The Republican Primary Race Is Filling Up

[bwframe]

Lot of people do this. Can't help but disagree.

You can pick a "Republican" and a "Democrat"... and they will be almost binary on the bigger issues and policies. Pro/Anti gun. Pro Life/choice. Pro/anti military force. Pro/anti business. Pro/anti gay marriage. Pro/anti religion.

The two parties have pretty clear lines of what they typically represent.

Yes, it's the same as when "your politician" gets caught in a lie to say that it's no big deal since they all lie.

 

[jamil]

There is no "party", Jamil. There are a set of interests that intersect from time to time and people call that the "real" party. Democrat or Republican makes no difference. It's a series of labels that shortcut the need to dig deep into key principles.

There are Parties. And they require membership. They're really not much more than an advocacy club for whatever the interests of the day are. In Lincoln's day, it was mostly anti-slavery. Today, both parties are mostly "establishment" plus a mix of social and economic preferences with which they use to get voters to agree with their side of the establishment.

But people have to be careful when the speak in terms of "real" Rs or Ds such that they don't define it for their own purpose and commit the "no real scottsman" fallacy. For example, in the 1970s a "real Republican" was someone like Dick ****ing Lugar. To say he's a RINO is a form of "no true scottsman". His politics suck, but that's not because he's not really a Republican. He's a card carrying member, which makes him the true Republican more than the pissed off voter who merely doesn't like some moderate Republicans.

Lot of people do this. Can't help but disagree.

You can pick a "Republican" and a "Democrat"... and they will be almost binary on the bigger issues and policies. Pro/Anti gun. Pro Life/choice. Pro/anti military force. Pro/anti business. Pro/anti gay marriage. Pro/anti religion.

The two parties have pretty clear lines of what they typically represent.

Well, sure they do. But it isn't because one has an R and one has a D. It's because their platforms evolved that way. Lincoln wasn't a conservative in the ideological sense. He was mostly a pragmatist. Something the rank and file of the Republican Party of today--really BOTH parties, don't really care for. There are no rules that Republicans must be right wing conservatives and Democrats must be left wing liberals. They just kinda found their respective homes.

And we're seeing conservatives become very impatient with the Republican Party this election. The utter rejection of the establishment candidates in Iowa is one example of that.

 

[bwframe]

...But people have to be careful when the speak in terms of "real" Rs or Ds such that they don't define it for their own purpose and commit the "no real scottsman" fallacy. For example, in the 1970s a "real Republican" was someone like Dick ****ing Lugar. To say he's a RINO is a form of "no true scottsman". His politics suck, but that's not because he's not really a Republican. He's a card carrying member, which makes him the true Republican more than the pissed off voter who merely doesn't like some moderate Republicans...

Real Republicans are the one's who vote. They fired Lugar, the same as they did Paul.

 

[SSGSAD]

Real Republicans are the one's who vote. They fired Lugar, the same as they did Paul.

I worked VERY hard, to FINALLY get rid of Lugar .....

He went more to the Left, everyday .....

 

[jamil]

Real Republicans are the one's who vote. They fired Lugar, the same as they did Paul.

I beg to differ. At best, and to avoid opinions and needless bickering, "Real" republicans carry the card. The people who vote are people with ideals who accept or reject the card carriers who run for public offices.

I'm not a Republican. I don't carry a card. I usually vote for republicans because they tend to promote candidates who think more like me than Democrats do. I voted for a Republican other than Dick. They both had the card. But even Dick is more Republican than I am since I'm not a party member.

 

[bwframe]

I worked VERY hard, to FINALLY get rid of Lugar .....

He went more to the Left, everyday .....

Understood, me too.
Similarly, Rand Paul did not represent voting Iowa R's.

 

[Expat]

I read the Reason FB feed. The reaction to Rand Paul has been interesting. Lots of the libertarians felt he was simply not pure enough to support. Others said as long as he had Tea Party support, they could not support him. It looks like the GOP has no reason to court them at all. If Rand couldn't attract their support, I don't think anyone could.

 

[BugI02]

Where is Mitt when he's really needed?

He has never actually been needed, so we can't really test any theories.

 

[BugI02]

Yes, right now. No polls are out as of yet that reflect the sentiment of the Trump loss/debate bailing in Iowa.
Combine that with the 10% wrongly forecasted figure from Iowa and things may get interesting?

From RealClearPolitics and as requested reflecting Trump's Debate bail and 2nd place finish:






Polls

​

Quick Poll/Map Links
Advanced Search


New Hampshire Republican Presidential Primary
Polling Data

Poll	Date	Sample	Trump	Cruz	Kasich	Rubio	Bush	Christie	Fiorina	Carson	Paul	Huckabee	Santorum	Spread
RCP Average	1/25 - 2/2	--	33.0	11.7	10.7	10.7	9.8	6.2	3.8	3.2	2.8	0.4	0.2	Trump +21.3
Harper (R)	2/1 - 2/2	425 LV	31	9	12	10	14	6	5	3	3	0	0	Trump +17
UMass/7News (Tracking)	1/31 - 2/2	502 LV	38	14	7	12	9	6	3	3	2	--	0	Trump +24

 

[BugI02]

I read the Reason FB feed. The reaction to Rand Paul has been interesting. Lots of the libertarians felt he was simply not pure enough to support. Others said as long as he had Tea Party support, they could not support him. It looks like the GOP has no reason to court them at all. If Rand couldn't attract their support, I don't think anyone could.

.View attachment 44784

 

[bwframe]

Rick Santorum is dropping out of the race

 

[JettaKnight]

Rick Santorum is dropping out of the race

He was in the race?

 

[jamil]

He was in the race?

I didn't even bother to include him in the ranked voting poll 2.0. I figured it was a short matter of time, especially since his biggest showing in 2012 was Iowa. This time? <0. Okay, not negative. But I think he's negative.

 

[Jludo]

Didn't see it mentioned yet that Rand is out too.
Rand Paul dropping out of presidential race - CNNPolitics.com

 

[JettaKnight]

Paging Chris Christie...

 

[jamil]

Paging Chris Christie...

The fatass pussbag isn't getting out anytime soon. He barely campaigned in Iowa. I doubt he expected to do well at all. He's doing fairly well in the Polls for NH. Hopefully they reject him next week. I think it will take a thorough rejection all the way through super Tuesday for him to get the hint.

 

[pudly]

Not so sure, I just heard that Christie really doesn't have any organization setup beyond New Hampshire. If he doesn't get any kind of momentum by then, it is hard to see him going on to South Carolina.

 

[jamil]

Not so sure, I just heard that Christie really doesn't have any organization setup beyond New Hampshire. If he doesn't get any kind of momentum by then, it is hard to see him going on to South Carolina.

I dunno. It sounds like he REALLY REALLY wants to rule the world.

 

[JettaKnight]

I dunno. It sounds like he REALLY REALLY wants to rule the world.

Doesn't everybody want to rule the world?

 

[printcraft]

Doesn't everybody want to rule the world?

Tears for Fears sure seems to think so.