Chatham County Online BBS
February 10, 2012, 12:01:40 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Before you go out to eat check out the Local Restaurant Reviews
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Tags Login Register  





Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down
  Send this topic  |  Print  
Author Topic: NC GOP moving to block independents from primaries  (Read 1558 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
chathambooks
Chathamohican
*****
Offline Offline

Last Login:February 04, 2012, 02:28:12 PM
Date Registerd:April 29, 2006, 12:43:05 PM
Posts: 1748



« Reply #15 on: November 21, 2009, 05:39:13 PM »

Schmukabee hasn't a chance outside of the bible belt. Not worried.
Logged

"You can't baby proof the world".

~Muddylaces
Muddylaces
Chathamohican
*****
Offline Offline

Last Login:Yesterday at 10:04:46 PM
Date Registerd:December 26, 2007, 09:46:35 AM
Posts: 2229



« Reply #16 on: November 21, 2009, 05:55:48 PM »

Schmukabee hasn't a chance outside of the bible belt. Not worried.

I don't see it possible to nominate a conservative in an open primary.   Even if we don't get Huckabee, he can cause Romney or Palin to lose, giving us the 2012 version of McCain.
Logged
RJLeeb
Guest
« Reply #17 on: November 22, 2009, 02:30:15 PM »

Schmukabee hasn't a chance outside of the bible belt. Not worried.

Hmmm.  Interesting sentiment.  Mind answering this question:

How is Mitt Romney more of a conservative choice than Mike Huckabee?

Logged
peacefulcapitalist
Chathamohican
*****
Offline Offline

Last Login:Yesterday at 04:24:34 PM
Date Registerd:May 05, 2006, 10:37:32 AM
Posts: 1867



« Reply #18 on: November 27, 2009, 07:54:57 PM »

Schmukabee hasn't a chance outside of the bible belt. Not worried.

I don't see it possible to nominate a conservative in an open primary.   Even if we don't get Huckabee, he can cause Romney or Palin to lose, giving us the 2012 version of McCain.

If you have an open GOP primary and no interesting Democratic primary, you might have a point.  In fact in 2008 the GOP nomination was settled well before the Democratic nomination so there was always a Democratic primary that was just as interesting if not more so, so Democrats and liberal independents voted in that primary, they wanted to have a say in the Democratic race muchmore than they wanted make mischief with the GOP.

In fact a lot of people think the Democratic nomination was drawn out because once McCain clinched the GOP nomination, GOP and conservative independent voters in later states voted in the Democratic primaries, mainly for Hillary Clinton.  They even had a name for it, "Operation Chaos"

And open GOP primaries are not why John McCain won. He won because the more conservative candidates were more numerous and split the vote in some key states like SC & FL (FL btw did NOT have open primaries), in each of those states he  won with less than 40%.  Fred Thompson drew support from Huckabee in SC ,and Guliani hurt Romney in FL, for example.

Logged

"I don't believe in superstitions.  They're bad luck." -- Bobby Valentine
belle
Guest
« Reply #19 on: November 27, 2009, 08:02:12 PM »

there was a lot of excitement in the Democratic Presidential primary in NC, held late, in May of 08. many independents, mostly young voters, chose to vote Democratic ballots. they chose Obama.

if the GOP doesn't want the independents, that is their loss. unfortunately for the Democrats, they decided to keep it open.

the Democrats will have to work some, to keep them.
Logged
Beel
Guest
« Reply #20 on: December 14, 2009, 07:44:18 AM »

The search for the kind of ideological purity implied by closing their primary will most likely insure further Republican defeats.  At the state level, NC has mostly elected sensible, moderate people when it comes to Republicans--Holshouser and Martin being two pretty good examples.  Neither of these Republican Governors would be electable in a Republican primary which excluded all but the most conservative.  Jesse Helms was but one NC Republican--I'm not at all sure that NC ever wanted a bunch of Helms in public office--one was probably enough to soothe the burning kernel of anger that lies at the very base of the base. 

McCain didn't lose because he was moderate.  He lost because the country had had enough of Bush/Cheney and their succession of blunders and disasters, because Obama was an obvious fresh, interesting, alternative--more articulate, much more hopeful (this is why the Peace Prize came Obama's way too).  And also, McCain lost because to most people, Palin was an absurd choice for VP which raised immediate doubts about McCain's judgement.  Oh, and then there was the Meltdown, which affected nearly every voter directly.  None of this is to deny that for some, McCain was too moderate to vote for. 

I don't know why nearly everyone, of whatever political persuasion, can't see this basic lay of the land re 2008.  There probably wasn't a Republican who could have been elected in the face of the context of 2008.  The selection of Palin was an amazing blunder, spitting in the teeth of a gale--which in response turned into a Cat 2 hurricane. 
Logged
RJLeeb
Guest
« Reply #21 on: December 15, 2009, 02:50:35 PM »

There probably wasn't a Republican who could have been elected in the face of the context of 2008.

Glad to see you acknowledge that people voted for Obama based upon who he isn't as opposed to who he is.

I guess that's rather obvious now given his approval rating.
Logged
NC YIPPIE
Chathamohican
*****
Offline Offline

Last Login:Yesterday at 10:10:45 PM
Date Registerd:February 09, 2006, 03:52:41 PM
Posts: 7065



« Reply #22 on: December 15, 2009, 04:16:54 PM »

I love how approval ratings are so important - sometimes, anyway.  Roll Eyes
Logged

Crossroads ... seem to come and go
Tags:
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
  Send this topic  |  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!