here's the link to prove it :

If there was a way to measure the TP and Evangelicals as a percentage of their group vs the mish mash of the Democratic Party as a percentage, I would bet just about any amount possible. I define mish mash as students, minorities, people on govt assistance, the dead, and the undocumented. Ooops, I just identified 100% of the Democratic party. I can't believe I'm writing with a straight face.

The TP and evangelicals will vote. 100% no, but it will be a high enough figure, and it will be higher in comparison with whatever Democratic demographic you want to come up with.

Obama has got to get the same level of vote support that he got in 08. People came out of the woodwork to vote. The luster is off. It ain't going to happen again. Students will go back to getting laid and drunk. Blacks and hispanics will vote at their usually low turnout.

A major leader of the TP Dick Armey, past leader of the House say yes. Mr. Armey say a majority of the TP don't buy Perry or Newts economics. They both look like despreate people.

I'm on the record as having said both the Tea Party and the evangelicals will "sit on their hands" if Romney is the nominee. Of course, after that, some of them will get up and use one hand to vote for Romney and the other to hold their nose.  Still, in the end I don't think he'll get enough support from that wing of the party to prevail unless the economy tanks again.

Regardless of whether its Romney (very likely now), it will boil down to the swing states.  Can Obama win Florida again?  He's down in the current polls.  What about Ohio?  Unemployment is a big factor there.  Michigan?  Pennsylvania?  Can he win Indiana again?  Very unlikely.

The swing states represent -- in my opinion -- the only real hope for Romney -- or anyone -- against the incumbent President.

That's why they hold elections.

In NH and Iowa the Indies were allowed to vote in the primary's but only registered Rebublicans can vote in the Florida  primary .

Some talk about this being a true test of Romney's appeal within the party. Iowa is not a very good test with their cacaus system and NH is very conservative. Romney has a home there and is from Mass. He was more or less expected to win, at least in NH.

I don't know who gets to vote in the SC primary.

The RNC will be watching Florida very closley for the vote and especially turnout. Statewide is important but the West Coast and the Northern part of the state is critical. Miami is difficult. Some parts are conservative and some are liberal.

I heard something on the radio that the evangelicals in NH were one of the groups where Romney did well, even running against the more conservatives.

I say that most people will follow RR's advice and they will vote for the most electable conservative who is running at the time.  With all others out, that leaves one.

Also, in "normal" times, the choice of the "most electable" isn't exciting.  But for conservatives, this is what 2008 was to liberals in voting against Bush.  The dislike of increased regulation and a philosophy that reflects Europe will drive people to the pools who wouldn't otherwise be enthusiastic.

And if you say that the Dems do not have a philosphy that is reflective of Europe, name 3 major areas where the Dems differ from Europe in social policy.

For him to claim the Tea Party will not vote for Romney is just idiotic. Tea party voters are more independent thinkers than a lot of groups like Union members. The group as a whole will, at the end of the day, vote for the Republican nominee.

is a pretty weak way to back up a position.  Also, I doubt there are nearly as many evangelicals in NH as there are in the South or Mid-West, so I'm not sure it's relevent.  The evangelicals and Tea Partyists are "true believers," and compromise on values is not in their lexicon.  Of course, both of us are just guessing at this point.

I admit that some times sources are not strong. However, I think in casual conversation, which this board is, there is not need to back up every comment with a study, article, or what ever.  

I happened to hear it on Bill Bennett, who I think is pretty reliable.

In any event, the bottom line is the enthusiasm gap works both ways.  In 2008 a lot of people voted against Bush.  A substantial part of Obama's appeal was anti-Bush, which is why he ran against Bush more than McCain.

I think that with the Tea Party and Evangelicals, this same thing is going to happen.

The Tea Party is more of the wild card, but even their, they are going to look at another trillion dollars and say that 100 billion is better, even if it isn't what they want.

And speaking of backing up, what is your source that the Tea Party is "true believers" who won't compromise?  

if you'd mentioned his name I might not have led with that.  As for Tea Partiers compromising, their unwillingness to do so has frustrated the hell out of John Boehner, for one.  Budget hawks would praise them for not compromising on going after the deficit.