login
Republicans are LOSING! (Page 4)
-
No new posts
|
 2013-10-16 10:34 AM in reply to: dmiller5 |
Champion  7821     Brooklyn, NY |  Subject: RE: Republicans are LOSING!Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by Left Brain Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by jeffnboise Sarah Palin? Do Republicans want her on the team? But she has SEEN Russia from Alaska, you mavericky maverick I swear....if I was Tuwood, I'd be convinced that Palin was a secret agent of the libs and planted by them to make the republicans look like morons. That woman is an idiot and the Republicans need to rid themselves of her or face the prospect of Madam President, Hillary Clinton, who would win by a landslide if the election was today. ~taking tuwoods tin foil cap off~ give me my hat back... I don't think Obama is very smart either, but he's a very experienced politician and comes across as such so the IQ doesn't necessarily matter. Obama was a law professor, and you don't think he is smart? I'd more lean towards lack of experience as a politician for his current troubles. He is an extremely intelligent person. Oh, c'mon. That's just a ridiculous thing to say. They don't hand out acceptance letters to Columbia and Harvard Law at the 7/11. And even if you believe that his race and affirmative action helped with his admission, he still had to have enough upstairs to graduate from two very rigorous, competitive universities. I went to an Ivy as well, and I can tell you first hand that I went to school with a lot of kids who lacked common sense, and there were plenty of kids who weren't as smart as the average student there, but it's frankly absurd to suggest that someone with those academic credentials is "not very smart". |
| 2013-10-16 10:37 AM in reply to: BrianRunsPhilly |
Champion 6993  Chicago, Illinois | Subject: RE: Republicans are LOSING! Leave Sarah Palin alone. She is awesome. If I ever got into congress she can lobby me anytime. I agree with tupuppy. She what the party needed at the time. They needed to distance themselves from Bush and thought they might get a number of Hilary supporters. She is good at stirring up a crowd but not very good at an interview. I am sure if I was in her shoes I might be the same way. |
| 2013-10-16 10:45 AM in reply to: chirunner134 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Republicans are LOSING! Originally posted by chirunner134 Leave Sarah Palin alone. She is awesome. If I ever got into congress she can lobby me anytime. I agree with tupuppy. She what the party needed at the time. They needed to distance themselves from Bush and thought they might get a number of Hilary supporters. She is good at stirring up a crowd but not very good at an interview. I am sure if I was in her shoes I might be the same way. What is awesome about that twit? Putting her on the ticket with McClain LOST the election as far as I can see. If the Republicans insist on parading her around and giving her a voice they are doomed in the next election. Whether you like the tea party and agree with them or not..... it's a loser for the republicans to get on a bus with them. You want to see happy democrats? Just watch them every time the tea party starts leading the republicans around by their collective noses. |
| 2013-10-16 10:48 AM in reply to: jeffnboise |
| Veteran 292 Wisconsin | Subject: RE: Republicans are LOSING! Originally posted by jeffnboise I'm really curious to hear people's opinions about how the Republican's can re-gain their (poll) mojo. One thing they could do would be to show they are willing to govern, instead of merely obstructing. Boehner would need to stop letting the TP control the House. Of course, there's a good chance he'd lose his speakership if he did. |
| 2013-10-16 10:53 AM in reply to: Left Brain |
Champion 7821 Brooklyn, NY | Subject: RE: Republicans are LOSING! Just a couple of things to add to the thread: Joe Lhota, who is the GOP candidate for mayor of NYC, said in the debate last night, "“Do not lump me in with the National Republicans.It’s unbecoming." Also, I saw this morning that the Houston Chronicle said in an Op-Ed today that it regrets its decision to endorse Ted Cruz. From the article: "When we endorsed Ted Cruz in last November's general election, we did so with many reservations and at least one specific recommendation - that he follow Hutchison's example in his conduct as a senator. Obviously, he has not done so. Cruz has been part of the problem in specific situations where Hutchison would have been part of the solution." Referring to Cruz' predecessor, Kay Bailey Hutchison, the paper wrote, "We miss her extraordinary understanding of the importance of reaching across the aisle when necessary. Neither sitting Texas senator has displayed that useful skill, and both the state and the Congress are the poorer for it." |
| 2013-10-16 10:57 AM in reply to: jeffnboise |
| Veteran 244 Ohio | Subject: RE: Republicans are LOSING! When we (the republicans) lost the presidential elections in '08 and again '12 and both times tried to make excuses and deflect blame about why we lost and not take a hard honest look at where the party was headed, I knew it was going to take the party to hit rock bottom before they would face the music and rebuild a republican that a majority of Americans could feeling comfortable being a part of. I think MAYBE they finally have. |
| 2013-10-16 11:06 AM in reply to: jmk-brooklyn |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Republicans are LOSING! Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Originally posted by dmiller5 Oh, c'mon. That's just a ridiculous thing to say. They don't hand out acceptance letters to Columbia and Harvard Law at the 7/11. And even if you believe that his race and affirmative action helped with his admission, he still had to have enough upstairs to graduate from two very rigorous, competitive universities. I went to an Ivy as well, and I can tell you first hand that I went to school with a lot of kids who lacked common sense, and there were plenty of kids who weren't as smart as the average student there, but it's frankly absurd to suggest that someone with those academic credentials is "not very smart". Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by Left Brain Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by jeffnboise Sarah Palin? Do Republicans want her on the team??? But she has SEEN Russia from Alaska, you mavericky maverick I swear....if I was Tuwood, I'd be convinced that Palin was a secret agent of the libs and planted by them to make the republicans look like morons.??? That woman is an idiot and the Republicans need to rid themselves of her or face the prospect of Madam President, Hillary Clinton, who would win by a landslide if the election was today. ~taking tuwoods tin foil cap off~? give me my hat back...? I don't think Obama is very smart either, but he's a very experienced politician and comes across as such so the IQ doesn't necessarily matter. ? Obama was a law professor, and you don't think he is smart? I'd more lean towards lack of experience as a politician for his current troubles. He is an extremely intelligent person. So, how do you quantify "smart"? Is it purely based on resume? If that's the case then he's a genius. For me, I base smarts on what comes out of his mouth and what he brings to the table. In those regards, it doesn't seem like his elevator goes all the way to the top floor. Maybe he's just SO smart that it comes out wrong. OK, I'll stop, I was just messing with you guys and I'm not very good at tearing people down anyways. I know Obama's smart, but I was having fun with the "Palin is dumb" bashing that was going on. Being smart is a very subjective thing and different jobs/roles require smarts in different ways. Engineers are genius smart, but can barely put a sentence together often times. Great orators are smart speakers, but may not be able to program a DVR. So, we're all smart in different ways. We often talk of Academic smarts where people are great teachers, but you put them on the street they can't apply what they know because they don't have real world smarts. This is a big reason I don't necessarily put a lot of weight into pedigree when it comes to politicians. Are you a leader and can get things done? ok I have no way whatsoever to quantify Obama's "intelligence" and you or anyone else have no way to quantify Palin's "Intelligence". Even if we hook them both up to IQ tests, it just measures one thing. I'm not trying to defend Palin as being "smart" or not, but I do know that when your opponent has to resort to calling you dumb it's because it's easier than trying to defeat your positions. Politicians are masters at doing this and love destroying people. I think it's one of the big reasons more people don't get into politics. If you're bored, go google "dumb things Palin has said" and "dumb things Obama has said". If you knew nothing else about either individual you'd think they were both idiots based purely on dumb things they've said. |
| 2013-10-16 11:17 AM in reply to: Left Brain |
Member 465 | Subject: RE: Republicans are LOSING! Originally posted by Left Brain Originally posted by chirunner134 Leave Sarah Palin alone. She is awesome. If I ever got into congress she can lobby me anytime. I agree with tupuppy. She what the party needed at the time. They needed to distance themselves from Bush and thought they might get a number of Hilary supporters. She is good at stirring up a crowd but not very good at an interview. I am sure if I was in her shoes I might be the same way. What is awesome about that twit? Putting her on the ticket with McClain LOST the election as far as I can see. If the Republicans insist on parading her around and giving her a voice they are doomed in the next election. Whether you like the tea party and agree with them or not..... it's a loser for the republicans to get on a bus with them. You want to see happy democrats? Just watch them every time the tea party starts leading the republicans around by their collective noses. McCain was a loser candidate that had serious issues with his base and the GOP establishment. Basically he couldn't get the regular volunteers to show up to the local campaign office to make phone calls for him. He lost the election the day he got nominated. I remember the day Palin was announced. I was sitting in one of those local campaign offices working on my campaign. And I can tell you that the volunteer numbers tripled within the week of her announcement. I would be hard pressed to think of another candidate that could have that much effect of a core volunteer base. So this whole idea that Palin caused McCain's lost is just bad analysis of what really happened.I agree that she wasn't ready for prime time but she wasn't responsible for losing the game. |
| 2013-10-16 11:22 AM in reply to: Jackemy1 |
| Veteran 292 Wisconsin | Subject: RE: Republicans are LOSING! Originally posted by Jackemy1 I remember the day Palin was announced. I was sitting in one of those local campaign offices working on my campaign. And I can tell you that the volunteer numbers tripled within the week of her announcement. I would be hard pressed to think of another candidate that could have that much effect of a core volunteer base. What you may be missing is that what inspires the base does not necessarily improve the chance of electoral success. Did Palin generate passion? Sure. Did she attract people to rallies? Sure. But every time a moderate/independent heard her speak, the chance of McCain winning decreased. |
| 2013-10-16 11:35 AM in reply to: jmk-brooklyn |
| Subject: RE: Republicans are LOSING! Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Just a couple of things to add to the thread: Joe Lhota, who is the GOP candidate for mayor of NYC, said in the debate last night, "“Do not lump me in with the National Republicans.It’s unbecoming." Also, I saw this morning that the Houston Chronicle said in an Op-Ed today that it regrets its decision to endorse Ted Cruz. From the article: "When we endorsed Ted Cruz in last November's general election, we did so with many reservations and at least one specific recommendation - that he follow Hutchison's example in his conduct as a senator. Obviously, he has not done so. Cruz has been part of the problem in specific situations where Hutchison would have been part of the solution." Referring to Cruz' predecessor, Kay Bailey Hutchison, the paper wrote, "We miss her extraordinary understanding of the importance of reaching across the aisle when necessary. Neither sitting Texas senator has displayed that useful skill, and both the state and the Congress are the poorer for it."
I think a case could be made that a lot of the "compromise" rather than taking taking a stance for what one believes is right, has lead us to the socialized out of control 17 Trillion dollar debt we have today. When both parties demonize a particular person I would suggest one ask and take a deep look as to why...... The establishment which is broken (and is happy to maintain the status quo) is afraid Ted Cruz is exposing them for the power hungry hacks that they are. YMMV
|
| 2013-10-16 11:40 AM in reply to: Left Brain |
| Subject: RE: Republicans are LOSING! Originally posted by Left Brain Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by jeffnboise Sarah Palin? Do Republicans want her on the team? But she has SEEN Russia from Alaska, you mavericky maverick I swear....if I was Tuwood, I'd be convinced that Palin was a secret agent of the libs and planted by them to make the republicans look like morons. That woman is an idiot and the Republicans need to rid themselves of her or face the prospect of Madam President, Hillary Clinton, who would win by a landslide if the election was today. ~taking tuwoods tin foil cap off~
Just a point of clarification, Sarah Palin NEVER said she could see Russia from Alaska or her porch. It was said by an actor on SNL but if you ask most people, they truly think she did say it. |
| 2013-10-16 11:44 AM in reply to: crusevegas |
Champion 6993 Chicago, Illinois | Subject: RE: Republicans are LOSING! Originally posted by crusevegas >
Just a point of clarification, Sarah Palin NEVER said she could see Russia from Alaska or her porch. It was said by an actor on SNL but if you ask most people, they truly think she did say it. Just like Al Gore inventing the Internet. He never said it but SNL actor did. |
| 2013-10-16 11:54 AM in reply to: chirunner134 |
| Subject: RE: Republicans are LOSING! Originally posted by chirunner134 Originally posted by crusevegas > Just like Al Gore inventing the Internet. He never said it but SNL actor did.
Just a point of clarification, Sarah Palin NEVER said she could see Russia from Alaska or her porch. It was said by an actor on SNL but if you ask most people, they truly think she did say it.
Al Gore to Wolf Blitzer in an interview when he was running for President.
"I took the initiative in creating the internet." Now there's more to this but those were his words. |
| 2013-10-16 11:55 AM in reply to: crusevegas |
Champion 7821 Brooklyn, NY | Subject: RE: Republicans are LOSING! Originally posted by crusevegas Originally posted by Left Brain Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by jeffnboise Sarah Palin? Do Republicans want her on the team? But she has SEEN Russia from Alaska, you mavericky maverick I swear....if I was Tuwood, I'd be convinced that Palin was a secret agent of the libs and planted by them to make the republicans look like morons. That woman is an idiot and the Republicans need to rid themselves of her or face the prospect of Madam President, Hillary Clinton, who would win by a landslide if the election was today. ~taking tuwoods tin foil cap off~
Just a point of clarification, Sarah Palin NEVER said she could see Russia from Alaska or her porch. It was said by an actor on SNL but if you ask most people, they truly think she did say it. You're right that she never said she could see it from her house-- that was from an SNL skit. What she actually said was, when asked by Charles Gibson what insight she had gained from living so close to Russia, she responded: "They're our next-door neighbors, and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska." While the truth doesn't make her quite as vapid-sounding as the legend, it's not a whole lot better in terms of providing an informed reply to the reporter who was looking for her to share some of her opinions and knowlege of foreign policy. |
| 2013-10-16 12:03 PM in reply to: jmk-brooklyn |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Republicans are LOSING! Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Originally posted by crusevegas You're right that she never said she could see it from her house-- that was from an SNL skit. What she actually said was, when asked by Charles Gibson what insight she had gained from living so close to Russia, she responded: "They're our next-door neighbors, and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska." While the truth doesn't make her quite as vapid-sounding as the legend, it's not a whole lot better in terms of providing an informed reply to the reporter who was looking for her to share some of her opinions and knowlege of foreign policy. Originally posted by Left Brain Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by jeffnboise Sarah Palin? Do Republicans want her on the team? But she has SEEN Russia from Alaska, you mavericky maverick I swear....if I was Tuwood, I'd be convinced that Palin was a secret agent of the libs and planted by them to make the republicans look like morons. That woman is an idiot and the Republicans need to rid themselves of her or face the prospect of Madam President, Hillary Clinton, who would win by a landslide if the election was today. ~taking tuwoods tin foil cap off~
Just a point of clarification, Sarah Palin NEVER said she could see Russia from Alaska or her porch. It was said by an actor on SNL but if you ask most people, they truly think she did say it. OK, I think I have to put myself in the dumb category. I don't know what "vapid" means. |
| 2013-10-16 12:04 PM in reply to: feh |
Member 465 | Subject: RE: Republicans are LOSING! Originally posted by feh Originally posted by Jackemy1 I remember the day Palin was announced. I was sitting in one of those local campaign offices working on my campaign. And I can tell you that the volunteer numbers tripled within the week of her announcement. I would be hard pressed to think of another candidate that could have that much effect of a core volunteer base. What you may be missing is that what inspires the base does not necessarily improve the chance of electoral success. Did Palin generate passion? Sure. Did she attract people to rallies? Sure. But every time a moderate/independent heard her speak, the chance of McCain winning decreased. Like I said, McCain had a zero chance of winning before Palin. So you could have ran burnt toast for VP and you wouldn't have reduce McCain's chances. But inspiring the base has everything to do with improving ones chance of electoral success. There is no other greater factor to determining candidate success than to gauge the excitability and the depth of the base behind the candidate. It even trumps money (though money is a good indication of the strength of the base behind the candidate). All success politicians "spring" from a base. It is why potential candidate form exploratory committees before they run. They want to figure out if there is enough of a base to spring from to develop momentum in a general election. If a candidate can't gather an excited base, that candidate can't win, period. You could Monday morning QB it all you want, but Palin was McCain's hail mary and was certainly no Doug Flutie. |
| 2013-10-16 12:12 PM in reply to: crusevegas |
Champion 6993 Chicago, Illinois | Subject: RE: Republicans are LOSING! Originally posted by crusevegas Originally posted by chirunner134 Originally posted by crusevegas > Just like Al Gore inventing the Internet. He never said it but SNL actor did.
Just a point of clarification, Sarah Palin NEVER said she could see Russia from Alaska or her porch. It was said by an actor on SNL but if you ask most people, they truly think she did say it.
Al Gore to Wolf Blitzer in an interview when he was running for President.
"I took the initiative in creating the internet." Now there's more to this but those were his words. yep He should have said he created the High Performance Computing Act of 1991 (aka gore bill) which led to the development of the National Information Infrastructure and the funding of the National Research and Education Network.  |
| 2013-10-16 12:13 PM in reply to: Jackemy1 |
| Veteran 292 Wisconsin | Subject: RE: Republicans are LOSING! Originally posted by Jackemy1 Like I said, McCain had a zero chance of winning before Palin. So you could have ran burnt toast for VP and you wouldn't have reduce McCain's chances. But inspiring the base has everything to do with improving ones chance of electoral success. There is no other greater factor to determining candidate success than to gauge the excitability and the depth of the base behind the candidate. It even trumps money (though money is a good indication of the strength of the base behind the candidate). All success politicians "spring" from a base. It is why potential candidate form exploratory committees before they run. They want to figure out if there is enough of a base to spring from to develop momentum in a general election. If a candidate can't gather an excited base, that candidate can't win, period. I disagree that "McCain had a zero chance of winning before Palin", but I'm not interested in arguing about it. Your statement regarding the base - I think it assumes that the party as a whole is somewhat contiguous on the political spectrum. The issue w/ the Republicans at the moment is that "the base" (ie. TPers) have moved so far to the right that if a candidate from that group is chosen, they will have no chance to attract moderates/independents. What you'll end up with is 30% of the electorate that is extremely motivated for their candidate. But, 30% isn't a winning strategy. |
| 2013-10-16 12:14 PM in reply to: crusevegas |
Champion 7821 Brooklyn, NY | Subject: RE: Republicans are LOSING! Originally posted by crusevegas Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Just a couple of things to add to the thread: Joe Lhota, who is the GOP candidate for mayor of NYC, said in the debate last night, "“Do not lump me in with the National Republicans.It’s unbecoming." Also, I saw this morning that the Houston Chronicle said in an Op-Ed today that it regrets its decision to endorse Ted Cruz. From the article: "When we endorsed Ted Cruz in last November's general election, we did so with many reservations and at least one specific recommendation - that he follow Hutchison's example in his conduct as a senator. Obviously, he has not done so. Cruz has been part of the problem in specific situations where Hutchison would have been part of the solution." Referring to Cruz' predecessor, Kay Bailey Hutchison, the paper wrote, "We miss her extraordinary understanding of the importance of reaching across the aisle when necessary. Neither sitting Texas senator has displayed that useful skill, and both the state and the Congress are the poorer for it."
I think a case could be made that a lot of the "compromise" rather than taking taking a stance for what one believes is right, has lead us to the socialized out of control 17 Trillion dollar debt we have today. When both parties demonize a particular person I would suggest one ask and take a deep look as to why...... The establishment which is broken (and is happy to maintain the status quo) is afraid Ted Cruz is exposing them for the power hungry hacks that they are. YMMV
I think you could argue that the opposite is true. If I'm arguing or negotiating with someone who I know will absolutely not give any ground whatsoever, I'm going to respond in kind, and I'm going to take every opportunity to use whatever means I have at my disposal to get my way without even having to try to build a consensus, because I know my opponent will never give me one. OTOH, if I know that my opponent will make a good-faith effort to meet me in the middle, I'm going to be much more willing to negotiate a settlement that neither of us is 100% happy with, but which we can both live with. Maybe the reason that both parties are demonizing Cruz is that he's the wrong candidate? Call me crazy. When you have two sides that are this polarized who both manage to agree on one thing, i.e. Ted Cruz isn't the guy, maybe, just maybe, he's not the guy. I think voters made it pretty clear in the 2008 election that they didn't want the GOP to focus on social issues like abortion and gay marriage as much as the economy and foreign policy, so it was inexplicable to me that the GOP effectively doubled-down on the social issues in 2012. And despite losing a very winnable election in 2012, you had talking heads on FOX suggesting that the GOP should move even further to the right for 2016. I don't get it personally. As much as I prefer having a democrat in the WH, I believe 100% that this country can't continue to function with the two parties so far apart. You can argue that the Democrats aren't doing a great job of moving toward the middle either, and you'd be right, but what they're doing is winning presidential elections and what the GOP is doing is losing them. So it seems to me that if the GOP wants to get back what they've lost, the onus is on them to try to find some people within the party to lead the party back towards middle ground. And it won't be the Tea Party. |
| 2013-10-16 12:15 PM in reply to: tuwood |
Champion 7821 Brooklyn, NY | Subject: RE: Republicans are LOSING! Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn Originally posted by crusevegas You're right that she never said she could see it from her house-- that was from an SNL skit. What she actually said was, when asked by Charles Gibson what insight she had gained from living so close to Russia, she responded: "They're our next-door neighbors, and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska." While the truth doesn't make her quite as vapid-sounding as the legend, it's not a whole lot better in terms of providing an informed reply to the reporter who was looking for her to share some of her opinions and knowlege of foreign policy. Originally posted by Left Brain Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by jeffnboise Sarah Palin? Do Republicans want her on the team? But she has SEEN Russia from Alaska, you mavericky maverick I swear....if I was Tuwood, I'd be convinced that Palin was a secret agent of the libs and planted by them to make the republicans look like morons. That woman is an idiot and the Republicans need to rid themselves of her or face the prospect of Madam President, Hillary Clinton, who would win by a landslide if the election was today. ~taking tuwoods tin foil cap off~
Just a point of clarification, Sarah Palin NEVER said she could see Russia from Alaska or her porch. It was said by an actor on SNL but if you ask most people, they truly think she did say it. OK, I think I have to put myself in the dumb category. I don't know what "vapid" means. Luckily, you could always be Governor of Alaska. |
| 2013-10-16 1:03 PM in reply to: Jackemy1 |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Republicans are LOSING! Originally posted by Jackemy1 Originally posted by feh Like I said, McCain had a zero chance of winning before Palin. So you could have ran burnt toast for VP and you wouldn't have reduce McCain's chances. But inspiring the base has everything to do with improving ones chance of electoral success. There is no other greater factor to determining candidate success than to gauge the excitability and the depth of the base behind the candidate. It even trumps money (though money is a good indication of the strength of the base behind the candidate). All success politicians "spring" from a base. It is why potential candidate form exploratory committees before they run. They want to figure out if there is enough of a base to spring from to develop momentum in a general election. If a candidate can't gather an excited base, that candidate can't win, period. You could Monday morning QB it all you want, but Palin was McCain's hail mary and was certainly no Doug Flutie. Originally posted by Jackemy1 I remember the day Palin was announced. I was sitting in one of those local campaign offices working on my campaign. And I can tell you that the volunteer numbers tripled within the week of her announcement. I would be hard pressed to think of another candidate that could have that much effect of a core volunteer base. What you may be missing is that what inspires the base does not necessarily improve the chance of electoral success. Did Palin generate passion? Sure. Did she attract people to rallies? Sure. But every time a moderate/independent heard her speak, the chance of McCain winning decreased. Don't forget the impact of the mortgage implosion on the election in 2008 as well. McCain was behind for most of the election, but when he announced Palin he surged into the lead. Somebody mentioned earlier that Palin is toxic to independents, but I looked through some old polls and she lead to a surge in independent and moderate support for McCain. Obviously that was back in 2008 so I'm sure opinions are different now. Here's the polling timeline back in 2008. The DNC Convention was late August, RNC convention 9/1 - 4. McCain/Palin surged out from the convention primarily from independent/moderates swinging over. The Financial melt down started on 9/7 and they both went down with the Ship.
|
| 2013-10-16 1:22 PM in reply to: tuwood |
| Veteran 292 Wisconsin | Subject: RE: Republicans are LOSING! Originally posted by tuwood McCain was behind for most of the election, but when he announced Palin he surged into the lead. Somebody mentioned earlier that Palin is toxic to independents, but I looked through some old polls and she lead to a surge in independent and moderate support for McCain. Couple comments: 1) you are assuming the bump in McCain's numbers were due to Palin; there is always a post-convention bounce, so causation should not be assumed 2) there was a honeymoon phase after she was chosen when she was given the benefit of the doubt, before people started to hear her speak and form opinions about her (ie. the Couric interview) |
| 2013-10-16 1:31 PM in reply to: tuwood |
Veteran 1019 St. Louis | Subject: RE: Republicans are LOSING! Originally posted by tuwood Where does September 24 & 25 fall on that chart? I remember watching Palin's speech at the RNC and thinking wow, she's just the spark McCain needed. And I remember watching her two part interview with Katie Couric and thinking McCain was done for. Originally posted by Jackemy1 Originally posted by feh Like I said, McCain had a zero chance of winning before Palin. So you could have ran burnt toast for VP and you wouldn't have reduce McCain's chances. But inspiring the base has everything to do with improving ones chance of electoral success. There is no other greater factor to determining candidate success than to gauge the excitability and the depth of the base behind the candidate. It even trumps money (though money is a good indication of the strength of the base behind the candidate). All success politicians "spring" from a base. It is why potential candidate form exploratory committees before they run. They want to figure out if there is enough of a base to spring from to develop momentum in a general election. If a candidate can't gather an excited base, that candidate can't win, period. You could Monday morning QB it all you want, but Palin was McCain's hail mary and was certainly no Doug Flutie. Originally posted by Jackemy1 I remember the day Palin was announced. I was sitting in one of those local campaign offices working on my campaign. And I can tell you that the volunteer numbers tripled within the week of her announcement. I would be hard pressed to think of another candidate that could have that much effect of a core volunteer base. What you may be missing is that what inspires the base does not necessarily improve the chance of electoral success. Did Palin generate passion? Sure. Did she attract people to rallies? Sure. But every time a moderate/independent heard her speak, the chance of McCain winning decreased. Don't forget the impact of the mortgage implosion on the election in 2008 as well. McCain was behind for most of the election, but when he announced Palin he surged into the lead. Somebody mentioned earlier that Palin is toxic to independents, but I looked through some old polls and she lead to a surge in independent and moderate support for McCain. Obviously that was back in 2008 so I'm sure opinions are different now. Here's the polling timeline back in 2008. The DNC Convention was late August, RNC convention 9/1 - 4. McCain/Palin surged out from the convention primarily from independent/moderates swinging over. The Financial melt down started on 9/7 and they both went down with the Ship.
|
| 2013-10-16 1:38 PM in reply to: kevin_trapp |
| Veteran 292 Wisconsin | Subject: RE: Republicans are LOSING! Originally posted by kevin_trapp Where does September 24 & 25 fall on that chart? I remember watching Palin's speech at the RNC and thinking wow, she's just the spark McCain needed. And I remember watching her two part interview with Katie Couric and thinking McCain was done for. Some analysis from the fall of '08: http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/09/palins-favorability-numbers-... http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/09/state-of-race-is-mccain-in-t... http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/10/wikipedian-candidate.html |
| 2013-10-16 2:09 PM in reply to: buck1400 |
Elite 6387 | Subject: RE: Republicans are LOSING! Originally posted by buck1400 When we (the republicans) lost the presidential elections in '08 and again '12 and both times tried to make excuses and deflect blame about why we lost and not take a hard honest look at where the party was headed, I knew it was going to take the party to hit rock bottom before they would face the music and rebuild a republican that a majority of Americans could feeling comfortable being a part of. I think MAYBE they finally have. Pretty optimistic statement considering current affairs. the only trick in their bag at this point is to drive the wedge deeper. And I see no let of that any time soon.
And if any of you guys hung out on any "conservitive" sites like me, you would indeed think the country was on the verge of collapse. I honestly think there are some very disturbed folks out there. The internet is not necessarily a good thing. |
|
|
|
|
| ||||
|
| |||
|
| |||
|
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK