Moderates Are Losers


Not all moderates are losers, of course. But when I was reviewing some of my earliest blog posts from the dawn of Obama's presidency, I was reminded of an important fact:

McCain the moderate only got 39% of the moderate vote.

On the other hand, Obama the extreme liberal got a whopping 60% of the moderate vote.

I would submit that uncommitted moderate and independent voters aren't necessarily looking to vote for candidates who strike a photogenic pose at the middle of the ideological spectrum. In fact, a large number swing voters aren't looking at ideology at all. They look at confidence, charisma, and a candidate's ability to communicate clearly without prevarication.

This is what can happen when swing voters find those things in a politician:


Yes, 1984 was a long, long time ago, but it isn't ancient history.

A word to the wise...

22 comments:

  1. .

    Are you going to vote for the moderate Romney, the RepublicanT Party candidate for President in November 2012?

    Ema Nymton
    ~@:o?
    .

    ReplyDelete
  2. As bad as some of the other options are, I think Romney is by far the worst Republican who has any chance of winning the nomination.

    ReplyDelete
  3. That is why a guy with a clear message and character will mop the floor with the Joker. Mittens is not that guy, he is a politician in the worse sense of the word and people know it. You want a guy that tells it like it is, but gives people true hope then Cain is the only choice in the race.

    He may stumble and say something to anger one group or another, but people will vote for him because he gives them the hope things will change (the same reason so many voted for the Joker, they wanted change in Washington and just got more of the same or worse). His biggest problem will be getting heard because the MSM isn't stupid, they won't let the truth get out at the cost of their golden child.

    ReplyDelete
  4. @Sandy Salt Cain has made some minor mistakes that have caused some legitimate concern, but lately, he has been shining brightly. I hope you have a chance to see the entirety of Cain's interview with CNN's Candy Crowley. He was simply brilliant.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I like Romney. I prefer Cain, but I don't get why so many people have a hard on for Romney. The guy was governor of Massachusetts, for godsake. The fact that he was able to get elected there is a testament to his political skill. In the absence of an overwhelming democrat majority to overcome, I see no reason to believe Romney would govern from the left.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Keep your RINOs thank you very much!

    ReplyDelete
  7. It is hard to imagine exactly where Romney would govern from, so that is the issue with most of us that want more in the next President.

    ReplyDelete
  8. It's not hard for me to imagine. He's a pretty standard, right down the line, mainstream republican. He's not to the left of the party on any issue except that health care boondoggle in Massachusetts. He's already said he's repeal the Brakabama health care takeover. What am I missing? Does the guy have some history of being a pathological liar, that I don't know about? The intense opposition some people have to him seems irrational to me.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I think it is a trust issue with a lot of people because he seems to have moved around on the issues based on what would get him elected. People are sick of politicians! We want someone we can trust and does change with the prevailing wind. It made be a false perception of Romney, but perception is reality as they say.

    ReplyDelete
  10. What did he move around on other than abortion? That's really the only thing I know about, and I consider abortion to be a completely irrelevant issue in presidential politics because of Roe.

    ReplyDelete
  11. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  12. It's funny you should mention Reagan. The person whose bio most resembles Reagan's is indeed Mitt Romney. He's a guy who used to be a lot less conservative than he is now. He's a guy who once supported abortion and now he doesn't. He was a centrist governor is a liberal state. etc.. I'm sure a lot of "purists" just spit at their computer, but it's true.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I live in MA. Romney doesn't impress me as having any conservative or libertarian credentials. He is a businessman first and foremost. And an effective one at that. From his business experience he has learned the benefits and occasional value of compromise.

    IMHO Romney would govern from the center. Not unlike Clinton.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I like your Clinton example but probably not for the same reason you do. Clinton was a balls out socialist. He governed from where he was given permission to govern by the republican majority. Congress is what matters. Congress has much more power to shape the agenda. (for instance, what gets called "obamacare" was written in congress. Brak had no hand in writing it) In the absence of a republican congress, Clinton would have done what Brak and his corrupt acolytes are doing. Clinton had sense enough to know he had to bullshit people into thinking he was a centrist, though. Brak either can't or won't do that. No one would buy it, anyway. And the current state of the left is so deranged, they'd abandon him at the drop of a hat if he moved an inch toward the republicans.

    Fundamentally, Romney is a conservative. Not a Barry Goldwater or anything, but a conservative nonetheless. Clinton was and is a leftist. I don't think the difference is a trivial thing. In the end, Congress matters most. It always had. I think that's the way it should be. It's popular for people to talk about wanting an executive who won't compromise, but to that I say, "Be careful what you wish for." I for one am quite grateful that Brak is unable to get anything done since the mid terms. Thank God for that. I don't want a country where one politician can inflict his personal will on the rest of the country. Brak has done a whole lot of extra-constitutional stuff and some outright illegal stuff that a republican would be impeached for, but that is simply the environment we live in. Bitching won't change it. Defeating the left electorally is our country's only hope.

    ReplyDelete
  15. And for what it's worth, John McCain was a conservative too. He had a great voting record except for that one giant black mark called McCain-Feingold. His main problem was he was just an extremely shitty candidate. Even Bob Dole was better. Standing at the dais holding your arms out like Frankenstein and grunting, "Fight with me, my friends." Just doesn't fly. His story couldn't overcome the creepiness.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Chuck - You said...

    "He governed from where he was given permission to govern by the republican majority. Congress is what matters. Congress has much more power to shape the agenda."

    You nailed it, and it is as it should be.

    ReplyDelete
  17. @Chuck

    The Club for Growth summarizes my concerns pretty well:

    "[Romney} would promote the unwinding of Obama’s bad economic policies, but we also think that Romney is somewhat of a technocrat. After a career in business, quickly finding a 'solution' seems to be his goal, even if it means more government intrusion as a means to an end. To this day, Romney supports big government solutions to health care and opposes pro-growth tax code reform – positions that are simply opposite to those supported by true economic conservatives."

    To that I would add that Romney volunteered (he was not conscripted) to be the CEO of Massachusetts, a very liberal state. His actions as governor indicate that he either believes in big, cumbersome, ham-fisted government -- or he is at least comfortable with it.

    I also would note that Romney's experience in the private sector in no way inoculated him against a desire for cronyism or statism. There are plenty of people in the corporate world who love big government.

    With his record, I doubt Romney can ever convince me that he really understands the danger of big government. And if we think we can elect a congress that will override Romney's preference for technocratic solutions to problems that would be best solved with increased individual liberty, we're only kidding ourselves.

    In the post-Obama era, we desperately need someone in the White House who has a passion for individual liberty and lean, efficient, constitutionally-constrained government. Mitt Romney does not fit that description.

    ReplyDelete
  18. "In the post-Obama era, we desperately need someone in the White House who has a passion for individual liberty and lean, efficient, constitutionally-constrained government. Mitt Romney does not fit that description"

    I would humbly submit that what we need more than anything is the existence of a "post-Obama" era. Short of that, it's all academic anyway. This country won't survive another 4 years of Brakabama. He's hell bent on destroying this country in the interests of what he considers justice. Romney isn't. As I've said before, Romney isn't my first choice, but he has the most of what matters the most and he remains the odds on favorite to win the nomination. Dumping all over the guy only serves the interests of your country's domestic enemies.

    ReplyDelete
  19. "To that I would add that Romney volunteered (he was not conscripted) to be the CEO of Massachusetts, a very liberal state. His actions as governor indicate that he either believes in big, cumbersome, ham-fisted government -- or he is at least comfortable with it."

    That's where you and I pert ways. Blaming the guy for living in Massachusetts just seems a little Capn' Ahab to me. He played the hand he was dealt. Would you have him move to another state like that carpet bagging whore Hillary Clinton?? Stay out of politics altogether because his home state is the most left wing in the country? You're creating an impossible standard and then berating him for falling short of it. Seems more a rationalization than sound reasoning to me. Again, I'd like there to be some super-duper conservative type sailing to the nomination, but wishing is for children.

    ReplyDelete
  20. "I would humbly submit that what we need more than anything is the existence of a "post-Obama" era."

    That's an important point, but we need to do better than to simply go from "worse to bad."

    "Dumping all over the guy only serves the interests of your country's domestic enemies."

    I'm not going to do anything that would sabotage the eventual nominee, whomever that may be. But the nominee is going to have to be able to withstand hits much more powerful than anything I will ever dish out.

    My criticisms of Romney fall into one of two categories:

    1. Points that were made over and over again in 2008, contributing to Romney's 3rd place finish.

    2. Points that matter to conservatives but are very unlikely to come up after the nomination.

    At this point,the GOP candidates are about as reasonable and grounded and conservative as they will ever be. After the nomination, it's a mad dash leftward. If we don't push to improve the candidates' positions and arguments now, we will have lost an opportunity we won't get back.

    ReplyDelete
  21. "Would you have him ... [s]tay out of politics altogether because his home state is the most left wing in the country?"

    He can do what he wants and go as far as his talents will take him. But I don't think Republicans should cherry pick their candidate from the most liberal state in the union. Romney is a natural product of the political environment of Massachusetts. But the rest of the country as a whole is more conservative than Massachusetts.

    If the Dems can win with someone as liberal as Barack Obama, Republicans can win with someone who is at least a little more conservative than Romney. (And to be in sync with the general American electorate, they should.)

    In running against an abject failure like BHO, we don't have to be skittish. We can choose a candidate who is a little more bold and courageous than Mr. Waffles.

    ReplyDelete
  22. You and I aren't going to decide who the nominee is.

    ReplyDelete

Commenting here is a privilege, not a right. Comments that contain cursing or insults and those failing to add to the discussion will be summarily deleted.