Dear "Conservatives"....

[Liability]

WTF do you care?

You just want to get President Obama back into Office.

Given that, as several folks have acknowledged in this thread, this country has a center-left majority (to the point where even the majority of the GOP primary electorate is apparently moderate to liberal), that would be a much easier task were Obama running against the clear contrast of modern rightwing radicalism. I think it's generally understood he would have crushed any of the actual conservatives in the GOP race. As it is, he's running against a slightly different shade of center-leftism than his own.

On the other hand, it's somewhat gratifying to know that ideologically that nation is more or less where I am, and even the far right kooks on sites like this recognize it. So you're right, maybe i don't care.

The country's electorate is actually center right.

Muddle on, though.

 

[The T]

WTF do you care?

You just want to get President Obama back into Office.

Given that, as several folks have acknowledged in this thread, this country has a center-left majority (to the point where even the majority of the GOP primary electorate is apparently moderate to liberal), that would be a much easier task were Obama running against the clear contrast of modern rightwing radicalism. I think it's generally understood he would have crushed any of the actual conservatives in the GOP race. As it is, he's running against a slightly different shade of center-leftism than his own.

On the other hand, it's somewhat gratifying to know that ideologically that nation is more or less where I am, and even the far right kooks on sites like this recognize it. So you're right, maybe i don't care.

Center-Left majority Gracie?

 

[dblack]

If what you say is that we have crap in there now...replace it, and we can vote out Romney next election if he doesn't produce.

Sure, but we start over again, essentially sacrificing all efforts to change the repubs into a real alternative. Again, as long as they think they can take us for granted, as long as they can ignore our concerns and count on our votes, they will.

Go ahead and vote for Obama again...it's your choice.
Me? I don't like the path Obama has taken us and where he wants to take us, so there is the difference in choice for me.

You know I'm not voting for Obama. You're trying to suggest that not voting Romney is the same as voting for Obama and it's just not. I won't pb voting for either of the corporatists on the ballot.

 

[Meister]

WTF do you care?

You just want to get President Obama back into Office.

Given that, as several folks have acknowledged in this thread, this country has a center-left majority (to the point where even the majority of the GOP primary electorate is apparently moderate to liberal), that would be a much easier task were Obama running against the clear contrast of modern rightwing radicalism. I think it's generally understood he would have crushed any of the actual conservatives in the GOP race. As it is, he's running against a slightly different shade of center-leftism than his own.

On the other hand, it's somewhat gratifying to know that ideologically that nation is more or less where I am, and even the far right kooks on sites like this recognize it. So you're right, maybe i don't care.

Actually, this country is and has been center right....but you can call it whatever you want...I imagine media matters would agree with you.
Your definition of being a conservative can be whatever you want it to be...it's just your opinion.

 

[Ed Spacer]

Not to interject...as much as we hated clinton.
We fiancee and myself,would deal with the centrist liberal,than an envowed communist.
at least clinton,in his delusional way,was an american supporter.
he was a pig,etc,etc,etc,but things were far more stable.

 

[Meister]

Sure, but we start over again, essentially sacrificing all efforts to change the repubs into a real alternative. Again, as long as they think they can take us for granted, as long as they can ignore our concerns and count on our votes, they will.

Go ahead and vote for Obama again...it's your choice.
Me? I don't like the path Obama has taken us and where he wants to take us, so there is the difference in choice for me.

You know I'm not voting for Obama. You're trying to suggest that not voting Romney is the same as voting for Obama and it's just not. I won't pb voting for either of the corporatists on the ballot.

Let's see how far your vote gets you with your choice. Like I said, I don't like the path that Obama is taking us.

 

[Liability]

-- excerpt from Moderation and Coherence in American Democracy by Michael W. McConnell.

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&...qGL6jX&sig=AHIEtbSXv06A93KfoI_RrhygbIgdtSU7Jg

 

[The T]

-- excerpt from Moderation and Coherence in American Democracy by Michael W. McConnell.

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&...qGL6jX&sig=AHIEtbSXv06A93KfoI_RrhygbIgdtSU7Jg

In other words? Parties mean squat.

 

[Liability]

-- excerpt from Moderation and Coherence in American Democracy by Michael W. McConnell.

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&...qGL6jX&sig=AHIEtbSXv06A93KfoI_RrhygbIgdtSU7Jg

In other words? Parties mean squat.

I don't think it means quite that much. But at the very least it shows recent academic support for the proposition (contrary to greenbeard's empty flatulence) that the American Electorate is effectively center-right.

 

[sfcalifornia]

There is nothing wrong with Romney. Why is the left so frantic to say there is? Hmmm?

Here's what's wrong with Romney:

Latest foot-in-mouth quote from yesterday:

"We’ve always encouraged young people: take a shot, go for it, take a risk, get the education, borrow money if you have to from your parents, start a business," Romney said
The Ed Show - Romney tells students to borrow money 'from your parents'

....evidently forgetting that 99% of us don't have dear ol' rich daddy to run to when we need a helping hand. He, along with his cronies, thinks education should be reserved for those who can afford it. He is completely detached from the reality that most Americans face.

 

[Mac1958]

-- excerpt from Moderation and Coherence in American Democracy by Michael W. McConnell.

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&...qGL6jX&sig=AHIEtbSXv06A93KfoI_RrhygbIgdtSU7Jg

In other words? Parties mean squat.

I don't think it means quite that much. But at the very least it shows recent academic support for the proposition (contrary to greenbeard's empty flatulence) that the American Electorate is effectively center-right.

Very liberal 5%, very conservative 9%.

So the whacked-out wings represent 14%. Hmm. I would have guessed 10%.

.

 

[geauxtohell]

Romney is a polished politician. He could be a republican or a democrat and he could be pro-life or pro-choice depending on the audience and the situation. I'd take him over the Harvard lawyer who fought to make the manslaughter of premature infants legal when he was a Chicago state senator.

I wouldn't take him at all.

Fuck it...He's owning his debacle....That's a semi good thing.

If he rebukes it, he's a flip-flopper.

He's hosed either way.

See what happens when you're a do-gooder?

Indeed. Romney is a poor choice.

Nope

Mitt is the only credible Republican running. Be interesting to see the Tea Party reaction when he gets the nomination

The Tea Party reaction will be them not voting for him! He won't get the nomination because of the Tea Party. Remember the Tea Party elected Rand Paul, almost knocked out Harry Reid, and got about 40 Tea Partiers into Washington.

The entire Tea Party will vote for Ron Paul and Herman Cain and will not settle for a status quo moderate like Romney.

.

Can you say B A C H M A N?

Romney is very, very smart. He understands business and, more importantly, has a good grasp of economics. I may not agree with everything he does but I'd probably vote for him. I'd like to see him pick Cain as VP. Give Cain 4 years experience inside politics and Cain would be a great candidate to follow Romney.

Cain might be a plausible VP...however? I see 'Romneycare' as dogging him...Since Obama has seen fit to tout it...

why is bachmann not smart enough

Well you see, the patented excuse for the GOP losing is always that the candidate was not CON$ervative enough. Rather than admit that Celebutard Palin and Moochele Bachmann the Welfare Queen will lose precisely because they are too CON$ervative, the CON$ would rather say they are too stupid to win.

*WEAK* Very weak. You still REFUSE to differentiate between Repubican and Conservative.

...

 

[Cowman]

I love it when conservatives have to settle.

 

[geauxtohell]

In other words? Parties mean squat.

The irony.............

 

[Liability]

I love it when conservatives have to settle.

You would. And the process has indeed given us a poor set of choices.

But there is still a pronounced difference between the two candidates. And that difference is more than sufficient to justify a vote for Mitt over the Bumbler in Chief.

 

[sfcalifornia]

Sure, but we start over again, essentially sacrificing all efforts to change the repubs into a real alternative. Again, as long as they think they can take us for granted, as long as they can ignore our concerns and count on our votes, they will.

Go ahead and vote for Obama again...it's your choice.
Me? I don't like the path Obama has taken us and where he wants to take us, so there is the difference in choice for me.

You know I'm not voting for Obama. You're trying to suggest that not voting Romney is the same as voting for Obama and it's just not. I won't pb voting for either of the corporatists on the ballot.

So you'll be voting for............Roseanne Barr and the Green Party?

 

[Liability]

In other words? Parties mean squat.

I don't think it means quite that much. But at the very least it shows recent academic support for the proposition (contrary to greenbeard's empty flatulence) that the American Electorate is effectively center-right.

Very liberal 5%, very conservative 9%.

So the whacked-out wings represent 14%. Hmm. I would have guessed 10%.

.

The important numbers are 40% vs 21%.



;

 

[WillowTree]

Sure, but we start over again, essentially sacrificing all efforts to change the repubs into a real alternative. Again, as long as they think they can take us for granted, as long as they can ignore our concerns and count on our votes, they will.

Go ahead and vote for Obama again...it's your choice.
Me? I don't like the path Obama has taken us and where he wants to take us, so there is the difference in choice for me.

You know I'm not voting for Obama. You're trying to suggest that not voting Romney is the same as voting for Obama and it's just not. I won't pb voting for either of the corporatists on the ballot.

well, actually yes it is..

 

[The T]

-- excerpt from Moderation and Coherence in American Democracy by Michael W. McConnell.

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&...qGL6jX&sig=AHIEtbSXv06A93KfoI_RrhygbIgdtSU7Jg

In other words? Parties mean squat.

I don't think it means quite that much. But at the very least it shows recent academic support for the proposition (contrary to greenbeard's empty flatulence) that the American Electorate is effectively center-right.

My comment was based upon another poster's assertion that "Republican means Conservative" which is utter nonsense. But I do gather the gist of your post none the less.

 

[Cowman]

I love it when conservatives have to settle.

You would. And the process has indeed given us a poor set of choices.

But there is still a pronounced difference between the two candidates. And that difference is more than sufficient to justify a vote for Mitt over the Bumbler in Chief.

Yeah, and the difference in Romney is going to be enough that people decide to just stick with what they have. Dude is seriously a turnoff to average working class people.