Quote from: Agnlaw on May 18, 2015, 02:37:46 PM
I prefer a liberal to a moderate. You can see the liberal's teeth.

What's the difference?

Quote from: taxed on May 18, 2015, 02:38:30 PM
What's the difference?

None.  There won't be a RINO in sight by election-day, 2016. 

The election will be about fixing the current president's disasters.  Gods, what a generational mess. 

Quote from: Agnlaw on May 18, 2015, 02:37:46 PM
I prefer a liberal to a moderate. You can see the liberal's teeth.

Within the party, it's the voting record and show of comity over any surface trappings. Outside it, I tend to agree at least the bared teeth help the score-keeping.

It's still way early in this, but the signs are not good that GOP party bulls can knock off the sheer mass of candidates in time for their convention. Every fiber of their being will be to resist the same sort of public tidal wave that put Obama into office. They will veer away from the true conservative because voters may WANT the firebreathers but the so-called adult GOP voters will want stability and reason and...compromise.

The Party of Surrender won't let them down. It will be a brokered convention.

Quote from: darroll on May 18, 2015, 11:23:04 AM
The GOP needs to take winning elections 101. (in grammar school)

Well, that's my point, in a way. The voters appear only capable of making  decisions based upon the immediate gratification of their personal bodily needs, kind of like livestock if you think about it, hoping there are no horses around here who can read, it then falls upon the adults to periodically intervene and make the decisions necessary for the survival, even prosperity, of the greater assemblage.  I think eight years of the Democrats is more than enough to ask.

Quote from: Agnlaw on May 18, 2015, 10:31:54 AM
How is it that a party comprised of a conservative/small-government majority keeps giving us presidential candidates like Bob Dole, John McCain and Mitt Romney? If there were run-offs in GOP primaries, would things work out differently?

Consider 2012.... What I mean is, take a conservative whose first choice was Gingrich, Paul, Santorum or Perry. Assume his first choice didn't make the cut; and, one of the other 3 is facing Romney in a primary run-off. You can't be sure, but I don't think anyone who voted for a conservative the first go around would have voted for Romney in a run-off.

For example, take the 13 pre-Super-Tuesday 2012 state primaries (after which, the fat lady isn't quite singing but you can hear her warming up). In every state but Nevada, there would have been a run-off since no candidate garnered at least 50% of the vote. It is interesting to look at it state-by-state, but long story short, Romney emerged as the winner with only 41% of the popular vote; while conservatives lost with 59%. How's that grab you?

Problem is, we're tee'd up to do it all over again in 2016. Even worse this time (because there are so may very good candidates to split the conservative vote... which will of course benefit Jeb).

I don't imagine that anything can be done in time to fix things before the 2016 primaries. Even so, I think the least we can do it attempt to put the subject on the table. So, if the above makes any sense to you, I would much appreciate if you would consider signing my petition to RNC leadership. Here's a link if you are so inclined: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/956/031/236/america-needs-conservative-leadership-reform-the-gop-presidential-primary-process-now/?taf_id=13804140&cid=fb_na

I tend to agree with that, given I live in Ohio, whose electoral votes make or break an election. And we have a candidate already chosen for us by those in other states.

Quote from: Agnlaw on May 18, 2015, 02:37:46 PM
I prefer a liberal to a moderate. You can see the liberal's teeth.

I used to say something similar to socialists and liberals, at least with socialists you know exactly what their goal is.

I don't see all the angst. The top RINO is Jeb. The only people that say he's the guy is the left. Even the GOP has backed off. And, does he really want to be president? So far he has been underwhelming and a bit strange. Lindsey? Is there a market for effeminate chickenhawks? Christie? Sure if everyone else is killed in a horrible boating accident. No one who has not yet jumped in has a chance.  As far as those that have declared even the RINOs have conservative credentials. The top two are indeed conservative.

It's a good situation to be in.

Quote from: The Boo Man... on May 18, 2015, 09:17:50 PM
I don't see all the angst. The top RINO is Jeb. The only people that say he's the guy is the left. Even the GOP has backed off. And, does he really want to be president? So far he has been underwhelming and a bit strange. Lindsey? Is there a market for effeminate chickenhawks? Christie? Sure if everyone else is killed in a horrible boating accident. No one who has not yet jumped in has a chance.  As far as those that have declared even the RINOs have conservative credentials. The top two are indeed conservative.

It's a good situation to be in.

Walker hasn't made it official and he does have a real chance!

Quote from: redbeard on May 18, 2015, 09:22:29 PM
Walker hasn't made it official and he does have a real chance!

I know but we all know he is in and is one of the top two.

Quote from: The Boo Man... on May 18, 2015, 09:23:38 PM
I know but we all know he is in and is one of the top two.

I'm still leaning in the direction of Walker and or Cruz.

Quote from: red_dirt on May 18, 2015, 01:46:59 PM
I am NY on one side of the family, MA on the other. Contrary to what is projected in the media, both states are home to a majority of honest, decent people. Especially, when you get out of the big city.

Now, I am coming to view Bloomberg, Del Blasio, and Warren as silent pleas for help, on the parts of the citizens of the states. They know how repulsive these candidates are.  They also know the states cannot continue down the road they have been on. But, they are stuck. They are locked in, and they cry out for help, relief.

I'm in a rural part of NYS.  The problem is urban versus rural.  I'm retired, but m wife still works and commutes into the city (50 miles each way) because that's were the jobs are.  The system is loaded that way.  Unfortunately, though we surround them, the urban centers are full of marxists and sheeple dependant upon what the marxists redistribute to them.  Not all of them, to be sure..but a significant majority of the politically active people.  The unintended consequence of our numerous institutions of higher learning, is the Leadership of all our cities is lop sided with rank and file, true believer, far out Leftists!  People are fed up with the Libreral control of goverment, schools, media and all things public, yet...the Liberals have a network that controls everything. 

NYS is amicrocasm of things to come if America doesn't reject the marxists take over of our federal system.  Just as we move out into the country, people will have to move to Texas and leave the country to be torn to pieces by the Libtard Rats that infect all our nation's cities. (yet, Texas isn't immune...their cities and colleges have growing populations of Libtard Elites, aswell.)

Quote from: kit saginaw on May 18, 2015, 03:06:29 PM
None.  There won't be a RINO in sight by election-day, 2016. 

The election will be about fixing the current president's disasters.  Gods, what a generational mess.

Did you think the same in 2012? How about 1996? I did...

In any case (since I don't see everyone running to sign the petition), what are the arguments against requiring run-off's in GOP primaries?

Some (like the quote above) seem to be saying that it won't be necessary in 2016. Based on history, I'm not as hopeful. Putting 2016 aside for the moment, do you agree with my assertion that 2012 would have worked out a lot better for conservatives if primary run-offs had been required?

If so, why not support the petition? Maybe because you don't think anything will come of it? I agree -- probably not this time around. I've no delusions about the efficacy of a petition in the short term. Even so, given the consequences (past and future) of the GOP's flawed primary process, isn't it worth it to start the conversation?

Another argument against (which I've not seen here) focuses on practicability (if you have a bunch of candidates, you would have to plan for two primary votes in every state!). Fair enough.

But isn't there another way to skin it? For example, yesterday I voted in the RNC straw poll, which asked me to select my top 3 choices among the candidates. I didn't find the process complicated or cumbersome. Add one more step to the process to rank my choices and presto... you've solved the problem.

Guessing some additional explanation may be needed... What I mean is, rather than a separate run-off, what if a primary voter could select (in order) as many candidates as he wished? For me (subject to change!), I would select 1) Cruz, 2) Jindal, 3) Perry, 4) Walker, 5) Paul, etc (with Jeb finishing in last place). Assume this process is in place in the next Texas primary. Assume the top 2 finishers are Jeb 28% (the establishment vote) and Walker 25% (my #4). Neither has >50%, so the winner would be determined by a "calculated run-off" in which Walker would get my vote (because my 1, 2 & 3 didn't finish in the top 2). 

Doesn't that make more sense than the current process? Without a run-off (back to the example above), Jeb would win Texas with only 28%! With a run-off on the other hand, assuming that no conservative would choose Jeb over Walker (in my estimate, no conservative would!) Jeb wouldn't even come close to winning the run-off. Instead, and this is inflated in Jeb's favour, Walker would win Texas. In favour of run-off's yet?

Last... there is the counterargument that makes me sick to my stomach. To win, we need a candidate that is attractive to the undecided's (aka, the idiots). To this I can only say... Oh, you mean like Romney, McCain or Bob Dole? How's that working for you?

I don't want to assume that I've covered all of the arguments against the petition... Anything else?

If not... Please take a minute to go sign the petition. :-)

Agnlaw
Just curious, but what kind of power are you placing on a petition that wants to strip power from the very people that created this mess?
Seriously, what good does this do without the power of law behind it?

We cannot have run-offs in the primaries.  It's expensive.  It slows everything down.  The candidates' delegates will hash-out any abstract abnormalities at the Convention itself. 

Quote from: kit saginaw on May 19, 2015, 08:36:20 AM
We cannot have run-offs in the primaries.  It's expensive.  It slows everything down.  The candidates' delegates will hash-out any abstract abnormalities at the Convention itself.

If that's not a brokered convention, then what is?