That would be interesting, I suppose, if the 2nd Amendment was under any kind of threat, which it isn’t.
Undoubtedly true.
But I would note that judgments about these matters tend to be heavily influenced by wishful thinking, as well as by a kind of circular thought process that says “I’m so right that it must be that I have broad support and anyone who disagrees only does so because …”
If The Simpsons is a reliable guide to life, and I think we can all agree that it is, marijuana ballot initiatives still won’t get the pothead vote.
Hoffman was still running as a Conservative, but got the official nod after Scozzafava dropped out. I figure Michael Steele represents official GOP endorsement, but I think the story mentions the party machinery gave him the nod too.
This is getting nitpicky, but no, that’s not the same thing. We all know Hoffman got endorsements from prominent Republicans - that’s what made the race interesting. He was not the candidate chosen by the Republican party in New York, and he didn’t have the little “R” next to his name, so he should not be called “the Republican candidate.”
So, Bachmann-Palin Overdrive will rule decisions for the Pubbie party for the next cycle? Now, Universe, I know I haven’t been a very good pantheist, but if you could just give me this sign…
The guys over at ThinkProgress seem to be of the opinion that the Virginia Dem lost because he wasn’t sufficiently Obamist. YMMV.
They hate rich people.
Nah, they only want their money.
If only there were some objective way of discerning which parties and positions had popular support. If only there were a profession that had any expertise with coming up with representative samples of the population, and asking them questions about such things.
That’s not what the question is here.
The question here is “what people would think about the issue under my preferred hypothetical scenario in which my suggested strategy was adopted?” Not too scientific.
I didn’t realize you were asking that question. I’m not sure why you are, or what relevance it has to my position that you are at odds with.
For instance, people have a pretty good idea of what the GOP stands for these days, and outside the South and parts of the inland West, people really don’t like it very much. That isn’t going to improve if the wingnuts get a larger say in the direction of the party.
And on the Dem side, there was recently a candidate who ran nationwide on much the same things that the Dem base stands for. Tall, skinny black dude with a funny African name. How’d he do? What’s been happening to Dem support as the proposals from his campaign have gotten delayed and watered down?
This isn’t rocket science.
If Virginia didn’t have the ridiculous consecutive term rule, does anyone think McDonnell would have defeated Kaine?
In New Jersey, Corzine’s defeat seems to reflect on him and the economy as opposed to any great enthusiasm for Christie. Christie’s platform had little specifics; he basically told the voters: vote for me, I’m not John Corzine and when I get elected I’ll fix shit.
This is bullshit righty canard #18896.
He didn’t run as a progressive. He basically ran a two line campaign.
- Bush stinks.
- McCain = Bush.
People grow tired of that after a while. (Maybe not the Dem base, but everyone else.)
We’re not discussing Dem support. We’re discussing overall support. Of course the Dems base is happier with progressive programs. The question is whether this is enough to overcome alienating moderates. You say it is (or, alternatively, that many moderates will be converted into progressives once they see the true unsullied face of progressivism). That’s a highly subjective judgment, as above.
It’s funny that anyone is still stupid enough to say that Obama didn’t run an issues based campaign. How myopic do you have to be to actually say that with conviction?
Obama ran such a great campaign specifically because he DIDN’T harp on how horrible his opponent was, his opponent lost specifically because he DID run that kind of a campaign. Obama was able to differentiate himself, he didn’t need to say Bush stinks because it didn’t need to be said.
Why are people so dead set on not thinking before they speak?
National Republican Senatorial Committee Abandons the Stragglers:
This should make it much cheaper for the radicals to dispose of any remaining moderates.
I should also add that Obama was helped by considerable personal qualities - charisma and a compelling life story, and polls have consistently showed him to be more popular than his policies. And with all that and an extremely unpopular incumbant he did not exactly win a landslide.
After a while I started to wonder if McCain had his first name legally changed from “John” to “Bush”.
I guess you don’t see what you don’t want to see. You can call yourself “myopic” if you’d like.
Oooh! Oooh! Can you tell us the one about how America is a center-right country, and how Obama’s win doesn’t really mean anything? That’s my favorite!
Obama won very decisively. It wasn’t a nail biter.
Mine is how he’s a radical socialist bent on destroying everything Americans hold dear, as illustrated by his Nobel prize.