define('DISALLOW_FILE_EDIT', true); define('DISALLOW_FILE_MODS', true); Comments on: The obligatory post-debate analysis https://norunnyeggs.com/2011/06/the-obligatory-post-debate-analysis/ The repository of one hard-boiled egg from the south suburbs of Milwaukee, Wisconsin (and the occassional guest-blogger). The ramblings within may or may not offend, shock and awe you, but they are what I (or my guest-bloggers) think. Tue, 14 Jun 2011 19:54:01 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9 By: DAILY WISCONSIN » Conservative’s GOP post-debate analysis » DAILY WISCONSIN https://norunnyeggs.com/2011/06/the-obligatory-post-debate-analysis/comment-page-1/#comment-39540 Tue, 14 Jun 2011 19:54:01 +0000 https://norunnyeggs.com/?p=10932#comment-39540 […] Conservative’s GOP post-debate analysis var addthis_product = 'wpp-260'; var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};Via No Runny Eggs. […]

]]> By: steveegg https://norunnyeggs.com/2011/06/the-obligatory-post-debate-analysis/comment-page-1/#comment-39537 Tue, 14 Jun 2011 18:51:32 +0000 https://norunnyeggs.com/?p=10932#comment-39537 principle in 2008, <a href="https://norunnyeggs.com/2008/01/republican-presidential-nominees-1956-2004/" rel="nofollow">I explained the special case</a> of Barry Goldwater. Even though he finished well down in the 1960 primary/caucus season, he was still the highest-finishing person who ran in 1964. I acknowledge the closest we came to breaking that cycle was 2000, when if the prior rules had been followed, Steve Forbes would have been the nominee as the highest-finishing person who ran in 1996. However, George W. Bush showed up to introduce the "parentage" rule, which trumps the "or highest-finisher" part of the "previous highest-finishing candidate in the prior competitive campaign season" rule. Ronald Reagan did finish second to Gerald Ford in 1976, and Nelson Rockefeller (Ford's VP) was unavailable to run in 1980.]]> In reply to LibertyAtStake.

Back when James Taranto first explained the Next-In-Line™ principle in 2008, I explained the special case of Barry Goldwater. Even though he finished well down in the 1960 primary/caucus season, he was still the highest-finishing person who ran in 1964.

I acknowledge the closest we came to breaking that cycle was 2000, when if the prior rules had been followed, Steve Forbes would have been the nominee as the highest-finishing person who ran in 1996. However, George W. Bush showed up to introduce the “parentage” rule, which trumps the “or highest-finisher” part of the “previous highest-finishing candidate in the prior competitive campaign season” rule.

Ronald Reagan did finish second to Gerald Ford in 1976, and Nelson Rockefeller (Ford’s VP) was unavailable to run in 1980.

]]> By: LibertyAtStake https://norunnyeggs.com/2011/06/the-obligatory-post-debate-analysis/comment-page-1/#comment-39535 Tue, 14 Jun 2011 14:46:57 +0000 https://norunnyeggs.com/?p=10932#comment-39535 rhetorical device, because it is GOP tendency. However, small quibble with pegging Ike as the last exception. I would identify Goldwater in '64 and Reagan in '80 as principled conservative insurgency candidates who took down establishment favorites (Rockefeller and Bush or Baker). d(^_^)b http://libertyatstake.blogspot.com/ “Because the Only Good Progressive is a Failed Progressive”]]> I like the Next-In-Line™ rhetorical device, because it is GOP tendency. However, small quibble with pegging Ike as the last exception. I would identify Goldwater in ’64 and Reagan in ’80 as principled conservative insurgency candidates who took down establishment favorites (Rockefeller and Bush or Baker).

d(^_^)b
http://libertyatstake.blogspot.com/
“Because the Only Good Progressive is a Failed Progressive”

]]>