The conservative majority is getting larger thanks to Chairman Zero. LMFAO

<link>

Uh huh. And who's gonna LEAD this 'majority'?

Palin?

Huckabee?

McCain?

Gingrich?

Can't beat somethin' w/ nothin', mac.

Macrol's cite suggests virtually no change in terms of how people identify themselves, with the several-points changes coming well within any accepted margin of error.

Macrol shits her cite as some sort of reflection on Obama. But, I think the more astute GOPs would be looking at all this as more of a reflection on the current state of GOPism.

The number of self-identified conservatives has held pretty constant since 1992--the earliest data in the link cited. There have been 5 presidential elections since and including 1992--3 won by Democrats and 2 by Republicans. So the 40% threshold is not sufficient to determine the outcome.

macrol:

The conservative majority is getting larger thanks to Chairman Zero. LMFAO

<link>

The word you should be using is 'plurality' not majority.

A majority of something means that it is over one-half of the total amount.

Whereas a pluarity of something is when it is more represented than anything else.

Also, you should be aware of the limitations of polling. It can be very easy to skew/change the results depending upon what questions are asked, how they are asked, and so on.

If you really want a majority of conservatives, then you need to learn a few basic things first.

"Conservative" vs. "liberal" aren't the same as GOP vs. Democrat. In this case, I'm suggesting that as an empirical argument, rather than a philosophical one. I'm a Democrat through and through, although I have on occasion voted for the odd GOP at the state and local level.

But..if I were FORCED to choose between describing myself as a conservative or a liberal, I'd go with the former. Frankly...I find the whole idea of making a choice between one or the other, to be a tad lame. After all (reverting back to the philosophical), all we Americans are fundamentally liberal AND conservative. And of course, I could never really be "forced" to answer that question. But, I'm guessing most poll respondents don't make the distinctions I do, and are perfectly willing to choose one over the other.

And....as the emprical evidence suggests, self-described "conservatives" seem perfectly willing to vote for Democrats, when they perceive the Democrat to be the more conservative of their choices. Considering...the remarkably radical nature of today's GOP, that's probably to be expected.

they lost a little to independents last year, but poll after poll after polls over the years has shown them to be between 40% and 60% of the US population.

KA

loser liberals, 20%

That's correct. Democrat doesn't translate into liberal and Republican doesn't translate into conservative as macrol seems to suggest. It's largely the moderates that Dems have been winning in recent elections. And of course some conservatives repelled by the Bush era incompetence, corruption abd bad governance. It's hard to see how the Republicans can make an appeal to moderates given their recent rhetoric. But I'm guessing come next fall, Republicans will be tamping ideology down and running as fiscal conservative, small government, pro-military spending candidates. Problem is, the GOP unleashed their own "populists" who are very happy to defeat Republican candidates on ideological grounds alone in order to face a Democrat in the general. Or run as third party candidates. I think this might be a bigger problem for Republicans than Republicans think. It's a bed Republicans made and exploited. Now it's time for them to lay down and accept some flea bites.

Too funny! Dream On!

Let's talk in about 3 years where you are....

of the electorate who now identify themselves as Republicans. The last poll I saw had that percentage down to 18&.

If you voted for McCain in the last election, you're the loser.

This Gallop poll also shows that 37% identify themselves as moderates, and according to the leading voice of the Republican Party, Rush Limbaugh, there is no room in today's Republican Party for moderates.

There is no polling listed for reactionaries, and reactionary would best describe what today's Republican Party has become.

what the word "conservative", means. The Democratic Party in general and the Obamans specifically, have taken full advantage of this. For a time within a cycle, it's possible to convince the voters to vote based on labels. Eventually though....those labels begin to lose their currency. I mean...after all, who seriously believes that the George Era was anything but radical (the opposite of conservative)? And when the labels begin to slip, a candidate has two choices. He can rely on calling himself conservative, or he can govern conservatively.

I doubt your words

suck it up Slate Fray Libs:

<link>

Independents can 'inch' all they want. Without a leader it's meaningless.

xxxxxxxxxxxx