Romney did better among more conservative voters, while McCain and Paul each got about one in five moderates, who made up about 20 percent of the electorate.
OK, what kind of a “moderate” would vote for Ron Paul? I can’t think of any position that he takes that could be considered “moderate.” He’s what most people would call an extremist*. If someone called themselves a “moderate,” or someone whom the AP would call a “moderate” would vote for Ron Paul then the word has no meaning whatsoever.
And frankly, I find people who call themselves “moderate” to generally be people with no firm or coherent political principles whatsoever. All it really means is that they are neither “liberal” or conservative, so the media types find them difficult to pigeonhole. And given the large number of possibilities of positions one can have without being in either of those media pigeonholes, that means that we can’t draw any conclusions whatsoever about them. We need a different word for such people than “moderate.”
* Not that there’s anything wrong with that–so am I, on many issues. I’m just (as I think that Glenn Reynolds once said of himself) an eclectic one.
Romney did better among more conservative voters, while McCain and Paul each got about one in five moderates, who made up about 20 percent of the electorate.
OK, what kind of a “moderate” would vote for Ron Paul? I can’t think of any position that he takes that could be considered “moderate.” He’s what most people would call an extremist*. If someone called themselves a “moderate,” or someone whom the AP would call a “moderate” would vote for Ron Paul then the word has no meaning whatsoever.
And frankly, I find people who call themselves “moderate” to generally be people with no firm or coherent political principles whatsoever. All it really means is that they are neither “liberal” or conservative, so the media types find them difficult to pigeonhole. And given the large number of possibilities of positions one can have without being in either of those media pigeonholes, that means that we can’t draw any conclusions whatsoever about them. We need a different word for such people than “moderate.”
* Not that there’s anything wrong with that–so am I, on many issues. I’m just (as I think that Glenn Reynolds once said of himself) an eclectic one.
Romney did better among more conservative voters, while McCain and Paul each got about one in five moderates, who made up about 20 percent of the electorate.
OK, what kind of a “moderate” would vote for Ron Paul? I can’t think of any position that he takes that could be considered “moderate.” He’s what most people would call an extremist*. If someone called themselves a “moderate,” or someone whom the AP would call a “moderate” would vote for Ron Paul then the word has no meaning whatsoever.
And frankly, I find people who call themselves “moderate” to generally be people with no firm or coherent political principles whatsoever. All it really means is that they are neither “liberal” or conservative, so the media types find them difficult to pigeonhole. And given the large number of possibilities of positions one can have without being in either of those media pigeonholes, that means that we can’t draw any conclusions whatsoever about them. We need a different word for such people than “moderate.”
* Not that there’s anything wrong with that–so am I, on many issues. I’m just (as I think that Glenn Reynolds once said of himself) an eclectic one.
I didn’t want to leave California, which I consider my real home state, though I was raised and spent the first quarter century of my life in Michigan. But I also have mixed feelings about moving back. Victor Davis Hanson, a true native, explains why:
At some point we Californians should ask ourselves, how we inherited a state with near perfect weather, the world’s richest agriculture, plentiful timber, minerals, and oil, two great ports at Los Angeles and Oakland, a natural tourist industry from Carmel to Yosemite, industries such as Silicon Valley, Hollywood, and aerospace
OK, CalOSHA has fined Scaled Composites for not training its employees properly in the handling of nitrous oxide. But there’s still no explanation of what caused the explosion, or really, how to prevent it in the future. At least, not in this story.
This can’t be good news for the SS1 propulsion system.
The Wikipedia entry on the title of this post is pretty minimal. I think that it could be usefully expanded and improved by pointing out this creature as a prominent example.
I expect too-frequent commenter “Jim Harris” to be along to defend him any minute.
Man should not put limits on what God can do, but that’s what people always do, he told the crowd. Just as God made five loaves and two fishes feed thousands, God has provided liberators for blacks in the past – from Nat Turner to the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., and now Barack Obama. But, Wright said, there were always reasons not to follow them.
Some argue that blacks should vote for Clinton “because her husband was good to us,” he continued.
“That’s not true,” he thundered. “He did the same thing to us that he did to Monica Lewinsky.”
I eagerly await further elaboration.
I’m going to run out of popcorn, watching the so-called “progressives” finally immolating themselves in their vile identity politics.
Hard to say what the effect will be, but reportedly, the day before the election, Rush Limbaugh has broken with precedent and, to all extents and purposes, endorsed a candidate in a Republican Primary:
Right after Rush finished the football segment, he popped in, out of reference or context, and read the best parts of the Human Events endorsement of Fred! I was sick in bed and heard it. He ended with asking the South Carolinians to seriously consider voting Fred Thompson if they believe in conservatism, and then went for the commercial.
Because he didn’t get rid of people like this a lot sooner. I hope that the next president, if a Republican, does a better job of controlling his own bureaucracy. If a Democrat, they won’t need to.
Because he didn’t get rid of people like this a lot sooner. I hope that the next president, if a Republican, does a better job of controlling his own bureaucracy. If a Democrat, they won’t need to.