« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

The Horserace for July 7, 2011

IA Caucus: Feb. 6, 2012
NH Primary: Feb. 14, 2012 (expected)
SC Primary: TBD
NV Caucus: Feb. 18, 2012

Michele Bachmann has caused a mystery and a feeding frenzy in the press. What’s her number?

Not her phone number. Her bank balance.

It is the big question in Washington and in political circles across the nation — how much money has Michele Bachmann raised? Sources close to the campaign say she’ll come in second. Romney has raised around $18 million. The next highest known number is Ron Paul, who is slightly south of $5 million with Tim Pawlenty barely trailing him. Then there’s the big name with only $225,000.00.

But Bachmann’s lead is going to surprise everybody. And her rise is Herman Cain’s fall. This week in the horserace, we see some real shake up — probably the first legitimate shake up since the New Hampshire Primary.

Rick Perry looks set to enter the race and Tim Pawlenty is pulling some surprises out of his hat that may pay off. And sooner than I expected, the pernicious “Mormon” issue is raising its head, forcing us to confront it.

We’ll get into all of that in this week’s horserace on the road to the White House.

Michele Bachmann

There is little that needs to be said about Michele Bachmann other than this: she has had the perfect week.

Bachmann is now the front runner for the anti-Romney wing of the primary coalition. The only thing that can knock her off her pedestal right now is an unforced error or a Governor from Texas.

Herman Cain

Herman Cain is having a rough ride. His fundraising is around $2 million — though to his credit that’s better than Gingrich’s fundraising. He lost another staffer in Iowa. At least he’s going on the Daily Show. If he can one up Jon Stewart, that might give him some momentum. But it is very hard to do. Stewart, after all, controls the show.

Things are not looking good for Herman Cain.

Newt Gingrich

If it were not for Newt Gingrich’s paltry fundraising, Herman Cain would be at the bottom of the top tier candidates. It is devastating that Gingrich, a former Speaker of the House of Representatives, would raise less money than Cain, a man with no prior political experience.

Even worse, Gingrich raised $2 million, but he spent $3 million, leaving just $225,000.00 in the bank and lots of debt.

The Gingrich campaign has ended. Someone just needs to tell him.

Jon Huntsman

Jon Huntsman’s campaign comes in 5th in fundraising with money just north of $4 million. The question, though, is how much of that is his money. The actual details have not been released. Huntsman continues to pursue a strategy of getting elitist opinion makers on his side, but I don’t think that will help him this year. He’s going to have to take out Romney. And right now, Romney is running strong in New Hampshire and elsewhere.

Huntsman does not fit the anti-Romney mold as well as someone like Bachmann. I also think the chances of splitting off cross over voters is less and less viable for Huntsman.

Thaddeus McCotter

From his statements thus far, I suspect McCotter is running to be a spoiler against Romney more than he is running to be President. He’s not going to be the nominee. His pro-union baggage is already getting him attacked by right to work folks. He’s got no long term viability as a Presidential candidate because his ability to impact others in the race.

Sarah Palin

I’m going to keep up here what I said last week about Sarah Palin. I do not, at this point, see signs that Sarah Palin is getting into the race for President. Considering, however, that she was in New Hampshire when MItt Romney announced and Iowa when Michele Bachmann announced, I definitely think Palin is trying to keep the window open to get in if her polling changes.

Right now, if I had to guess, I think she is not running for anything except continued relevance. Palin can legitimately shape up to be the king maker. I continue to dwell on her comments during the bus tour that she wants Rick Perry to run.

Ron Paul

I’ll repeat my prior view on Ron Paul. He will not be the nominee, but his ability to excite a base of youthful voters is something that continues to impress a lot of people who should know better.

Tim Pawlenty

Pawlenty’s numbers are disappointing to a lot of people, but he just picked up Mike Huckabee’s daughter in Iowa and a slew of legislators in Florida. He’s also got some traction in South Carolina with key supporters. Pawlenty’s fundraising surprised many in that he came in less than $5 million, but he is right about where Huckabee was at this time in 2007. The problem is, he’s no Mike Huckabee.

His slow and steady strategy continues to pay dividends and I think it is wise that he is ignoring Michele Bachmann for now. But he can only do that for so long and will now be outmatched by her in cash. More so, a Perry entry hurts Pawlenty.

Rick Perry

We need to slow down the Perry train. He is not running. At least, he is not running yet. Rick Perry may very well get in. I hear more and more that he will. But a lot of people are getting their egos bruised because Perry is not doing the requisite courting of people who presume to be someone who must be courted. It is because (1) Perry isn’t in the race and (2) a lot of the complainers have heightened senses of self-worth.

If Perry gets in, Bachmann and Pawlenty get hurt. But he’s not in. Yet.

Mitt Romney

The Wall Street Journal’s Political Diary flagged this quote:

“For some reason, when people talk about whether Mitt Romney’s Mormonism will keep him from getting elected, the focus is almost always entirely on whether evangelicals will accept him in the primaries. In recent weeks, some commentators have noted a recent Gallup poll that shows that Democrats are more likely than Republicans to hold a candidate’s Mormonism against him. … The poll also found that independents are slightly more likely to say they will not vote for a Mormon than Republicans are. My theory is that some conservatives think that Mormons aren’t Christian enough, while some liberals think they’re too Christian. … It is nice to see the stereotype of evangelicals as especially intolerant debunked. But don’t the polls — especially the numbers on independents — mean that Romney (or [Jon] Huntsman) could be a risky general-election candidate? It is probably worth thinking through since Romney has a good shot at being the Republican nominee” — journalist Ramesh Ponnuru blogging at nationalreview.com, July 5.

It is an issue about which Republicans must tread carefully, but still must tread. If the election were today, Romney would be the nominee. And as his money grows, the odds of him winning grow. Surprisingly though, Michele Bachmann continues to gain on him in key states. Even a new poll out of New Hampshire has Bachmann going into second place. If she can consolidate the anti-Romney faction, I think Romney loses.

The bigger issue for Romney is Rush Limbaugh. For the past several weeks, Rush has been rather critical of Romney going so far, yesterday, to say he thinks Romney is running against “us” where “us” equals “conservatives.” Certainly McCain withstood Rush in 2008, but he had a different constituency on his path to victory — a constituency Romney is not assured of.

As I said last week, Romney seems capped out on support right now between 35% and 40% of the GOP primary. A divided field with many viable challengers continues to help Romney. If people start dropping out — particularly should Rick Perry get in — things change for Romney.

Rick Santorum

There is no buzz about Rick Santorum’s financial numbers, just as there was no buzz about him running. This may be the last time we have him in this horserace as I do not see him being able to make a go of it. About the only question I have is who drops out first — Gingrich or Santorum.

COMMENTS

  • http://ruminationsaspirations.blogspot.com jonbingham

    …and not enough moderates in the field.
    Conservatives need to not split their votes across a ton of candidates leaving the door wide open for the next McCain.

  • gawken

    And I hope thye are..it’s a pretty smart strategy.

    We have two states, PA and MI, where the GOP did very well in 2010. The incumbents in both states are lackluster, politica hacksl. Both can be beaten, yet, for a multitude of reasons, neither has attracted a viable conservative candidate.

    I’ve lways left that Santorum wanted a rematch against Casey, and “running” for the WH has definitely raised his profile. I believe that whatever he has in his presidential account can be transferred to a Senate race, and I suspect that when he drops out to run against Casey, he will have NO problem raising the needed funds.

    Stabenow is very vulnerable, yet the MI GOP hasn’t generated a candidate. Had McCotter announced for the senate, it would have been a blip on the national political radar. Now, he ‘s getting lots of media exposure. Put him in a few debates, he’ll stand out, and then when he goes after Debbie, the $$ will also flow in.

  • acat

    I don’t see why Santorum thinks he can win the white house. It’s never made sense – he should have run in 2008, not now – but he could do very well in a Senate race. The campaign slogan writes itself – “Are you better off now than you were when you chose to replace me with this ijit” (erm, maybe needs to be more .. civil…)

    I’m not up on Michigan politics, but McCotter – from what I’ve heard and read – could be able to do the same thing .. it’s a good strategy, and if McCotter does as Erick says he will and pulls some votes away from Romney, double win.

    I believe you are correct about being able to use donations for the POTUS run to finance a different run – I believe you are even more correct that this lets donors know nationwide that there are fights for the Senate in MI and PA, and that if their Senators aren’t up for election, they may want to donate…

    I also know that there are more Dems like Casey up this year – elected in 2006 in relatively purple states that have been skewing more red as the economy sours – that are up this year than there have been in a long, long time. It’s shaping up to be a good year for the GOP .. but an expensive one for candidates. Raising money outside of their respective States is almost mandatory.

    Mew

  • GOPUGA

    Of our candidates, I think he is the most conservative that right now WOULD beat Obama. Now if Perry gets in the race, I would add him to this list. While I like Bachmann, Caine, Santorum etc. i’m just not sure they can win the general election.

  • Goldwater_Conservative

    not really the part about Perry but I 100% agree on Pawlenty. In fact if Pawlenty had been govenor in Texas and Perry was govenor in Minnesota I think we would be comparing Paw to goldwater and Perry to Romney. Perry is conservative because conservatives elect the winner in Texas. Pawlenty is conservative because he just truly is conservative.

  • lizabtha

    Might win Iowa, but hasn’t a prayer in the general. She seems too nutty. Sorry, but there it is. This is how she is perceived.

    Best team possible, imho? Perry/Pawlenty.

    I really like Pawlenty, but he lacks fire necessary to get elected as prez. That’s too bad, as he strikes me as the brightest of the bunch.

    He’d be a great VP pick, this time around, for any candidate.

  • edintexas

    Not for me. Romney being a Rockefeller Republican – now THAT’S a deal breaker.

  • standingonthewall

    Yes, thanks for saying it so well!

  • graytemples

    Perry is Palin as far as dislike from the MSM.

    I am concerned about the “rumors” that apparently have been out there tho never proven.

    My theory is, if Perry is “clean” he will run. If he has a skeleton(s), he will not run.

    If he runs, the savagery inflicted upon Palin will be “Sunday School Stuff” compared to what will be inflicted on Perry.

    If he is “clean”, and if he runs, the Obama Camp will be quaking in their shoes.

  • rightwingmom52

    and aren’t aware of his Specter endorsement, I hear a lot of folks say they’re impressed with Santorum. McCotter certainly should liven up the debates, although considering how dry he is, it felt a little odd to say that.

    Hope they take your advice.

  • snowshooze

    I hear it a lot and all over… Palin/Bachman..Cain/Bachman…Perry/Palin ( The non-runner surprise? ) or any of those other speculations.
    I do not recall at any time two Presidential Candidates circling the wagons and teaming up. I can’t see it happening..but has it?

  • nepanyrush

    He has a fake image, built from his father’s legacy, but only those who follow politics realize that it is fake. Pro-life people in PA actually think he is pro-life, because he describes himself that way, despite his votes, one after another, that oppose protecting the unborn. He presents himself as a conservative, or at worse a moderate, while reliably voting liberal. The problem in PA is the media caters to his false image. It would take a concerted effort to expose Casey for who he really is and the GOP candidate will not get any help from the media in this unveiling.

  • beltwaylvr

    Bachmann can sweep the floor with him any day of the week. She shouldn’t be worried about him. Perry is GWBush, take 2, on immigration and Americans just will not tolerate that anymore.

    See for yourself:

    PICKET: Does GOP want Perry’s DREAM act too?
    http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2011/jun/19/picket-does-gop-want-perrys-dream-act-too/

  • nepanyrush

    I like Pawlenty, and he is the most conservative, but like Fred Thompson last time around, he just does not generate enthusiam. Bachman generates enthusiasm, but the media will have more to paint her as unqualified if she wins the primary than they will with Pawlenty. I do think Pawlenty would win the general election, but clearly he has trouble generating enthusiasm and doesn’t have the fake “Presidential” look that Romney has (and which casual, unenlighted voters seem to use to make their judgements).

  • unclefred

    His campaign is not coalescing as it needs to.

    Because is has no political experience, it is imperative that he gather expertise around him so that he can give detailed answers and produce detailed position papers. This is especially important in areas like foreign policy, debt reduction, defense, and reducing the federal bureaucracy. Until he does this he can’t move from generalities to specifics. I have been waiting for him to at least begin to do this, and he has not. Generalities only hold for so long, he needs to put depth underneath his answers.

    Bachmann – Like her ideas, I see no basis to believe that she has anything like the executive experience needed to run the nation.

    Pawlenty – He seems a sound conservative candidate. He does NOT need to generate enthusiasm, the raging disgust for Obama will motivate the base, and push the independents to look at anyone remotely acceptable to the center. Pawlenty easily makes this cut. He’s electable and assuming that Perry stays on the sidelines, is our best bet to stop Romney and get a conservative in the WH.

    Perry – if he gets in and nothing else happens it will be between him and Romney. I’d take Perry over Romney in a heartbeat.

  • Goldwater_Conservative

    but think how absolutly fickle and worthless enthusiasim is. Afterall thats what got us Obama. I dream of a country that one day doesnt decide their leader with an “american idol” format.

  • http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

    I have often heard rumors about the rumors but no one has ever said what the rumors were all about?

  • Whacker77

    I’m a broken record when it comes to the 2012 field, but I remain underwhelmed at best. Not a single name on that list jumps out at me as someone who has breakout appeal. I guess the person who comes closest is Rick Perry, but even he seems a bit murky to me.

    Don’t get me wrong. I would vote for most all of the names listed in the general election. Still, we’re being asked to choose from a former governor with multiple positions on multiple issues, a congresswoman who has been gaffe prone, and Obama’s ambassador. Poor Pawlenty has everything going for him except voter support.

    I’m sure the eventual nominee will look better after winning, but the group is just not impressive. I like Pawlenty and I like Bachmann, but I don’t see either with a real chance to win the general. I think Pawlenty’s campaign is almost over and he should consider the Senate. Bachmann is fine, but I think she’ll suffer the same media fate Palin did. Whether she’s potrayed fairly won’t matter because bad press is just bad press.

    I think many on our side assume just because Obama has done poorly any Republican can win. That’s not the case though. If we nominate an Angle/Buck/ O’Donnell type, that person would be the issue rather than Obama. We need to make sure our choice is a conservative, but also someone who doesn’t become the entire show. Anyone but Angle would have beaten Reid, but we chose poorly.

    What continues to amaze me is the fact the bigger names have passed so far. Obama is as beatable as any incumbant since Hoover, but Jeb and Christie have said no. I can understand Christie’s reason, but not Jeb’s. If he thinks we’ll be clamoring for him after 10 years out of office in 2016 he’s mistaken.

    As blah as I am about the current group, just imagine how excited we’d all be if our field had these names.

    Chris Christie
    Jeb Bush
    Marco Rubio
    Rand Paul
    Rick Perry
    Mitch Daniels

    That’s a group full of riches.

  • akafroman

    Santorum is the only one who has the pro-life credentials enough to adequately point out all of the pro-abortion votes Casey has made (not defunding PP, voting for Obamacare). Casey will be very difficult to beat, but at the very least he would be called out on his hypocrisy and might win the race with a black eye.

  • http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

    I read the referenced article including the update from Perry’s office. The issue was dealt with at the state level and appeared to be uncontroversial in that it unanimously passed the Texas Senate.

    Perry also noted that securing the border comes first and then we can discuss other immigration issues.

    I am not sure this will be a huge problem for Perry. He has been fairly direct in pressing Mr. Obama to do his job and control the border.

  • altexas

    This is not the year we need a RINO. We could win with Mickey Mouse if that is all we had. This time we can get a real conservative in easy.

  • Scope

    will Palinize every one of our candidates, and especially any one of them appearing to move up in popularity with the voters. Perry will not get any worse treatment than Bachmann is currently getting. The heat will surly intensify, but it will be against any one in the current lead at any one time.

  • chihank

    Perry / T-Paw sounds like a great ticket. Two multi-term governors of the South and Midwest. Either Perry or T-Paw have more executive experience than Romney, Newt, Palin, Cain, RuPaul, and Santorum put together.

  • http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

    Whoever enters the field will be attacked by the MSM. If we allow the MSM to dictate who we choose, we have already lost.

  • altexas

    His record, pro-toll roads, trans Texas corridor land grab, enforced immunizations of young girls, all of which went down in flames due to popular opinion.

    I like Rick Perry as my Governor just fine. The Texas Governor is the weakest of all Governors by our State Constitution. He can do very little but his job. At this point he is the longest serving Governor in Texas history and I would vote for him again today but would prefer to keep him in Texas to harass Washington.

  • chihank

    With the MN gov’t shutdown, the Dems are actually blaming T-Paw for the shutdown. Stupid, but MSNBC is running with that moniker.

  • http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

    Have you guys seen the recent New York Times piece about the Bush v. Perry rivalry? It is old news here in Texas. The open break came when the Bushies lined up against Perry and with KBH in the Republican primary for governor. Perry will not run as the anti-Bush but the anti-Obama. The whole article was much to do about nothing with a few anonymous Bush sources thrown in to add some sort of legitimacy.

  • chihank

    Donald Trump says he may get back into the Presidential race if the GOP nominates someone that he doesn’t approve of. Trump will make his decision during the season finale of the Apprentice in May 2012.

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

    I didn’t see it, but then again, I don’t read the Enquirer, or the NYTimes. Or any other dead tree rag.

  • red_oakster

    is that he’s feared most by Romney and Perry. If Pawlenty wins Iowa, he becomes the prohibitive favorite.

    Romney and Perry have a chance to cripple Pawlenty at the Ames straw poll by pouring support and money into Bachmann’s campaign. In contrast, Pawlenty’s low money total makes it hard for him to match them. If Pawlenty loses badly in Ames, he is probably finished.

    That would be very good for both Romney and Perry. If Romney and Perry don’t help Bachmann at the straw poll, Pawlenty’s organizational strength will position him to win or at least do very well-which would revive his candidacy because he will have exceeded expectations. And if he is revived, he has a chance to compete successfully in the caucuses. That’s why I expect Romney/Perry to do whatever they can to bring down TPaw at Ames.

  • Scope

    which have mainly been left leaning, have surely been trying to push a choice for us, in addition to print and talking heads. I’m not so sure that there are half the number of Romney supporters that most of the polls have shown. I guess it goes back to the old story about someone in NY saying she didn’t understand how Bush won, as she didn’t know anyone who voted for him.

  • rightwingmom52

    .

  • http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

    I only saw it because Drudge linked to it.

  • http://www.redstate.com/jcrestonm jcrestonm

    Gary Johnson was removed from the Horse Race blog. His campaign has not had any traction and is dead in the water.

  • http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

    I was aware of his record and the policies you mentioned. Is that what these people mean when they mention “rumors”?

    Do you think these Texas issues will play in the large GOP or will they be written off as inside baseball type stuff?

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

    I am just happy that the days when those bastards could control what people thought was news are long gone, and good riddance.

  • mine

    Why get get behind Pawlenty when we have Bachmann? Obviously Bachmann is going to be the lead conservative candidate. I read Redstaters complaining that conservatives need to get behind one candidate. Lets just get behind a most excellent candidate in Bachmann? I still say I’m happy will all the top tier candidates but I do think Bachmann leaves everyones else in her dust.

    I have to say I feel a dirty taste in my mouth when the bigotry against Romney is raised. Bigotry is as acceptable as racism. In other words, please lets leave it alone. It’s not okay.

  • mine

    Why get get behind Pawlenty when we have Bachmann? Obviously Bachmann is going to be the lead conservative candidate. I read Redstaters complaining that conservatives need to get behind one candidate. Lets just get behind a most excellent candidate in Bachmann? I still say I’m happy will all the top tier candidates but I do think Bachmann leaves everyones else in her dust.

    I have to say I feel a dirty taste in my mouth when the bigotry against Romney is raised. Bigotry is as acceptable as racism. In other words, please lets leave it alone. It’s not okay.

  • altexas

    There is an old accusation from about 7 years ago that Rick Perry is gay. It means nothing to me since my boyfriend is gay. :) In short it means nothing.

    Rick would make a fine President. I just think we can go for the gold next year and get a solid Conservative: Cain, Bachman, Palin; like that.

    Also, I like him as my Governor.

  • altexas

    His opponents and enemy’s will use whatever they can get against him. These are clear examples of non-conservative tendencies.

    They are an indication of positions he may take as a President. Negatives in my opinion for that position.

  • lizabtha

    Perry with that Texas heat and rhetoric, Pawlenty with his cool, careful character. Both experienced execs.

    Lots of appeal there to a wide range of folk, esp up against fumblin’ Barry and slo-Joe.

    The debates would be very entertaining. :D

  • lizabtha

    Because Bachmann strikes a lot of folks as a real nut. Pawlenty doesn’t. He might be a tad dull, but you(general voter ‘you’) don’t expect crazy things to come out of his mouth every other minute. He’s smart and grounded. Bachmann is flighty.

    That being said, with her love of big ag, farm-girl appeal, she may win Iowa.

    Big whoop. That will be her one shining moment.

  • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

    governance in his two terms as Governor of a blue state. He actually made government in Minnesota smaller. And he served two terms. And, when he speaks, he actually knows what he’s talking about.

    He’s not perfect, but he’s a whole lot better than any of the current crop.

  • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

    Perry will take them on. Palin hides behind facebook.

  • http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

    I am not sure what rumors I mean because I don’t know what the rumors are. The original comment mentioned “rumors.” I have never heard the rumors but this is the third time I have heard rumors of rumors – if that makes sense.

    I had not heard the rumor you mentioned.

  • http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

    I agree completely. I just did not want the reputation as a NYT reader. The story was so dated and hyped it was embarrassing. : )

  • mtnexile

    No, he wouldn’t. Romney has red-lined his engine getting to 25%–enough to put him at the top of a crowded field, but not nearly enough to win the nomination. I seriously doubt that Romney ever gets over 33% support, even after the field narrows to two.

    If the election were today, Romney would get a quarter of the delegates, and no support outside of his own camp. A brokered convention would be controlled by anti-Romney forces–there’s no way of knowing which candidate would come out on top, except that (s)he would have only one face.

  • victrola

    Bachmann has most likely knocked Pawlenty out of contention (which is a shame as Pawlenty is just as conservative as Bachmann but could actually beat Obama) Pawlenty’s best hope was Iowa, and I think it’s very likely Bachmann will now take Iowa and then sputter out like Huckabee in 2008, Bachmann also will keep Palin out (a good thing imo), whatever narrow opening Palin had, Bachmann shut down. Both of them would be competing for the same votes, it would get incredibly ugly, and the media would be lapping it up.

    If the primary comes down to Bachmann vs Romney, Romney will win that easy. Most voters will come to the conclusion that Bachmann is a risky gamble that we have no business playing against such a vulnerable incumbent. If Obama looked like he was cruising to a second term, GOP voters would be all for a Bachmann “Hail Mary”, but Obama is very beatable with a consensus candidate, and Romney already has the polls to prove he can beat Obama.

    If Perry jumps in, all bets are off, and I think he has an excellent chance at knocking off Romney. He’ll pull heavily from the Tea Party faction as well as Establishment Republicans that can write the checks. Perry also has the “presence” of a POTUS (silly, but it matters) and can point to 1 out of 2 jobs in the US being created in Texas. My biggest criticism would be though that he needs to tone down the “stemwinder” speaking style that will send Independents running into Obama’s arms.

    I think both Romney or Perry can knock off Obama, so I think we’ll be in good shape in the general, but in office, I would certainly prefer a President Perry. If we could get a Perry/Rubio ticket, we’d stomp Obama in a landslide.

  • westcoastpatriette

    and think she has the savvy to overcome and demolish the MSM’s savage assaults that will eventually be used against her. She’s not afraid to confront the viciousness…(remember when she mocked Chris Matthews on his own show last election?) She’s not a push over and, unlike Palin, has that teflon-like ability to ignore insults. At a minimum, I am enjoying watching her blow people away already.

  • redtillimdead

    She’s great. She’s smart and she can rouse up a crowd like no one else. However, she can’t win in the general. In 2008, our argument against Obama was that he only served in the US Senate for 4 years, and before that, in the state senate. In 2012, are we gonna turn around and run someone who has only been in the House for 4 years and before that in the state senate? We’d look pretty foolish and hypocritical

  • redtillimdead

    The Democrats are more uncomfortable with Mormonism than Republicans. But the media won’t report that because Republicans are the bigoted racists and Democrats love everyone.

  • redtillimdead

    Kerry/Edwards
    Clinton/Gore
    Obama/Biden

  • carolina

    Sounds perfect to me! (I just hung up from an extensive poll call from PPP)
    I chose Perry. Both Palin and Perry were included in this poll. I found it interesting that they asked this particular question twice – once with Palin in, and again with Palin out. I guess that is the only way they think they can get accurate poll results……..

  • zooboy

    It is pushing full Marxism after getting elected, on a lying ‘hope and change” platform. O also proved that, without executive experience, a candidate can be elected with looks, charisma, speaking ability, and enthusiastic, organized supporters. Michele has all of these. She also has character and principles like Reagan, which O never had. She is very electable.

  • redtillimdead

    What did we constantly harp on in 2008 with Obama? THAT HE HAD NO EXECUTIVE EXPERIENCE!! A President is an EXECUTIVE. I don’t want a President who needs on the job training. I wish she had run for Gov in 2010. If Emmer could almost win, she could have won. She would then be a two term Governor in 2016 or 2020 and be the perfect candidate. But, that didn’t happen. She has been a legislator all of her political life. Oh, and I agree. She is very electable. If Obama’s approval rating is below 40%. Because, despite what some people here like to think, you cannot be elected President with 80-85% of Republicans, no matter how fired up they are if you are losing independents and getting less than 10% of Democrats. With an Obama approval rating over 40% (I don’t understand why, but yes, it is still above 40%), Bachmann can’t do this.

  • SirGladiator

    If Governor Palin decides she doesn’t want to be President, then Michelle Bachmann is instantly the true front-runner. Folks can talk about Perry this or Christie that, but the reality is we’ve got a field pretty well set, and Palin’s really the only one that can change it. If she doesn’t, Bachmann is going to win Iowa, Romney ‘likely’ will win NH, but Bachmann right now has a better chance of winning NH than Romney does Iowa. I hear talk about Bachmann possibly saying dumb things, and its true she had one or two hum-dingers some years back that I’m sure she would do differently today, but that’s the point, she learned from her relatively minor number of mistakes, and she’s far more impressive today than she was when she first took the national stage, just as Governor Palin is. Romney has made, and continues to make, far more gaffes than Bachmann, for all the media fascination with trying to find fault with her she’s actually far more reliable than Mitt.

    I’m still hopeful that Governor Palin will decide she wants to be President, if she does it’s likely she will win, but if she doesn’t I’d have to say Bachmann is the odds on favorite, both to win the nomination and the White House.

  • redtillimdead

    I meant to post this above. Please delete this..

  • redtillimdead

    What did we constantly harp on in 2008 with Obama? THAT HE HAD NO EXECUTIVE EXPERIENCE!! A President is an EXECUTIVE. I don?t want a President who needs on the job training. I wish she had run for Gov in 2010. If Emmer could almost win, she could have won. She would then be a two term Governor in 2016 or 2020 and be the perfect candidate. But, that didn?t happen. She has been a legislator all of her political life. Oh, and I agree. She is very electable. If Obama?s approval rating is below 40%. Because, despite what some people here like to think, you cannot be elected President with 80-85% of Republicans, no matter how fired up they are if you are losing independents and getting less than 10% of Democrats. With an Obama approval rating over 40% (I don?t understand why, but yes, it is still above 40%), Bachmann can?t do this.

    And yes, part of Obama’s problem is lack of experience. You can still be a competent leader with terrible policies. Obama has terrible policies and is an incompetent leader.

  • Ann_W

    He’s done tons of non-conservative stuff. Romney was in a blue state and was trying (w/ input from the Heritage Foundation) do a health care thing better than the legislature was poised to create. Perry is in Texas w/ no appetite for anything big govt; yet, he still comes up w/ the vaccination thing, etc. I don’t understand everyone clamoring for him to get in.

  • Ann_W

    Once he’s the nominee everyone will be focused on him. Solid conservative principles will triumph over the mess that all of Obama’s harebrained ideas.

  • powertothepeople

    and yes you must be right, having vaccines for a deadly disease that was not well thought out but never came to fruition is the same as enacting socialist state run medical care and blaming the action on being in a blue state and trying to make it not quite as bad as what the legislature had in mind. Get real, Perry is heads, shoulders, and body more conservative than Romney, period.

    Good Grief. This type of absurdity is about the most obnoxious nonsense our side throws up. And state this being a Bachmann supporter.

  • septembergurl

    Thread* and not the *say who you’re for and make it short* thread, I opine as follows:

    Bachmann: She has it all — passion, discipline, commitment, skill. In any other year she would be on the way to the nomination. It took guts –lacking in many a Republican– to become the voice and face of the Tea Party in DC. In so doing she vaulted from a backbencher to a national figure. Fabulous instincts, guts, everything you want in a politician — I just don’t think it’s her year. But she could be our first woman President — no question.

    Gingrich: In the Republican debate in New Hampshire it became clear there were two candidates with the ability to think on their feet. Unfortunately for Republicans, one is Newt gingrich (the other of course is Michelle Bachmann). What a waste, is all I can say.

    Huntsman: Kind of a Zen thing…waiting for Romney to take himself out with his multiple panders and flip flops…pick up the energy a tad and you’re golden as the non-Romney.
    Seriously, the NH, SC, Florida is not a bad strategy. Figure Romney gets dinged in Iowa, JH already running OK as the non-Romney, non-tea party dude in NH. He ekes out a win due to strong but limited Bachmann & Paul showing, comes into SC as the can-do pro-biz pro-life executive.

    Can I say this? Jon H Jr win/loss 2:0. Mittens: 1:2. I’m just sayin.

    McCotter: I love McCotter. If not for the pandering to auto unions and support for the bailout. Dude is running against Stabenow, that would be excellent!

    Palin: Not running.

    Pawlenty: OK help me out here. He’s been running for a year, still mired in low-mid single digits in polls, posts a *meh* fundraising quarter. Having given a speech on economics that won him plaudits while failing to move the needle on approval. He then doubles down with a speech on foreign policy in which, incredibly, he takes the one position that has been abandoned by every party and every group — liberal, conservative, whatever — namely,the neoconservative policy of engagement and nation-building as pusued by Bush and, later, Obama. This is the McCain position of calling anyone who doesn’t want to stay in Afghnistan 100 years and fight for Europeans’ right to cheap oil from Libya an isolationist,like this is 1939 or something. AsI’ve sai, Obama has screwed up so badly in foreign policy that Republicans have a gimme here — no need to spell out your position, TPaw!

    Perry. As a Southerner, he could expect to do well in Iowa and SC. Maybe enough to shake up the race. As a general election candidate,many problems. Not insurmountable. He can enter late, which is a great advantage.

    Paul: He will be a factor in Iowa. Rand Paul is going to Campaign for him and he’s spending some money. After Iowa, he will fall back to second tier. But the issues favor him as they did not in 2008 (when the emphasis was on foreign policy) and I expect him to hang on at least through Super Tuesday.

    Santorum: Gone after Iowa. Or maybe NH.

    Romney: the frontrunner in all aspects — polls, endorsements, money, etc.
    He is not going to win Iowa,however,and he might not win NH either. He is not putting much effort into SC either. We will see how he holds up.

  • redtillimdead

    He lost by 18 as an incumbent.
    And yes, it was 2006, but still. 18 points is a lot, no matter how bad the year. We’d be better off with a Ron Johnson type here. Santorum is still extremely unpopular in PA.

  • tea4me

    …my vote stays with Bachmann.

    If they do the right thing and stay out. Bachmann will win. If not, we’ll be stuck with Romney.

  • electionwatch

    Santorum may be able to beat Casey. Although he lost to as an incumbent in 2006 by 18 points, that was 2006. Now, in a poll of the Republicans primary by Public Policy Polling, he leads the primary field with 45%. That means he’s still popular among Pennsylvania Republicans. In a PPP poll in April of the actual Senate race (the latest poll of the race), Casey leads by only 12 over Santorum, with a year and a half until the election. This is better than all of the other possible Republican candidates polled. Congressman Jim Gerlach, who is still undecided on the race, was next best at 18% behind Casey.

    In the Santorum vs. Casey poll, there were 13% undecided. That’s barely enough to give Santorum the lead. There is also the margin of error. which could help Santorum. He’s only back 12 in a poll of a Democratic incumbent who was thought not to be in danger of losing his seat by PPP, a Democratic-leaning polling firm. Also, Casey is under 50% in the poll. Casey is vulnerable, and with Santorum bumping his name recognition up, he could beat Casey if he drops his presidential bid to pursue his old seat.

  • cwilson

    …and liked what he had to say. But, I won’t support him (unless and until he’s the actual nominee) because I just don’t believe he isn’t simply a creature of the Beltway.

    He supported, and together with W, basically ensured the primary win and eventual re-election of, Arlen Specter (R D-PA). Why did he do this? Everybody knew Specter was a turncoat — except, apparently, Santorum and W. Serious lack of (a) conservative commitment, and (b) political judgement.

  • cwilson

    It’s great that he’s backed away from “ethanol subsidies”. And the inherently corrupt and corruptible, and freedom-killing cap-and-tax system which he used to support. Now what about his continued support for ever increasing ethanol mandates (e.g. E20?) If I’m selling ethanol, I’d much rather the feds force my customers to buy twice as much of it, than get a small dollar subsidy on half the amount.

    Said various favorable things about Massachusetts-style “health care reform” complete with individual mandate, for MN.

    “The era of small government is over . . . government has to be more proactive, more aggressive.” ? Tim Pawlenty, 2006.

    Sorry, I don’t think TPaw is the conservative I am looking for.

  • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

    no candidate has fewer blotches than TPaw. Not one of them.

    Oh, and not one of them has actually managed to compile a conservative record as governor and get reelected. And leave the Republican Party in better shape than he found it when he left office.

  • averagevoterdotcom

    disparaging casual average voters.
    libs do this all the time.
    be respectful to them and win them over.

    thank you.

  • acat

    who are holding the line against Gov. Dayton’s (D) tax hike on “the rich”.

    Pawlenty has definitely gotten results.

    Mew

  • acat

    is “worth a bucket of warm {spit}”, as the saying goes.

    Does Pawlenty bring enough to the ticket? If Perry’s just after the midwest, why not Perry/Bachmann?

    Mew

  • aesthete

    Pawlenty adds nothing to the ticket as VP — he’s too boring, and not particularly popular in his state.

  • Ann_W

    How can you head Al Gore’s Texas election committee in 1988, also he has his cockiness problem with Cameron Todd Willingham.

    We’d be much better off with Pawlenty who has shown that he can act conservatively even when his state isn’t.

  • unclefred

    A couple have or are self destructing, like Newt. At this point if someone is in the race and still making headway they have a shot. Despite the media’s portrayal of this as some kind of a sprint we won’t really know where things sit until at least the Fl primary or “super Tuesday”.

  • powertothepeople

    to take things that are not significant and make them significant.

    Reagan was a democrat for most of his political career. He saw the light, turned out to be one of the best presidents ever. Cockiness, yep that is a disqualifying moment. Really? Support who you want to support, but these are pathetic reasons to use to try to convince someone else not to support him.

    You do know that TPaw had his own liberal moments, right? Support of TARP, Cap and Trade, etc. You knew that right? I mean horrible ole Perry never had the cap and trade moment of liberalism. I like TPaw, was behind him till Michelle got in, but you really need to learn more about who you are supporting before going off on some irrelevant tangent about how horrible Perry is. It would save you some pride.

  • chihank

    The 2012 ticket needs to be 2 Governors with solid excutive experience. A combination of Perry, T-Paw, Haley Barbour, or Mitch Daniels would fit the bill. Governors are most likely to win the White House.

  • acat

    One Governor at the top of the ticket, and someone with a deep D.C. rolodex in the Veep slot since – as GWB found out – we need a conservative president to battle congress’ overspending instincts regardless fo which party controls it.

    A Perry/Barbour or Perry/Daniels ticket would be better in that case as both Barbour and Daniels have a clue how D.C. works and would know who to call. More importantly, in Barbour’s case, the calls would be answered.

    Mew

  • acat

    .. and every dime spent defending in PA is a dime that can’t be spent defending elsewhere. The Dems have limited resources, after all.

    Besides, if Santorum phrases the question as something on jobs or “are you better off?” .. i.e. if he runs as more of a three-legged conservative than he’s been to this point, he should be able to Alinsky Casey pretty effectively.

    Mew

  • Ann_W

    You may want to look up the case. There were genuine advances in science that shed light on the case, and he wouldn’t be bothered. That case is a big deal for the general election, but I guess he wouldn’t even be on my radar if people weren’t going all crazy about how awesome he is. He’s not appreciably better than Romney and worse than Pawlenty.

    I hate candidate worship regardless of the party. He’s not going to save us. And yes he does remind me of getting burned by the free spending GWB.

  • powertothepeople

    this whole death penalty thing is your hill to die on. Please tell me where you get your he was innocent theory from other than from the anti death leftist leaning publications. I have read the case and see where any prudent pro death penalty gov would have came to the same conclusion. But by all means, enlighten us all. And please, do not drop the “voodoo” investigation techniques the Times used.

    By the way, if it was that big of a deal, you would be hearing more about it and would have heard more about it in his last election. You are again trying to make a mountain out of nothing.

    Now on to your other nonsense. Please do not state you hate candidate worship as you have displayed the very thing you claim to hate. I could care less who you support, I support Michelle. But lets not play coy shall we. You have little knowledge about Perry, by your own admittance what you state is only what someone told you, you constantly pimp for TPaw, and to make the comment that Perry is not “appreciably better than Romney” shows you are out of touch with reality and know little about politics. My dogs latest additions to my yard is better than Romney, that alone shows how much better Perry is to Romney.

    By the way, love how you avoided answering my factual assertions that your candidate of choice had his own very dismal leftist moments. Or is he the only one not disqualified from you support for doing something less than conservative?

    As I said before, get educated (meaning learn from your own research) and get real. Would save yourself a ton of time from writing nonsense.

  • Ann_W

    Governing a blue state is MUCH different than governing a red state. You must realize that , right? I understand that Pawlenty has made mistakes, too, but his accomplishments in a blue state are more like the environment that a president will face than TX is. I don’t care enough about this argument to continue it. But I just always cringe when people say “If only Perry would get in then we’d have a real conservative” We already have good candidates in there, and not looking at him critically doesn’t help anyone.

  • redtillimdead

    Santorum is a former two term Senator. He has 45% in a primary of PA Republicans against total unknowns. He trails in the Presidential primary in PA. He’s not popular in PA with Democrats, Republicans, or Independents. If another conservative runs in the primary and Santorum also runs he will lose.

  • chihank

    For what its worth, the Daily Kos Pollster, (Public Policy Polling) release some polling in PA. Palin’s favorables in PA is +36 / -57 (net of -21) Santorum’s favorables are +21 / -54 (a net of -24). It says something that the state’s native son is more unpopular than Palin.

  • powertothepeople

    that when people state ?If only Perry would get in then we?d have a real conservative? that they have not done the research for themselves ( you know unlike you, you know where you said someone told you Perry…….) and decided for themselves that he was not conservative enough. Making an assumption like that, considering you yourself admitted you knew nothing about Perry that someone did not tell you, really makes an ass out of you.

    And yes I get pissed at nonsense like yours. It is uneducated republicans who do more damage to their own choice in candidate all because they regurgitate things someone told them, just like you have done. I like TPaw, as I said he was my choice prior to Michelle getting in, but you are doing more damage to him with the type of nonsense you posted than any anti TPaw could do.

  • electionwatch

    by the fact that Obama’s approval ratings there right now are 46+/48-, which means that a poor performance by Obama in a state that has went blue for the last six presidential elections, could actually help Santorum beat Casey. Casey can be beat by Santorum.

  • madjayhawk

    It is incredible to think that Republicans may select someone who is just as unqualified to be President of the United States as our current one is. It is scary. At a time when this country needs a leader with executive experience, with experience in identifying and solving problems, and with experience in locating, hiring and motivating qualified people to assist them lead the country.

    Don’t we ever learn? If we can’t nominate and get behind the best QUALIFIED candidate we will be just as responsible for the marginalization of our country as the Obama/Pelosi/Reid team is.

    There are precious few Republican candidates capable of leading this country in what is starting to look like an economic nightmare. Think of it this way: would you select a personable guard, a good looking cheerleader, or smooth-talking linebacker to play quarterback on your NFL team? Or would you look for someone who has actually shown he can pass accurately, effectively run when need be, and lead a team when the chips are down?

    This is an important choice for us to make. Do not make it lightly.

  • madjayhawk

    What has Bachmann actually accomplished during her life that would warrant anyone voting for her to be President of the United States? She is the least qualified candidate in the Republican field. We should never nominate or elect a representative or senator for president who does not have some substantial executive experience. She has none. I cannot fathom the fascination people have for this woman. She is a Republican Barrack Obama when it comes to substance and experience.

  • gekster

    That was a nice rant, but who is your choice and why.
    I’m just asking.