...unfortunately there is no such guarantee that a conservative will win in November. And THAT is the shame of it all. U.S. Army Retired |
Posted on 01/03/2008 3:27:06 PM PST by MindBender26
Regardless of which Democrat wins Iowa tonight, a Republican will win in November. Regardless of which Democrat wins Iowa tonight, a Republican will win in November.
No, the above is not some wholly-headed, crystal ball projection. It is a cold, hard political fact.
On the eve of the Iowa caucuses, conventional wisdom claims the Democrats should be a shoe-in in the Post-Bush 2008 Presidential election. In reality, the Democrats are in huge trouble and have little change of carrying themselves back into the White House.
The problem lies in how parties chose their national candidates. The caucus and primary system ensures, at least for the Democrats, that one of the least electable candidate is chosen as their national standard bearer.
Democratic Party caucuses and primary elections bring out the party faithful and the far-left wing of the Dems. These early events are dominated by the most liberal elements of the party. For example, in past years, Jessie Jackson garnered as much as 35% of the vote in Democrat primaries. Al Sharpton made serious runs in some 2004 primaries, garnering 20% of the vote in South Carolina and double digits in Washington, DC. No one without a clinically significant level of hallucinogens remaining in their bloodstream thinks Jessie Jackson or Al Sharpton could/would/should be president of the United Sates, but millions of Democrats voted for them in the primaries.
Those same Democrats who voted for Jackson, Sharpton “Screamin’ Dean,” Dennis “Take me back to the Mother Ship” Kucinich and other far-out primary candidates will chose the winners and losers in Iowa tonight.
But the problem for the Democrats is not so much which candidate will win in Iowa, who will be second, but that the Iowa caucuses will ensure that one of the three leading Democratic candidates will capture the presidential nomination… and not one of them has a chance in November.
Certainly all the media attention has been on the primaries, and the Democratic candidates have done their best to win these early elections, but what everyone is forgetting is that all this is meaningless. Ask John Kerry, Al Gore, George H. W. Bush, Bob Dole and dozens of other losing Presidential candidates stretching back more than 200 years. How many young people today know who Walter Mondale is/was? Do the names Schuyler Colfax or Alton Brooks ring bells with any of us?
Winning the presidential nomination but losing the General election is at best a very bitter sweet memory, and that’s exactly what the Democrats have chosen to do again in 2008.
The Democratic nominee will most likely be Obama, Edwards or Clinton. None of them could ever win a national election. Period.
Take a close look at Obama. Is America ready to elect a first term, hugely inexperienced Senator, who happens to be Black and was raised a Muslim? Forget about whether or not he can win the support of as majority of the far-left wing, politically active Dems in Iowa. Think about voters in the country as a whole, in November, when everyone gets to vote.
Not a chance… not even in the Iowa General.
What about Hillary? She polls as the most hated woman in the history of U.S. national elections. She has huge, previously undisclosed skeletons in her closet, and every survey shows that the more people know about her, the less they like her.
Hillary Clinton has gone down in popularity every month since she announced that she would seek the Presidency. A candidate winning their party’s nomination who wants to be elected to national office needs to be increasing their popularity with all voters, not crashing in the opposite direction.
Everything Hillary does to gain 1% with the far-left Democratic primary voters costs her 2 or 3% in all-party national election support.
Finally, John Edwards.
Who?
He is a former ambulance chaser, a personal injury lawyer with one term of very limited junior Senate experience.
There are video tapes of him claiming to “channel” the energy of dead children so as to get huge verdicts from uneducated juries. Dozens of middle-class North Carolina couples would be only too glad to tell a TV audience how Edward’s frivolous lawsuits cost them their businesses.
Edward’s record is even more vulnerable than his hair on windy day.
Most of the Republicans, on the other hand, are safe, sane, stable, “nice guys.” Romney, McCain, Giuliani, Thompson and others…. Only one can get the nomination, but they are all “nice guys.”
Men like Biden, Dodd and Lieberman don’t have the “chosen but hated candidate” problem, but none of them will win the Democratic primaries, or even come close.
So tonight, remember, that the winners on the Republican side (with the exception in Ron Paul and possibly Holy Huckabee,) they are all very electable “nice guys.”
On the Democrat side, however, every victory in these primaries and caucuses is a step closer to a losing ticket in the November General.
Thank you DNC, for all your support!
Oh, so easy to say!
Second it. When it comes to issues, security is job 1.
Not if Rudy McRombee is nominated.
Not to mention who are the Demo candidates. Look, Obama is an awesome speaker, but when you get beyond the facade and see what is underneath, it is scary. Hilary, what can we say about that, it is really time for someone besides a Clinton or even a Bush. Hillary if not married to Bill would not be anyone.
Edwards, that guy is embarassing to watch, it is hard to watch how pretentious he is.
I think that GOP has some great candidates not including McCain and Huck, but I would probably be happy over any of the rest of them. McCain bless his heart is an American hero, but what can I say. I am surprised that Huck got this far but that is IMHO
Not to mention who are the Demo candidates. Look, Obama is an awesome speaker, but when you get beyond the facade and see what is underneath, it is scary. Hilary, what can we say about that, it is really time for someone besides a Clinton or even a Bush. Hillary if not married to Bill would not be anyone.
Edwards, that guy is embarassing to watch, it is hard to watch how pretentious he is.
I think that GOP has some great candidates not including McCain and Huck, but I would probably be happy over any of the rest of them. McCain bless his heart is an American hero, but what can I say. I am surprised that Huck got this far but that is IMHO
Nobody is listening to any of these prognostications. It wouldn’t make the grade on Coast, it won’t here.
47% of the voters voted for John Kerry. That's scary.
It is hard to believe how hate filled they are.
The last time a Democrat won POTUS with over 50% of the vote was 1976 but this is not the time for slacking!
| ...unfortunately there is no such guarantee that a conservative will win in November. And THAT is the shame of it all. U.S. Army Retired |
Your prediction is actually logical considering the hideous Left Wing nature of the Democratic Primary system. Unfortunately, the reality of the situation is very different because the current political environment is NOT logical.
And the problem is not with the Democrats, who cannot help what they have become...they are just pathetic Left Wing socialists. No, I’m afraid the problem is on OUR SIDE. Just read some of the responses on here with their hatred of Rudy, Romney, McCain, etc...their casual use of the term RINO.
No, I’m afraid we are going to lose in 2008 and it’s going to be a self-inflicted wound because a lot of Freepers, and other right wingers, are deteriorating into the Right Wing version of the slime you see at Daily Kos and Democratic Underground.
In the climate of 2008, many Right Wingers would call Ronald Reagan a RINO because he used to be a Democrat and head up a Union, or because he was divorced.
The Democratic Party lost their way decades ago, but sadly, the Conservative Movement is on the verge of doing the same...or worse...in 2008.
Yup, it's a LOCK. Get a 2nd mortgage on your house, take that money, go to Las Vegas and put it on a Republican to win in November.
It'll be the easiest money you ever made..
You left out Huckster and Paul. It is not a casual use of the term, either. They are the textbook examples of RINOs, and NONE of those 5 have any business serving as the standard-bearer for a Conservative party, period.
Hi all, I am wondering something. If McCain or Rudy are the nominee, will you vote for them? If not, would you let the WH go to Dems, and if so, what’s your reason?
| Yeah. How dare Jim Robinson call candidates RINOs on his own darn forum. Oh you meant the rest of us and not JimRob. < /sarcasm> U.S. Army Retired |
Using the standards you guys use today, Ronald Reagan would never have been elected Governor of California, let alone President of the United States.
So I guess you’d rather see Hillary or Obama win than hold your nose and vote for Rudy or Romney, etc...
Yeah, that makes a lot of sense...
This is all very well from a sane POV, but I think too much of the country has lost what limited capacity they had for rational thought. The MSM drumbeat has corrupted too many, God knows they have had the time to do it..............
I do think, and have said for some time, that Edwards is the most difficult of these three to beat because he would run strong in the South, VA, upper midwest, esp. OH, WI, MI, and PA.
Of course he can do it, and so can you. That doesn’t mean it makes sense. The ‘circular firing squad’ mentality on our side is not helping the nation.
Good luck with that............
| That is actually a very interesting question because if the RINO is elected he will start to build coalitions with Demoncrats and RINO Republicans to get his agenda done whereas if the Demoncrat candidate wins at least the Republicans are set up as the opposition. There will be a lot of debate about that. U.S. Army Retired |
I’M GOING TO THE CAUCUS IN 1 HOUR, WHY SHOULDN’T PEOPLE VOTE FOR ROMNEY? (Seriously, I may speak to my group and my facts on him are not clear, going to push for Fred)
I can tell you that I would definitely vote for ANY of the Republican candidates over Hillary or one of the other Dems. The only exceptions might be Ron Paul, who is clearly mentally disturbed, and Mike Huckabee, who scares the hell out me with his William Jennings Bryan persona. But neither Paul nor Huckabee could actually win anyway, so a 3rd Party vote wouldn’t hurt.
That is what my thinking is: the MSM is constantly working to corrupt the minds of the drooling fools that watch or read their crap. They never rest, and I suspect their efforts have raised that 47% since 2004.
H911ARY 3rd place tonight, Edwards 2nd , Obama 1st........
Unfortunately, I'm not convinced of this. Remember that John Fraud Kerry came very close to winning, despite being ugly, unpleasant, and having committed treason during the Vietnam War. The vast millions of Demonrat bloc voters (blacks, Hispanics, govt. union members, inner city "walking dead," etc.) plus the MSM mean that almost any thing with the D label has a serious chance.
What a truly terrifying statement you’ve just made.
I guess you would rather have President Obama handling matters of National Security over President McCain, just so we can line ourselves up as a “strong opposition” to set a future agenda.
I find it very hard to believe that you really believe that...
| A Stern Warning to the “Conservative Elites” about Mitt Romney
U.S. Army Retired |
So do 99.9% of this forum. But put it this way: cutting off your leg will save your life, or keep it and die of gangrene just to spite life. It may come down to that, so to speak. A detestable choice, but this is about the survival of our republic, not a pissing contest.
You guys are a broken record. You just don’t get it.
Thanks for the serious dose of reality. But just so you know, it will fall on DEAF EARS here. I’ve been making essentially the same argument for months and it’s utterly fruitless with most of the crew.
You guys are willing to risk OUR LIVES by putting a Democratic TRAITOR in the White House, and I’M THE ONE WHO DOESN’T GET IT????
Now just a minute, sounds like YOU want to elect Hillary or Obama. Can’t have it both ways.
Oh do tell!
I’m not voting for a liberal, of EITHER party. When Fred or Duncan Hunter is the nominee, I’ll support them in November.
Not the same if it’s 100% certain that we are going to lose. Ron Paul as the Republican nominee is a SURE loser. Mike Huckabee as the Republican nominee is a SURE loser. But if polls indicated the day before the election that they actually had a chance, then I WOULD DEFINITELY vote FOR the Republican...even that sick bugger Ron Paul over the Democrat.
"If that ain't trademark infringement, I don't know what is!"
| Hold on curly. All I am saying is that the only way to stop the liberal agenda MIGHT be having Republicans as the opposition because a RINO president could ignore conservatives. Might being the key word. It is VERY debate-able. U.S. Army Retired |
I would agree, but never misunderestimate how many liberals were let out of insane asylums in the 70’s and 80’s!
Look, Duncan Hunter is the BEST candidate by a huge margin...it’s not even close. I’ll vote for him every chance I get, but that’s not the issue. The issue is if the race is between a Centrist who is strong on National Security and a Leftist pacifist, then what do you do? The answer is obvious.
“Using the standards you guys use today, Ronald Reagan would never have been elected Governor of California, let alone President of the United States.”
That was THEN. This in NOW.
Ok, I might have agreed with you before 9/11, but not now. National Security trumps EVERYTHING at this point. EVERYTHING. Why else would people like us support the Patriot Act and other anti-freedom legislation???
GOOD! Push Fred and Duncan!
Edwards isn't even popular in his home state of NC. You may be right about the midwest and PA, but I don't think any state south of the Mason Dixon line would give Edwards the time of day, personally.
Well, I’m not stopping you from voting for ‘em in the general, just don’t ask me to. I don’t vote for kooks or liberals. Especially when they hail from the GOP.
Sadly you are correct. And ironically, if it weren’t for Reagan, you guys wouldn’t have the luxury of calling people RINOs because the Republicans would be a permanent minority party and the Conservative movement would have died decades ago.
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.