Post-Debate Reaction

[Torie]

Mittens ruled totally, and he will get a discernible bump. Perry will disappear. Cain's erosion will continue. Newt may get a tad more from the erosion of the others.

[Torie]

The problem with Huntsman is that he really never gets to the beef or the nub of an issue. And way too much feel good generalities. He failed to explain or sell with any authority his tax plan that the WSJ so loved. Maybe he should have had the WSJ stand in for him.

[Torie]

I have to agree that Newt is going to get some play again.  I don't think he has it either, of course, but don't be surprised to see him start to seriously move up in the polls to a competitive position.  Especially when the Cain boomlet fades.

Just as an FYI - if I thought that any of the candidates in the Republican primary could be taken seriously by the Republican base as a Presidential candidate after the usual scrutiny, Romney would be dead meat.  Otherwise, in the end, he'll be turned to out of desperation.  Which should say something, both short-term and long-term about things.

I think the last serious post on this forum I made was this one.  It was probably the last post worth reading on this forum, as well, except for maybe jmfcst, as he is the only one around who understands how Republican primaries operate.  It still applies, and quite frankly, with Perry and Bachmann both destroyed and Cain perhaps mortally wounded (and not coming across as a deep thinker), it is obvious who will benefit.

P.S. I did think about responding to Torie's comment that if Herman Cain imploded, Mitt Romney would move up in the polls, but there was no real point in responding to such inanity.

That post was just about actual poll numbers from two states smartass. But yes, not everyone in the other camps thinks stop Mittens is job one actually. So when one of them drops ...

[Torie]

Mormons don't have souls Sam Spade?  Would you care to expand on that?  I assume you don't mean that, er literally, although come to think of it, I agree that they don't from a literal perspective, but then I don't think anyone else does either.

Anyway, is the the LDS thing the real factor fueling your unmitigated animus to Mittens? 

[Torie]

It is highly unlikely that I would ever vote for a Mormon, because frankly, they don't have souls, and cannot be trusted on anything. 

SS and I see eye to eye on something for once.

Maybe we need a thread on this in the religion section. Why don't you think Mormons have souls Lief?

[Torie]

And a Perry collapse could be DISASTEROUS for Romney. More than anything, he needs the conservative vote to be split. Iif Perry's support all goes to one consensus "conservative" candidate, Mittens is toast.

It seems that the bulk of the Dems around here really (along with a few LDS loathing Pubbies) really don't want Mittens to be nominated doesn't it?

[Torie]

Each and every Pubbie I chat with in real life (including ex governor Pete Wilson with whom I spoke for a few minutes a couple of nights ago) wants to nominate the strongest opponent to Obama. Granted, it is a non random sample.

[Torie]

Each and every Pubbie I chat with in real life (including ex governor Pete Wilson with whom I spoke for a few minutes a couple of nights ago) wants to nominate the strongest opponent to Obama. Granted, it is a non random sample.

I think that's probably true, but I also think there's a non-negligible faction of the primary vote (the same which is current doggedly sticking by Cain) that are convinced that a 'true conservative' or whatever will also be, inherently, the strongest opponent to Obama.

Red State (?) had a post to the effect that a Romney nomination will be a disaster for the Republicans because moderates don't win elections or some bullsh**t.

Without moderates like Torie on board the Pubbie will lose to Obama - period. Isn't that obvious?

[Torie]

Each and every Pubbie I chat with in real life (including ex governor Pete Wilson with whom I spoke for a few minutes a couple of nights ago) wants to nominate the strongest opponent to Obama. Granted, it is a non random sample.

So why doesn't Romney have a commanding lead in the polls? You've got to get out of your liberal ivory tower and meet some hard working heartland folks

You are beginning to sound like CARL.    Anyhoo, some are holding back still watching and waiting (and in CA we have a long wait, since the primary is not until June), but that is their Boolean function.

[Torie]

Without moderates like Torie on board the Pubbie will lose to Obama

Likely.

You ever click on the PM button at the top of this page?  Look at the distribution of blue dots and red dots.  Most of the blue dots fall on the right, and most of the red on the left.  Fair enough.

What fraction of the blue dots are to the left of about 3.5?  Eyeballing, I'd say at least a third.  Maybe close to 40 percent.  Now, those blue dots just represent a subset of members who post on this forum.  Do they represent the GOP primary electorate at all?  If they do, then what you said about the general election applies as well to the primary, in the sense that without the moderate and left of the Republican party, a candidate cannot win the primary.

Also, if this forum represents the general electorate, then no Republican would ever have a shot in the general election (see pie chart below), so it may not be a fair comparison.

This Forum is obviously unrepresentative of Pubbies, much less the electorate at large (as to the latter it is almost all white and young), with a much higher SES than average, and younger and more educated, and considerably more moderate, particularly on social issues, but my wing of the party is maybe about 15%-20% of it as a guess. On the forum, it might be close to a third - maybe even pushing 40%.