Where are the GOP voters?

[Robert Goren]

In the contests so far, there has over 150,000 fewer voters compared to those same contests in 2008. Any guess as to why this is.

[Marshall Bennett]

They don't like the candidates. Most voters don't like the president either. So expect more of the same come November, on both sides.

[boxcar]

They don't like the candidates. Most voters don't like the president either. So expect more of the same come November, on both sides.

And this will definitely favor the incumbent if the Rug gets the nomination. If they don't like him now, they're not going to be more enthusiastic about him come election day. Let's face it: There just isn't much to like.

Boxcar

[HUSKER55]

IT IS A PHYSICAL IMPOSSIBILITY THAT ANYONE COULD BE HAPPY WITH ANYONE IN THE ARENA RIGHT NOW.

[cj's dad]

Somehow, someway, Sarah will have an impact on this elections nominee

[boxcar]

Somehow, someway, Sarah will have an impact on this elections nominee

Huh? :confused: However, I will say this: The coronation of Romney is going to prove harder than the GOP figured. He's not the mortal lock they would like to think he is.

Boxcar

[Ocala Mike]

They're waiting for the reincarnation of Ronald Reagan. Someone has to come from the clouds, because it's sure as hell that they're not gonna come out for the Massachusetts moderate. With Gingrich somewhat marginalized, Santorum's now gonna do the heavy lifting for Obama and start attacking Mitt.


Ocala Mike

[jdhanover]

Reagan would be way too moderate nowadays for the Republicans. He actually governed (working with Tip O'Neill etc). There are too many pols (both parties) unwilling to compromise nowadays. RR would be very unhappy with today's climate.

[boxcar]

Reagan would be way too moderate nowadays for the Republicans. He actually governed (working with Tip O'Neill etc). There are too many pols (both parties) unwilling to compromise nowadays. RR would be very unhappy with today's climate.

The Party of Stupid is trying all it can do to coronate Romney, a self-confessed liberal, but Reagan would be too moderate today for them? When did you land here? Did you have nice flight from your universe? :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[boxcar]

They're waiting for the reincarnation of Ronald Reagan. Someone has to come from the clouds, because it's sure as hell that they're not gonna come out for the Massachusetts moderate. With Gingrich somewhat marginalized, Santorum's now gonna do the heavy lifting for Obama and start attacking Mitt.


Ocala Mike

Not Rick's modus operandi. But he sure ripped Obama a new one the other day after he swept those three states. :ThmbUp:

Boxcar

[PaceAdvantage]

The Party of Stupid is trying all it can do to coronate Romney, a self-confessed liberal, but Reagan would be too moderate today for them? When did you land here? Did you have nice flight from your universe? :rolleyes:

BoxcarI don't get where this whole "Reagan is too moderate for today's Republicans" comes from either. Sounds like a creation of the left-wing mothership if you ask me.

I never hear conservatives saying such things.

[Robert Goren]

I don't get where this whole "Reagan is too moderate for today's Republicans" comes from either. Sounds like a creation of the left-wing mothership if you ask me.

I never hear conservatives saying such things.It comes from his son Michael Reagan, a former conservative talk show host. There is clip at the end of the piece showing the younger Reagan on Fox News.
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/09/27/michael-reagan-my-dad-might-be-too-moderate-for-todays-gop/

[PaceAdvantage]

His son didn't say Reagan was too moderate for today's GOP. His exact quote was that he "might be."

Not as much of a ringing endorsement as you make it out to be...

[NJ Stinks]

His son didn't say Reagan was too moderate for today's GOP. His exact quote was that he "might be."

Not as much of a ringing endorsement as you make it out to be...

But not a "a creation of the left-wing mothership" either.

[Robert Goren]

His son didn't say Reagan was too moderate for today's GOP. His exact quote was that he "might be."

Not as much of a ringing endorsement as you make it out to be... You are right , but that's where the whole idea came from.
There is at least one thing that came out the Reagan presidency that wouldn't sit too well with a lot of today's conservatives, the Immigration Reform and Control Act that he signed in 1986 that gave amnesty to 3 million illegal immigrants and laid the ground work for the mess that we are in today. I can't believe that you think that most conservatives would being willing sign into law a similar bill today.

[Tom]

The list of people who would be far better than Obama includes the Three Stooges.

[elysiantraveller]

With the emergence of the Tea Party a person like Ronald Reagan would have a very difficult time getting the nomination. He would be considered too progressive.

[PaceAdvantage]

With the emergence of the Tea Party a person like Ronald Reagan would have a very difficult time getting the nomination. He would be considered too progressive.Then how the heck is Romney leading the pack? What you say makes little sense.

[boxcar]

With the emergence of the Tea Party a person like Ronald Reagan would have a very difficult time getting the nomination. He would be considered too progressive.

Try laying off the kool-aid for awhile (as in forever). Maybe then at least one of your feet would have a chance of touching the earth.

Boxcar

[Robert Goren]

Can you imagine how the Romney super pac would portray Reagan if he was running today? They would have a field day.

[lamboguy]

Then how the heck is Romney leading the pack? What you say makes little sense.
you know something, that is a great question!

i know he has a big edge in money, i would love to know how many people that are voting for him in those primaries are converted democrats?

MITT ROMNEY'S whole life revolves around being elected president, and we all know he will do anything or say anything that it takes to try to get elected.

[boxcar]

Can you imagine how the Romney super pac would portray Reagan if he was running today? They would have a field day.

Yeah, they would. They have moved so far to the left.

Boxcar

[elysiantraveller]

Then how the heck is Romney leading the pack? What you say makes little sense.

I don't know if you realize this or not but Romney IS having a tough time getting the nomination.

[ArlJim78]

With the emergence of the Tea Party a person like Ronald Reagan would have a very difficult time getting the nomination. He would be considered too progressive.
you do realize this is utter nonsense don't you?

[bigmack]

Boxcar & his wife can proudly say they wouldn't have voted for Reagan as dog catcher. We was a lib, you know?

uJDhS4oUm0M

[elysiantraveller]

you do realize this is utter nonsense don't you?

Based on what?

Reagan's solution to the economy was deficit spending. Reaganomics...

He wouldn't win the nomination in today's age.

[boxcar]

Boxcar & his wife can proudly say they wouldn't have voted for Reagan as dog catcher. We was a lib, you know?

So, you're saying that Reagan was a non-partisan progressive like your Rug is?

And there you go again: Still stuck on Stupid because you can't get unstuck from the past. But in one sense I can sympathize with you because being stuck on Romney isn't any different. :lol: Tough being caught between a rock and hard place, isn't it? Here you are caught in between the Rug and BO. And you think: Ah...to my right is Romney and inches to his left is BO. Talk about a squeeze play. :lol: :lol:

Boxcar

[riskman]

Reagan was elected Governor of CA.over the incumbent Brown(Jerry Browns father) Reagan ran as a conservative but if I remember correctly he tried to cut spending by 10% once elected even though the state was running a deficit. Reagan soon realized that taxes had to be increased and signed a bill increasing taxes and blamed Browns administration for the increase because of the deficit. I think they wound up with a surplus then took the credit for that--what else
is new.
Reagan's record was moderate, more than his rhetoric. Reagan won reelection easily in 1970 as his communication skills was a major plus.
Would not be surprised if his budget and spending were much higher then went he entered office at the end of his term. Inflation was also high at the time.
Not sure how the Republican Party would view him today, if he was running for the nomination.Sure he would be in a dog fight, just like Romney.

[fast4522]

People act very differently in the general election, have yourself another reefer Robert and you can imagine more things about where all the republican voters are. The bills are coming due all the time, the only thing for sure, is there will not be 5 trillion more dollars spent in the next Presidents term, and it is a fair bet the cuts will touch you.

[Robert Goren]

People act very differently in the general election, have yourself another reefer Robert and you can imagine more things about where all the republican voters are. The bills are coming due all the time, the only thing for sure, is there will not be 5 trillion more dollars spent in the next Presidents term, and it is a fair bet the cuts will touch you.If they involve social security, then they will. As for having another reefer, I took one puff off one in the sixties. My sinuses felt like they had swollen to size of basketballs. I can tell you when the ditch weed starts to pollinate every summer. If you knew half as much as you think you do about me, you'd know that. I will thank you leave your strange ideas about my supposed drug use out of your posts. You won't look like such an idiot in the future. You can disagree with my politics all you want, plenty of people here do. But idiotic assumptions about my personal life are not only way off base, they are out of line.

[ArlJim78]

Based on what?

Reagan's solution to the economy was deficit spending. Reaganomics...

He wouldn't win the nomination in today's age.
in todays age, meaning the year 2012, the big story is that the tea party is having little impact on the election. Mitt Romney, a moderate Rino from the last cycle has emerged this time as the heir apparent, the chosen one, sure to come out on top at the end of the road. every one of the tea party favorites have either not run or crashed and burned.

So this hard turn to the right that you feel we've taken in this age will give us Mitt Romney (the father of Obamacare) as a nominee, and its all because we can no longer accept progressives like Reagan?

are you telling me that the people who are now ready to nominate Mitt Romney are doing so because they've become more extreme, more conservative than in the early 80's? Tea party types would trip over themselves, they would stampede to the voting booth in order to vote for someone with brass balls, a modern era Reagan. its the Paulbots who might have a problem with Reagan, but not the tea party.

you can't compare the times, deficit spending? Reagan would not have supported this mess we have now. the problem was nothing like we have now. the thing is everything has shifted radically to the progressive/statist side. its people like Kennedy and MLK who would be radical right wing conservatives today. back then even democrats gave lip service to the constitution, to lower taxes, to capitalism, to having a budget, etc.

in a time and scope limited context, the idea of deficit spending does have some merit, as a stimulative. but it can't become a way of life, whereby we spend 40% more than we collect in revenue year upon year as far as the eye can see. thats a recipe for disaster and it's not a right wing radical idea to think that, its a fact.

we have an out of control government. period. electing more of the status quo is not enough.

[bigmack]

Still stuck on Stupid because you can't get unstuck from the past.
Ask yourself how you gathered your judgement of Brylcreem. The past. And you're yapping about unstuck?

Ask yourself if you're willing to accept a change of heart in people. No? That's because you're a Neanderthal who doesn't deserve to vote, like a little kid who doesn't want to play because no one wants to play by his own set of rules.

Had Google been around in 1979 you would have found that clip of RR and said "No dice" to voting for him. Damn Liberal, you would have blurted.

Some people, like yourself, are naturally unhappy. Me? I am filled with love for my fellow man, and brimming over with love for women.

I see half-full. You can't even see the glass because of your myopic mind.

http://aaronn.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/glass_half_full1.jpg

[fast4522]

If they involve social security, then they will. As for having another reefer, I took one puff off one in the sixties. My sinuses felt like they had swollen to size of basketballs. I can tell you when the ditch weed starts to pollinate every summer. If you knew half as much as you think you do about me, you'd know that. I will thank you leave your strange ideas about my supposed drug use out of your posts. You won't look like such an idiot in the future. You can disagree with my politics all you want, plenty of people here do. But idiotic assumptions about my personal life are not only way off base, they are out of line.

You are from that time, a few years on me. The reason this country is in such of a mess is because of folks from your time. The jokers in the Congress just don't know how to tell you children of the sixty's NO. There is a rude awakening for those who prefer to continue the gravy train, there is no money left and today's kids just as soon see you freeze.

[fredking22]

Any Ron Paul supporters

[PaceAdvantage]

I don't know if you realize this or not but Romney IS having a tough time getting the nomination.Is he? You really think he's not going to get it? Come on man...follow the money...who is getting the most money?

Anyway, your theory was that RONALD REAGAN (because of the Tea Party), of all people, would have a tough time being nominated in this day and age. And yet, we have a guy like Mitt Romney AS THE FRONT RUNNER (and basically has been the entire time).

Now you're gonna tell me Reagan was less conservative than Romney?

I guess anything is possible on the Internet.

[PaceAdvantage]

in todays age, meaning the year 2012, the big story is that the tea party is having little impact on the election. Mitt Romney, a moderate Rino from the last cycle has emerged this time as the heir apparent, the chosen one, sure to come out on top at the end of the road. every one of the tea party favorites have either not run or crashed and burned.

So this hard turn to the right that you feel we've taken in this age will give us Mitt Romney (the father of Obamacare) as a nominee, and its all because we can no longer accept progressives like Reagan?

are you telling me that the people who are now ready to nominate Mitt Romney are doing so because they've become more extreme, more conservative than in the early 80's? Tea party types would trip over themselves, they would stampede to the voting booth in order to vote for someone with brass balls, a modern era Reagan. its the Paulbots who might have a problem with Reagan, but not the tea party.

you can't compare the times, deficit spending? Reagan would not have supported this mess we have now. the problem was nothing like we have now. the thing is everything has shifted radically to the progressive/statist side. its people like Kennedy and MLK who would be radical right wing conservatives today. back then even democrats gave lip service to the constitution, to lower taxes, to capitalism, to having a budget, etc.

in a time and scope limited context, the idea of deficit spending does have some merit, as a stimulative. but it can't become a way of life, whereby we spend 40% more than we collect in revenue year upon year as far as the eye can see. thats a recipe for disaster and it's not a right wing radical idea to think that, its a fact.

we have an out of control government. period. electing more of the status quo is not enough.What he said... :ThmbUp: