Discussion saved as draft

If you have something you'd like to say on this topic, please Log in or Register and Click the box to Start A New Discussion.

Why Don't Republicans Want To Win This Election?

by Hickory Jackson (Principles: Freedom and Privacy) - 2 year ago

Inquiring minds (or mind) want to know why Republicans will not just do the obvious and nominate a Kasich - Rubio ticket.

If John Kasich were to be nominated by the Republican Party, he would become our next President. Kasich is successful, popular, experienced, competent, trustworthy and even likeable.  In the election, he would undoubtedly win Ohio, be favored in Pennsylvania and several other blue “Rust Belt” states, and if he selects Rubio as his running mate, Florida would be his as well.  


Furthermore, once he is elected, he would do everything that Republicans say they want. He would work with Congress to repeal and replace Obamacare, appoint Conservative judges, reduce taxes at every level to make America more competitive, roll back intrusive regulations, and be guided in all his decisions by his strong Christian values.


So what gives? Why are Trump, Cruz and Rubio so far ahead of Kasich when two of them are despised by nearly half of all Republicans and the third has Obama’s resume and is promising a return to the disastrous militaristic foreign policy of Bush 43?


Someone, please explain. I just don’t understand.

Comments and Responses (2)

Reasoning used for ARGUMENTS presented
By  United States Grant - 2 year ago
Whenever someone says "undoubtedly", hide your wallet. Romney couldn't win either of his home states so why do you assume Kasich wins not only his home state but all the blue states around it. Kasich 2016 is Romney 2012 who was McCain 2008 - a compromiser who can't even excite Republicans - let alone Independents and Democrats. If Rubio or Cruz want to throw the establishment a bone by choosing Kasich as a running mate, then fine. But since there is absolutely no evidence that Kasich could win the general election, we might as well pick a candidate that we can be proud of - someone who we know will do the right thing when they get elected.
Discussion Leader's Response : This comment is relevant to the discussion. (Commenter's rating is increased.)
Discussion Leader's Explanation : Kasich is POPULAR in Ohio. Romney was chased out of Massachusetts after one term. Ohio is a swing state and while Michigan and Massachusetts are bright blue. Kasich is clearly the best positioned Republican to win Ohio and scare the Democrats into defending the neighboring states. My question remains - why do you need to be excited about a candidate in order to nominate him? Isn't it enough that Kasich is already promising to do everything you want? Or, are you saying that anyone who can win the election, is automatically disqualified from getting the Republican nomination?
Reasoning used for ARGUMENTS presented
By  Dan T - 2 year ago
This could be related to the article about debate questions. When the dialogue is focused on the nuances of difference in the primary candidates' position, Kasich, who supports immigration reform, expanded Medicare, and believes in climate change, does not fare well. The debate where he got booed for supporting the bank bailouts, which any President would have had to do, is a good example. If the focus were on who could make the strongest case for center-right values and who is best positioned to effect incremental change in one direction or the other, he would be doing better.
Discussion Leader's Response : This comment is relevant to the discussion. (Commenter's rating is increased.)
Discussion Leader's Explanation : All good points and perhaps it does answer the question. Kasich does not fit the current Republican mold in several areas and if he does win the election, they don't trust him to deliver on their agenda. I still believe the areas where he agrees with the core Conservative constituency are more important that the areas where he disagrees but perhaps the prior comment seals the deal. After the last two elections, Republicans have no confidence that a (relatively) moderate candidate can win so why compromise on any principles when there is no guaranty that the sacrifice will pay off.