Quote:
Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
2 questions:
1) By "we" do you mean the libertarian republicans?
|
Socially liberal, Economically conservative. The difference between a Libertarian Republican and a moderate Republican is that Libertarian Republicans are big on gun rights, moderates are not.
Quote:
Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
2) For whom has the loss been most expensive? Do the elections of 2006 demonstrate that the strategy dooms the current non-RINO Republicans to persistent minority status? Or do the 2004 elections show that they can hold a majority, absent aberational elections resulting from singular/unique policy choices?
|
The problem is turnout. As long as the trend continues that people vote less and less, then the social conservative Republicans can hold onto power just by turning out the base. In low turnout elections, only the extremists show up to vote. In low turnout elections both moderate and libertarian Republicans don't turn out to vote. The pool of social conservative voters is shrinking but as long as turnout keeps shrinking they can still hold onto power. If we just had a fifty percent turnout in all Federal elections, the extreme liberals and the social conservatives would have no power at all. But when you have low turnout the extremists in the power hold the keys to the kingdom. That is why the social conservatives controlled Washington and the extreme liberals control the California legislature.
