I have looked at the numbers. Moderate Republican candidates have struggled to get the conservative base to turn out in big numbers. If Bush or Christie is the candidate in 2016, turnout on the right will be low again. Whoever the candidate is, he will need to win the independents without alienating the base. I don't think that either Christie or Jeb Bush are capable of pulling off that feat. Unfortunately, I believe that both men have a shot at the nomination because the idiots running the party learned nothing from the losses by Romney, McCain, and Dole. Nor did they learn anything from the two wins posted by Reagan.

 

I will try to find the stats for you. There were some very eye opening stats in the last election and a huge part of it is the Spanish vote.

Rubio might be the strongest of the bunch vs. Mrs. Clinton. But I don't see him winning the nomination. Right now I'd make Rick Perry the front-runner.

 

Not according to polling:

 

RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - 2016 Republican Presidential Nomination

Rubio might be the strongest of the bunch vs. Mrs. Clinton. But I don't see him winning the nomination. Right now I'd make Rick Perry the front-runner.

 

I agree on Rubio.

I will try to find the stats for you. There were some very eye opening stats in the last election and a huge part of it is the Spanish vote.

Spanish people live in Spain and Spanish-Americans or their ancestors immigrated from Spain. I think you meant Hispanic voters, and obviously they were a big factor in the 2012 election.

 

My point is that most conservatives who vote will vote for the Republican candidate. A candidate who cannot inspire conservatives to turn out in large numbers cannot win a general election.

Spanish people live in Spain and Spanish-Americans or their ancestors immigrated from Spain. I think you meant Hispanic voters, and obviously they were a big factor in the 2012 election.

 

My point is that most conservatives who vote will vote for the Republican candidate. A candidate who cannot inspire conservatives to turn out in large numbers cannot win a general election.

 

Thank you. Hispanic. I was drawing a blank on the proper term.

The way Huckabee is polling I think I'd be trying to get an endorsement from him if he's not going to run.

Not according to polling:

 

RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - 2016 Republican Presidential Nomination

Perry's been through the process once already. He's got an organization and money. He's conservative enough for the Tea Party folks, who will decide the primary. OK ... he ain't the sharpest tool in the shed, but that didn't stop the last governor of Texas who ran for president. Perry's running mate will be New Hampshire Sen. Kelly Ayotte.

Go look at demographics and the breakdown of the last election. The voters that won that election for Obama have nothing to do with the Republican base. The Republican base has become a little like the African American vote. You know what they are going to do every election no matter who the candidate is. Those aren't the voters a candidate needs to get to win an election. The biggest demographic impacting presidential elections is the spanish voter.

While I agree with you that the GOP needs to expand, I don't think you're correct on your analysis on the Repub base.

 

Romney didn't excite his base and get them to the polls, I'm not talking about just his message and philosophy. That sucked too, but so did his ground game.

 

For instance, states like FL, VA, CO, and OH. All were in a margin of below 5%.

 

VA was lost by a margin of 3%. FL was less than 1% and OH was less than 2%.

 

VA is a state that has a Republican Governor and Legislature. They nominated Ken Cuccinelli -- known as a right-wing tea partyer -- who eventually lost due to a poorly ran campaign and going away from his base. It's also a state where Rand's daddy got 40% of the vote in the primary with only Mitt Romney. That should give you some sign as to how the base felt about Romney.

 

FL is a state with a Republican Gov and Legislature as well. It's also a state that voted in tea party candidate Marco Rubio in 2010 -- which we all know was more about the anti-Obama sentiment than it was about electing a conservative -- first in the primary, ridding themselves of the Establishment, much like Romney is viewed as.

 

OH is an off and on state. You never know which way its going to go -- unless you have a superior game plan.

 

What's so funny is how people on here insist and insist that someone like Rand Paul is too extreme and blah blah. Yet poll after poll in states like New Hampshire, Colorado, Nevada, North Carolina -- ya know, those swing states, Rand Paul not only beats generic Repubs, but he actually beats Hillary.

 

He's also the only candidate that has a shot at the minority vote. His stance on mandatory minimums and Voter ID are helping him.

Thank you. Hispanic. I was drawing a blank on the proper term.

I knew what you meant. I think that Mexican-American or Latino is probably a more accurate term for most Spanish speaking voters in this country.

 

I agree that the Hispanic vote is a growing factor in presidential elections. However, I don't think that Republican candidates should simply assume that Hispanic voters are single issue voters who all want to see amnesty to illegal immigrants. Most came to this country looking for good wages and a different way of life than they had in Mexico. They are American citizens who do not necessarily want to see the U.S. become more like Mexico with its high unemployment and corrupt federal government.

 

Candidates like Rubio and Cruz can win a substantial share of the Hispanic vote. Bush and Christie may try but they cannot out pander Hillary Clinton to win Hispanic votes.

Here are some numbers for you Mitch. Obama lost the white vote by the widest margin of any winning candidate ever - 39% to 59% for Romney. The previous record was 12% spread. Even though he only got 39% of the white vote Obama wins. Obama also lost ground with African Americans, 2% fewer than his first election. So how did Obama win? Over 71% of Latinos voted for Obama. That is why I said after the last election that Republicans better change their positions on immigration reform or they will be in trouble in future elections. Whoever the Dem candidate is will do better than Obama did with white voters and with women voters so that makes the challenge even greater for a Republican candidate. The number one issue in the next election? Immigration.

 

I will recant on an earlier comment. Cruz might have better chance than I was thinking because of the Latino vote.

Carson's not perfect on Guns but he has clarified his position and he's more agreeable on them now.

 

It is my understanding that Carson is not as 2nd Amendment friendly as say Cruz but much more so than Christie? If so, I could live with that. My guess is Carson would try to be as hands off as possible on gun laws.

Perry's been through the process once already. He's got an organization and money. He's conservative enough for the Tea Party folks, who will decide the primary. OK ... he ain't the sharpest tool in the shed, but that didn't stop the last governor of Texas who ran for president. Perry's running mate will be New Hampshire Sen. Kelly Ayotte.

In case you have not noticed, Obama is not the sharpest tool in the shed either. It is why he continues to keep his academic records locked away. Bush had a higher SAT score and a better GPA than John Kerry.

 

Perry is the second most popular politician in his state. He is no Ted Cruz but Perry has a solid record as governor and he would be a huge improvement over the incumbent.

Anybody who says the party doesn't need to look at it's base for winning a general needs to look no further than the 2000 elections.

 

Everybody blamed Nadar for sifting off 2.75% of the vote, enough for Gore to take the win.

 

He simply replied with, "maybe next time the Democrats will pay more attention to their progressive base."

 

In comes Barack Obama.

 

Out of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, Which was the Progressive candidate for the Dems in 2008? Who was the moderate?

In case you have not noticed, Obama is not the sharpest tool in the shed either. It is why he continues to keep his academic records locked away.

You must subscribe to Donald Trump's newsletter.

Anybody who says the party doesn't need to look at it's base for winning a general needs to look no further than the 2000 elections.

The nation has changed greatly in terms of demographics since 2000. Revisit Post No. 55.