Republican Primary - Keystone Phil versus Alexander Hamilton
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 19, 2024, 05:15:30 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Forum Community
  Forum Community
  Forum Community Election Match-ups (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, YE, KoopaDaQuick 🇵🇸)
  Republican Primary - Keystone Phil versus Alexander Hamilton
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Poll
Question: Well who would you vote for and who would win?
#1
Keystone Phil/Keystone Phil
 
#2
Keystone Phil/Alexander Hamilton
 
#3
Alexander Hamilton/Keystone Phil
 
#4
Alexander Hamilton/Alexander Hamilton
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 25

Author Topic: Republican Primary - Keystone Phil versus Alexander Hamilton  (Read 4940 times)
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderators
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: December 23, 2009, 04:50:07 PM »

Post maps if you wish.
Logged
Rowan
RowanBrandon
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,692


Political Matrix
E: 1.94, S: 4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: December 23, 2009, 04:53:12 PM »

Phil and it wouldn't even be close.
Logged
tmthforu94
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,401
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.26, S: -4.52

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: December 23, 2009, 04:56:12 PM »

Phil would easily win the Republican primary, based off politics, mainly.
Logged
MasterJedi
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,526
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: December 23, 2009, 05:05:03 PM »

Phil/Phil, Hamilton wouldn't even come close.
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: December 23, 2009, 05:05:22 PM »

I would pull it out in the end.
Logged
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: December 23, 2009, 05:07:46 PM »


Like Deeds?
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: December 23, 2009, 05:09:34 PM »



Blue- Hamilton
Red- Phil
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderators
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: December 23, 2009, 05:12:27 PM »


You wouldn't win Texas. There aren't enough Republican Hispanics to control the GOP Primary and the rest would all be Keystone's type of voter.
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: December 23, 2009, 05:15:55 PM »


You wouldn't win Texas. There aren't enough Republican Hispanics to control the GOP Primary and the rest would all be Keystone's type of voter.

Texas Republicans would support the anti-illegal immigrant candidate and the sane candidate. Though I think Texas would be close, nothing west of it would even be contested by Phil.
Logged
tmthforu94
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,401
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.26, S: -4.52

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: December 23, 2009, 05:22:12 PM »

Trying to follow primary schedule...

Logged
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: December 23, 2009, 05:24:29 PM »

Keystone would have an appeal to the GOP base unlike a dude, who during last months was once a progressive, a conservative, a libertarian... take your pick.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderators
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: December 23, 2009, 05:24:45 PM »

Also you wouldn't win Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, the plains states, Minnestota has a caucus system that would make it easy for a conservative win see Romney winning it in 2008. Wisconsin would vote the same as MN and MI. The GOP state parties in both Washington and Arizona are hella Conservative. You would not win North Carolina, or any other outer or inner Souther State except Florida, and you might get close in VA.
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: December 23, 2009, 05:29:34 PM »

Also you wouldn't win Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, the plains states, Minnestota has a caucus system that would make it easy for a conservative win see Romney winning it in 2008. Wisconsin would vote the same as MN and MI. The GOP state parties in both Washington and Arizona are hella Conservative. You would not win North Carolina, or any other outer or inner Souther State except Florida, and you might get close in VA.

If Pat McCrory could get nominated by the NC GOP, I'm sure I could. The NC GOP is getting less conservative. A lot of the conservatives are actually registered Democrats there.

I would easily win Idaho and Utah and Wyoming and Montana. Not as sure on the Dakotas.

WA and AZ are already in the bag for me, and I would win Minnesota fairly easily as well.

Phil would only win in the radical and racist states mostly located in the Deep South. He would certainly win the populist vote, but I would win among urban and suburban Republicans, middle class, upper-middle class, and wealthy Republicans, business owners, as well as rural libertarian-esque Republicans in the Midwest. I would easily raise more money, I would easily win the votes from moderates and libertarian Republicans, and Independents in states like New Hampshire. My campaign's organization would be stronger, allowing me to do better in caucues (the real reason Romney won, not his "conservatism").
Logged
RIP Robert H Bork
officepark
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,030
Czech Republic


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: December 23, 2009, 05:36:00 PM »

Also you wouldn't win Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, the plains states, Minnestota has a caucus system that would make it easy for a conservative win see Romney winning it in 2008. Wisconsin would vote the same as MN and MI. The GOP state parties in both Washington and Arizona are hella Conservative. You would not win North Carolina, or any other outer or inner Souther State except Florida, and you might get close in VA.

Romney is no conservative.
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: December 23, 2009, 05:39:51 PM »

Also you wouldn't win Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, the plains states, Minnestota has a caucus system that would make it easy for a conservative win see Romney winning it in 2008. Wisconsin would vote the same as MN and MI. The GOP state parties in both Washington and Arizona are hella Conservative. You would not win North Carolina, or any other outer or inner Souther State except Florida, and you might get close in VA.

Romney is no conservative.

You're no conservative.
Logged
RIP Robert H Bork
officepark
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,030
Czech Republic


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: December 23, 2009, 05:40:47 PM »

Also you wouldn't win Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, the plains states, Minnestota has a caucus system that would make it easy for a conservative win see Romney winning it in 2008. Wisconsin would vote the same as MN and MI. The GOP state parties in both Washington and Arizona are hella Conservative. You would not win North Carolina, or any other outer or inner Souther State except Florida, and you might get close in VA.

Romney is no conservative.

You're no conservative.

How so?
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: December 23, 2009, 05:41:35 PM »

Also you wouldn't win Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, the plains states, Minnestota has a caucus system that would make it easy for a conservative win see Romney winning it in 2008. Wisconsin would vote the same as MN and MI. The GOP state parties in both Washington and Arizona are hella Conservative. You would not win North Carolina, or any other outer or inner Souther State except Florida, and you might get close in VA.

Romney is no conservative.

You're no conservative.

How so?

You love war and intervention.

Bob Taft turns in his grave due to your display name.
Logged
RIP Robert H Bork
officepark
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,030
Czech Republic


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: December 23, 2009, 05:47:10 PM »

Also you wouldn't win Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, the plains states, Minnestota has a caucus system that would make it easy for a conservative win see Romney winning it in 2008. Wisconsin would vote the same as MN and MI. The GOP state parties in both Washington and Arizona are hella Conservative. You would not win North Carolina, or any other outer or inner Souther State except Florida, and you might get close in VA.

Romney is no conservative.

You're no conservative.

How so?

You love war and intervention.

Bob Taft turns in his grave due to your display name.

*facepalm*

Nobody "loves war".

Returning to my original point, I'm not aware that Romney is an isolationist. It wouldn't surprise me if he were one, but that would not make him a conservative. Further, conservatism != isolationism.
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: December 23, 2009, 05:54:47 PM »

Also you wouldn't win Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, the plains states, Minnestota has a caucus system that would make it easy for a conservative win see Romney winning it in 2008. Wisconsin would vote the same as MN and MI. The GOP state parties in both Washington and Arizona are hella Conservative. You would not win North Carolina, or any other outer or inner Souther State except Florida, and you might get close in VA.

Romney is no conservative.

You're no conservative.

How so?

You love war and intervention.

Bob Taft turns in his grave due to your display name.

*facepalm*

Nobody "loves war".

Returning to my original point, I'm not aware that Romney is an isolationist. It wouldn't surprise me if he were one, but that would not make him a conservative. Further, conservatism != isolationism.

Incorrect. Isolationism is a pillar of conservative thought.
Logged
RIP Robert H Bork
officepark
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,030
Czech Republic


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: December 23, 2009, 05:57:22 PM »
« Edited: December 23, 2009, 05:59:42 PM by Mideast Assemblyman True Conservative »

Also you wouldn't win Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, the plains states, Minnestota has a caucus system that would make it easy for a conservative win see Romney winning it in 2008. Wisconsin would vote the same as MN and MI. The GOP state parties in both Washington and Arizona are hella Conservative. You would not win North Carolina, or any other outer or inner Souther State except Florida, and you might get close in VA.

Romney is no conservative.

You're no conservative.

How so?

You love war and intervention.

Bob Taft turns in his grave due to your display name.

*facepalm*

Nobody "loves war".

Returning to my original point, I'm not aware that Romney is an isolationist. It wouldn't surprise me if he were one, but that would not make him a conservative. Further, conservatism != isolationism.

Incorrect. Isolationism is a pillar of conservative thought.

No, and even assuming for now that it is, that hardly makes Romney a conservative overall. In other words, conservatism still is not the same thing as isolationism; isolationism is at best only a part of conservative thought.
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: December 23, 2009, 05:59:17 PM »

Also you wouldn't win Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, the plains states, Minnestota has a caucus system that would make it easy for a conservative win see Romney winning it in 2008. Wisconsin would vote the same as MN and MI. The GOP state parties in both Washington and Arizona are hella Conservative. You would not win North Carolina, or any other outer or inner Souther State except Florida, and you might get close in VA.

Romney is no conservative.

You're no conservative.

How so?

You love war and intervention.

Bob Taft turns in his grave due to your display name.

*facepalm*

Nobody "loves war".

Returning to my original point, I'm not aware that Romney is an isolationist. It wouldn't surprise me if he were one, but that would not make him a conservative. Further, conservatism != isolationism.

Incorrect. Isolationism is a pillar of conservative thought.

No, and even assuming for now that it is, that hardly makes Romney a conservative overall.

Who cares whether Romney is a cosnervative?

I would crush Phil in a primary battle.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderators
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: December 23, 2009, 05:59:48 PM »

Hamilton trying to wear his faux coat of Libertarianism has now made him a less effective spokesman for Romney.

Logged
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: December 23, 2009, 06:00:40 PM »

Hamilton trying to wear his faux coat of Libertarianism has now made him a less effective spokesman for Romney.



When have I ever claimed to be a libertarian? Not once have I associated myself with such an ideology.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderators
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: December 23, 2009, 06:08:02 PM »

Also you wouldn't win Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, the plains states, Minnestota has a caucus system that would make it easy for a conservative win see Romney winning it in 2008. Wisconsin would vote the same as MN and MI. The GOP state parties in both Washington and Arizona are hella Conservative. You would not win North Carolina, or any other outer or inner Souther State except Florida, and you might get close in VA.

Romney is no conservative.

You're no conservative.

How so?

You love war and intervention.

Bob Taft turns in his grave due to your display name.

*facepalm*

Nobody "loves war".

Returning to my original point, I'm not aware that Romney is an isolationist. It wouldn't surprise me if he were one, but that would not make him a conservative. Further, conservatism != isolationism.

Incorrect. Isolationism is a pillar of conservative thought.

No, and even assuming for now that it is, that hardly makes Romney a conservative overall.

Who cares whether Romney is a cosnervative?

I would crush Phil in a primary battle.

lol. In a party dominated by Southerners which you have stated are ignorant and stupid, you think you would do well enough to get close.

ROTFLOL.


Admit it, Phil would wipe your ass of the floor.

Hamilton trying to wear his faux coat of Libertarianism has now made him a less effective spokesman for Romney.



When have I ever claimed to be a libertarian? Not once have I associated myself with such an ideology.

I never associated myself with any particular ideology except conservatism in its most general forms yet that doesn't stop you from calling me a populist unfairly.
Logged
MasterJedi
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,526
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: December 23, 2009, 07:29:28 PM »


That's what she said.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.058 seconds with 16 queries.