HappySqurriel on 03 September 2008
| akuma587 said: I think Lieberman would have been a lot better VP choice than Palin. Statistically Republicans are more likely to support a candidate through thick and thin than the Democrats are. I am not going to bring up the actual numbers on that, but if you really want them I will. I did read it offline, so that might be hard to do. Part of the reason why is that Republicans are generally more conservative and have less problem "falling in line" with whoever is at the head of their party. Democrats tend to question authority a bit more and will not support a candidate just because their party has elected him. (The Hillary debacle is a decent example of this). So I would have said, "Fuck the base, they will vote for me anyways cause they are that damn conservative, so I am going to try to steal away as many independents as possible. Plus Lieberman is an extremely efficient politician who is great at crossing party lines." |
I have (personally) never seen anything that would validate your assumptions ... In Canada the Liberals were so corrupt that they (literally) stole hundreds of millions of tax-payer dollars and funneled it to their friends and yet 30% of voters will line-up to vote for them again.
As I said in another thread, in both parties there is a base of true-believers who will vote strictly on partisan lines; and had Sarah Palin been the Democrat VP Nominee and Hillary Clinton been the Republican VP Nominee you would hear a lot of Republicans bash Sarah Palin and a lot of Democrats bash Hillary Clinton.
