<img src=http://willohroots.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/bell_curve.jpg>
If you look at it this way, say 1/3 or so is the hard right, 1/3 is the hard left and 1/3 are moderate (left on some issues, right on some other issues...which is why they are considered a moderate).
This is why elections are almost always won in the middle, when a candidate can capture the middle they win...
Unless there is a strong third party candidate who could pull significant votes from the middle giving either the hard right or hard left a chance (if their party put an extremist hard liner as their candidate.)
Palin, Rush, etc. are hard right, which is why they may get a high approval among their followers, they also have very high negatives which cancels out their ability to win an election.
For all the talk that Obama is hard left (which is of course nonsense as a hard leftist would never have given money to the banks, would not continue in Iraq or Afghanistan, would have taken radical actions to tax the wealthy by now, would have taken action on alternative energy...) he has not strayed from the traditional democratic positions that much.
The problem is the republicans are now segmented into groups of extremists, normal republicans, and moderate republicans.
A major issue for the republicans right now is the threat of a strong third party candidate who appeals to the hard right. Say you put up a moderate republican like Hagel or Meg Whitman...the hard right which includes the birther types might reject that moderate republican candidate and create a third party opening for someone like Palin.
Then you have what happened in 1992, where the presence of Ross Perot essentially kept Bush from re-election and allowed Clinton to be elected.
If that happens in 2012, and the hard right republican votes go Palin like votes went to Perot, it almost assures a re-election for Obama.
Quote from cstfx:
And why do you think that is?
