Go back
Moderates have stolen the Republican Party

Moderates have stolen the Republican Party

Debates

2 edits
Vote Up
Vote Down

McCain has an unsurmountable lead, with a lion share of the delegate count, but looking at his share of the vote from all the primaries and caucuses, he has barely managed a third of the vote. In fact, Mitt Romney, who has just dropped out, has scored higher in percentage support across all states, but with drastically fewer delegates. How has this been achieved?

Simple, by making states that have the greatest proportion of moderates and independents give all their delegates to the winner (winner takes all), and leave those states with a higher proportion of conservatives to divide delegates up proportional to the vote (proportional representation).

Result: The prospective republican nominee has only to win the moderate states (which typically vote Democrat anyway) to be virtually assured of the Republican nomination. This is exactly what McCain has done. The majority of states won by Romney and Huckabee have given delegates to McCain proportional to his share of the vote, while the states McCain has won have typically given no delegates at all to Romney and Huckabee. That is the only reason why McCain is so far ahead in the delegate count.

Moderates have stolen the party. Conservatives in the GOP have been swindled.

If there is any point in Mike Huckabee continuing to run against McCain it will be to further highlight the stupidity and inequity of the Republican Party's nomination process.

So while the Democrat race might only be settled at the convention, the Republican race is over prematurely, and conservatives are left with a candidate that few of them can stomach.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Gatecrasher
McCain has an unsurmountable lead, with a lion share of the delegate count, but looking at his share of the vote from all the primaries and caucuses, he has barely managed a third of the vote. In fact, Mitt Romney, who has just dropped out, has scored higher in percentage support across all states, but with drastically fewer delegates. How has this been ...[text shortened]... is over prematurely, and conservatives are left with a candidate that few of them can stomach.
So while the Democrat race might only be settled at the convention, the Republican race is over prematurely, and conservatives are left with a candidate that few of them can stomach.


Ain't democracy a bitch sometimes?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by kirksey957
Ain't democracy a bitch sometimes?
There certainly is great poetic justice in it all.

I just don't see any conservative commentators fingering the electoral process. Maybe they are just too dense to see how they've been diddled.

Vote Up
Vote Down

What is really amusing about all this is that it was none other than Rudy Guliani who encouraged many of the states (particularly the larger ones) to move to a 'winner take all' format. Back when he was way ahead in the national polls he felt it would be nice to have the primaries over and done with quickly...well, he was done quickly, at least.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Gatecrasher
McCain has an unsurmountable lead, with a lion share of the delegate count, but looking at his share of the vote from all the primaries and caucuses, he has barely managed a third of the vote. In fact, Mitt Romney, who has just dropped out, has scored higher in percentage support across all states, but with drastically fewer delegates. How has this been ...[text shortened]... is over prematurely, and conservatives are left with a candidate that few of them can stomach.
bad for conservatives... good for the country

4 edits
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by duecer
bad for conservatives... good for the country
Real conservatives are good for the country. Unfortunately their evangelical allies, the welfare farmers of the heartland and jackasses like Limbaugh (he needs to learn to conserve his marriages and waistline) have stolen the "conservative" tag.

The real conservatives are split between the Libertarian Party and minority status in the Republican Party.

MacSwain might count too, but he's in Bananaland down there somewhere. Maybe not; he's a little too comfortable with the Republican anti-liberal hate speech.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Gatecrasher
I just don't see any conservative commentators fingering the electoral process. Maybe they are just too dense to see how they've been diddled.
Yeah... what with the vote for president being rigged in favour of the Republicans and all... I'm not really surprised we don't see Republicans mentioning or fingering the electoral process. In fact, I can quite imagine they're going nowhere near it at all!

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by shavixmir
Yeah... what with the vote for president being rigged in favour of the Republicans and all... I'm not really surprised we don't see Republicans mentioning or fingering the electoral process. In fact, I can quite imagine they're going nowhere near it at all!
Rigged, Schmigged. What does it matter? Both Candidates are Liberals anyway. Does it matter what they call their party? McCain even tried to join the Dem party after he lost the nomination to Bush last time.

F. GRANNY.

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by smw6869
Rigged, Schmigged. What does it matter? Both Candidates are Liberals anyway. Does it matter what they call their party? McCain even tried to join the Dem party after he lost the nomination to Bush last time.

F. GRANNY.
Oh please.
McCain may have one or two liberal policies (hell... about as many as Clinton and Osama... or whatever his name rhymes with), but he's a capitalist pig in the deep, dark recesses of his black blood pumpin' heart.

Coming to think of it... Obama vs. Osama... it sounds like a Hollywood flick if ever I heard one. Get John Wayne to play the role!


EDIT: Just to make things clear: "Black blood pumpin'" has nothing to do with skin colour, it's a reference to Bill Hicks' adequate description of Rush Limbaugh in "Rant in E-minor".

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by shavixmir
Oh please.
McCain may have one or two liberal policies (hell... about as many as Clinton and Osama... or whatever his name rhymes with), but he's a capitalist pig in the deep, dark recesses of his black blood pumpin' heart.

Coming to think of it... Obama vs. Osama... it sounds like a Hollywood flick if ever I heard one. Get John Wayne to play the rol ...[text shortened]... a reference to Bill Hicks' adequate description of Rush Limbaugh in "Rant in E-minor".
I like the Obama vs. Osama angle. Could be fun. Thanks for giving me a reason to vote. I shall fote for Obsama....whatever.

F. GRANNY.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Gatecrasher
McCain has an unsurmountable lead, with a lion share of the delegate count, but looking at his share of the vote from all the primaries and caucuses, he has barely managed a third of the vote. In fact, Mitt Romney, who has just dropped out, has scored higher in percentage support across all states, but with drastically fewer delegates. How has this been ...[text shortened]... is over prematurely, and conservatives are left with a candidate that few of them can stomach.
Impressive, your right.
Kelly

Vote Up
Vote Down

I would say that whether or not there is reform within the Republican party depends greatly upon how they do in the general election. After all, necessity is the mother of invention. If it is realized that by disemboweling the conservative voice within the Republican party causes them to start loosing general elections then it will change. However, if not you will more than likely see more of the same. Make no mistake, neither party has a "soul", so to speak. All that matters is winning. In fact the Democrats, after being humiliated by "W" of all people several times in a row, began consulting the much hated and disdained evangelicals in order to better understand how to appeal to them and steal their vote.

I guess you could argue that by putting a liberal at the helm of the Republican party you might snatch the vote of moderates and a few liberals. However, I think this to be unlikely. Instead Mchillary will get humiliated in the general election.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by whodey
I would say that whether or not there is reform within the Republican party depends greatly upon how they do in the general election. After all, necessity is the mother of invention. If it is realized that by disemboweling the conservative voice within the Republican party causes them to start loosing general elections then it will change. However, if not ...[text shortened]... I think this to be unlikely. Instead Mchillary will get humiliated in the general election.
I agree.

And you're right. McCain will have a heck of a time in general election if he's up against Obama. I think the conservatives will just stay home which means McCain is sunk. Should be close if it's Hillary. How funny would it be to see hardcore conservatives restricted to voting for either Hillary Clinton or some one they hate almost as much?!

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by telerion
[b]I agree.
Wow!!

Please give me a little time to relish this moment. Perhaps I will print it out and frame it on my wall at home.

Vote Up
Vote Down

If the Republican Primary is rigged towards moderates, why did McCain get Stomped by GWB in the lead up to the 2000 election? I don't exactly buy your scenario here, but this is a sincere question. Have the rules changed? or just the attitudes?

It seems to me that, unlike 2000, this time McCain has the widest name recognition.

Also, I'm tempted to say that many Republicans are rebelling against the current unpopular president and his inability to "play well with others." With Bush's approval rating as it is, I'm not surprised that many Rebublicans are goingthe way of the moderate.