Ray Malone's Commentary

The problem for both parties in presidential elections is always how to gain the support of a majority of moderates in the battle ground states.. In about 34 states moderates do not make a difference. About 17 of those states are going to vote liberal no matter what. In another 17 states the majority will always vote conservative.

The presidential election is always decided in the remaining 16 states which are often called battle ground states. In those states neither conservatives nor liberals are a majority and therefore the moderate voters hold the balance of power.

The biggest problem that conservatives have is they think that arguments that persuade conservatives will persuade moderates.
That is just not true.

If the arguments that persuaded Conservatives persuaded Moderates then all Moderates would be Conservatives.

The best solution for Conservatives is to find reasons that will persuade moderates to vote for conservative positions and policies. There are always those that say that for conservatives to win the moderate votes, they must adopt more liberal positions.

Rudy Giuliani holds a number of socially liberal positions. He is pro abortion, pro gun control and pro gays. His redeeming qualities are he is pro tax cuts and pro Iraqi war.

But Conservatives don't have to settle for a socially liberal candidate in order to win.. Reagan reached out to moderates.. and even attracted some Reagan Democrats, but he did not do it by taking socially liberal positions. He maintained his positions but he sold himself using reasons that would appeal to moderates and moderate Democrats.

Reagan knew that being anti abortion was a winner in the industrial Mid West. Ohio is not pro abortion. Yes the Democrats are, but not the moderates and conservatives which together make up a majority. To win socially conservative and economically liberal Moderate votes one must be a social conservative and point out that the Democrat is a social conservative. Anti Abortion is a majority position in battle ground states.. Remember in 2004, Kerry was warned to not talk about abortion and not talk about gays? Why was that.. because if the swing voters were made aware of Kerry's socially liberal positions he could not carry Ohio. Kerry spoke of being anti abortion, and went hunting with his gun in the final days before election. He would not have doen that if pro gun and anti abortion were not majority positions.

Bush used direct contacts of church members to make sure they were aware of Kerry's voting record on abortion, guns, and gays.

Of course if Rudy gets the Republican nomination it will be Hillary's campaign that makes sure the Ohio church members are aware of Rudys position on abortion. guns and gays. Yes Rudy and Hillary agree.. but Hillary knows the anti abortion, pro gun, and anti gay agenda voters will stay home on election day. If they stay home Hillary wins.

Just for the record, a pro gay candidate cannot carry Ohio. Not even a pro gay Democrat can carry Ohio against a socially conservative republican.. Rudy will take those issues off the table.

Reagan found ways to present the conservative agenda in ways that appealed to moderates. But his appeal to moderates was mostly on economic issues. Reagan knew what the New York Liberals have never learned. Socially liberal is a minority position.

Rudy Giuliani is trying to sell the Republican party that only a moderate Republican can win. That is the same argument that Wendell Willkie, Thomas Dewey, Jerry Ford, Bush Sr, and Bob Dole made.It has never been true.

It is so simple find things in the conservative agenda that moderates will support, make the arguments in a non ideological form that will appeal to moderates. If that is done the Republican wins.

If a candidates tries to pull the "I agree with Democrats on most issues" bit the moderate voters will always elect a REAL DEMOCRAT over a fake one..

<h3>Reagan in speech after speech used MODERATE REASONS to persuade Moderates to vote for Conservative Positions. </h3>

There is the belief in many circles that conservative social positions cannot be sold to moderate voters. Reagan proved that wrong twice.

But one can not sell conservatives positions and policies that fails to recognize that Moderates are not ideological. That moderates are not ideological is obvious

There have been a number of columns by so called media experts predicting the terrible things that will happen to Republicans who support the Iraqi war and the wonderful things that will happen to Democrats who say "pull out now."

I would urge those pundits to go back and read the election returns from 1968 and and 1972. The Vietnam war became an issue in both of those presidential elections. In 1964 standing up to communism was popular and LBJ won an easy victory. There were few American voters in 1964 who had ever heard of Vietnam.

But in 1968 the polls showed LBJ losing big time primarily because of the Viet Nam War. LBJ had lost the support of the left. So LBJ announced that he would not stand for reelection in 1968 Richard Nixon won easily. Vietnam in 1968 was very bad for Democrats.

But go back and read the media and its polls in 1971 and the first half of 1972. Yes the polls showed that the Vietnam war was very unpopular and that Richard Milhous Nixon was in deep trouble with this very unpopular war. So unpopular that there were riots on the streets in our big cities. Los Angles, Detroit, Chicago and several other cities experienced anti war riots. The perceived loss of support for Nixon may be why Nixon's people did the Watergate break in on June 17, 1972.

But what happened in the 1972 election? What was the result of an election that pitted the unpopular Richard Nixon against cut and run George McGovern?

Nixon won in a huge landslide. That is what happened. If the Vietnam war was the issue in 1972, then it was a huge positive issue for Richard Nixon. Nixon won a much bigger victory than LBJ did in 1964. Nixon came within one tenth of one percent of exceeding the margin of victory achieved by FDR in 1936.

Election returns show that FDR was the most popular president of the 20th century, or he was on election day in 1936. Nixon, in 1972, was the second most popular president of the 20th century.. At least he was on election day 1972.. That is if you believe the election returns are a reflection of what voters really think. Consider that Nixon got 60.7 percent of the vote in 1972 and Franklin Delano Roosevelt got 60.8 percent in 1936.

Yes 1972 was at the height of the unpopularity of the Vietnam war and yet Nixon won big time. This is the same war that had 4 years earlier chased LBJ out of the presidential race.

How could that be. It must be that the Vietnam war was not the drag around the Republican's necks that the media says it was. It was a huge drag around Democratic necks. It was not a drag around the Republicans.

Members of today's media remember their opposition to the war. But they did not and do not now represent the American people. Democrats were against the Vietnam war ... big time. Just for the record Democrats do not vote for Republicans... That is why they are called Democrats.

The Elections returns show that. Vietnam hurt the vote getting ability of Democrats and improved the vote getting ability of Republicans. The only conclusion is enough moderates deserted McGovern in 1972, to elect Nixon in a huge landslide.

But you say Bush is very unpopular. What do you think Richard Nixon was in 1972? Do you think Nixon was the definition of a nice likable guy? Nixon's job approval rating was terrible in nearly all of 1972. Yes Virginia Nixon's job approval rating was lower than even Truman's in 1952.

Republicans for some reason tend to believe the media. They do not bother to study history.

It will be interesting to see where Hillary goes once she wins the Democratic Nomination.

I firmly believe that the only way Hillary can win is if the Republican nominee deserts George W. Bush. A lot of Republicans deserted Richard Nixon in 1972. IT did not cost Richard Nixon it cost the Republicans who deserted him.

I would urge that every Republican candidate take some time and study the history of Vietnam.. It just might open their eyes.

IRAQ and Vietnam destroy Democrats. They do not destroy Republicans.