Never too early to talk about 2016....

[Dave Gray]

While the former moderates is a cute anecdote, it's total bullshit.  Romney and McCain are moderates.  They can call themselves whatever they want, but saying you're "severely conservative" doesn't make it so.  It just makes you a liar.

Had Romney been able to win his nomination by "hugging" Obama like he did at the debates, maybe he'd be president now.  It's when you try to be something you're not, you come off as a phony.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

While the former moderates is a cute anecdote, it's total bullshit.  Romney and McCain are moderates.  They can call themselves whatever they want, but saying you're "severely conservative" doesn't make it so.  It just makes you a liar.

Had Romney been able to win his nomination by "hugging" Obama like he did at the debates, maybe he'd be president now.  It's when you try to be something you're not, you come off as a phony.

I won't disagree with you on that.  But the point remains.  You can't win the GOP nomination as a moderate, running as a moderate.  In order to win the nomination you must either be a far right canidate -- GWB or run as as a sever conservative -- McCain'08, Romney.  If you are a moderate running as a moderate -- McCain'00, Guilinai.  You won't win Rep primaries.   

[Spider-Dan]

While the former moderates is a cute anecdote, it's total bullshit.  Romney and McCain are moderates.  They can call themselves whatever they want, but saying you're "severely conservative" doesn't make it so.  It just makes you a liar.

They campaigned as conservatives, and they were rejected for the same.  Jon Huntsman had a very conservative record as governor of Utah, but he chose to campaign as a moderate, and was rejected in the primaries for that position.

You don't win an election based on your record, you win it by convincing people of what you will do (and your record is only part of that).  If the GOP primary had never existed, Romney might have been able to convince the electorate that he would govern as a moderate... but his desperate sprint to the right in the primaries made that impossible.  Pre-primary McCain had some of the most bipartisan support of any politician in decades (look at how he was beloved by The Daily Show), but his actions in the primary, along with his selection of That Woman, undid most of that.

[Dave Gray]

You can't win the GOP nomination as a moderate, running as a moderate.  In order to win the nomination you must either be a far right canidate -- GWB or run as as a sever conservative -- McCain'08, Romney.  If you are a moderate running as a moderate -- McCain'00, Guilinai.  You won't win Rep primaries.  

This is legitimate speculation, but it's speculation that I don't believe would prove to be true -- though it's not been tested.  The crazies serve to "scare" the business GOP, but I don't think they're a real threat.  Romney was going to beat that field regardless of who was in it.  I believe he would have still won the nomination by being a sensible conservative.

If Jeb Bush or Chris Christie make a serious run at the position, I believe they can win without getting nuts.  I think that it might actually be good for the GOP to put that to the test and see if the base will actually elect a lunatic: Herman Cain, Bachman, etc.  Then let them get destroyed and reshape the party.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

This is legitimate speculation, but it's speculation that I don't believe would prove to be true -- though it's not been tested. 

Yes, it has been tested.  McCain ran as a moderate in 2000 and got is ass kicked in the primary.  He embraced the far right in 2008 and won the primary and got is ass kicked in the general election.  Guliani was a ligitimate moderate in 2008 and couldn't get any support.   

[Dave Gray]

Yes, it has been tested.  McCain ran as a moderate in 2000 and got is ass kicked in the primary.  He embraced the far right in 2008 and won the primary and got is ass kicked in the general election.  Guliani was a ligitimate moderate in 2008 and couldn't get any support.  

Interesting point and I see what you're saying.

I'll counter with this: 2000 was a long time ago -- the political landscape has changed.  Bush was a big name, as was McCain.  And Bush won....something that the far right can no longer do, it seems.  And even Bush ran on a "compassionate conservative" platform, which has since been replaced with self-deportation, contraception, and all these other extreme social positions.

I think that Guiliani lost to McCain for 2 reasons: It was his turn, like the GOP is so famous for.  And he really didn't have a platform, other than "9/11 this, 9/11 that".  But it also goes to my point that McCain is a moderate.  So is Giuliani.  It's not like Giuliani got beat from someone on the right -- just someone acting like they were.

[Spider-Dan]

This is legitimate speculation, but it's speculation that I don't believe would prove to be true -- though it's not been tested.  The crazies serve to "scare" the business GOP, but I don't think they're a real threat.  Romney was going to beat that field regardless of who was in it.  I believe he would have still won the nomination by being a sensible conservative.

It's not "speculation" at all; GOP primary voters have resoundingly rejected moderates.  Look at the only GOP president primary candidate that never led the field or won any poll of any kind: Huntsman.  What was the defining characteristic of his campaign?  Moderatism.

And you keep saying that they are only "acting" like they're extremely conservative, but what you actually mean is that they are campaigning as extreme conservatives, which is the whole point.  Maybe if they got into office, they might revert to their previous moderate policies... but at that point, "you dance with the girl that brung you" is a powerful argument.  If you campaigned as a severe conservative and won, why wouldn't you govern as one?

[Dave Gray]

Huntsman is a particularly poor example.  He never had any funding to gain ground, he didn't have a name people knew...  He wasn't gaining any ground, regardless of his positions on anything.  He's another boring Mormon with Obama ties -- just one that nobody knew and without a ridiculous war-chest and financial backing.

And I don't agree that Romney campaigned as a conservative.  He campaigned HALF THE TIME as a conservative.  And then ran to be a moderate for the election and campaigned on that stuff. 

I personally don't think that Romney was going to be pushing Pro-Life bills in the White House if he were elected, as you'd have thought if you listened to him in the primaries.  ...but you never know.  He was a business guy who was going to do business things -- tax cuts for rich & corporations, drop regulations, etc.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

And I don't agree that Romney campaigned as a conservative.  He campaigned HALF THE TIME as a conservative.  And then ran to be a moderate for the election and campaigned on that stuff. 

That is the worst way to campaign -- being two-faced.

[Spider-Dan]

Dave, traditionally the argument that the "establishment candidate" (e.g. Romney) makes during the primary is, "My opponents are too extreme to win the general election.  Vote for me, the more moderate candidate, so we have a chance to win in the general."  This is precisely the argument that Huntsman made in this cycle.  He lost in an embarrassing fashion.  (And your arguments for funding or name recognition would carry more weight if Michele Bachmann and Herman Cain had not climbed their way to the top of the GOP primary polls at one point or another.  Huntsman stands alone as the one primary candidate that had no traction whatsoever at any time.)

Contrast that with the primary argument that Romney actually made, which was "I am much more conservative than my opponents."  The guy tried to place himself to the right of Rick Santorum on abortion!  At no point did Romney attempt to make the argument that the less extreme candidate would stand a better chance in the general; instead, he tried to prove himself to be more extreme than his competitors.

This is the problem.  When everyone in your primary is running as fast as they can towards the fringe, you cannot just etch-a-sketch your way back to the center for the general.  Yes, it's well-known that candidates play to their base in primaries and tack back to the center in the general... but when even the establishment candidates are shunning the label of moderate, you are playing in a different league.

[Dave Gray]

^^ I largely agree with the last two points.

This is what Romney tried and failed.  The GOP, realistically, should have been able to beat the Dems with a weak economy.  They ran to the right and couldn't two-face their way back to the middle, thus the loss.  Worse for them, they are damaging the long-term viability of their brand in doing so.

[Phishfan]

if Michele Bachmann and Herman Cain had not climbed their way to the top of the GOP primary polls at one point or another. 

I can admit that I didn't watch the polling all that closely and a good pollster can almost predict his outcome by targeting the right groups but I find it hard to believe both of these candidates (or either) topped any credible polling. Were either of them really looking like the top candidates at any point or does this go into the pulled one out of the ass for emphasis category? I considered both of them idiots but like I said I really didn't follow the polling.

[Dave Gray]

^ Cain and Bachman led the polls but it was smoke and mirrors.  I don't think anyone ever believed that either of them had a legitimate shot at the election.

[Spider-Dan]

The GOP primary electorate hated Mitt Romney and successively glommed on to everyone that was Not Romney (except Huntsman) until that person proved completely incompetent.  Romney essentially won by default.

I believe the poll leadership timeline was Bachmann, Perry, Cain, Gingrich, Paul, Santorum.