So who's everyone supporting for 2008?

[Smiling JOe]

SJ,
The GOP wins when it runs far right, but it doesn't have the balls to do so. Let's look at since 1980. Reagan ran pretty far right and won in landslides in 80 and 84. Bush ran as Reagan's successor, but not as far right and won in 88, then when he moved towards the center, and lost in 92. Dole was playing to the middle and lost in 96. Bush leaned towards the middle with compassionate conservatism and barely won in 2000 and won in a close race in 2004. This goes to Congress as well, sweeping with the Contract With America, then losing when the GOP couldn't stop spending. I could go on, but you should see something of a trend.

I fully agree with this statement. I think many far right Republicans have shifted to the Libertarian party, and going back a little bit in time, I think that Ross Perot won a fair amount of the Republican vote. Just my gut instinct, but I think that much of our population tends to be fiscally conservative and socially liberal. As you note, the GOP is not leaning far enough right on the fiscal side. They are a little right of center on the social side. The Dems tend to be slightly left of center on both the fiscal and social issues, and I think that their spending habits is what pushes so many people away from that party.

IMO, the most popular candidate will be the fiscal conservative who is socially liberal. If that person runs, they will win by a landslide, as long as myspace and youtube doesn't change things based on which candidate has the coolest myspace page.

 

[Smiling JOe]

In a national election, I am looking at donor rolls and campaign participants to decide which "backers" are more qualified to do the job, or which ones would support those ideals that I think are important.

A "good" lobbyist firm courts both sides of the isles, so good luck with trying to decide which party corporate America supports. It seems that only the celebrities endorse one party, or candidate. ;-)

 

[BeachSiO2]

A "good" lobbyist firm courts both sides of the isles, so good luck with trying to decide which party corporate America supports. It seems that only the celebrities endorse one party, or candidate. ;-)

So true, but in addition to the lobbyists, they will pick some campaign people and friends to hold key department positions. So, if you look at who their campaign people and friends are (i.e. Gonzales was very close to W in Texas) then you can get an idea of what you're selecting. It takes much more work that way but it also keeps a reality check on all the canned statements.

 

[Smiling JOe]

Bush lost the last time out because of Perot. "Read my lips" anger did not turn Repubs into Dems. Dole looked horrible on TV, which is the ultimate sin in politics. State by state voting results for '04 and '00 are virtually the same, reflecting two elections with two weak candidates.

Good points. Ross took many votes. He was fired up and pissed off about the status quo. I remember in one of the debates, when he responded to another candidate who had said that he didn't care if factories were producing potato chips or computer chips. (Perot made millions off of computer chips). Perot chimed in and said that there was a world of difference between the producing potato chips and computer chips, getting down into the math of it all. He was feisty and people liked him for it.

Dole had good potential at being elected, but IMO, he blew it by looking too stiff. He appeared as stiff as Gore. When the race was over for Dole, he went on David Letterman's show, and he was so relaxed and joking. If that man had been running, he would have won without doubt.


BeachSiO2, I often think the same thing. We have a Republic form of Democracy. If you stop and think about it, you will begin questioning what the Founding Fathers knew that we seem to overlook.

 

[6thGen]

Bush lost the last time out because of Perot. "Read my lips" anger did not turn Repubs into Dems. Dole looked horrible on TV, which is the ultimate sin in politics. State by state voting results for '04 and '00 are virtually the same, reflecting two elections with two weak candidates.

Exactly. Why was Perot running? Because Bush moved further towards the center.

 

[6thGen]

Interesting point and one I always think of when people start talking about spreading democracy around the world- our own President is not elected democratically.

Unfortunately we've moved more towards a democracy since our founding. The Founders understood that subjugating the will of the minority isn't a good thing, and they agreed with me that less people should have an influence on policy.

 

[6thGen]

I fully agree with this statement. I think many far right Republicans have shifted to the Libertarian party, and going back a little bit in time, I think that Ross Perot won a fair amount of the Republican vote. Just my gut instinct, but I think that much of our population tends to be fiscally conservative and socially liberal. As you note, the GOP is not leaning far enough right on the fiscal side. They are a little right of center on the social side. The Dems tend to be slightly left of center on both the fiscal and social issues, and I think that their spending habits is what pushes so many people away from that party.

IMO, the most popular candidate will be the fiscal conservative who is socially liberal. If that person runs, they will win by a landslide, as long as myspace and youtube doesn't change things based on which candidate has the coolest myspace page.

True, but most social issues should be left to the states. If Mississippi wants to ban drinking, have at it, but I won't be gambling there. If Florida wants to ban gay marriage, then we can lose revenue from the Keys when they establish their independence as The Conch Republic.

 

[Cheering472]

Sorry 6th but not having made a decision on my candidate 16 months prior to the election isn't waiting til the last minute, it's being informed and rational. Try to do the same please.

 

[6thGen]

Sorry 6th but not having made a decision on my candidate 16 prior to the election isn't waiting til the last minute, it's being informed and rational. Try to do the same please.

You aren't punching the chad by answering a question on an anonymous internet message board, dolt. I'm just asking who you are supporting now. And my apologies, I saw it was the braintrust known as scooterbug who said she wouldn't read anything about it for several months, so that's not exactly "being informed". As I said, right now I'm supporting two folks who have not even announced, so it's not like I've pulled the curtain behind me yet.

 

[Cheering472]

You aren't punching the chad by answering a question on an anonymous internet message board, dolt. I'm just asking who you are supporting now. And my apologies, I saw it was the braintrust known as scooterbug who said she wouldn't read anything about it for several months, so that's not exactly "being informed". As I said, right now I'm supporting two folks who have not even announced, so it's not like I've pulled the curtain behind me yet.

It's very mature of you, and so intelligent, to resort to name calling. Thanks for showing your flaws. But can we all please try to keep this on a higher level?