Once again, for all the slow children waaaaaaaay up there in the cheap seats: losers don't get to splutter, lecture or pontificate, without all the sober and non-retarded listeners in the audience pointing and giggling uncontrollably in response. That's because losers, by definition -- being losers -- lack the necessary credibility to effectively splutter, lecture or pontificate in the first place. Stamp your hoof twice, if any of this is sinking in yet.
Uncontested FACT: "Moderates" squishes got to run exactly the RINO candidate they most wanted. Said candidate ended up being solidly and unforgivably slaughtered in the electoral college by an empty suit of clothes with a nice, toothy smile. Credibility of RINO moderates on the topic of Proper Candidate Selection, as a logical and inevitable end result: 0.
Uncontested FACT: "Moderates" squishes got a campaign run precisely the way they (and their RINO candidate) desired, down to the last "honorable" detail. Said campaign couldn't even muster a piddling 150 electoral votes versus an aopen and unapologetic terrorist sympathizer whose hand-picked VP running mate believes FDR was President during the Great Depression and that "J-O-B-S" is a three-letter word. Credibility of RINO moderates on the topic of Proper Campaign Structure and Operation, as a logical and inevitable end result: 0.
Last time pays for all, kiddies: "Money talks, bull***t walks." When the Ford/Dole/McCain actually manages to WIN a presidential elction, the conservative voting base might actually start listening to the squish wing's increasingly tired snakeoil pitches without rolling our eyes and snorting.
Not one nano-second before, however. We have absolutely no good reason whatsoever to do so, after all.
You just continue to lose and lose and lose, each and every single time we (foolishly) allow you yet another opportunity to prove yourselves. You're the Seattle Mariners of American politics.
No one's listening. And that's no one's fault but your own.
*Yawn* Once again, for all the slow children waaaaaaaay up there in the cheap seats: losers don't get to splutter, lecture or pontificate,
That's right. And "the losers" were YOU and every other so-called "conservative" with the common sense of a Labrador Retriever that threatened to stay home and allow a Marxist to gain the White House unless the candidates were exactly to your liking in an election year when the "conservative" brand name had been made toxic to the majority of American voters by George W. Bush.
* The Losers *
Uncontested FACT: "Moderates" squishes got to run exactly the RINO candidate they most wanted.
FACT: If the "Moderates" had had their way, Sarah Palin would still be a name that 99.5% of the American voters had never heard of. Although she was conservative, she was an unqualified Affirmative Action candidate if there ever was one. She still is.
Even FReepers watching the Palin-Couric interview thought that Palin "was awful during the Couric" interview.
And that was just FReepers. I have a laundry list of Independents ( you might hate Independents but they constitute 36% of the entire American electorate and they are allowed to vote whether you like it or not ) that I know of who were leaning McCain before the Palin choice put them firmly in the Obama camp.
That goes for the relatives of FReepers too:
I love Sarah but Im worried that as far as he media - and their gotchitis - is concerned that she is too green and there isnt enough time to get her up to speed. I have two female relatives who are upset at being presented with such an unqualified VP. Of course I had to point out their complaints could be applied to Obama but unfortunately Obama does quite a good job of covering himself up.
That is the defense of the Republican ticket that was left to us prior to the election, "Our VP candidate is unqualified for the Oval Office if McCain should die but your Presidential candidate candidate is unqualified for the Oval Office if he gets elected."
Did you ever crunch the numbers in the article that you yourself posted like I advised you to?
If you had, you would have seen that the total UNFAVORABLE rating among the ENTIRE American electorate for Sarah Palin was 53%.
FIFTY THREE PERCENT UNFAVORABLE RATING!
That was not 53% saying "I like Coke more than I like Pepsi." That was 53% saying UNFAVORABLE as in, "I like Coke but I will never drink cod liver oil."
That was exactly the percentage of votes that Obama got: 53%
In case you have not figured it out, it is mathematically impossible to win any election when over 50% of the entire electorate has an UNFAVORABLE opinion of you and, there you are, like a 13 year old schoolboy with a crush on the Homecoming Queen, championing Sarah Palin, with a 53% UNFAVORABLE rating, to be the head of the 2012 ticket.
Even my Labrador Retriever has more common sense than that.