where there was a 20% increase on four years ago in the number of Republicans voting.

Of course each of the four has very different demographics but it appears that Gingrich was able to enthuse the party's core supporters in South Carolina in a way that Romney has been unable to do elsewhere.

Scissors-32x32.png

It's estimated that the Romney campaign and its associated bodies spent $15.3m on on TV spots in Florida in the past month alone. To put that into context John McCain spent just $11 million on ads during his entire 2008 primary campaign.

Scissors-32x32.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW, I thought Newt's speech last night was his best of this campaign. That said, I'm still in Mitt's camp. I live in a Blue state and have a lot of middle of the road friends. They can stomach Mitt, but they absolutely can't stand Newt.

 

 

With all due respect to your middle of the road friends, the GOP has already proven it can't win national elections by trying to appeal to voters who can only stomach its more liberal candidates. The article I just posted above provides additional support of that. Mitt is not exactly generating Republican enthusiasm. The GOP will only start winning national elections when it can find a nominee who motivates its own base. The same can be said of the democrat party. Obama wasn't exactly a middle of the road candidate. John Kerry failed in part by trying hard to convince Republicans he was one of them. War veteran, "can I get me a huntin' license", look mom, I'm an astronaut.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You might be right. I don't know.

 

I just know that the hatred of Newt runs pretty deep in this neck of the woods. There is a lot of bitterness, especially since the GOP in this area worked REALLY hard to get him elected against Tom Foley who, ironically, had done pretty well for this region for a lot of years.

 

We will see. I suspect, that the GOP primary is going to look very different from the national election. I think we're going to break a lot of conventional wisdom this year all the way around.

 

I think both GOP and Dem voters are going to be lackluster. People are very depressed. There are no good candidates. We're all just turning off the tv and trying to keep our head down.

 

I do know this, no matter who wins our Primary, I will be voting against Obama. The only candidate I could get excited about was Herman Caine. At least that guy had some soul and a little charisma.

 

So it comes down to the only thing I actually know at this point: I am voting against Obama. Period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You might be right. I don't know.

 

2I just know that the hatred of Newt runs pretty deep in this neck of the woods. There is a lot of bitterness, especially since the GOP in this area worked REALLY hard to get him elected against Tom Foley who, ironically, had done pretty well for this region for a lot of years.

 

We will see. I suspect, that the GOP primary is going to look very different from the national election. I think we're going to break a lot of conventional wisdom this year all the way around.

 

I think both GOP and Dem voters are going to be lackluster. People are very depressed. There are no good candidates. We're all just turning off the tv and trying to keep our head down.

 

I do know this, no matter who wins our Primary, I will be voting against Obama. The only candidate I could get excited about was Herman Caine. At least that guy had some soul and a little charisma.

 

So it comes down to the only thing I actually know at this point: I am voting against Obama. Period.

 

All I know is I will have to vote to anyone against Obama, not crazy about the Republican field right now, can't stand Mitt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, shoot. Now I'm thinking about this. Ha!

 

A couple of points.

 

1. It did not matter who the GOP nominee was in 2008. Short of the messiah himself, no one was going to beat Obama. The GOP was fragmented and discouraged. We were divided between loyalists and haters of President Bush. We were tired and grouchy. So we just nominated the guy who was next in line. But to be honest, I don't think a single GOP candidate could have won that year period. There could have been tighter races, but not a winner. It's just to hard to run against a very motivated Democrat candidate, who also had the novelty of being the first black man in contention and was able to convince the middle he wasn't scary.

 

2. This year we face something unprecedented in my lifetime at least. We have a lot of groups that have coalesced in new and unusual ways. This is where I think Newt has a HUGE edge, possibly even outside the party. He is already attempting to co-opt the class warfare meme from Obama. He is incredibly clever here in a way that is impressive. The PROBLEM is, that he comes with incredible baggage and there are a lot of us, inside and outside the party "elite" that don't trust the man at all. He reminds me of that lothario that is able to talk his way into and out of anything...but leaves such frustration and hatred and so many broken promises behind he can not rally enough of a coalition to be an effective leader. He is flat out right on almost every issue. I don't trust that he can get here from there.

 

3. We do win elections by capturing the middle. But not because they LIKE our guy. Like I said, it is because they are not SCARED by our guy. In addition though, we also have to win by making sure that the party is excited about the candidate. We were not in 2008. McCain tried to fix that by bringing Palin on board, but it was such a blatantly manipulative move and she scared the middle so much it didn't even help him gain traction.

 

4. So where are we at this moment in this election: We have two candidates, neither of which is able to build a coalition within the party and get us excited. We have a middle group that is deeply distrustful and upset about Obama and willing to look at other candidates. Part of the party is more comfortable with Mitt because of his lack of baggage per say, but loves the articulate ability that Newt has to explain our values in a way that connects. Mitt doesn't scare middle of the road voters, Newt does. Newt fires up the base and we love him, but he scares middle of the road voters. This is a horrific place to be in. The worst possible. And that is where I get scared, because I am not sure how we work ourselves out of this.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ouch, that is horrible. This is why I hate sound bites. I understand what Romney is saying (and to be fair Newt's done this sort of thing too) but man, the other side will be brutal during the regular election.

 

It's a good thing you and I have never opened mouth and inserted foot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ouch, that is horrible. This is why I hate sound bites. I understand what Romney is saying (and to be fair Newt's done this sort of thing too) but man, the other side will be brutal during the regular election.

 

It's a good thing you and I have never opened mouth and inserted foot.

 

I do it so often I have to rent feet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So I totally agree with Berg on every point. Does it make me smart that I'm not going to the other site to read the comments then? :lol:

 

I made a reply...I leave it to your imagination as to what I said...and the tone. I channeled the new tone of *civility our President talked about.

 

 

*does civility include calling people dumber than dirt?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3. We do win elections by capturing the middle. But not because they LIKE our guy. Like I said, it is because they are not SCARED by our guy. In addition though, we also have to win by making sure that the party is excited about the candidate. We were not in 2008. McCain tried to fix that by bringing Palin on board, but it was such a blatantly manipulative move and she scared the middle so much it didn't even help him gain traction.

 

 

Two questions. 1. What evidence is there that we win elections by capturing the middle? 2. Who is the middle?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Swing States. That can be broken down by state even further, because every state has swing counties.

 

2. From my observation, people in the middle tend to be "leaners" one way or another when it comes to ideas. Tthey have a tendency to be extremely suspicious of political parties whom they see as being more loyal to their parties than to their country. They see parties as being more committed to imposing their own ideas, then working together for a solution. They tend to be somewhat passive about politics, vote regularly, but not tuned in enough to know if rhetoric matches performance. They are situationally for, and against, government. They are what I call, political skimmers.

 

They want good economics and low taxes, but don't feel banking regulations are a bad thing. They don't distinguish between local, state and federal governments. They like entitlement programs, but want a balanced budget. They can't figure out what the big deal about Terri Schaivo or abortion is, because it's none of their business...they just don't want to pay for either one. Education is good, war is bad. Big Business can't be trusted, but they are pleased with their local Walmart and Bank of America branch.

 

They want their roads fixed and to not have to spend hours on the road, support recycling, clean air and clean water, drive a Prius to save money, but wouldn't step foot on a bus or train.

 

They hate Obama care, but they hate their insurance company too. They want someone to fix that.

 

What they look for in a candidate is practical solutions that aren't going to hurt them directly. They do not want a radical departures and big changes. They want "corrections."

 

You and I would put these people on the left. People on the left would put these people on the right. They are the 30% that still watch ABC/NBC/CBS news for an hour every night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3. We do win elections by capturing the middle. But not because they LIKE our guy. Like I said, it is because they are not SCARED by our guy. In addition though, we also have to win by making sure that the party is excited about the candidate. We were not in 2008. McCain tried to fix that by bringing Palin on board, but it was such a blatantly manipulative move and she scared the middle so much it didn't even help him gain traction.

 

 

Two questions. 1. What evidence is there that we win elections by capturing the middle? 2. Who is the middle?

 

Also, we do not win elections by capturing the middle. I'm sorry if I implied that. We win the middle by capturing the energy of our side...and then not SCARING the middle. Two different things.

 

Edited to add: Who says conservatives can't be nuanced!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We win the middle by capturing the energy of our side...and then not SCARING the middle.

 

That makes total sense to me and nails how I think either side wins elections. It's an energy thing. The side with the most energy wins. Little else matters. And "voting against the other guy" does not qualify as energy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Swing States. That can be broken down by state even further, because every state has swing counties.

 

2. From my observation, people in the middle tend to be "leaners" one way or another when it comes to ideas. Tthey have a tendency to be extremely suspicious of political parties whom they see as being more loyal to their parties than to their country. They see parties as being more committed to imposing their own ideas, then working together for a solution. They tend to be somewhat passive about politics, vote regularly, but not tuned in enough to know if rhetoric matches performance. They are situationally for, and against, government. They are what I call, political skimmers.

 

They want good economics and low taxes, but don't feel banking regulations are a bad thing. They don't distinguish between local, state and federal governments. They like entitlement programs, but want a balanced budget. They can't figure out what the big deal about Terri Schaivo or abortion is, because it's none of their business...they just don't want to pay for either one. Education is good, war is bad. Big Business can't be trusted, but they are pleased with their local Walmart and Bank of America branch.

 

They want their roads fixed and to not have to spend hours on the road, support recycling, clean air and clean water, drive a Prius to save money, but wouldn't step foot on a bus or train.

 

They hate Obama care, but they hate their insurance company too. They want someone to fix that.

 

What they look for in a candidate is practical solutions that aren't going to hurt them directly. They do not want a radical departures and big changes. They want "corrections."

 

You and I would put these people on the left. People on the left would put these people on the right. They are the 30% that still watch ABC/NBC/CBS news for an hour every night.

 

 

"They want good economics and low taxes, but don't feel banking regulations are a bad thing. They don't distinguish between local, state and federal governments. They like entitlement programs, but want a balanced budget."

In other words they are really really really confused.

This makes my head hurt

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Swing States. That can be broken down by state even further, because every state has swing counties.

 

2. From my observation, people in the middle tend to be "leaners" one way or another when it comes to ideas. Tthey have a tendency to be extremely suspicious of political parties whom they see as being more loyal to their parties than to their country. They see parties as being more committed to imposing their own ideas, then working together for a solution. They tend to be somewhat passive about politics, vote regularly, but not tuned in enough to know if rhetoric matches performance. They are situationally for, and against, government. They are what I call, political skimmers.

 

They want good economics and low taxes, but don't feel banking regulations are a bad thing. They don't distinguish between local, state and federal governments. They like entitlement programs, but want a balanced budget. They can't figure out what the big deal about Terri Schaivo or abortion is, because it's none of their business...they just don't want to pay for either one. Education is good, war is bad. Big Business can't be trusted, but they are pleased with their local Walmart and Bank of America branch.

 

They want their roads fixed and to not have to spend hours on the road, support recycling, clean air and clean water, drive a Prius to save money, but wouldn't step foot on a bus or train.

 

They hate Obama care, but they hate their insurance company too. They want someone to fix that.

 

What they look for in a candidate is practical solutions that aren't going to hurt them directly. They do not want a radical departures and big changes. They want "corrections."

 

You and I would put these people on the left. People on the left would put these people on the right. They are the 30% that still watch ABC/NBC/CBS news for an hour every night.

 

 

"They want good economics and low taxes, but don't feel banking regulations are a bad thing. They don't distinguish between local, state and federal governments. They like entitlement programs, but want a balanced budget."

In other words they are really really really confused.

This makes my head hurt

 

Yes! But they don't care enough to really understand. I find "the people in the middle" far more frustrating than liberals in debating because they are so unprincipled that you can't get a good foundation on which to discuss the issues.

 

But that doesn't mean they don't vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 1709342051
×
×
  • Create New...