re: Ds and Rs nominees-latest Quinnipiac poll

quote:

---

I think that many Conservatives were getting pretty fed up with GWB by the end of his tenure, but the response to the "moderate" was to escort someone (arguably) further left into the GOP campaign in 2008. That was the last straw that pushed a lot of Conservatives over the edge, especially since the result was so disastrous to the country (as many Conservatives believed).

The situation was further exasperated in 2012 with Romney, who was also not a Conservative, getting the nod to go up against Obama. In spite of Obama's liberal first term, he still managed to beat Romney, who was very lackluster and failed to get the GOP base motivated to vote.

And this goes back to my original point: the GOP, by trying to appear more moderate, is actually doing itself more harm. Voters already know that Democrats own the social and economic liberal platforms. By adopting the same platforms, the GOP is only going to lose its base, while those who are sympathetic to the liberal ideals have no reason to stray from the tried-and-true liberal Democrats who have consistently maintained those positions.

What we have here are two fundamental philosophies about government: bigger and smaller. Republicans who jump on the "bigger" train are hailed by the liberals as being open-minded while those who hold to the smaller government position are ridiculed as "fringe" and "extreme". And with those buzz words, the Conservatives are marginalized (for no good reason), because a moderate Republican isn't much of a change to a liberal Democrat. At least an "extremist" Conservative (Republican or Tea Party Libertarian) would offer something different for the voters to consider, and I'd rather a candidate lose based on their principles than win acting like a Democrat. But that's just my opinion.

---