[SonnyCorleone]

Until there is a clear Republican front runner, it makes sense for the Democrats to sit on the dirt. They want a vulnerable opponent. The Republicans have the opposite problem. If they bring up dirt they are accused of fighting a dirty campaign and harming someone who could be a front runner later. Reagan's admonition about speaking ill of a Republican still has some effect. Thus the abundant dirt in some Republican candidates' past and present is a ticking time bomb waiting for a clear front runner

[TheRobb7]

After seeing the recent twists and turns in the GOP race, a question formed in my mind:

Who can the GOP put forth that can actually win in November?

Before answering, think of the following:

-Yes, I want a conservative to be the nominee

-Both Hunter and Thompson have dropped out, never having gained traction once the voting started. (Regardless of the reasons, the bottom line is that they DIDN’T, so they are out.)

-The article here mentions the Reagan COALITION, which meant he attracted Dems that had conservative tendencies, winning them over with his conservatism.

Therefore, if the White House is to be kept out of the Dems hands, the GOP is going to need someone who can build that kind of coalition-—while not compromising conservatism.

That cannot be done while recieving the vote totals that Hunter and Thompson were getting.

So then, Who can the GOP put forth that can actually win in November?

This is the discussion that is needed on FR.