Quote:
Originally posted by skywalker:
Well it seems that in 2002, the Dems tried to be more like the Reps and ended up losing quite a few seats. Why settle for Republican Lite (re centrist/right Democrats) when you can have the real thing. Lieberman being more like Bush will not get him elected, may as well go for the real thing, not a pretender to the throne...hmmm?
Mark
|
ROTHFLMAO
"HALE" the Dems were left in 2002, but go ahead and keep that thunking up, the Reps need even more seats in 2004.
Running to the center gets you the votes, the trick is you have to be close enough to the center to get the center's vote but not too far over the center line and lose the votes of the far extreme of your party.
The break down as I see it from over 30 years of watching the politcal landscape is like this:
20% extreme left-vote left maybe left center
20% extreme right-vote right maybe right center
20% left center- will vote for somebody as far as right center or extreme left
20% Right center- will vote for somebody as far as left center or extreme right
20% center- will vote either left center or right center
Now if you stake out the extreme of either side you will only get in the upper 40% while if the other side runs more to the center will get over 50% in the majority of states and win their electorial college vote. There are more electorial college states in the center then the right or left. And it is worse for the left then the right, If you run to far to the left you give up over 1/3 of the electorial college vote from the south, right out of the shute. You may have 1/4 of the electorial college votes, but you're working from a 8-10% deficit(SP?).