….but I have seen them quite often, I have to admit.

“[zealously supporting your candidate] is not a good way to get your opponents to support your candidate in the general.”

That is just a weak and dishonorable thing to say. At some point supporters get so crazy that it does reflect on their candidate (Luap Nor), but that’s not true of the rest of the candidates.

Not only good information for the newer people to wrap their head around, good reminders for us “old salts”.

“I’ve actually noticed, though, that a lot of those to whom I often look are just as nonplussed by this year’s lineup as I have been.”

I think this isn’t so much a negative on the candidates. The Presidency is the GOP’s to lose this year. As a result, people are looking for the perfect President on one hand, and trying to avoid nominating someone that could actually lose in this environment on the other.

For me, my biggest challenge in choosing was that I like three of the people still in very much, rather than not liking anyone at all.

While it’s naive and silly to whitewash your favorite candidate’s flaws and only speak well of them, it’s even worse to spend all your time tearing down other candidates (yes I’m talking to you, Tbone), because like it or lump it, one of these candidates will be facing off against Obama in the general, and there’s no sense in writing our opponents’ negative ads for them. See: Ronald Reagan’s Eleventh Commandment, which has mostly been ignored on this site lately.

Agree on the givens and fluff just being clutter.

However, we have to watch so we don’t fall into the media trap. The candidates do need to give solid logic on how they will beat Obama and his policy flaws, not just shallow rhetoric.

There is a double standard by media in an attempt to frame the general election debate.

Republican candidates are compared to “perfection” and relentlessly attacked on flaws and the left’s favorite, hypocrisy.

On the other hand, the media does not do the same scrutiny of Obama.

This double standard attempts to make the entire field of Republicans look weaker than Obama. While hard core conservatives and much of RS sees this bias, much of America does not. Gingrich has been making a good connection w/ voters by making this point consistently.

So in the primary, we need a constant thread of how each candidate can beat obama, and how, and what damage obama is doing. This message cannot be fluff, but rather specifics that people can relate to. I believe Perry gave a good example by stating how much shorter it takes to start a business in TX vs a liberal state(CA?). People can relate to this stuff.

We are not helping the situation w/ the fluff that is increasing at RS. Instead of discussing substance, there is a growing trend of fluff attacking various candidates and their supporters. We need to realize we are on the same team and have difficult opponent to defeat.

Thanks for this diary. It really is making me think. I have never been politically active before and I just started posting at Red State. I agree about the fluff. I looked back at a comment I just made on another thread and found I am guilty of one of the kind of statements you referenced.

“He has earned my support by being the only candidate who consistently acts according to his strongly held conservative principles.”

I have to admit that is an exaggeration. No candidate is consistent all the time. Some are definitely better than others but none of them are perfect, and more than one of them are reasonably consistent.

I do have a candidate I support strongly, but I want to be honest and factual when giving my reasons for supporting that individual. This diary will help me get there!

Don’t be too hard on us newbys. Whatever it takes to inspire more of us to get involved is a good thing, and having the opportunity to get behind a candidate we feel strongly about can be the catalyst we need. I intend to stay involved no matter what the outcome is for my candidate.

Every time I hear that I see Gerry Ford falling down AF 1 Stairs, Bob Dole falling when he can’t get up and John McCain’s “Obama will make a fine President” comments.

Then there is the “He’s the Republican the Democrats most fear” bull scat. Again I have images of Ford, Dole and McCain dancing in my head.

Oh, and let’s not leave out “He’s inevitable”.

I’m absolutely appalled at that state we find ourselves in in this Primary…The idea that John Kerry of all people could say the leading contender for the nomination is a flip flopper and not be laughed out of the country as a mindless buffoon is beyond me….but the sad fact is…not only is he not being laughed at…I find myself nodding in agreement and groaning….I remember the fun I had in 2004 laughing at all his contradictory positions…and almost pittying the democrats who were stuck trying to defend him….and am sick to my stomach at the thought that we might be in the same lose lose position this year.

Then I look at the rest of the field for an alternative…and despair.

The “Big Tent” analogy isn’t the correct one…the correct one is a MAGNET…we need to be a MAGNET that draws these independents in who are sick and tired of what’s going on in Washington—Fred Thompson

is (1) We must govern from the center in order to bring the country together or in order to “get things done” (or similar phrases like we must move to the center), and (2) He will work with those on both sides of the aisle and/or bring a spirit of bi-partisanship to the White House.

… is my all time pull-out-my-hair in frustration phrase.

Next is the smug douchebag; “Stick a fork in him, he’s done.” Not yet a fixture of the campaign season, but certainly bound to show up.

but I’m not posting this to go into detail.

Everyone who wants to see this nation get back on the right track has a common bond. We’re on the same side. We may have differences of opinion in who the leader for the battle should be, but we’re still on the same side. It’s just something to keep in mind at all times. In other words, don’t go so far on the rhetoric that we end up shooting ourselves in the foot, so to speak.

“My dad can beat up your dad.”

Oh, and my candidate is waaayyyy better than your candidate.

“If [candidate] needs you to help convince me to support him, then he’s not worthy of my support.”

I’ve seen this one a lot, and it actually kills brain cells and lowers your IQ if you read it. But by the time you know, of course, the damage is already done. I’ve reported it to the CDC and the FDA and am certain they will take action before I’m reduced by Redstate to a drooling vegetable lying on the carpet.

He argued at length on why Mitt Romney cannot beat Mr. Obama.

I’ve been trying to recommend this diary ever since it was written, but for some reason it only allows me to click “unrecommend”. So accept this as a recommend!

“He’s a businessman, OF COURSE he’ll get the economy back on track!” (Yes, that was meant for the Cain and Romney supporters.)

“Texas! Yee haw!” (or some variant thereof)

Patronizing, unjustified statements of the form, “I like [candidate], but he’s not serious.”

Incendiary attacks on supporters and candidates by association. Example: “Candidate X once worked as the coffee boy in a company that traded with another company that traded with Iran. I guess you must really hate Iranian women, Candidate X supporters.”

“Polls don’t matter! Charge!!!!” (Again, only applies to unqualified and unjustified arguments.)