CNN Poll: Republicans want winner over ideology in 2012

[Golem]

CNN Political Unit
February 8, 2011

Given the choice between a candidate who agrees with them on the issues or a candidate who can defeat President Barack Obama in 2012, a new national poll indicates Republicans overwhelming want a winner.

According to CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Tuesday, nearly seven out of ten Republicans say they would prefer a GOP presidential nominee who can top Obama in the next election, with 29 percent saying a nominee who agrees with them on every issue that matters the most is more important.

More

[DefiantSix]

If that's the case, then the Republicans can try it again without the conservatives in 2012.

I sincerely doubt this is anything more than CNN doing their rendition of Tokyo Rose, though.

[dandi]

If that's the case, then the Republicans can try it again without the conservatives in 2012.

I sincerely doubt this is anything more than CNN doing their rendition of Tokyo Rose, though.

Whistling past the graveyard, as it were.

[DefiantSix]

Whistling past the graveyard, as it were.

Maybe so.  But I tell you this; I'm damned tired of getting promised by somebody "electable" that they will be standing for the same principles I do, just to watch 'em cave to the Dhimmi'Rat Communist Party at the first opportunity.

We keep going down the same "compromise" route and gee, we keep getting the same lackluster ****heads as our candidates/office holders.  Juan McLame was just the latest in a long series of "compromise" candidates.  You say you are willing to accept a candidate who is with you on 60% - 70% of your issues; well the problem with that is that the RINO bastards we've been fronting for the past 20 years are with us on the 60% - 70% cheese-dick shit.  The stuff where it doesn't require a ****in' spine to make your ****in' stand there.  I want the 'critter that's with me on the 30% - 40% that really ****in' matters in the long run.  I don't give a shit about the ****er's ISSUES:  I want to see what ****in' PRINCIPLES these clowns are going to stand for.  Near as I can tell, there ain't a single republican who is principled enough for me to be interested in pissing on the sonuvabitch if he were on fire.  Tim Pawlenty, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, and the rest of the ass clowns inclusive.

I tell you which Republican I'll vote for in 2012.  I'll vote for the first cocksucker who stands his sorry ass up and calls for Congressional investigations into Lord ObeyWon's START treaty with the Russkies.  I'll vote for the first sorry SoB who orchestrates a work stoppage on the budget - to include shutting down the entire ****ing Federal Government, if necessary - until Caliph Barry addresses and corrects the court rulings on his extra-constitutional power grabs.  Until then, the entire grab-asstic Republican Party is beneath my contempt and not worthy of my vote.

The Republicans have less than 21 months to earn my vote.  The clock is ticking.

[FreeBorn]

I tell you which Republican I'll vote for in 2012.  I'll vote for the first cocksucker who stands his sorry ass up and calls for Congressional investigations into Lord ObeyWon's START treaty with the Russkies.  I'll vote for the first sorry SoB who orchestrates a work stoppage on the budget - to include shutting down the entire ****ing Federal Government, if necessary - until Caliph Barry addresses and corrects the court rulings on his extra-constitutional power grabs.  Until then, the entire grab-asstic Republican Party is beneath my contempt and not worthy of my vote.

D6 you're coming close to describing Ron Paul.

[DefiantSix]

I tell you which Republican I'll vote for in 2012.  I'll vote for the first cocksucker who stands his sorry ass up and calls for Congressional investigations into Lord ObeyWon's START treaty with the Russkies.  I'll vote for the first sorry SoB who orchestrates a work stoppage on the budget - to include shutting down the entire ****ing Federal Government, if necessary - until Caliph Barry addresses and corrects the court rulings on his extra-constitutional power grabs.  Until then, the entire grab-asstic Republican Party is beneath my contempt and not worthy of my vote.

D6 you're coming close to describing Ron Paul.

Except I have no use for that racist cocksucker, or his 100 percenter Ronbots, either.  I have no problem with a critter that'll compromise with Dhimmi'Rats; I just don't want the ones that think "compromise" with the Dims means selling out core principles and values in exchange for the 21st century equivilent of a handful of shiny beads.

[seabelle]

They ran an "electable" in 2008, eh?  How did that work out for them    At least McCain gave us Sarah !

http://twitter.com/#!/SarahPalinUSA/status/36171323721908224

[BearArms]

I'm someone who does take into consideration "electability" when voting in a Republican primary. I mean that is, after all, the whole point of putting forth a candidate -- for him or her to win. Why else would you have them run?

Granted, "electable" does NOT mean a moderate full of "compromises." Just as in 2008, in 2012 we will be running against a far-left candidate. That means we have to put forward a solid right-wing candidate -- someone who has very consistent conservative views -- to stand a chance. McCain was not electable. A moderate will lose every time to Obama. Because a moderate loses core conservative votes, and by finding too much common ground with Obama you create a situation where stances overlap and voters become indifferent and they pick the one with the most charisma.

We have to have someone who will pick a side and really differentiate themselves from the left.

So agreeing with conservatives on the issues IS being electable in this case.

And, it sounds shallow, but we need someone with the ability to speak well and charm crowds the way Obama does. The fact is, Obama is one of the more charismatic Presidents we've had in recent times, and the Republican candidate has to be able to combat that. The first person that comes to mind is Romney but I have my reservations about him. RomneyCare has the potential to catch up to him among other things.

And we need a campaign that is at least somewhat decent. The McCain/Palin campaign was utter shit. Probably one of the worst presidential campaigns of all time. But that's beside the point.

[Tess Anderson]

A false choice - either a candidate that agrees with you on every major issue or one that can win the election is not a mutually exclusive choice. CNN is really upset that they can't isolate the GOP candidate and get a jump-start on destroying him or her. CNN's ideology is the one that would lose.

[delilahmused]

And, it sounds shallow, but we need someone with the ability to speak well and charm crowds the way Obama does. The fact is, Obama is one of the more charismatic Presidents we've had in recent times, and the Republican candidate has to be able to combat that. The first person that comes to mind is Romney but I have my reservations about him. RomneyCare has the potential to catch up to him among other things.

Two things: Obama WAS considered a charismatic speaker. By now, everyone has heard his bumbling and stumbling when he doesn't have his TOTUS.

And people now realize they elected someone with style instead of substance.

More than anything else, they're going to look for someone with concrete solutions, the balls to take him on, and someone who can take the beating the press will give them and not be intimidated.

Cindie

[Chris_]

If that's the case, then the Republicans can try it again without the conservatives in 2012.

I sincerely doubt this is anything more than CNN doing their rendition of Tokyo Rose, though.

Well Defiant I truely hope that you are right, but if it comes to voting for a non-conservative Republican, or Obama or Cllinton, I will be forced to vote for the Republican just to keep the Dems out of the White House in 2012