He (or she) is too conservative


How often have we heard that sorry line. A decent story on PolitickerAZ about CD 1 got me thinking about what the pundits were saying about Reagan in 1980. Well I found it. A Time article from April 1980. Here is the money quote:

More than half of all voters think that Reagan is too conservative to attract enough independent and Democratic votes to win the presidency

My view is that winning is not about being conservative or moderate. It is about strong candidates with well run campaigns. Bob Dole was moderate enough. He ran a lackluster campaign and lost. Same for George Bush 41 in 1992. Senator Kyl is very conservative and ran an excellent campaign in 2006. In the end Pederson was not even close. I could go on but the fact is that there is no substitute for winning and some candidates do and some don’t, liberals, moderates, and conservatives alike. Go Sydney!


Comments

  1. Ron, you are onto something, but I think the most appealing quality for voters is AUTHENTICITY. When I voted for Reagan, I did so not because I was with him on 100% of the issues, but because he was genuine, sincere, steadfast and any other synonym you want to throw into the mix. Reagan also garnered support due to the wretched state of the nation in 1980 and the feeling that Carter and the Dems were either wringing their hands in desperation and saying nothing could be done, or pointing the finger at us because of our supposed “malaise.” They compounded their ignorance when they ran Mondale, Carter’s vice-president, in 1984.

    Kerry’s greatest liability was his utter lack of authenticity. Bush 41 lost in ’92 because he not only seemed insincere after breaking his “no new taxes” pledge, but he seemed not to care about average folks. This year, Romney and Edwards both reinvented themselves…and look at the results.

    Were I running against McCain, I would spend a lot of time talking about how the Straight Talk Express went into the shop and had a “pimp my ride” makeover done by the same people who trashed McCain in 2000. His shameless pandering makes even Kerry look sincere and genuine! In fact, the Democrats MUST expose McCain as a hypocrite because he is busily trying to define himself for the American people as consistent and ideologically reliable when the truth is that McCain does, in any instance, what will best help advance the interests of McCain.

  2. Rex,

    Absolutely. I did not specifically list all of the qualities of a strong candidate but authenticity would be right at the top.

  3. Rex, the Straight Talk Express did not have a “pimp my ride” makeover but was downgraded for a cheaper model.

    But to your point, McCain is a lot of things and he is not the kind of conservative that Reagan was – not by a long shot, but you would be hard pressed to call him a hypocrite.

    What Reagan had was an ability to communicate – hence the term the great communictaor. Listen to his Time for Choosing speech. Syd cites that speech in the first sentence of the why I am running page. If she can conjure up that magic, we might have the real McCoy

  4. In 2006 Kyl ran on one main plank. Peterson would vote for amnesty. Look how fast Kyl tried to sell us amnesty after elected. Despicable. Winning is everything? Lying to the voters is never excused, nor forgotten. I would sign a recall petition today to remove the lying Jon Kyl. Kyl lost his amnesty snow-job and has not stood up for Border Security since. He unabashedly sold out the electorate. I’m ashamed to call him my Senator now.

  5. kralmajales says:

    Wow…Rex said it all. I also supported Reagan…was a starry-eyed admirer. I also thought Kerry was an aloof candidate at best, but think he would have easily been a better President than George Bush. A terrible choice he was, but he would have been great in the office.

  6. Mark,
    You aren’t very bright, are you?

Speak Your Mind

*