I guess I need to be set straight

[RightOnTheLeftCoast]

"The only people that will vote for Romney is us. He will get ZERO independents and ZERO moderate Democrats."

Your contention is unsupported by the evidence. The guy was Governor of Massachusetts. He will draw independents and moderate 'rats.

[littlehouse36]

And what is the point of a conservative website if we all get behind Rudy McRomnabee.........

 

[I'm ALL Right!]

So we’re supposed to vote for the person who can get the most votes from the opposing party? Thanks for clearing that up. I thought we were supposed to support a candidate who upheld Conservative values. How silly of me.

[JRios1968]

Please tell me you didn’t join just to post this...

[donna]

Romney is not a conservative.

[tlb]

>>>If you think the key to a Republican win is in getting “independents” and “moderate Democrats” to cross over and not conservatives to turn out to vote, you are sadly mistaken.

No, he is not mistaken. Republicans amount to roughly a third of the electorate. Democrats a third and independents a third. One third of the vote doesn’t win. Period.

At election time you get a portion of the center or you become irrelevant. However the crackpot fringe on FR seems to favor the latter position.

[MARTIAL MONK]

I’m not a Romney man but he would do fine in the general. Religion would probably be something of a factor but he is a smart guy and can probably counter that. He has a compelling case and, compared to his possible opponents, an outstanding record.

[johnny7]

You’re a DemocRAT at heart... that’s the problem.

[aruanan]

No, he is not mistaken. Republicans amount to roughly a third of the electorate. Democrats a third and independents a third. One third of the vote doesn’t win. Period.

At election time you get a portion of the center or you become irrelevant. However the crackpot fringe on FR seems to favor the latter position.

Again, you, like he, are making some fundamental errors.

First, even given the assumption that registered voters are split in every voting district of every state in the proportions you believe, you assume a 100% turn-out. This almost never happens. Bill Clinton was elected twice with less than 50% of the cast vote which itself represented only a fraction of registered voters.

Second, to win you have to motivate your own people to turn out at the polls in greater numbers than the opposition. This means they have to believe in their candidate more than the opposition believes in their candidate.

Third, to win really, really big, like Reagan won, you have to motivate others outside your party in the same way you motivated those inside your party to support your candidate. The way this happens is two-fold:

1. to have a candidate that is fundamentally different from the opposition candidate in a way that is consistent with the underlying political beliefs of the majority of your party's base. In the case of Republicanism, this is a conservative candidate. If you field a candidate that is trying to attract "uncommitted" voters by making himself more like the opposition, you will simultaneously depress the turnout of your base as well as the turnout of the "independent" or "uncommitted" because you are giving both of them less, rather than more, reason to vote your candidate;
2. to have an opposition candidate who is really, really extreme in a way that is demonstrably anathema to the majority of people who will actually be motivated to vote for your candidate and against the opposition. This happens more often and to a greater degree nationally when the opposition is a socialist, dirigist, international-accomodationist freak and your candidate declares that he's not going to use the government to remake society into some heaven on earth by making everybody's economic and health choices for them whether they like it or not and that the nation's health and safety are not subject to the whims of foreign enemies.

Fourth, you're assuming that an election is won by total number of votes cast. This is not the case. And in a close election, it is even more likely not to be the case. Ever hear of the electoral college?

[Slings and Arrows]

Registered to post this, did you?

Welcome to FR.

[L98Fiero]

If you are talking about winning, I’d agree with your post. Elections are won and lost by the “moderate” vote whether hard-cores want to admit it or not. McCain, unfortunately, stands to pull the most of those votes against either Clinton or Obama, in my opinion.

I hate doing it this way, but I’m playing defense this cycle to keep the Dem out. Sucks, I know but I think it’s the best strategy seeing as how things are going.

[Tijeras_Slim]

Welcome to FR.

[pepperhead]

That would be the point of a Republican website..........

[darkangel82]

Unfortunately true, but he’s all we got now.

[GreenAccord]

Hmm, Stev-o hasn’t supplied a reply. You don’t think.....

[pepperhead]

So we’re supposed to vote for the person who can get the most votes from the opposing party? Thanks for clearing that up. I thought we were supposed to support a candidate who upheld Conservative values. How silly of me.

That's what I thought. Or that is at least why I post here. The last time I looked the front page here says.......

Welcome to Free Republic!

Free Republic is the premier online gathering place for independent, grass-roots conservatism on the web. We're working to roll back decades of governmental largesse, to root out political fraud and corruption, and to champion causes which further conservatism in America. And we always have fun doing it. Hoo-yah!

I see no mention of supporting RINO's because they can supposedly get the most votes.

[lowbridge]

Who the hell are you?

[grellis]

Just out of curiosity--what if he does win the nomination?

Seriously, folks--I want to know. A lot of freepers have been asserting that "they will never vote for candidate X," and X can equal every candidate still in the running. Suppose your very favorite candidate does not win the nomination. Does that mean, in the general, that you will

a) sit it out

b) vote third party

c) write in your favorite candidate's name

d) vote for the democrat

???

That's your big plan, is it? Did I miss an option?

Guess what, folks: A, b, and c all equal d.

I don't like any of the candidates. I don't even care for the man who I voted for in the recent Michigan primary. I will not be completely satisfied with anyone who wins the GOP nom. But I will go to my grave before I sit on my ass and do nothing--or waste my vote on a third party candidate or write-in, which as tantamount to doing nothing--and allow a dem to win the general.

So go ahead! Do nothing. Do me a favor, though, ALL of you who keep making these stupid threats: If you carry through with them, and we end up with four years of a democrat heading up the Executive, relinquish your FR account and start hanging out with your pals over at DU.

Sheesh

[Sloth]

The only people that will vote for Romney is us. He will get ZERO independents and ZERO moderate Democrats.

Yeah, because Massachusetts is just chock-full of FReepers, right-wing evangelicals and hardcore small-government types.

[pepperhead]

A B or C. Never D. As for my account you have no right to ask for it. And if anyone would fit in with the people at DU it is the RINO’s that are infesting this site.