« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

Perry, Like Palin, Helps Romney. At Least Initially.

By: Erick Erickson (Diary)  |  June 10th, 2011 at 10:29 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

More than a few people are a bit perplexed by a point I made in this morning’s post. It was this one:

Third, Perry’s entry would buy Mitt Romney time in the lead. Time is the one campaign commodity that cannot be added to. Every day Mitt Romney leads is a day it becomes increasingly likely Romney is the nominee. If Perry gets in, odds increase that Romney, not Perry, is the nominee.

I view this one as a no brainer, but some of you either disagree or aren’t sure what I mean.

Every student of Morton Blackwell learns that political campaigns have three basic commodities: (1) Time, (2) Talent, and (3) Treasure. Of those commodities, talent and treasure are renewable resources to a limited extent. Time is both definite and finite.The constant factor in the 2012 Republican Presidential race right now is that Mitt Romney has the highest name ID of declared candidates. While you and I know who Rick Perry is, we are not normal primary voters. Those people are only now just becoming engaged and they remember Romney from 2008, but many do not know Perry.

So Perry would have to build up his name identification and raise money. This leaves Romney in the lead as the clock continues ticking.

Every day that the media is focused on the ups and downs of other candidates, including an obsessive media rectal exam of Rick Perry as he gets in and starts hitting the stump is another day that Mitt Romney stays in the lead.

This is not to say that Rick Perry getting in makes Mitt Romney the nominee. No, that’s not what I said. The odds certainly increase, but odds and outcome are two different things.

If I had to call it right now, I would say Mitt Romney would not ultimately be the nominee. But right now he’s ahead in Iowa, ahead in New Hampshire, and ahead in South Carolina. If any candidate starts attacking Romney right now, instead of hoping for unforced errors or third party attacks, they’ll drive their own unfavorables up, along with Mitt Romney’s.

There’s just too much time to go.

So Perry, like Palin, getting in would keep Romney at the top longer than he otherwise might be there. In doing so, it allows Romney a prime opportunity to continue increasing his favorability rating and name id.

Again, it doesn’t mean Rick Perry getting in ensures a Romney victory. But it does buy Mitt Romney more time as the media fixates on Perry and his dynamic in the field, which is more likely to hurt the rest of the field more than Romney.

Time helps Romney, whose “play it safe” strategy right now amounts to running out the clock.

If you need just a quick, short hand version, consider this:

There is a lot of money on the sidelines waiting to find who is going to be the legitimate leader of the anti-Romney coalition. Rick Perry getting in delays finding that leader, keeping that money on the sidelines, keeping Mitt Romney on top. It really is that simple.

Tags: , ,
Get Alerts

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • http://www.FranBaker.com frankieb

    I’d be hitting the “JOBS, JOBS, JOBS” note everywhere I went. That’s what people are concerned about. They aren’t working and are trying to live on unemployment, which doesn’t cut it. (We have relatives going through this now.)

    The second note I’d hit would be “DRILL, DRILL, DRILL!” What could be simpler? Or tie in better to the first note? Drilling equals jobs for the crews, jobs for people to repair the rigs, jobs for teamsters carrying oil to the refinery … “JOBS, JOBS, JOBS.”

    Keep it simple. Keep saying it until people have it memorized. Keep the pressure on those clowns in the White House and Cabinet!

  • http://thethinkingvoter.blogspot.com abierubin

    First of all, in regard to Palin, we’ve seen how in one sentence she can knock the entire Romney wind flat. On the day he announced he’s running, she mentioned the health care mandates in MA and that was enough to have it reported all over including being on the front page headlines of New Hampshire’s largest conservative newspaper as opposed to Romney who announced his campaign in NH that day. Palin knows how to target her opponents with a few well chosen words that go far, really far and that includes Obama.

    Romney may be on top right now, but the campaign can barely be considered started, and all a conservative candidate like Palin or Perry got to do is point out Romney’s many leftist ideas such as Romneycare, supporting ethanol subsidies, and believing in global warming.

    And if you’re concerned the party wants a moderate like Romney, I am convinced that the tea party grassroots around the country has only grown since 2010 and our party will nominate a candidate that believes in conservative values and will know how to express that and also not be afraid to speak out against Obama.

  • acat

    appear to be for Conservatives to not split their vote among several candidates, or for someone to suck the oxygen out of Romney’s campaign in the northeast.

    So far, most conservatives are showing no sign – at least here on Red State – of recognizing this peril… so we have to hope for someone to get in and scuttle Mitt in the northeast…

    The only candidate who could conceivably damage Mitt’s air supply is Giuliani… and with his 2008 dismal fail, I’m not sure he’ll have the treasure to achieve this.

    Maybe Toonces is right .. and we need to get ready to support Candidate Romney. Ugh.

    Mew

  • citizenjerry

    Is Willard really the one we want as our nominee? He’s what Reagan called a “pale pastel.” They also used to be called “Rockefeller Republicans” or more like Democrat Lite.

    Matt Kibbe of FreedomWorks said that if Romney is the nominee, tea party voters might stay home. Is that what we really want? We’ve tried pale pastels before, from Bob Dole to John McCain. Another of this year’s crop of duds said we shouldn’t criticize the president by name.

    If I were making predictions, if the Republicans foist Willard on us as our nominee, he’ll lose. Then there will be open revolt in what was the GOP. The TEA Party has come too far to accept a faint echo of the Democrats..

  • http://www.erickerickson.org Erick Erickson

    If Perry gets in, it will delay finding the anti-Romney alternative. That will delay the anti-Romney money. That will sustain Romney at the top.

  • red_oakster

    Erick, your universal triad of time talent and treasure also requires the particulars of GOP presidential nominations. And the iron law is that a candidate must do quite well in either Iowa or New Hampshire to win the Republican nomination.

    Perry has a big problem in this regard. Iowa is crowded and Pawlenty has already seized the economic growth issue. Federalism and Texas economic engine may excite people at RedState, but it’s not enough of a message for the nomination. Moreover, the presence of Bachmann and Cain siphons off social conservative votes. George W. Bush locked up the Iowa political establishment and added a solid helping of social conservative voters. Perry will be hard pressed to do that.

    And if Perry doesn’t do well in Iowa, he’ll get creamed in New Hampshire. In reality, his positioning is not much better than Barbour’s.

    As for Romney, the man has a glass jaw. If Pawlenty does well in Iowa, Mitt is finished. Mitt’s hoping for a conservative crackup in Iowa, with a Cain or Bachmann emerging. If he can win New Hampshire under this scenario, the delegate mathematics mean that Romney will win. Bachmann and Cain will never win in places like Ohio, Florida, and California. Romney simply will roll up delegates in blue and purple states while losing the occasional southern state. But Mitt needs help to win.

  • Locked and Loaded

    he would continue gunning for Obama, and Romney would be an afterthought. Let the (many) others knock Mitt off; it shouldn’t be that hard. I think it could play out this way.

    Perry may have the intangible that could assure a landslide and that Romney will never have – the sheer guts to stick it to Obama and not back down.

  • CMaree

    on internecine party ripostes or internecine verbal attacks.

    Party candidates must focus their energies on conveying to all voters an appealing platform to reboot our crashing economy, push for American energy independence, and stiffen our Constitutional spine as well as our current bow down, bend over foreign policy stands.

    Enter the race boldly, but don’t beat on our own!

  • tankertodd

    Given Erick’s analysis it follows that Romney knows what he’s doing. He knows how to run a campaign. Which certainly makes him a better choice than Gingrich. But you may have already known that…

    Still too early. Still looking forward to Romney NOT being the nominee, but at least comforted that he can do *something* right.

  • chihank

    However, expect Romney to get Scott Brown to cmapaign for Romney in NH. Also who will Chris Christie back? Christie seemed to want Mitch Daniels. Will Chrisite back Romney?

    Also lot of Haley Barbour’s people are leaning toward Rick Perry. With Establishment support from Barbour and Palin/Tea Party support, Perry could be a compromise candidate. The primaries are going to be interesting.

  • conservativemusician

    Romney is far too flawed a candidate with all the RINO/liberal positions he is espousing. I also believe Rush was right when he said that Perry entering the race would change the entire landscape and would inject excitement into a GOP field that is kind of bland right now. I also agree with what he said the other day in that Romney severely damaged himself with his comments on global warming. Global warming is in the process of being debunked, so this was a serious gaffe on Romney’s part. I believe that conservatives will not let this pass – along with the fact that Romney still won’t come to terms about how disastrous his support for socialized medicine in Mass. was.

    Romney is continuing to alienate the conservative base with his liberalism, figuring that in the end, he will be the nominee and that we will all hold our collective noses as we did back in 2008 when McCain was the nominee. As conservatives, we simply can’t let this happen again. The stakes are just too high and we don’t need Obama-lite for our nominee, especially when we have better, more conservative choices. I am excited about the possibilities of a Perry candidacy. As Rush said, his entry into the race will shake up the field in a big way. Although I like Palin, I also think Perry is more electable because he is presiding over the state with the best economy, has more executive experience than Palin, and has less baggage to contend with than Palin does. My $.02.

  • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

    Then, he can completely turn the primary race on its head.

  • barleycorn

    Romney may poll a few percentage points above everyone else right now but 18-21% won’t win the nomination.

    Romney is the establishment candidate and everyone else is Other. Given that all the candidates who make up Other, and a huge majority of Republican voters, are virulently opposed to mandated healthcare, I think it is reasonable to conclude that Other will ultimately win the nomination, not Romney.

    If Romney were polling at 40-45% then I would tend toward agreement with your theory, but while Romney may have the highest floor, I believe his ceiling is too low to win the nomination.

  • CMaree

    An Air Force Veteran, a social and fiscal conservative, Rick Perry has the credentials that many of my friends feel could be the antidote America needs.

  • red_oakster

    My only addendum would be that Pawlenty probably is the only conservative capable of uniting the conservative coalition before New Hampshire.

  • http://www.twitter.com/AWG9_yoyo yoyo

    Romney on the other hand, has nothing but a campaign to run.

    So take Gov Perry’s time and divide by two-ish.

    (and I bet the same formula works with Gov Christie as well.)

  • chihank

    Case in Point. You add all the excutive experience of Romney, Palin, Bachamnn, Cain, Newt, Ron Paul, and Santorum. That sum is less than the excutive experience of of T-Paw or Perry. The best ticket for 2012 would a combo of T-Paw and Perry.

  • http://www.twitter.com/AWG9_yoyo yoyo

    In 2007, I would have bet the farm that it was going to be a HClinton v MRomney….

    Then in 2008, I would have bet the farm that it was going to be President McCain….

    I am all out of farms, personally.

  • paramedichess

    You are right in that we will be stuck with Romney if there is no unity soon on the conservative side. Apart from Perry jumping in, which is still unknown, I think the obvious choice is Pawlenty. Newt is dead in the water, Santorum is a joke candidate. Cain is a great guy, but won’t get the traction he needs fast enough, and Bachmann is a congresswoman (we don’t elect congressman to the White House). Pawlenty is not a perfect candidate (they don’t exist – even Reagan had huge flaws) but he governed a blue state in a conservative way, he has a compelling blue-collar background, he has great ideas, he is not afraid to say hard things, and he doesn’t have any huge flaws to get over. We have a choice. We can squabble and fight about third-tier candidates and enjoy a Romney candidacy, or we can unite behind Pawlenty and fight Obama with a much more conservative candidate.

  • acat

    does things a little differently. After their legislature recesses, which should be pretty soon, the governor can pretty much hand the day-to-day to the lieutenant governor and campaign full time.

    Romney has less responsibility today … but also has to overcome being Romney.

    Mew

  • ray_harbin

    I BELIEVE THAT ROMNEY IS A KIND GENTLEMAN– BUT HE IS A LONG WAY FROM POSSESSING CONSERVATIVE CREDENTIALS– MASSACHUSETTS IS NOT A STATE THAT ELECTS RIGHT WING GOVERNORS THE LIBERAL KENNEDY “S WERE IDOLS FOR FIFTY.. YEARS TED RAN INTO A 7 FOOT TIDAL CREEK, LEFT, HIS OFFICE STAFF GIRLFRIEND TO DROWN,, AS HE HIGHTAILED IT TO THE MAINLAND TO AVOID ANY CONNECTION WITH THE ACCIDENT. HIS STATE GAVE HIM A FREE PASS AND REELECTION. A STATE WHICH ELECTED NO CONSERVATIVES TO FEDERAL OFFICE FOR 70 YEARS. THEY DID ELECT A MAN TO REPLACE TED KENNEDY SAID TO BE CONSERVATIVE– BUT IT’S TOO SOON TO KNOW . A BOSTON NEWSPAPER CALLED IT “A STUNNING MIRACLE”. THE ONLY STATE OUT OF THE FIFTY THAT REAGAN DID NIT CARRY IN 1984

    WHILE GOVERNOR HE OVERSAW A HEALTH BILL REMARKABLY LIKE OBAMACARE. HE CURRENTLY OR RECENTLY SUPPORTED: SAME SEX MARRIAGE– ABORTION — GLOBAL WARMING LEGISLATION,– PARDONS FOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS–THE ABSURD GRAIN TO ETHANOL SUBSIDY AND GUN CONTROL. WHERE’S ROOM FOR CONSERVATISM??

  • smitch61

    It’s not over until the primary is over, we have no idea who all the players are. It only perhaps helps Romney until the media makes an issue of his Mormon faith. The media will also point out his ‘riches’, and his family political hierarchy. Who it helps or does not help right now is not the issue. I am old enough to have lived through both Nixon and Carter. WHOEVER is the nominee will be the next president of the United States..

  • smitch61

    I can also attest that Mr. Romney is no conservative. Not the kind of conservative I am anyway.

    By the way, when I received a call from Brown’s reelection campaign last week, I let them know that I have absolutely no intention of sending him any more money. I said to the kind lady on the phone that Mr. Brown had campaigned that ‘it was not the Kennedy seat’, and then proceeded to vote the way Kennedy would have… go figure.

  • citizenjerry

    While we’re talking about best candidates, the state Republican parties that have open primaries need to get rid of them. We found out in 2008 that open primaries only let Democrats choose our candidate for us.. Democrats will always pick a loser for us.

  • acat

    A list of the early States with open primaries would help.
    A list of some of the currently-in-office GOP officials in those States would help.

    It’s a good idea. It needs some meat on the bones, though.

    Mew

  • barleycorn

    There’s a seat open in the game tonight. We’d love to have you.

  • http://www.mosov.org MoSov

    post the EXACT same comment. Beat me to it, abierubin.

  • phenry

    wouldn’t that make Palin the defacto anti-Romney candidate if he doesn’t get in? How in the world does Palin help Romney? Without her in the race, he’d be a lock.

  • victrola

    Romney’s main appeal is that he’s a top tier candidate in a field of long shots, the only other candidate running that could actually beat Obama right now is Pawlenty. When people see a bunch of weak horses (even if they agree with them on the issues) and an imperfect strong horse, they’re going to back the strong horse every time. What Romney wants is more Santorum, Bachmann, Palin, Cain-type Republicans running to only divide his competition up even further.

    Perry changes all of that, you would suddenly have a top tier candidate that CAN beat Obama, that raise the big bucks and draw from Establishment type Republicans as well as the grassroots. Perry would also suck a lot of “establishment” money out of the room that would normally go to Romney, and he’s the closest thing to a “white horse” that conservative have been yearning for.

    Right now, my first choice would be Perry, followed by Pawlenty, then Romney. I’m not a Romney fan, but I’m not backing a Republican longshot that I know will lose to Obama, and whatever you can say about Romney, I think he will do well in a general election. I would rather deal with a conservative- leaning centrist like Romney in the White House with a Republican Senate and House than another 4 years of Obama.

  • paledon

    It appears that this writer is not a student of history. Very rarely do candidates who are leading the primary polls at this point very rarely win the nomination. AKA… see Howard Dean 2004. These polls are nothing more than fodder for 24 hour news outlets and so called political pundits to talk about. The American public will not pay any attention to the presidential race until after Christmas. And I will make this prediction now. Next spring when it all counts, Romney care is going to be hung around his neck and his campaign will sink. He will be out of the race by May. And his stance on he believes in man made global warming. WAs just another nail in his political coffin.

  • dkm466

    Time is the key?? Tell that lame line to Hillary Clinton vs Bozo. McCain had time b/c of articles like this. The media wants the Romney Pig With Wings to fly

  • EcH90

    You should put those three sentences at the very top of it.

  • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8
  • onyon43

    Just to clarify, you are talking about elected official executive experience? I am not sure that elected official executive experience is the best measure of a candidate… Was that the point you were trying to make?

  • gpclaw

    He just needs a strong showing.

    Unless there is a part of Perry’s record that I am not yet aware of, Perry seems like a guy that both the Tea Party, and establishment republicans can get behind.

    Let’s face it, it seems like everyone is searching for a better alternative to Romney. Romney never stopped running for the GOP nomination, so he has a four year head start on everyone, and name recognition. If a late entry, such as Perry, finishes anywhere near Romney in the primary, wouldn’t that demonstrate Perry as the stronger candidate?

    The only knock I can see against Perry in the 2012 election, is that he succeeded Bush as Governor. However, the fact that the Texas economy has been so strong during the economic downturn, should be enough to overcome the “Bush” connection.

  • acat

    Those who are supporting Romney appear to largely not from Social Conservatives or the Single Issues crowds; instead they seem to be focussed on a few things…

    Fiscal conservatism – Perry’s lack of biz expertise is not likely to peel anyone…

    Anti-SIVV – (used here to mean non-Conservative GOPers) – not likely to peel anyone here.. Perry’s got better cred up and down the SIVV lines….

    “Electability” – Perry’s lack of nationwide experience and stature is likely to minimize the number Perry can peel … but this is really his best shot at it….

    It pains me to say this but .. I do think you’re engaging in some wishful thinking.

    Mew

  • acat

    If we get three or four “strong finishers” in Iowa and Romney wins big (as in – nobody else is even close) in New Hampshire .. the issues-agnostic donors will flock to Romney and he’ll be able to outspend everyone else 2-1 or 3-1.

    If, however, Tea Partiers (and that applies to Social Conservatives of all varieties) come together behind a single candidate, yielding a hands-down win in Iowa, then we’ve got a chance of keeping an actual Conservative on the ballot until Super Tuesday.

    Mew

  • redwood

    Perry – Palin in 2012
    Palin – Perry in 2012

    Either way recognition is not a problem.
    Rectal exam? Give the pros a two-fer.

    Romney? Not for me. Put Romney up and I write in Mickey Mouse.

  • Whacker77

    I don’t see how Perry entering the race helps Romney at all. Romney is the supposed frontrunner right now because he has money and is viewed as the least bad choice. That’s hardly a ringing endorsement.

    I think I’m like most other Republicans and conservatives. I’m completely uninspired by the current crop of choices and don’t believe any of them can beat Obama because they don’t generate enthusiam and they each have big flaws.

    While I’m not 100% sold on Perry, he’s the kind of guy who could jump in the race and generate some excitement and buzz. No one else in the race can do that. Palin generates a lot of buzz, but she’s not running. The only concern would be is he another Fred Thompson.

    I would be inclined to support Perry, but I remain hopeful Jeb jumps in the race. I hate his immigration policy, but I love his governance of Florida and I love the ease with which the electoral map would swing in his favor. I know others disagree though.

  • irishfreedomfighter

    and would switch in a heartbeat to Perry if he does run. My heart is with libertarian-conservatism, but since you know who (can’t say his name) has about as much chance of winning the presidency as I do, I’ve been grudingly supporting Romney as have all of my friends and family. Every one of us would relish the opportunity to vote for Perry, as he is pretty much as nearly perfect a candidate as anyone from the GOP could want.

    Most of Romney’s support comes from name recognition and the widespread belief that he is the only candidate with a shot against Obama. If Perry runs, everything changes completely.

  • irishfreedomfighter

    and would switch in a heartbeat to Perry if he does run. My heart is with libertarian-conservatism, but since you know who (can’t say his name) has about as much chance of winning the presidency as I do, I’ve been grudingly supporting Romney as have all of my friends and family. Every one of us would relish the opportunity to vote for Perry, as he is pretty much as nearly perfect a candidate as anyone from the GOP could want.

    Most of Romney’s support comes from name recognition and the widespread belief that he is the only candidate with a shot against Obama. If Perry runs, everything changes completely.

  • mboyle1988

    She is poison to the ticket. I personally love her, but on Fox News. We cannot win an election with Palin anywhere on the ticket. I’m sorry people. We can’t. Perry is the best choice for president. I don’t know whom I’d choose for VP, but I lean towards Jindal. My heart says Rubio, but my head says he needs more experience.

  • audax
  • rowdydfw

    Romney has name recognition because he is a has been politician already rejected by republicans how many times now? He opted out of a governor’s race in 2006…why? Because his health care debacle was already tanking and the liberals were screeching because he wanted an amendment to ban same-sex marriage after the court had allowed it. Even the social republicans in Mass rejected that. His claim that he did not run again for governor to explore a presidential run as early as 2006, was BS! He knew he couldn’t get elected again. He was rejected in 2008 in favor of another liberal republican. Romney is spending his own freaking money and the little he’s managed to amass from those willing to back a loser.

    The ONLY ones supporting a Romney 2012 polling are liberal democrats who know he doesn’t have a even a fat chance of winning in 2012, but want republicans to think he can run and win.

    Any sane republican drinking up the hogwarsh of Romney being the lead candidate…just needs to think again.

    Why should Sarah Palin throw her hat in the ring and start spending when she can still get people to pay her to speak, and coninue to raise money? Personally and campaign money? It doesn’t matter when she throws her hat in the ring…the money is waiting for her. Newt and Huckabuck even know that, neither one of them could get it.

    Rick Perry, as we all know could throw his hat in the ring at any time and have the backing of any number of billionnaires throwing money and backing him. Lest people forget, he’s having to call a special session because he sat on his behind and watched while important legislation we needed and valued got pushed to the end of the line and didn’t get passed. Now he has to get busy and shove it thru, or he doesn’t have a fat chance either. He may not anyway because Texans know all the wrong turns Perry took and we had to slap him up side the head to get him turned in the right direction. Also known is that Texas is chock full of reasonable, independent, strong thinkers that keep this state humming as long as we don’t let some total progressive get in the Mansion.

    We also know that the next person in the Oval Office better get in there and start slashing and burning government programs and pushing legislation and agencies to get the feds out of the private sector. We don’t have time to slap Perry around and make him get off his behind and MOVE IT!

    Also, have you seen Perry debate? I have. He would have to spend the next 18 months alone cramming to figure out how to get around Obama’s flat out bald-faced lies in a debate.

  • rowdydfw

    Romney has name recognition because he is a has been politician already rejected by republicans how many times now? He opted out of a governor’s race in 2006…why? Because his health care debacle was already tanking and the liberals were screeching because he wanted an amendment to ban same-sex marriage after the court had allowed it. Even the social republicans in Mass rejected that. His claim that he did not run again for governor to explore a presidential run as early as 2006, was BS! He knew he couldn’t get elected again. He was rejected in 2008 in favor of another liberal republican. Romney is spending his own freaking money and the little he’s managed to amass from those willing to back a loser.

    The ONLY ones supporting a Romney 2012 polling are liberal democrats who know he doesn’t have a even a fat chance of winning in 2012, but want republicans to think he can run and win.

    Any sane republican drinking up the hogwarsh of Romney being the lead candidate…just needs to think again.

    Why should Sarah Palin throw her hat in the ring and start spending when she can still get people to pay her to speak, and coninue to raise money? Personally and campaign money? It doesn’t matter when she throws her hat in the ring…the money is waiting for her. Newt and Huckabuck even know that, neither one of them could get it.

    Rick Perry, as we all know could throw his hat in the ring at any time and have the backing of any number of billionnaires throwing money and backing him. Lest people forget, he’s having to call a special session because he sat on his behind and watched while important legislation we needed and valued got pushed to the end of the line and didn’t get passed. Now he has to get busy and shove it thru, or he doesn’t have a fat chance either. He may not anyway because Texans know all the wrong turns Perry took and we had to slap him up side the head to get him turned in the right direction. Also known is that Texas is chock full of reasonable, independent, strong thinkers that keep this state humming as long as we don’t let some total progressive get in the Mansion.

    We also know that the next person in the Oval Office better get in there and start slashing and burning government programs and pushing legislation and agencies to get the feds out of the private sector. We don’t have time to slap Perry around and make him get off his behind and MOVE IT!

    Also, have you seen Perry debate? I have. He would have to spend the next 18 months alone cramming to figure out how to get around Obama’s flat out bald-faced lies in a debate.

  • Tbone

    Are you a supporter of the IRA terrorists, scumbags and organized criminals?

  • acat

    Boston?

    If so, then .. what about Perry is more appealing than, say, Cain or Pawlenty?

    Mew

  • Tbone

    He is McCain redux. The MSM will sucker Republican voters into nominating him and then turn on him with a vengeance. He’ll lose support among independents and conservatives won’t have any passion to carry him home.

    On the plus side, there won’t be much enthusiasm for Obama. Voter totals will probably numerically match Polk/Clay.

  • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

    Not having a candidate that outshines, and out organizes Romney in early primaries early on will be the end of hope for conservatives looking for the anti-Romney candidate.

    Here’s the problem I think conservatives need to overcome:

    STOP calling them “ANTI-ROMNEY” candidates. START calling them ANTI-OBAMA candidates that are better candidates than Romney.

    I think the problem for conservatives is they can’t coalesce around a single candidate, because so far the candidates are defining themselves by what they are not… and by what criticisms they have of each other and Obama/Dems… nobody is leading out with real policy ideas(endorsing Paul Ryan plan, or speaking out against Obamacare, or pointing out economic issues, or explaining odd historical facts and pointing out the MSM’s lame grasp of history, or suggesting ethanol subsidies is some sort of energy policy or wasteful gov’t spending on bad energy policies, or discussing FAIR TAX, or ANTI-WAR, or any fringe issue in my humble opinion is not “leading out”)… This kind of politicking may work for Democrats, but not for conservatives… we like good ideas, and we like to hear them lain before us pragmatically… Monday’s debate will hopefully shake things up… but not likely, the moderator will likely spend time throwing gotcha questions at each candidate rather than give them an opportunity to address real issues…. and thus the conundrum continues….

    The libertarian-conservative faction of the GOP is becoming fractured single issue voters lured in by the cult of personality…

    We’re becoming like democratic demagogues of the liberal left… looking for a savior of ideals, and not someone that wants to fix things… I think this is why so many assume that good candidates are not good enough to knock Mitt Romney out of the front-runner… not that they can’t, but that only “candidate x” has name recognition, or organization, or factor x that trumps all other “anti-Romney” candidates, and can still be ‘electable in the general’…

    I think the candidates need to do more to show us they have ideas that can withstand the scrutiny and spin of the MSM… and that they can resonate with All Americans… not just idyllic conservatives… this doesn’t require a compromise of their principles, it requires the ability to communicate the efficacy of good principled governing… And this is why we all want the Reagan candidate to emerge… Many of us are waiting… silently… zealots and all aside… we’re waiting for someone to emerge from the smoke and mirrors of speculations.

  • boonerdan

    Your message of JOBS and DRILLING are great topics and will resonate with Americans who do not have enough of either right now. The problem is that Mitt is a BIG government progressive with a track record of growing government and taking wealth from the private sector. Don’t look now, but that is exactly the problem today.

    Mitt’s recent doubling-down on global warming only shows me a further disconnect from regular Americans the problems we face every day.

  • dajeeps

    Against the rest of the candidates, he reminds me of those kids games where you look at a picture that has several similar objects and one that doesn’t quite fit. I can’t believe that just last year we took on senators in primaries because they were too liberal and won – which almost never happens – and now we’re walking on eggshells around Romney? Geez. This guy doesn’t really fit in – the only thing Republican about him is the “R” next to his name – and if necessary needs a hook to get him off stage. He must not get the nomination and I do not care by what means.

  • gpclaw

    According to the Wall Street Journal, Some 37% of all net new American jobs since the recovery began were created in Texas.

    There are a few things that concern me about Perry. News like this goes a long way towards making me forget about them.

  • Mike

    …has driven an existing party to a single victorious cycle. One.

    We haven’t taken over the local committees yet. We haven’t learned to control the big money yet. And most importantly, we haven’t had time to flush out the bad candidates for President. Romney is the consequence of roughly a decade of inaction.

    We can hope for a decent candidate this time, but the only way we move our Presidents to the right is to make sure that none of the squishy moderates survive (electorally, for you DKos trolls) their first campaign for local office.

    Get rid of the pale pastels before they become the governors of states, or Senators. COUGHSPECTERCOUGH.

  • drothgery

    some consistency on winner take all vs proportional vs proportional w/ threshold vs winner taker all by district on delegate selection would be nice.

    Not sure what the RNC can do about it, though, short of stripping delegates from states that don’t comply.

  • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

    Rick Perry for President:
    Because I refuse to hold my nose and vote for another WIMP!

  • http://theheartlander.wordpress.com/ heartlander

    here, in my opinion, is the most important bit:

    I think the candidates need to do more to show us they have ideas that can withstand the scrutiny and spin of the MSM? and that they can resonate with All Americans? not just idyllic conservatives? this doesn?t require a compromise of their principles, it requires the ability to communicate the efficacy of good principled governing.

    YESSSS!!
    That is exactly it. You don’t win people over by compromising and watering down; you win them by communicating well, and thereby persuading them of the rightness of your views.

    This is why for quite some time now I just can’t get away from feeling that the No. 1 quality we need in our candidate is a DAZZLING, phenomenal ability to communicate.

    This is why I just adore Paul Ryan. BLAST IT! I wish the GOP would DRAFT him as its nominee!

  • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

    I have Diet Coke sprayed all over my screen now, thank you.

  • gpclaw

    “Texas accounts for 45% of net U.S. jobs createdduring the recovery”

  • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull
  • Doc Holliday

    I know Hot Air has it in for the guy, but this video is just not good enough, really not good enough.

    http://hotair.com/archives/2011/06/10/herman-cain-we-should-stop-irans-nuke-program-by-pursuing-energy-independence/

  • Doc Holliday

    Palin could change that, maybe Perry. Obama has the largest war chest ever, I think only Romney has the money even to make a serious attempt at the nomination. Sure it is early, but that is how it looks at the moment.

    Rudy could be a good candidate if he got right on a few issues such as 2A. He will have trouble with the social conservatives, but they still want Obama out. It seems to me he has simply not done the groundwork to even make the argument he should be our candidate. If he gets in now, it will be a halfhearted attempt ala Fred in 2008.

    I think Pawlenty really wants this, he better toughen up quick. Obama is not going to play bean bag.

  • Doc Holliday

    but we can’t make people run. One would hope we had a better field than this, but we don’t.

  • Doc Holliday

    Romney wants to be president and has the money to try. Where are the “Tea party” candidates? How can we or they complain if people don’t run, and run to win?

  • Remington_Steele

    on Perry being a top tier candidate. He is top tier caliber-wise, and I like all your other points, but Perry has not been vetted on the national level.

    It’s easy to say that’s not a big deal, but when you go from 1 state’s media to the focus of the national media, that vetting process is not fast nor easy. It’s a process to get past the spin doctor’s take on very move you’ve made over the course of your adult life. Perry will be busy in that arena for months and that’s one reason Erick is saying Perry helps Romney. Romney doesn’t need the money, even though he has quite a bit of the establishment’s money in addition to his own. Perry needs to show he can play smart and hard on the national level and hope that Romney trips up.

    If Perry steals the air out of the room from TPaw and Bachmann, this may end up a Romney/Perry or vice versa ticket unless proverbial blood is split in the debates.

  • Remington_Steele

    on Perry being a top tier candidate. He is top tier caliber-wise, and I like all your other points, but Perry has not been vetted on the national level.

    It’s easy to say that’s not a big deal, but when you go from 1 state’s media to the focus of the national media, that vetting process is not fast nor easy. It’s a process to get past the spin doctor’s take on very move you’ve made over the course of your adult life. Perry will be busy in that arena for months and that’s one reason Erick is saying Perry helps Romney. Romney doesn’t need the money, even though he has quite a bit of the establishment’s money in addition to his own. Perry needs to show he can play smart and hard on the national level and hope that Romney trips up.

    If Perry steals the air out of the room from TPaw and Bachmann, this may end up a Romney/Perry or vice versa ticket unless proverbial blood is split in the debates.

  • http://redmerrimack.blogspot.com/ charliebravoNH

    1. There will be a candidate to challenge Romney in NH. Right now we are early in the process and lot of people are waiting on the sidelines here for that candidate.

    2. Pawlenty and Santorum have been working real hard in NH and have built up noticeable organizations here. That is important because a candidate needs to count his supporters and get them out to vote. You can’t do that with TV ads or Fox news Interviews.

  • izoneguy

    Gov. Rick Perry interview, part 2

  • bikeguy65

    He lost MN only. http://electoralmap.net/1984.php. Probably the last time my vote counted in a presidential election

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
  • irishfreedomfighter

    No. Are you a steak or a human?

  • irishfreedomfighter

    No. Are you a steak or a human?

  • irishfreedomfighter

    Perry is more appealing than both Pawlenty and Cain because of the job that he has done with Texas’ economy. It would be a fantastic selling point in the general. While Obama has been running up crazy debt and our economy has gotten even worse, Texas has become an economic powerhouse that will surpass California as the largest state economy soon. I personally loved the 10th Amendment Rights that he brought up back in 09′, and I also loved when he called out Bush back in 07′ for not being a fiscal conservative.

    Perry has a fiery personality and is a much better speaker than Pawlenty. Pawlenty may have a solid record, and of course I’d vote for him over Obama, but Obama would beat im in debates based on personality alone. Pawlenty would make a good VP, but he is in no way exciting enough to appeal to swing voters who vote for slogans and speeches.

    As for Cain, he has no legislative exprience whatsoever, and therefore has no record. I personally find it hard to trust a blank slate. He should run for the House or Senate before the Presidency. I seem to recall him supporting affirmative action back when he lost his Senate primary. Perry has a fantastic record (not perfect, but Reagan wasn’t either) and is a terrific campaigner. I’ve been wanting him to run since 09′.

  • Tbone

    but answer the question. Do you support the filthy, terrorist, cowardly scum of the IRA?

  • irishfreedomfighter

    I said no. Read my answer again. I am an Irish-American, and I’m proud of it. And I’m fighting for American freedoms by making my voice heard. My name does not in any way signify any sort of support for the post 1916 IRA.

  • irishfreedomfighter

    I said no. Read my answer again. I am an Irish-American, and I’m proud of it. And I’m fighting for American freedoms by making my voice heard. My name does not in any way signify any sort of support for the post 1916 IRA.

  • gunslingr45

    Yup, cut from the same cloth IMHO.

  • gunslingr45

    we know him for who he really is, which is to say a “RINO.”

    So many RINO’s, so little time.

  • gunslingr45

    will join you, but I also think they are counting on it. But I am going to write in my own name. I just never trusted that short guy.

    So many RINO?s, so little time.

  • carolynr

    Romney is another big government guy. We have had enough of this. Perry believes in state’s rights. I like him, I don’t think he will take any bs…and I want Romney out of the lead…PRONTO.