Republican Primary - Keystone Phil versus Alexander Hamilton (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 30, 2024, 07:41:22 PM
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 (search mode)
Pages: [1]
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 5035 times)
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

« on: December 23, 2009, 05:05:22 PM »

I would pull it out in the end.
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

« Reply #1 on: December 23, 2009, 05:09:34 PM »



Blue- Hamilton
Red- Phil
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

« Reply #2 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
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

« Reply #3 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
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

« Reply #4 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
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

« Reply #5 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
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

« Reply #6 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
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

« Reply #7 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
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

« Reply #8 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
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

« Reply #9 on: December 24, 2009, 01:16:49 AM »

Yankee, the South is irrelevant to winning the primary. Ask Huckabee.
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

« Reply #10 on: December 24, 2009, 04:36:15 PM »

Yankee, the South is irrelevant to winning the primary. Ask Huckabee.

Ask McCain who won South Carolina in 2008 and become the front runner, and who lost SC in 2000 and couldn't recover his momentum.

I could win SC in an OPEN PRIMARY, dumbass.
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

« Reply #11 on: December 24, 2009, 04:38:31 PM »

Yankee, the South is irrelevant to winning the primary. Ask Huckabee.

Ask McCain who won South Carolina in 2008 and become the front runner, and who lost SC in 2000 and couldn't recover his momentum.

I could win SC in an OPEN PRIMARY, dumbass.

Yes, you fit perfectly: a guy who in few months claimed to be progressive, conservative or libertarian, when only needed to win a support.

When did I claim to be a libertarian?

And progressivsm and conservatism are compatible.
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

« Reply #12 on: December 24, 2009, 07:14:51 PM »

I'm Catholic, idiot.
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

« Reply #13 on: December 25, 2009, 12:10:55 AM »



Thats not what you told Straha when you were trying so hard not to get your head handed to you. lol

I'm a cultural Catholic and identify as one on all my official records.
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

« Reply #14 on: December 25, 2009, 11:39:11 AM »

Calling yourself a progressive will get you NOWHERE in a Republican primary.

Against a gay? Most Repulicans would avoid the gay and vote for the progressive.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
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 0.055 seconds with 15 queries.