CNN/ORC Poll: Bush surges to 2016 GOP frontrunner

[Toro]

Clinton v Bush 2.0 is a depressing thought.

 

[kaz]

That makes no sense. We do know that the Dems took the popular vote 5 times and 4 times; the Pubs took the popular vote once and won two times. Had the Pubs not taken the center and left of center they would not have won what they did take.

So Gore was running for the popular vote? Wow, he was too stupid to be President.

Your babble didn't contradict me. W while not being a Conservative motivated them. The first time because he lied that he was Conservative. The second time it was a combination of Iraq and that the Democrats ran a gag candidate, John F'ing Kerry.

The other four, Republicans ran center/left candidates who were clearly center/left who were disliked by the right and lost. The problem with center left is they like you can't decide which party you support while the leftists in the Democratic party don't have that split and then the conservatives stay home.

Stop babbling. Your take on the history of it is perverted and senseless.

The cons won twice, because they had the right and took the center once and SCOTUS the other time.

We have no candidate other than Bush who can take the center. None.

You're making it up Jake. I'm not saying conservatives voted for the Democrat, I'm saying they stayed home. Which they did. They didn't vote for the Democrat clone candidate. Ditto me. I voted for Perot in 92, then Libertarian in three (Browne, Browne, Badnarik, then Ralph Nader before finally breaking my streak and voting for Romney because Obama was finally bad enough to actually vote for the lesser evil. My hurdle for the Republicans is incredibly low, but they can't clear it. Not even close. Lots of conservatives were the same, it wasn't worth voting for the Republican..

 

[kaz]

I don't care for dynasties - left OR right.

I don't care about dynasties, I'm just afraid he'll suck as much as his brother and father did.

 

[kaz]

Jeb will be indomitable about immigration reform, which forces those to his right to vote for him if they have any sense than the Democrat.

But I don't think Mitt will run.

Jeb will have to recreate himself as "I'm not George"

To do that he will have to shed some traditional social conservative stances on gay marriage, abolition of abortion and run on his immigration stance and fiscal conservatism

Just being a fiscal conservative would make him "not George."

 

[kaz]

There is no far right viable candidate, except maybe Paul.

Ted Cruz, Jeff Sessions, Trey Gowdy, Mike Lee, Dr Carson, Alan West... shall I go on?

How did you ever get so full of shit?

Hence the word "viable"

See, it was a clown question bro. You are defining viable. Who gives a shit what a Marxist considers "viable?"

Viable means a chance to win

Ted Cruz, Jeff Sessions, Trey Gowdy, Mike Lee, Dr Carson, Alan West have no chance

Reagan had no chance either, remember?

 

[kaz]

There is no far right viable candidate, except maybe Paul.

Ted Cruz, Jeff Sessions, Trey Gowdy, Mike Lee, Dr Carson, Alan West... shall I go on?

How did you ever get so full of shit?

Hence the word "viable"

See, it was a clown question bro. You are defining viable. Who gives a shit what a Marxist considers "viable?"

And the question was asked by a clown. He is a former Republican, not a Marxist and you are not sane when you say such stupid things, Kaz. You do not get your own definitions. Simple when viewed realistically.

LOL, RW was never a Republican. You believe anything, don't you Jake?

No one who was a Republican and went left would call themselves "right winger" to be ironic, only a left wing idiot does that.

 

[kaz]

Ted Cruz, Jeff Sessions, Trey Gowdy, Mike Lee, Dr Carson, Alan West... shall I go on?

How did you ever get so full of shit?

Hence the word "viable"

See, it was a clown question bro. You are defining viable. Who gives a shit what a Marxist considers "viable?"

Viable means a chance to win

Ted Cruz, Jeff Sessions, Trey Gowdy, Mike Lee, Dr Carson, Alan West have no chance

They will only bring ridicule down on the far right.

Can you imagine Alan West with full time media scrutiny?
He would bring down the whole party

Like Obama and Biden did to the Democrats? You could be right...

 

[JakeStarkey]

And Kaz continues to bring ridicule down on himself and the far right.

Justly so.

 

[nodoginnafight]

That makes no sense. We do know that the Dems took the popular vote 5 times and 4 times; the Pubs took the popular vote once and won two times. Had the Pubs not taken the center and left of center they would not have won what they did take.

So Gore was running for the popular vote? Wow, he was too stupid to be President.

Your babble didn't contradict me. W while not being a Conservative motivated them. The first time because he lied that he was Conservative. The second time it was a combination of Iraq and that the Democrats ran a gag candidate, John F'ing Kerry.

The other four, Republicans ran center/left candidates who were clearly center/left who were disliked by the right and lost. The problem with center left is they like you can't decide which party you support while the leftists in the Democratic party don't have that split and then the conservatives stay home.

Stop babbling. Your take on the history of it is perverted and senseless.

The cons won twice, because they had the right and took the center once and SCOTUS the other time.

We have no candidate other than Bush who can take the center. None.

You're making it up Jake. I'm not saying conservatives voted for the Democrat, I'm saying they stayed home. Which they did. They didn't vote for the Democrat clone candidate. Ditto me. I voted for Perot in 92, then Libertarian in three (Browne, Browne, Badnarik, then Ralph Nader before finally breaking my streak and voting for Romney because Obama was finally bad enough to actually vote for the lesser evil. My hurdle for the Republicans is incredibly low, but they can't clear it. Not even close. Lots of conservatives were the same, it wasn't worth voting for the Republican..

The evidence shows that conservatives DID NOT stay home as you suggest.

In 2012 conservatives made up 35% of the electorate.
In 2008 conservatives made up 34% of the electorate.

(In 1980 - "the Reagan Revolution" - Conservatives made up 28% of the electorate)

So this narrative that "Conservatives stayed home in 2008 and 2012" is false - and proven false by the numbers.

2004 - 34%
2000 - 29%
1996 - 33%
1992 - 30%
1988 - 33%
1984 - 33%

Mitt Romney gave you the highest turnout among conservatives in at least 32 years!

I'm sorry if it goes against what you'd LIKE people to think but the numbers don't lie. The GOP has maxed out on what they are going to get from the far right. The only ground they can make up is among moderates where a Republican has NEVER won without getting at least 45% of the moderate vote since 1980. Romney and McCain lost the moderate vote by more than that.

THAT is why they lost.

Every narrative you guys try to trot out to try to justify a shift to the right:

"Conservatives stayed home" or "Romney won the moderates and STILL lost"

Has been proven false by the actual numbers. Who is telling you this crap?

Would you rather lose on Fantasy Island or win in the real world?

 

[kaz]

That makes no sense. We do know that the Dems took the popular vote 5 times and 4 times; the Pubs took the popular vote once and won two times. Had the Pubs not taken the center and left of center they would not have won what they did take.

So Gore was running for the popular vote? Wow, he was too stupid to be President.

Your babble didn't contradict me. W while not being a Conservative motivated them. The first time because he lied that he was Conservative. The second time it was a combination of Iraq and that the Democrats ran a gag candidate, John F'ing Kerry.

The other four, Republicans ran center/left candidates who were clearly center/left who were disliked by the right and lost. The problem with center left is they like you can't decide which party you support while the leftists in the Democratic party don't have that split and then the conservatives stay home.

Stop babbling. Your take on the history of it is perverted and senseless.

The cons won twice, because they had the right and took the center once and SCOTUS the other time.

We have no candidate other than Bush who can take the center. None.

You're making it up Jake. I'm not saying conservatives voted for the Democrat, I'm saying they stayed home. Which they did. They didn't vote for the Democrat clone candidate. Ditto me. I voted for Perot in 92, then Libertarian in three (Browne, Browne, Badnarik, then Ralph Nader before finally breaking my streak and voting for Romney because Obama was finally bad enough to actually vote for the lesser evil. My hurdle for the Republicans is incredibly low, but they can't clear it. Not even close. Lots of conservatives were the same, it wasn't worth voting for the Republican..

The evidence shows that conservatives DID NOT stay home as you suggest.

In 2012 conservatives made up 35% of the electorate.
In 2008 conservatives made up 34% of the electorate.

(In 1980 - "the Reagan Revolution" - Conservatives made up 28% of the electorate)

So this narrative that "Conservatives stayed home in 2008 and 2012" is false - and proven false by the numbers.

2004 - 34%
2000 - 29%
1996 - 33%
1992 - 30%
1988 - 33%
1984 - 33%

Mitt Romney gave you the highest turnout among conservatives in at least 32 years!

I'm sorry if it goes against what you'd LIKE people to think but the numbers don't lie. The GOP has maxed out on what they are going to get from the far right. The only ground they can make up is among moderates where a Republican has NEVER won without getting at least 45% of the moderate vote since 1980. Romney and McCain lost the moderate vote by more than that.

THAT is why they lost.

Every narrative you guys try to trot out to try to justify a shift to the right:

"Conservatives stayed home" or "Romney won the moderates and STILL lost"

Has been proven false by the actual numbers. Who is telling you this crap?

Would you rather lose on Fantasy Island or win in the real world?

Hillary Clinton called herself a "fiscal conservative." I reject your definition of self described. Jake says he's a Republican. Self described is meaningless.

 

[nodoginnafight]

That makes no sense. We do know that the Dems took the popular vote 5 times and 4 times; the Pubs took the popular vote once and won two times. Had the Pubs not taken the center and left of center they would not have won what they did take.

So Gore was running for the popular vote? Wow, he was too stupid to be President.

Your babble didn't contradict me. W while not being a Conservative motivated them. The first time because he lied that he was Conservative. The second time it was a combination of Iraq and that the Democrats ran a gag candidate, John F'ing Kerry.

The other four, Republicans ran center/left candidates who were clearly center/left who were disliked by the right and lost. The problem with center left is they like you can't decide which party you support while the leftists in the Democratic party don't have that split and then the conservatives stay home.

Stop babbling. Your take on the history of it is perverted and senseless.

The cons won twice, because they had the right and took the center once and SCOTUS the other time.

We have no candidate other than Bush who can take the center. None.

You're making it up Jake. I'm not saying conservatives voted for the Democrat, I'm saying they stayed home. Which they did. They didn't vote for the Democrat clone candidate. Ditto me. I voted for Perot in 92, then Libertarian in three (Browne, Browne, Badnarik, then Ralph Nader before finally breaking my streak and voting for Romney because Obama was finally bad enough to actually vote for the lesser evil. My hurdle for the Republicans is incredibly low, but they can't clear it. Not even close. Lots of conservatives were the same, it wasn't worth voting for the Republican..

The evidence shows that conservatives DID NOT stay home as you suggest.

In 2012 conservatives made up 35% of the electorate.
In 2008 conservatives made up 34% of the electorate.

(In 1980 - "the Reagan Revolution" - Conservatives made up 28% of the electorate)

So this narrative that "Conservatives stayed home in 2008 and 2012" is false - and proven false by the numbers.

2004 - 34%
2000 - 29%
1996 - 33%
1992 - 30%
1988 - 33%
1984 - 33%

Mitt Romney gave you the highest turnout among conservatives in at least 32 years!

I'm sorry if it goes against what you'd LIKE people to think but the numbers don't lie. The GOP has maxed out on what they are going to get from the far right. The only ground they can make up is among moderates where a Republican has NEVER won without getting at least 45% of the moderate vote since 1980. Romney and McCain lost the moderate vote by more than that.

THAT is why they lost.

Every narrative you guys try to trot out to try to justify a shift to the right:

"Conservatives stayed home" or "Romney won the moderates and STILL lost"

Has been proven false by the actual numbers. Who is telling you this crap?

Would you rather lose on Fantasy Island or win in the real world?

Hillary Clinton called herself a "fiscal conservative." I reject your definition of self described. Jake says he's a Republican. Self described is meaningless.

Doesn't matter what you accept and it's not MY definition (as I think you are probably aware - not sure why you tried to attribute it to me).

The numbers don't lie. You can continue to lose where you live on fantasy island - or you can make the journey to the real world where you may be more successful.

BTW - if you reject that there are really THAT many real conservatives - then Romney landed you an even higher percentage of "real" conservatives Einstein.

 

[kaz]

So Gore was running for the popular vote? Wow, he was too stupid to be President.

Your babble didn't contradict me. W while not being a Conservative motivated them. The first time because he lied that he was Conservative. The second time it was a combination of Iraq and that the Democrats ran a gag candidate, John F'ing Kerry.

The other four, Republicans ran center/left candidates who were clearly center/left who were disliked by the right and lost. The problem with center left is they like you can't decide which party you support while the leftists in the Democratic party don't have that split and then the conservatives stay home.

Stop babbling. Your take on the history of it is perverted and senseless.

The cons won twice, because they had the right and took the center once and SCOTUS the other time.

We have no candidate other than Bush who can take the center. None.

You're making it up Jake. I'm not saying conservatives voted for the Democrat, I'm saying they stayed home. Which they did. They didn't vote for the Democrat clone candidate. Ditto me. I voted for Perot in 92, then Libertarian in three (Browne, Browne, Badnarik, then Ralph Nader before finally breaking my streak and voting for Romney because Obama was finally bad enough to actually vote for the lesser evil. My hurdle for the Republicans is incredibly low, but they can't clear it. Not even close. Lots of conservatives were the same, it wasn't worth voting for the Republican..

The evidence shows that conservatives DID NOT stay home as you suggest.

In 2012 conservatives made up 35% of the electorate.
In 2008 conservatives made up 34% of the electorate.

(In 1980 - "the Reagan Revolution" - Conservatives made up 28% of the electorate)

So this narrative that "Conservatives stayed home in 2008 and 2012" is false - and proven false by the numbers.

2004 - 34%
2000 - 29%
1996 - 33%
1992 - 30%
1988 - 33%
1984 - 33%

Mitt Romney gave you the highest turnout among conservatives in at least 32 years!

I'm sorry if it goes against what you'd LIKE people to think but the numbers don't lie. The GOP has maxed out on what they are going to get from the far right. The only ground they can make up is among moderates where a Republican has NEVER won without getting at least 45% of the moderate vote since 1980. Romney and McCain lost the moderate vote by more than that.

THAT is why they lost.

Every narrative you guys try to trot out to try to justify a shift to the right:

"Conservatives stayed home" or "Romney won the moderates and STILL lost"

Has been proven false by the actual numbers. Who is telling you this crap?

Would you rather lose on Fantasy Island or win in the real world?

Hillary Clinton called herself a "fiscal conservative." I reject your definition of self described. Jake says he's a Republican. Self described is meaningless.

Doesn't matter what you accept and it's not MY definition (as I think you are probably aware - not sure why you tried to attribute it to me).

The numbers don't lie. You can continue to lose where you live on fantasy island - or you can make the journey to the real world where you may be more successful.

You think that anyone who thinks government shouldn't make our choices for us lives on fantasy island? I wouldn't be lecturing anyone on the "real world." In the real world, government are power hungry and unaccountable and make crappy choices.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Stop babbling. Your take on the history of it is perverted and senseless.

The cons won twice, because they had the right and took the center once and SCOTUS the other time.

We have no candidate other than Bush who can take the center. None.

You're making it up Jake. I'm not saying conservatives voted for the Democrat, I'm saying they stayed home. Which they did. They didn't vote for the Democrat clone candidate. Ditto me. I voted for Perot in 92, then Libertarian in three (Browne, Browne, Badnarik, then Ralph Nader before finally breaking my streak and voting for Romney because Obama was finally bad enough to actually vote for the lesser evil. My hurdle for the Republicans is incredibly low, but they can't clear it. Not even close. Lots of conservatives were the same, it wasn't worth voting for the Republican..

The evidence shows that conservatives DID NOT stay home as you suggest.

In 2012 conservatives made up 35% of the electorate.
In 2008 conservatives made up 34% of the electorate.

(In 1980 - "the Reagan Revolution" - Conservatives made up 28% of the electorate)

So this narrative that "Conservatives stayed home in 2008 and 2012" is false - and proven false by the numbers.

2004 - 34%
2000 - 29%
1996 - 33%
1992 - 30%
1988 - 33%
1984 - 33%

Mitt Romney gave you the highest turnout among conservatives in at least 32 years!

I'm sorry if it goes against what you'd LIKE people to think but the numbers don't lie. The GOP has maxed out on what they are going to get from the far right. The only ground they can make up is among moderates where a Republican has NEVER won without getting at least 45% of the moderate vote since 1980. Romney and McCain lost the moderate vote by more than that.

THAT is why they lost.

Every narrative you guys try to trot out to try to justify a shift to the right:

"Conservatives stayed home" or "Romney won the moderates and STILL lost"

Has been proven false by the actual numbers. Who is telling you this crap?

Would you rather lose on Fantasy Island or win in the real world?

Hillary Clinton called herself a "fiscal conservative." I reject your definition of self described. Jake says he's a Republican. Self described is meaningless.

Doesn't matter what you accept and it's not MY definition (as I think you are probably aware - not sure why you tried to attribute it to me).

The numbers don't lie. You can continue to lose where you live on fantasy island - or you can make the journey to the real world where you may be more successful.

You think that anyone who thinks government shouldn't make our choices for us lives on fantasy island? I wouldn't be lecturing anyone on the "real world." In the real world, government are power hungry and unaccountable and make crappy choices.

Dude - you've lost if that's what you try to twist.

You know good and well that ignoring the numbers - and making up narratives that the numbers clearly refute - puts you right smack in the heart of fantasy island.

Oh you can PRETEND that it's because you are conservative and those saying it are liberal. But the truth is, what puts you on fantasy island is your rejection of the real world and real numbers. And you know it.

 

[kaz]

Oh you can PRETEND that it's because you are conservative and those saying it are liberal

I'm not a conservative, moron.

 

[JakeStarkey]

That makes no sense. We do know that the Dems took the popular vote 5 times and 4 times; the Pubs took the popular vote once and won two times. Had the Pubs not taken the center and left of center they would not have won what they did take.

So Gore was running for the popular vote? Wow, he was too stupid to be President.

Your babble didn't contradict me. W while not being a Conservative motivated them. The first time because he lied that he was Conservative. The second time it was a combination of Iraq and that the Democrats ran a gag candidate, John F'ing Kerry.

The other four, Republicans ran center/left candidates who were clearly center/left who were disliked by the right and lost. The problem with center left is they like you can't decide which party you support while the leftists in the Democratic party don't have that split and then the conservatives stay home.

Stop babbling. Your take on the history of it is perverted and senseless.

The cons won twice, because they had the right and took the center once and SCOTUS the other time.

We have no candidate other than Bush who can take the center. None.

You're making it up Jake. I'm not saying conservatives voted for the Democrat, I'm saying they stayed home. Which they did. They didn't vote for the Democrat clone candidate. Ditto me. I voted for Perot in 92, then Libertarian in three (Browne, Browne, Badnarik, then Ralph Nader before finally breaking my streak and voting for Romney because Obama was finally bad enough to actually vote for the lesser evil. My hurdle for the Republicans is incredibly low, but they can't clear it. Not even close. Lots of conservatives were the same, it wasn't worth voting for the Republican..

The evidence shows that conservatives DID NOT stay home as you suggest.

In 2012 conservatives made up 35% of the electorate.
In 2008 conservatives made up 34% of the electorate.

(In 1980 - "the Reagan Revolution" - Conservatives made up 28% of the electorate)

So this narrative that "Conservatives stayed home in 2008 and 2012" is false - and proven false by the numbers.

2004 - 34%
2000 - 29%
1996 - 33%
1992 - 30%
1988 - 33%
1984 - 33%

Mitt Romney gave you the highest turnout among conservatives in at least 32 years!

I'm sorry if it goes against what you'd LIKE people to think but the numbers don't lie. The GOP has maxed out on what they are going to get from the far right. The only ground they can make up is among moderates where a Republican has NEVER won without getting at least 45% of the moderate vote since 1980. Romney and McCain lost the moderate vote by more than that.

THAT is why they lost.

Every narrative you guys try to trot out to try to justify a shift to the right:

"Conservatives stayed home" or "Romney won the moderates and STILL lost"

Has been proven false by the actual numbers. Who is telling you this crap?

Would you rather lose on Fantasy Island or win in the real world?

Hillary Clinton called herself a "fiscal conservative." I reject your definition of self described. Jake says he's a Republican. Self described is meaningless.

That's yourself you are condemning. I have voted Republican from top to bottom more than 75% of the time over the last four elections.

This is what I mean, Kaz, about you don't get to self describe your fantasy for reality.

You have to stay with the facts and the accepted definitions, which you don't get to change for yourself.

 

[JakeStarkey]

But you do reject the real world, Kaz, and we are not going to change for you.

 

[rightwinger]

There is no far right viable candidate, except maybe Paul.

Ted Cruz, Jeff Sessions, Trey Gowdy, Mike Lee, Dr Carson, Alan West... shall I go on?

How did you ever get so full of shit?

Hence the word "viable"

See, it was a clown question bro. You are defining viable. Who gives a shit what a Marxist considers "viable?"

Viable means a chance to win

Ted Cruz, Jeff Sessions, Trey Gowdy, Mike Lee, Dr Carson, Alan West have no chance

Reagan had no chance either, remember?

Reagan had been a front runner in 1976 and had been a two term governor of California. He was also well known by the American people. Making him better suited than everyone on that list combined

 

[kaz]

So Gore was running for the popular vote? Wow, he was too stupid to be President.

Your babble didn't contradict me. W while not being a Conservative motivated them. The first time because he lied that he was Conservative. The second time it was a combination of Iraq and that the Democrats ran a gag candidate, John F'ing Kerry.

The other four, Republicans ran center/left candidates who were clearly center/left who were disliked by the right and lost. The problem with center left is they like you can't decide which party you support while the leftists in the Democratic party don't have that split and then the conservatives stay home.

Stop babbling. Your take on the history of it is perverted and senseless.

The cons won twice, because they had the right and took the center once and SCOTUS the other time.

We have no candidate other than Bush who can take the center. None.

You're making it up Jake. I'm not saying conservatives voted for the Democrat, I'm saying they stayed home. Which they did. They didn't vote for the Democrat clone candidate. Ditto me. I voted for Perot in 92, then Libertarian in three (Browne, Browne, Badnarik, then Ralph Nader before finally breaking my streak and voting for Romney because Obama was finally bad enough to actually vote for the lesser evil. My hurdle for the Republicans is incredibly low, but they can't clear it. Not even close. Lots of conservatives were the same, it wasn't worth voting for the Republican..

The evidence shows that conservatives DID NOT stay home as you suggest.

In 2012 conservatives made up 35% of the electorate.
In 2008 conservatives made up 34% of the electorate.

(In 1980 - "the Reagan Revolution" - Conservatives made up 28% of the electorate)

So this narrative that "Conservatives stayed home in 2008 and 2012" is false - and proven false by the numbers.

2004 - 34%
2000 - 29%
1996 - 33%
1992 - 30%
1988 - 33%
1984 - 33%

Mitt Romney gave you the highest turnout among conservatives in at least 32 years!

I'm sorry if it goes against what you'd LIKE people to think but the numbers don't lie. The GOP has maxed out on what they are going to get from the far right. The only ground they can make up is among moderates where a Republican has NEVER won without getting at least 45% of the moderate vote since 1980. Romney and McCain lost the moderate vote by more than that.

THAT is why they lost.

Every narrative you guys try to trot out to try to justify a shift to the right:

"Conservatives stayed home" or "Romney won the moderates and STILL lost"

Has been proven false by the actual numbers. Who is telling you this crap?

Would you rather lose on Fantasy Island or win in the real world?

Hillary Clinton called herself a "fiscal conservative." I reject your definition of self described. Jake says he's a Republican. Self described is meaningless.

That's yourself you are condemning. I have voted Republican from top to bottom more than 75% of the time over the last four elections.

This is what I mean, Kaz, about you don't get to self describe your fantasy for reality.

You have to stay with the facts and the accepted definitions, which you don't get to change for yourself.

Do you realize that no where in that answer did you ever address my point, jake?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Reagan was the right choice for the American people in 1980.

Where does the "no one" nonsense originate.

Check the polls in 1976 and 1980.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Stop babbling. Your take on the history of it is perverted and senseless.

The cons won twice, because they had the right and took the center once and SCOTUS the other time.

We have no candidate other than Bush who can take the center. None.

You're making it up Jake. I'm not saying conservatives voted for the Democrat, I'm saying they stayed home. Which they did. They didn't vote for the Democrat clone candidate. Ditto me. I voted for Perot in 92, then Libertarian in three (Browne, Browne, Badnarik, then Ralph Nader before finally breaking my streak and voting for Romney because Obama was finally bad enough to actually vote for the lesser evil. My hurdle for the Republicans is incredibly low, but they can't clear it. Not even close. Lots of conservatives were the same, it wasn't worth voting for the Republican..

The evidence shows that conservatives DID NOT stay home as you suggest.

In 2012 conservatives made up 35% of the electorate.
In 2008 conservatives made up 34% of the electorate.

(In 1980 - "the Reagan Revolution" - Conservatives made up 28% of the electorate)

So this narrative that "Conservatives stayed home in 2008 and 2012" is false - and proven false by the numbers.

2004 - 34%
2000 - 29%
1996 - 33%
1992 - 30%
1988 - 33%
1984 - 33%

Mitt Romney gave you the highest turnout among conservatives in at least 32 years!

I'm sorry if it goes against what you'd LIKE people to think but the numbers don't lie. The GOP has maxed out on what they are going to get from the far right. The only ground they can make up is among moderates where a Republican has NEVER won without getting at least 45% of the moderate vote since 1980. Romney and McCain lost the moderate vote by more than that.

THAT is why they lost.

Every narrative you guys try to trot out to try to justify a shift to the right:

"Conservatives stayed home" or "Romney won the moderates and STILL lost"

Has been proven false by the actual numbers. Who is telling you this crap?

Would you rather lose on Fantasy Island or win in the real world?

Hillary Clinton called herself a "fiscal conservative." I reject your definition of self described. Jake says he's a Republican. Self described is meaningless.

That's yourself you are condemning. I have voted Republican from top to bottom more than 75% of the time over the last four elections.

This is what I mean, Kaz, about you don't get to self describe your fantasy for reality.

You have to stay with the facts and the accepted definitions, which you don't get to change for yourself.

Do you realize that no where in that answer did you ever address my point, jake?

kaz, you have no point.