At this point in 2011? Perry 38%, Romney 23%, Ron Paul 9%

[240 is Back]

Perry had more support than #1 and #2 combined....  just like Trump does.

[Coach is Back!]

Perry had more support than #1 and #2 combined....  just like Trump does.

There ya go again, living in the past. Except this time you have 14 others that can actually run a country so if Trump drops out or drops in the polls, who cares. The problem is when it comes to the actual Presidential election uninformed voters vote based on "feelings" and as of late, race and gender instead of the actual issues. Romney all but bitch slapped Obama on TV during the debate yet Obama won and even after Obama won Romney was still proven right simply because just about everything he said came true. This quote proves it...

how come repubs aren't smart enough to choose carly fiorina, since women always vote for a woman?

[Straw Man]

There ya go again, livitng in the pas. Except this time you have 14 others that can actually run a country so if Trump drops out or drops in the polls, who cares. The problem is when it comes to the actual Presidential election uninformed voters vote based on "feelings" and as of late, race and gender instead of the actual issues. Romney all but bitch slapped Obama on TV during the debate yet Obama won and even after Obama won Romney was still proven right simply because just about everything he said came true. This quote proves it...

how come repubs aren't smart enough to choose carly fiorina, since women always vote for a woman?

says the retarded dwarf who runs his life based on the beliefs, superstitions, and prejudices written down by a bunch of anonymous men 2000 years ago

[240 is Back]

There ya go again, living in the past.

people who cannot learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.  Remember?

2008... repub run a RINO, the base doesn't bother showing up to vote.
2012... repubs run a rino, and again, the base doesn't bother voting.

2016... yall are kneepadding a lifer liberal like Trump that only turned RINO when convenient... and again, you will act all surprised when the base doesn't bother to vote.  Once they learn his past positions, they'll feel a little stupid fo sucking up to him.  "When hilary sat first row at your wedding" and "when you gave hilary a dump truck of $ to get elected" and "when you supported abotion, anti-gun legislation, etc..."

Trump didn't suddenly believe in gun rights or suddenly value himan life.  He admits it has nothing to do with religion, he had no moment of clarity.  He just 'evolved" to win politically, and NOW he's using reagan to justify it.  "Reagan evolved, so can I".

Reagan gave us amnesty, reagan tripled the size of govt, doubled the debt, raised taxes and even supported the Brady bill.  There you have it. 

[240 is Back]

The problem is when it comes to the actual Presidential election uninformed voters vote based on "feelings" and as of late, race and gender instead of the actual issues.

I see.  So the massive amount of repubs taht suddenly love trump - that has nothing to do with emotion, feelings, venom, rage... and he's doubling jeb/walker because of his positions on the issues, huh?

His support of abortion, gun legislation, amnesty, taxing the rich - those are the issues that the republicans have weighed so heavily before moving trump up the polls, right?  Nothing to do with his angry jingoist chest pounding, entertaining nature or overall brash obnoxiousness... it's his consistently liberal positions for 62 years that have drawn republicans to his side, correct?

come on, man!

[Straw Man]

people who cannot learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.  Remember?

2008... repub run a RINO, the base doesn't bother showing up to vote.
2012... repubs run a rino, and again, the base doesn't bother voting.

2016... yall are kneepadding a lifer liberal like Trump that only turned RINO when convenient... and again, you will act all surprised when the base doesn't bother to vote.  Once they learn his past positions, they'll feel a little stupid fo sucking up to him.  "When hilary sat first row at your wedding" and "when you gave hilary a dump truck of $ to get elected" and "when you supported abotion, anti-gun legislation, etc..."

Trump didn't suddenly believe in gun rights or suddenly value himan life.  He admits it has nothing to do with religion, he had no moment of clarity.  He just 'evolved" to win politically, and NOW he's using reagan to justify it.  "Reagan evolved, so can I".

Reagan gave us amnesty, reagan tripled the size of govt, doubled the debt, raised taxes and even supported the Brady bill.  There you have it. 

so Repubs have to run a more liberal candidate if they want any hope of winning....right?

[240 is Back]

so Repubs have to run a more liberal candidate if they want any hope of winning....right?

no.   repubs need to run a more conservative candidate, like Cruz or Rand.

The repub BASE and repub WOMEN only show up for very conservative candidates.  80, 84, 88, 2000, 2004 and 2010 are the years repubs 1) ran conservatives 2) won women 3) kicked the shit out of dems.

trump is a rino/moderate on most issues, and once the base learns this, they'll stay home.  Just like they did in 2008 and 2012.  getbiggers predicted it in 08, and KNEW it in 2012, and it happened.   And it'll probably happen again.  until the repubs choose someone with actual conservative values, they don't win the eletion - and history shows that, even if some people don't want to look at it.

There ya go again, living in the past.

we can learn a LOT from the past.  Recent elections show us that GOP candidates with liberal pasts DO NOT get votes from republican base, and they don't win elections.

Maybe if it happens agian, when 2020 rolls around, they'll finally listen.  I doubt it tho.

[Straw Man]

no.   repubs need to run a more conservative candidate, like Cruz or Rand.

The repub BASE and repub WOMEN only show up for very conservative candidates.  80, 84, 88, 2000, 2004 and 2010 are the years repubs 1) ran conservatives 2) won women 3) kicked the shit out of dems.

trump is a rino/moderate on most issues, and once the base learns this, they'll stay home.  Just like they did in 2008 and 2012.  getbiggers predicted it in 08, and KNEW it in 2012, and it happened.   And it'll probably happen again.  until the repubs choose someone with actual conservative values, they don't win the eletion - and history shows that, even if some people don't want to look at it.

we can learn a LOT from the past.  Recent elections show us that GOP candidates with liberal pasts DO NOT get votes from republican base, and they don't win elections.

Maybe if it happens agian, when 2020 rolls around, they'll finally listen.  I doubt it tho.

really ?

how many times have you pointed out that the country is skewing more liberal so how in the world do you conclude (based on what actual EVIDENCE) that the country wants a more conservative, and in fact a stridently conservative POTUS

I assume you're just trolling again

[240 is Back]

really ?

how many times have you pointed out that the country is skewing more liberal so how in the world do you conclude (based on what actual EVIDENCE) that the country wants a more conservative, and in fact a stridently conservative POTUS

I assume you're just trolling again

the numbers of politics is pretty clear.  Both sides have about 47% that shows up every time IF they run a candidate that matches their base.  Then they fight over the 6% of undecideds in the middle.

Repubs didn't get that "built-in" 47% in 2008 or 2012 because they base hated the candidate.  ROmney ended up with only 47 or 48%, and he did grab soe independent votes.  The base stayed home.  And they will again.

[Straw Man]

the numbers of politics is pretty clear.  Both sides have about 47% that shows up every time IF they run a candidate that matches their base.  Then they fight over the 6% of undecideds in the middle.

Repubs didn't get that "built-in" 47% in 2008 or 2012 because they base hated the candidate.  ROmney ended up with only 47 or 48%, and he did grab soe independent votes.  The base stayed home.  And they will again.

nothing you wrote concludes that a hard right conservative can win

the fact that RINO's lose proves that the country doesn't want a RINO

It doesn't prove (or even support) that the country wants a hard right winger

I honestly don't even know where to start with you

You seem to believe that some fantasy 6% "undecideds" are hard core right wingers that will stay home unless a Ted Cruz is the candidate

Even if that were true (and there is zero proof that it is) you're totally forgetting the polarizing effect that a candidate like that would have on the electorate.  

Moderate Repubs would flee and given that half the country doesn't even vote you'd likely have many more show up just to keep him out of office.  Think how many people cast a vote against someone they don't want rather than in favor of who they do want.  

Look at the publics view on immigration, gay rights, women health issues, education, healthcare....

None of that suggests the nation wants a hard right winger

Again, you HAVE to be trolling otherwise you're less intelligent than I thought (no offense but seriously your premise is ridiculous)

[240 is Back]

Repubs only win one way - if they win the women vote.  And the women that win them elections are conservative women that didn't vote romney, or mccain/palin.

If repubs run a conservative, then this base of right-leaning women that turned out in 80, 84, 88, 2000, 2004 and 2010 WILL show up.  And the repub candidate will win.  If the repubs run a liberal-leaning moderate, the base women don't bother voting.  It's that simple, and I have 32+ years of elections which demonstrate this fact.

IMHO, it all comes down to women - if repubs want to win, they have to win the women vote.  Period.  All this shit about "but maybe this time, a RINO will appeal because..." just isn't historically accurate.

Win women, and you win the presidency.  Run a rino, and you don't win women.

[Coach is Back!]

people who cannot learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.  Remember?

2008... repub run a RINO, the base doesn't bother showing up to vote.
2012... repubs run a rino, and again, the base doesn't bother voting.

2016... yall are kneepadding a lifer liberal like Trump that only turned RINO when convenient... and again, you will act all surprised when the base doesn't bother to vote.  Once they learn his past positions, they'll feel a little stupid fo sucking up to him.  "When hilary sat first row at your wedding" and "when you gave hilary a dump truck of $ to get elected" and "when you supported abotion, anti-gun legislation, etc..."

Trump didn't suddenly believe in gun rights or suddenly value himan life.  He admits it has nothing to do with religion, he had no moment of clarity.  He just 'evolved" to win politically, and NOW he's using reagan to justify it.  "Reagan evolved, so can I".

Reagan gave us amnesty, reagan tripled the size of govt, doubled the debt, raised taxes and even supported the Brady bill.  There you have it. 

You voted Obama twice and you haven't learned a thing. Try again.

[Straw Man]

You voted Obama twice and you haven't learned a thing. Try again.

jesus christ you have nothing to offer to any conversation

go flip a tire

[240 is Back]

Lol swear on your big toe, coach.   Swear on it!

[whork]

the numbers of politics is pretty clear.  Both sides have about 47% that shows up every time IF they run a candidate that matches their base.  Then they fight over the 6% of undecideds in the middle.

Repubs didn't get that "built-in" 47% in 2008 or 2012 because they base hated the candidate.  ROmney ended up with only 47 or 48%, and he did grab soe independent votes.  The base stayed home.  And they will again.

If the base cant be motivated, when a muslim commie terrorist is about to win a second term i doubt anything can.

[Straw Man]

Repubs only win one way - if they win the women vote.  And the women that win them elections are conservative women that didn't vote romney, or mccain/palin.

If repubs run a conservative, then this base of right-leaning women that turned out in 80, 84, 88, 2000, 2004 and 2010 WILL show up.  And the repub candidate will win.  If the repubs run a liberal-leaning moderate, the base women don't bother voting.  It's that simple, and I have 32+ years of elections which demonstrate this fact.

IMHO, it all comes down to women - if repubs want to win, they have to win the women vote.  Period.  All this shit about "but maybe this time, a RINO will appeal because..." just isn't historically accurate.

Win women, and you win the presidency.  Run a rino, and you don't win women.

so you think conservative women dind't show up to vote for Palin because she wasn't bat shit crazy right wing enough for them so this vast group of hard core right wing women decided to stay home?

LOL

and again, somehow the bat shit crazy Repub gets the vote and how do you avoid middle or of the road conservatives and independents from staying home (or switching parties as many did in 2008)

How do you stop the polarizing effect from stimulating even more voter turnout from the left (many millions of whom stay home)

WTF man

do you even think this shit through before you post it?

[whork]

nothing you wrote concludes that a hard right conservative can win

the fact that RINO's lose proves that the country doesn't want a RINO

It doesn't prove (or even support) that the country wants a hard right winger

I honestly don't even know where to start with you

You seem to believe that some fantasy 6% "undecideds" are hard core right wingers that will stay home unless a Ted Cruz is the candidate

Even if that were true (and there is zero proof that it is) you're totally forgetting the polarizing effect that a candidate like that would have on the electorate.  

Moderate Repubs would flee and given that half the country doesn't even vote you'd likely have many more show up just to keep him out of office.  Think how many people cast a vote against someone they don't want rather than in favor of who they do want.  

Look at the publics view on immigration, gay rights, women health issues, education, healthcare....

None of that suggests the nation wants a hard right winger

Again, you HAVE to be trolling otherwise you're less intelligent than I thought (no offense but seriously your premise is ridiculous)

This.

[240 is Back]

so you think conservative women dind't show up to vote for Palin because she wasn't bat shit crazy right wing enough for them so this vast group of hard core right wing women decided to stay home?

conservative women didn't show up because mccain was at the top of that ticket.  Repubs often add the "me too" conservative person onto the ticket, but it doesn't help much.  Ask veep Ryan. 

they get the women vote = they win the election, and I demonstrated the years where this happened, and in those years, they wiped the floor with the repubs.   But in the years they didn't win women, the dems won. 

at some point, maybe 4, maybe 8, maybe 20 years from now, you'll see it continue to happen and say "hey, maybe 240 was on to something there".  I'm sorry if 32 years' of elections was too small a sample size.