Conservative Minority? Not Even Close

Always thoughtful blogger, James Joyner, wonders if conservatives are now a minority within the Republican Party. With all due respect to James, the analysis is terribly flawed. It cherry picks items to make the case and ignores those that make it clear, the analysis is wrong.

AllahPundit, who strongly prefers Romney but maintains a realistic outlook, concurs.

So, we have two countervailing trends:

Conservatives prefer Romney over McCain, hands down McCain is winning Republican primaries against Romney

This, incidentally, despite Romney having outspent McCain by ridiculous margins in television advertising.

What is one to conclude from this?

To date, McCain has won exactly one Republican Primary that didn't include significant numbers of Independents and Dems.

John Hinderaker asserts that, “as the primary season draws to a close, most conservatives are coalescing around Mitt Romney.” Bill Quick believes we are now engaged in “the War for the GOP” with the “GOP establishment attempting to remake the party in its preferred liberal-conservative image - an image in which the ‘conservative’ part is mostly window dressing for the suckers.

Whether the late gathering around Romney will be enough, or not, remains to be seen. But the fact that it's happening - and far from completely - refutes the notion of a conservative minority. Conservatives within the GOP have always been a coalition. There's certainly been enough written about it that it shouldn't come as a surprise. And McCain is the clear favorite of conservative hawks.

Beyond that, few would characterize Huckabee's remaining, in many cases, substantial support, liberal at all. If those were Romney votes, McCain likely would never have re-emerged. Romney may be a great executive and I think he'd likely make a solid president - but a stellar campaigner he is not. He's not intuitively a pol.

By the time you factor in all the conservative sub-groups voting in the Republican Primary not being attracted to one genuinely good messenger, any notion that they are a minority within the Party simply doesn't wash.

And ultimately that's the real problem. A moderate who doesn't represent the majority of the party may be able to take the reins. Even with many Hawks liking McCain, Huckabee is the biggest factor preventing a consolidation around Romney to the degree he might need to win. The threat many conservatives perceive is that, given Huckabee's populist economics, liberal positions on Global Warming - which match McCain's - two weak candidates, each unable to attract a clear majority alone under any circumstances, could continue to try and peel off sections of the current coalition and reform the party in, not a broader, but more liberal leaning tent.

The good thing is they don't even really line up on that. McCain isn't crazy about the God people - and if Huckabee weren't just pandering, he'd be much more of a Dove. This battle will go on well after the primary and a likely lost election. And the result remains to be seen.

I wouldn't rule out Romney just yet, either. Certainly McCain is out in front. But much now depends on delegate counts, not states. Also, most every race this year has broken late. The recent Rasmussen pols had as many as 25% undecided. I don't want to drum up any false hopes for Romney supporters, but until Tuesday night, I don't think we can know.

Comments

[Coffee260]

A Clinton Presidency will damage the country, but it won’t destroy my dignity. A vote for McCain will do both.

[Joe Citizen]

Obama will win the election. Republicans will regroup and focus on redefining conservatism for the new era, and will certainly nominate their first draft of such a candidacy in the Obama landslide re-elect. By 2016, they will settle on a viable alternative to Obama's successor. But what the issues and positionings will be by then, no one can really know.

[Roy Mustang]

Your dignity is infinitely less important than the well-being of this country. Vote for whoever you think will damage this country less.

[Frank Saxon]

McCrazy would be a worst disaster then the Hildabeast. Better the enemy you know then a lying lib scumbag, who claims he's your friend.

[Roy Mustang]

Better Roberts than Ginsburg. Better Pro-Life than 100% NARAL. Better victory in Iraq than defeat.

Nevermind. McCain has personally insulted me in some shape form or manner. Screw him. Go Hillary!

[Roy Mustang]

I'm sorry. I mean Go Romney!

[Dex]

Hey, Roy - I forget how did McCain vote on Ginsburg? How long did he filibuster her?

[Roy Mustang]

With 96 other Senators. Alan Simpson. RINO! Mitch McConnell. RINO! Howell Heflin. RINO!!! RINOS everywhere!

How about citing a confirmation hearing when the voting was actually close? Bork? Alito?

[Roy Mustang]

Shelby swtiched. Not Heflin. I'm getting old.

[Dex]

but I thought McCain was a Maverick, who does what's right no matter what anyone else does, right? He doesn't just go along with the crowd, right?

Maybe he's just another GOP establishment Senator who's for sale to the highest bidder or kindest word in the press...

[Dex]

And on Alito? you mean the Justice that McCain wouldn't have appointed for being too conservative?

[daveinboca]

Sadly, Romney resembles another MA governor who didn't have enough gumption to get angry when asked if the death penalty would be appropriate for the rape/murder of his wife. Dukakis let nary a hair out of place, and blew the election as a hollow man with no feelings whatsoever.

McCain has holes in his campaign large enough to let a convoy through:

National Security candidate who doesn't want our borders guarded?

A leader with anger management problems?

Yet, insipid placid Mitt gets all sanctimonious when McCain lies about him. Does the guy have a set or is he a Ken doll with perfect hair & forehead?

[Roy Mustang]

Over 40 Senators voted against Alito. McCain had the unique power as the leader of the Gang of 14 to kill that nomination. It's ironic that McCain had even more power than Bush over the Alito nomination. Appoint, indeed.

In any case, no, I mean the Alito that McCain praised, lobbied and voted for. Which Alito are you referring to?

[seekeronos]

Pretending for a moment that McCain could possibly beat Obama ... McCain (and the MSM, and the voters who carried his water) will ruin the GOP and forever render it a fractured party that could only win regionally or perhaps only in certain local and state level elections.

In a McCain-Obama or a McCain-Hillary contest, I will CERTAINLY VOTE DEOMCRAT to preserve this nation: McCain is a vile, disgusting swine who has gone beyond the pale of his service record to betray the GOP base time and time again for his "place in the sun".

We will certainly do as badly as we did with Carter or FDR at the helm, but by 2012 or at most, 2016, we will have a much better chance of energizing a solid conservative candidate who will bring things on course.

[Roy Mustang]

President Carter, eh? Another hostage crisis would certainly energize that solid conservative candidate in 2012! And...dare I say it? Another 9/11 would give us Reagan incarnate!

Vile, disgusting swines indeed.

[Dex]

The Alito I'm talking about is the one McCain wouldn't have nominated. You bring up the gang of 14? Ok, Senator McCain fought awfully hard to keep the filibuster of judicial nominees alive. Had he ever used it, especially when Clinton was nominating hardcore leftists? Why not? Where was this leadership I keep hearing so much about? or was he just going along to get along with the Dems? And why should we expect different when he's in the executive branch?

McCain doesn't care about the social issues (except for granting amnesty to illegals) and doesn't know that much about the economic ones. And what he does know isn't necessarily so. He's a one-issue candidate - Iraq - and that on that one issue he isn't better than the others.

I'm not a single issue voter, Roy. I get that you are. A lot of McCain's momentum is based on the idea or the feeling that he can win this fall. He cannot. And the base is telling you so. You might listen rather than hurling invective on every message board and comments section you can find. I doubt it, but you might.

[superdestroyer]

Why do people believe that the Republicans can make a comeback after Senator Obama is elected president. The demograhic changes in the U.S. ensure that growing dominance of the Democratic Party. The growing hispanic and black populations were going to make the Republicans irrelevant by 2030. The incompetence of the Bush Admnistration has just spread up the process.

An Obama rout will probably give the Democrats 40 seats in the Senate. That would make the Republicans irrelevant on the national stage. Eight years of an Obama administration and large Democratic majorities in Congress will not only make the current Republicans irrelevant but also discourage the next generation. Why would any 30 something conservative want to run for office when the result is probably losing in a rout. Also, the money for conservatives will dry up after the Democratic Party becomes so dominate.

If you want to see the future of politics, look to states like Maryland, Mass, California, and NJ.

To use a poker analogy, the Republican Party has no hand and no draw and is the short stack player.

[Chris]

Ahh, the conservative minority. Stuck in the past, their quaint beliefs will serve as a curiosity for the rest of us for years to come.

[Fred Beloit]

supermano is having a wet dream: "An Obama rout will probably give the Democrats 40 seats in the Senate. That would make the Republicans irrelevant on the national stage. Eight years of an Obama administration and large Democratic majorities in Congress will not only make the current Republicans irrelevant but also discourage the next generation."

Hey, pal, why don't you go see if you can find a date?

[superdestroyer]

Fred,

Of course, I meant that an Obama Rout would give the Democrats 60 seats in the Senate and would prevent the Republicans from being able to filibuster. When that happens, very possible in 2008 and highly likely in 2010, the Republicans in Congress become irrelevant.

Also, 60 or more Democratic senators will allow the Democratic party to look more moderate while becoming more liberal. Blue Dog Democrats like Webb and Tester will be able to vote to end a filibuster (effectively voting for legislation and then actually vote against it during a voice vote.

The real question is what will the U.S. be like as a one party state with the Democratic Party the only relevant political party.

[WAHOO WILLIE SEZ:]

Man, I so hope that superdip and chrissy are correct in their assumptions!! They and their legacy get to PAY for their wonderful utopia and it's going to be hilarious. I WANT MY MOMMY!!!!!

[seekeronos]

Fred, it is a long shot... but the only way superdoofus's prophecy comes true is if the future Obama administration does the following:

1) Writes a super-sneaky executive order (thus bypassing any amnesty bill BS) granting blanket citizenship to all illegals within US borders, (no Democratic congresscritter would complain) on the single condition (as orchestrated through MOveOn.org and certain far left radical Aztlan/MEChista groups) that they become patronistas to "Partido Democtratico"... this makes big business giants like the WSJ marginally happy when faced with crushing taxes; the losses can be written off against the cheap migrant labour)

2) Withdraws from the Middle-East and ...redeploys in short order to Darfur and/or every other useless hellhole in Africa (to make the radical Black voters happy)...

3) Puts us on a series of universal entitlement programs that would make FDR look like a astute free market capitalist by comparison...

4) Buys off the Jihadists with his Islamic "Mojo" and plenty of oil to give us a few years of perceived peace...

Add in a few more gay Republicans scandals (sic) and some other scandals to give Obama and the newly surgent supermajority DemCong a reason to pack the SCOTUS with Communards and godless Marxists who will put the remaining faithful Christians into "re-education" camps...

And perhaps the Big "O" may put us onto into an socialist market economy superficially resembling that Red China (i.e. harsh controls, without the phenomenal growth) or (most of) Europe... and of course, mandatory indoctrination of children into the socialist framework, and by 2030, the Republican/Conservative way of thinking should be but a unpleasant memory in the mind of an ancient Obama or an aging Markos Moulitsas.

Indeed, if supertwerp gets his way, by 2030, anyone wishing to run on a Reagan platform will be sneered at and at best, thought a charming but unlikely anachronism, as much as we today look down our noses at Paleocons like Buchanan and Ron Paul:

Completely.Totally.Unelectable.

[Chris]

"put the remaining faithful Christians into "re-education" camps...'

You assume that the rest of us care what you nutballs do or think.

[WAHOO WILLIE SEZ:]

"You assume that the rest of us care what you nutballs do or think."

You appear to be obsessed with them.

[seekeronos]

"--- You assume that the rest of us care what you nutballs do or think. ---"

Of *course* I do.

Because far-left statists like Hillary (your hero) cannot resist the urge to tamper with and destroy other peoples' lives in order to enslave them.

Folks like you (or more specifically, your masters and overlords who run things over there on the Leftist Plantation - they very seldom let worker bees like you have any say in the matter) THRIVE on tyranny and the loss of other peoples' liberty.

It draws you and consumes you, much like rotting meat draws flies.

[Chris]

You Real Americans have gotten so tiresome and grumpy! If I was an old man like John McCain I'd fal asleep just reading this stuff.

[seekeronos]

"--- You Real Americans have gotten so tiresome and grumpy! If I was an old man like John McCain I'd fal asleep just reading this stuff. ---"

If you don't like us or what we say so much...

...why are you still here?

[Chris]

You provide endless entertainment. Cmon, quote some 'scripture' for us.

[WAHOO WILLIE SEZ:]

"Cmon, quote some 'scripture' for us."

Not exactly "scripture" but a truism. He who laughs last, laughs best.

[seekeronos]

Hmmm. Let's see.

I could pull out an old "fire and brimstone" verse, but I reckon you'd just as soon not be bothered.

Ah, I have just the thing you need:

"But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." (Romans 5:8, KJV)

With the way you present yourself here, I'd venture to say that you probably are not much liked, and more likely unloved by few people. Sure, there are a few people you know from your school days who you hung out and drank with, or a few girls (boys?) you thought you loved... but they all turned out not to be quite right, no?

Fret not though, for there is someone who loves you more than your parents ever could, or any other lover:

Jesus loves you.

He loved you so much, that He stretched out His arms and died on a cross... and He rose again from the Grave and out of Hell to save your soul, "Chris".

Funny thing, that you seem to hate Christ, his message and his people - your name, if taken from "Christian" or "Christopher" is a direct namesake for someone who follows Christ.

How about surrendering your life to the Creator who saved you, and loved you enough to die and receive the penalty on Himself for your sins?

You have nothing to loose but your unforgiven sins, and an eternity separated from God suffering in hellfire.