I cannot figure out what you are tying to say in this post.
Well yeah, considering that SC is a critically important early voting state, and how important it is for the Republican activist wing, I think it makes perfect sense to have a Republican debate here.Greenville, SC, the so-called buckle of the bible-belt? How appropriate is it for Fox News to hold the battle of the lightweight Republican presidential candidates there?
Wouldn't the GOP be better served lining up their primaries with the bluest of blue states at the front end? That way, they have to appeal to the more moderate GOP voters and it makes it less likely for the nominee to be seen as a right wing crazy as he/she starts campaigning for the generl.Well yeah, considering that SC is a critically important early voting state, and how important it is for the Republican activist wing, I think it makes perfect sense to have a Republican debate here.
Wouldn't the GOP be better served lining up their primaries with the bluest of blue states at the front end? That way, they have to appeal to the more moderate GOP voters and it makes it less likely for the nominee to be seen as a right wing crazy as he/she starts campaigning for the generl.
3 blow-out wins, 3 blow-out losses, and 2 vry close wins. The three blow-out wins were the first 3 elections during the era against Carter, Mondale, and Dukakis,not a very formidable trio. SInce the 1992 election, the GOP candidate has been increasingly handicapped with a need to overcome the right-wing pandering they did in the primaries or as the incumbant. This year, we see the need for even more extreme pandering to win the primary.You're assuming they want that. The opposite has worked pretty good for them for the past 30 years.
3 blow-out wins, 3 blow-out losses, and 2 vry close wins. The three blow-out wins were the first 3 elections during the era against Carter, Mondale, and Dukakis,not a very formidable trio. SInce the 1992 election, the GOP candidate has been increasingly handicapped with a need to overcome the right-wing pandering they did in the primaries or as the incumbant. This year, we see the need for even more extreme pandering to win the primary.
Herman Cain ws the freeper favorite, but even he took a lot of heat in their live debate thread for agreeing with our Commander-in-Chief in not releasing the bin Laden photos.
FreeRepublic.com - aka the basest of the base.Freeper?
Well, they would do better to take my advice, especially this year. Someone like Romney could defeat Obama, especially if not crippled by having to flip flop their way towards the nomination. Someone like Trump or Palin doesn't have a chance and actually hurts the GOP's chance to winning the Senate and holding the House (boith goals that are currently achievable, even if Obama repeats a blow-out).Objectively, maybe. But I doubt most of them see it that way. Remember, they're on the inside, and they are the people pushing it ever further to the wingnuts.
FreeRepublic.com - aka the basest of the base.
Well, they would do better to take my advice, especially this year. Someone like Romney could defeat Obama, especially if not crippled by having to flip flop their way towards the nomination. Someone like Trump or Palin doesn't have a chance and actually hurts the GOP's chance to winningthe Senate and holding the House (boith goals that are currently achievable, even if Obama repeats a blow-out).