Why delete it? Oly and MikeCorey's posts are both excellent and (IMO) discuss facts about the horse race as opposed to opinions on the positions held by the candidates. I think that's the line, and both kept the ball in bounds.
The impact of the Tea Party electorate has been interesting. It is perhaps the most energized of any voting bloc out there. And as John Boehner can testify, the Tea Party representatives seem to be holding the line on their beliefs. Love it or hate it, these folks are organized, energized and have come to try and bring change. It is hard to have a neutral opinion on their impact -- you either love it and wish more folks would listen to them, or you have a negative reaction to it.
Which then rolls over to the point Oly made -- what impact does that have on the general election? The more extreme wings of either party have a tough time to win over the 20% of folks in the middle who make the difference in the national elections. The same would be true for the Democrats if the Occupy movement fielded candidates in state primaries.
As several pundits have noted, the Republicans are struggling between ideology and electablity. Romney speaks to the mind, Gingrich speaks to the gut/core. The Democrats went through similar struggles when they were in the wilderness after the 1980 woodshedding. These things come and go, come and go.
But bitter internecine warfare in the primary can effectively kill a party's chance to win as well, sometimes, regardless of who comes out of the primary. While Carter probably would not have won in 1980 or Ford in 1976, for example, the bloody battles with Ted Kennedy and Ronald Reagan (respectively) put a dent in the eventual nominee that never got unbent. Will the Tea Party folks support a nominee like Romney, or just stay home? Will moderate Republicans and Reagan Democrats vote for a nominee like Gingrich or Ron Paul?
Last edited by OldPhiKap; 12-18-2011 at 08:51 AM.
Twerp-free since July 1, 2014.