Iowa

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

I said most Iowa Republicans were more moderate. Overall registration is about 50:50 and the state tends to vote Democratic.

My father is a pragmatist, I'd say more aligned with a later Goldwater brand of conservatism that's nearly absent in the modern GOP.

He completely agreed with this good piece from the Economist. I agree with it as well...

Is it possible to "combine a muscular foreign policy with sound economics, individualism and entrepenurial pragmatism," yet still have differing opionions on "God, gays, and guns"? Or different views on taxes, abortion, immigration, environment, health insurance, Israel, and regulatory agencies? Or must the "right Republican" have the "correct" views on all these issues (presumably the infallilble middle/moderate position). And if it is not possible to have different (extreme--that which differs from the middle) views, the middle will automatically "plump for Mr. Obama" who must then, presumably, have the correct middle views. But if he does, then wouldn't the middle vote for him regardless? This is presuming, of course, that he also has the correct "muscular foreign policy with sound economics, individualsim and entrepeneurial pragmatism," or that they either aren't paying attention, don't care, or don't have a clue about those things. Of course, If Obama does have those correct attributes as well as the correct middle views on the other stuff--he's in! Why bother about "the right Republican?"

But if the middle insists that it will only vote for a candidate with those correct middle views, then isn't it being as extreme as those even further to the right Republicans?

Isn't it more likely that different "Republican" candidates, as well as different Republican voters, have different views and are not all going to insist that candidates must "sign on the dotted line" for all the correct views? When it comes to the final vote, won't some more simple common threads that divide the parties make the difference, and won't the middle/independent voters have to decide on the difference in those common threads? And when we speak of that middle, aren't there, even in it, differing opinions in all those points ascribed to it?

But, I suppose, it's comforting to compartmentalized minds to have solid categories--right, left, middle--in order to percieve a well-ordered, predictable world.

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Isn't it more likely that different "Republican" candidates, as well as different Republican voters, have different views and are not all going to insist that candidates must "sign on the dotted line" for all the correct views?

I think this is the crux of the article.

Hell. Ron Paul and Rick Santorum are running for the same slot!

The identity of the "conservative" is a much bigger tent than the identity of the "liberal" in American politics. Usually less than 20 percent of Americans would even self describe themselves as "liberals".

Compare the USA to other successful nations like Australia and most of our Democrats are to the "right" of their Right Wing!

Icons like Reagan wouldn't even be on the GOP primary ballot given the politics of today, yet he led in many ways (not all certainly) as a pragmatist.

There's ideology and there's leadership. The joke that is the Republican primary is all the proof necessary that the party doesn't seem to understand what it really wants.

Ultimately they'll settle on what the enthusiastic crowd sees as the least worst. Fortunately for all of us he's not a terrible choice...

I have confidence in the end we'll have a good race for the next POTUS.

-spence

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

I think this is the crux of the article.

Hell. Ron Paul and Rick Santorum are running for the same slot!

The identity of the "conservative" is a much bigger tent than the identity of the "liberal" in American politics. Usually less than 20 percent of Americans would even self describe themselves as "liberals".

Compare the USA to other successful nations like Australia and most of our Democrats are to the "right" of their Right Wing!

Icons like Reagan wouldn't even be on the GOP primary ballot given the politics of today, yet he led in many ways (not all certainly) as a pragmatist.

There's ideology and there's leadership. The joke that is the Republican primary is all the proof necessary that the party doesn't seem to understand what it really wants.

Ultimately they'll settle on what the enthusiastic crowd sees as the least worst. Fortunately for all of us he's not a terrible choice...

I have confidence in the end we'll have a good race for the next POTUS.

-spence

Sounds like you're confidently in the bag for status quo. But nobody seems to be satisfied with how it is. Down the same road regardless who, eh? If the election depends on the middle, the middle must be satisfied with the status quo (i guess that's sort of a definitionf of middle--status quo). Yet everybody bitches about the results--they keep on voting for the same middle and keep getting the same crappy results. Ain't that somebody's definition for insanity?

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Sounds like you're confidently in the bag for status quo. But nobody seems to be satisfied with how it is. Down the same road regardless who, eh? If the election depends on the middle, the middle must be satisfied with the status quo (i guess that's sort of a definitionf of middle--status quo). Yet everybody bitches about the results--they keep on voting for the same middle and keep getting the same crappy results. Ain't that somebody's definition for insanity?

No, we certainly need to address our structural issues. Both parties are in denial here IMHO.

Some real time stats just for you guys...My father just returned (minutes ago) from the Republican Caucus at the elementary school I attended. I'd note it's a mixed but relatively professional community.

Undecided 1
Huntsman 2
Bachmann 7
Perry 12
Gingrich 25
Paul 29
Santorum 39
Romney 84

-spence

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

No, we certainly need to address our structural issues. Both parties are in denial here IMHO.

Some real time stats just for you guys...My father just returned (minutes ago) from the Republican Caucus at the elementary school I attended. I'd note it's a mixed but relatively professional community.

Undecided 1
Huntsman 2
Bachmann 7
Perry 12
Gingrich 25
Paul 29
Santorum 39
Romney 84

-spence

Seems like latest results have Romney and Santorum tied at 24% and Santorum is rising.

Structural issues . . . both parties in denial . . . duh, ain't that . . .like, the status quo?