« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

Why It Is Still Romney’s Race To Lose

By: Erick Erickson (Diary)  |  August 17th, 2011 at 12:56 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

I’m getting a lot of disagreement with my earlier statement that the race is still Mitt Romney’s to lose. Some of it is irrational exuberance from Perry supporters. Some of it is legitimate. Your mileage may vary on my thinking, but I did want to lay it out.

I think the first thing to point out is what Sean Trende pointed out at Real Clear Politics.

Around this time in 2003, it was a given that Howard Dean would be the Democrats’ nominee, and that John Kerry’s campaign was on life support. In 2007, people were already writing the postmortems on the Obama and McCain campaigns, dissecting what had gone wrong. In all three cases, it wasn’t until November that the eventual nominees began to show some signs of life. My former colleague Jay Cost is fond of saying that pollsters right now are polling a bunch of people who just aren’t paying attention. He’s right, and that’s important to keep in mind.

That is precisely right and precisely my starting point.

What we have now is a five way race for the primary: Michele Bachmann, Jon Huntsman, Ron Paul, Rick Perry, and Mitt Romney.

Neither Huntsman nor Paul, at this point, have a path to victory, but their voters could be deeply influential in picking the nominee — ironically, though polling at a smaller percentage, Huntsman’s voters will have more influence than Paul’s because Paul’s are largely of the “Paul or nobody” variety. Huntsman likewise has not yet begun to fight with his money, so we can’t count him out just yet.

Yes, Herman Cain’s voters, Newt Gingrich’s, and Rick Santorum’s will also play a role, but those candidates themselves have ceased to be relevant in 2012 and, despite my highlighting Trende’s points about early conventional wisdom, these candidates will not regain any relevance. Their paths to victory are gone for good.

So why is it still Mitt Romney’s race? Two things: money and Karl Rove.

Rick Perry may get ahead of Mitt Romney in the polling, but he cannot knock Mitt Romney out. Romney has too much money and can add more at will. Perry is, in fact, going to have to do a serious job of raising money online from the grassroots and high dollar donors.

More so, we still don’t know if Rick Perry is going to be just a flash in the pan. He could be. He’ll have to work on positioning himself as someone more than a regional candidate, let alone a candidate without broad base appeal throughout the Republican Primary. Perry is going to have a great few weeks, but we’ll need to see about his staying power. If he is unable to stay strong, Romney will be able to play it, but even more so, someone like Chris Christie, rumored now to be looking at getting in, might be able to capitalize on it. (Full disclosure: I don’t think Christie is running)

Mitt Romney’s money advantage can buy him time to hold on and wait for Perry to implode. And helping Perry implode will be none other than Karl Rove. The rumors about a Bush vs. Perry antagonism are really more about Rove vs. Perry and Perry’s team. The hostility is already there and Rove plays not just for keeps, but also to avoid his own marginalization should Perry be the nominee.

The attacks are going to come fast and furious over the next couple of months. If Perry can withstand them and raise money, then yes, it will be his to lose. But right now, the attacks are just revving up. While the attacks may be old to tuned in Republican activists and Texans, they will be brand new to voters just starting to tune in.

Yes, Perry is a candidate many people are suddenly excited about. But Romney does not need excitement. He has high name identification, lots of money, and patience to wait while others attack Perry. I think it is still his to lose. More so, Rick Perry will have to fight Michele Bachmann over a common pool of voters that Romney does not necessarily need.

If, by November, Perry is still holding his own, then I think Perry really becomes the true front runner and it will become quickly locked in by a primary calendar that will favor Perry. Between now and then, my guess is that the polls will fluctuate with rumors of other candidates, possible other candidates, and several debates to shape the candidates.

Putting it another way: Mitt Romney has been the front runner for months on end. Rick Perry has only been in the race five days. That’s too soon to suddenly declare Romney, with his money and backers, in second place.

Tags: , , ,
Get Alerts

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • izoneguy

  • http://www.gmsplace.com/ civil truth

    As successful as Rick Perry has been in recent years in Texas, the national scene is very different. We’re already seeing the attempt to cast him as another Southern racist (with misogynist, anti-gay, anti-Hispanic +/- anti-Semitic waiting in the wings). Plus the effort to cast him as an extremist. Not to mention the Bush 2.0 whiff (another Texas governor) as a drag on his race. And the media willing to go along.

    No way to see how this will pan out – Perry is a fighter, and if people can find him a refreshing antidote to Obama’s aloofness, that will help him surmount the attacks. Still the strongest hope to avoid Romney, but it will depend on Perry selling his message. But unlike Bush, Perry has articulated a vision and a message and equally importantly is willing to stand up and proclaim it.

    The warm-up band is finished with its act – the main performance is underway.

  • gawken

    Mitt will never, never again lead in the polls.

    Between now and Thanksgiving, I think there are 3 more debates scheduled, plus Sen DeMint’s candidates forum ( date not yet announced..but it will have a big impact, because you will need 5% in the RCP poll average on 8/22 to participate..thus culling out several from the process going forward.)

    Perry is going to stand out in these debates…and his numnbers will increase, and Mitt’s drop.

    Basically, Palin will have to decide within 60 days if she’s goign to run, or if she should endorse Perry.

    Ask yourself, if Palin announced TODAY that she was officially entering the race, what would the first subsequent pol, say a week later , show:

    Here’s my take: Palin35%, Perry 25%, Mitt 15%, Paul 10%, Bachmann would be in single digits, and all the others would hardly register..

  • izoneguy

    A goofy left wing lady said Rick Perry carried a taser around because a Mexican might attack him at the border. Hmmm, Austin is no where near the border.
    Hannity shot back – No he carries a gun because some left-wing kook might attack him.

  • clintonformccain

    “More so, Rick Perry will have to fight Michele Bachmann over a common pool of voters that Romney does not necessarily need.”

    I think Michele Bachman is done. IMO, her support was “placeholder” support because she was the most aligned with the Tea Party wing, not because anyone really thought she had Presidential stature. She’s helped herself immensely with a strong, disciplined performance, but she was never going to be a serious challenger for a sitting President.

    “Putting it another way: Mitt Romney has been the front runner for months on end.”

    I don’t really see Romney as having solid front-runner status. Of course, I view the polls at this point as utterly 100% meaningless. I’m going more on the dynamics of the race. If anything the continued disappointment in the field and hoping for additional candidates has been an indictment of Romney. Trust me, when Obama and Clinton were duking it out in 2007, there was nobody clamoring for more candidates to get in the race. The call for more contenders in the Republican race has been a tacit statement that the existing field was short of heavyweight contenders.

  • msctex

    Perhaps the most telling aspect of any politician should be the relative amount of genuine Fear they instill in their opposition. Who brings out the most irrational responses? Who makes adult professionals with livelihoods and integrity on the line look into a camera and offer statements they know full well to be false? Who makes the relatively sane ones crazy, and the crazy ones incoherent? Whose statements are cut up and reassembled, so that the words offer content and context not previously present, even if those same words have been utilized in the same original context by the opposition’s leader?

    Who brings out the absolute worst in the opposition? In this contest, that question has been answered in very short order, has it not? And if that person is in fact a rational, proven politician — a Serious Person, to cite Mencken — the choice from this perspective seems clear.

  • perry4prez

    There are 3 simple reasons why Rick Perry is the best choice to be our nominee. I call them the “3C’s”. He is a Christian, a Constitutionalist and a Conservative. Mitt Romney is none of those. I want a nominee who I can vote for for reasons beyond “he is not Obama” and of our current candidates only Bachmann and Perry have the 3C’s.

  • izoneguy

    Yes he is a Christian – Mormons are Christians.

  • acat

    Yes, he’s got cash and name recognition, and he’s got Rove, but he’s got two big spots that Perry – and only Perry – could use against him in the primary.

    Romney has a tin ear. He’s been late jumping on issues that a pro-business pro-jobs candidate should be on.

    Romney hasn’t *done* anything in 4 years. Where was he on all of the issues since 2008? He’s not splashed the media at all, at least not that I’ve *perceived* – and yes, perception vs. reality is an important distinction.

    Romney has not taken the fight to Obama effectively – demonstratably, Obama has not responded to Romney….

    All of these things, Romney could have done – cheaply, as demonstrated by Palin – and positioned himself as not just “the inevitable”, but as “the one we want to be inevitable”.

    As for the attacks, I suspect Perry’s team knows what’s coming. I know that, were I in their shoes, I’d be looking at what has happened on Red State and other political sites to see what’s likely to be thrown. The question is calibrating the response so that it hits the target without offending potential voters.

    The swipe at Bernanke is instructive….

    Mew

  • http://www.veronicaestrada.com Veronica

    and still be morally corrupt.

    Morality begins with the people. Do you invite your friends to go to Church with you? Read the Holy Bible?

    The more Christian the people, the more Christian the vote.

    Then you’ll get your Christian President.

  • izoneguy

    I guess the MSM saved a bunch of money. since they did no vetting of Obama.

    CHRIS MATTHEWS: NEWS ORGANIZATIONS ARE ?GOING TO SPEND EVERY NICKEL THEY HAVE? INVESTIGATING RICK PERRY

  • kinghenry

    are Democrats or 3rd party going by Ras. poll from Iowa. Also, Paul is helping Santorum do better than he would otherwise.

    My question is Rand Paul, who is campaigning for his lunatic father? Does he agree with him on the issues? If not, where?

    Paul will never support the GOP nominee and could possibly run 3rd party while trashing whoever GOP nominee is. Will Rand follow suit?

    Perry and Palin if she runs will run on American Exceptionalism and a strong National Defense, being against this is as big a deal to Paul as “Ending the Fed” is.

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

    I understand and agree with the point on Romney.

    However, I would add that Perry also plays for the long haul. What we are seeing at this point is Perry revving up the base and drawing distinctions between himself and Romney. Romney is the establishment candidate and Perry will continue to paint him as such – see his comments about Wall Street and now Man Made Global Warming. If 2012 is the year of the Tea Party Presidential Nominee, then Romney will not be that nominee. All Perry has to do is keep making the distinction and, when people begin to pay attention, it will take hold and Romney will begin to drop in the polls.

    As to Karl Rove, the man has become a parasite more concerned with his own power than with conservatism. We saw this under Bush with the play for the Hispanic vote with immigration reform / amnesty. We saw this in his play for the senior citizen vote with the new medicare supplement. Rove will and has sacrificed conservatism and conservative principles for power. He must be thwarted.

    Rove is establishment. He favors big Washington and moderates like Kay Bailey Hutchinson. He helped Hutchinson to primary Perry for the governorship and went down to humiliating defeat. In the long run, the animosity of Rove will help Perry to distinguish himself from Bush.

  • acat

    Please be aware that it’ll get you some extra scrutiny.

    Your anti-Romney slam on religious grounds makes non-Mormon christians appear bigoted; I’m sure they don’t appreciate this.

    Mew

  • acat

    (who?)

  • kinghenry

    Reports are he’s looking into running now. Where would he enter race? Take most of Mitt’s support?

    I think as far as slashing Government goes and thwarting the MSM/Dem narrative Christie could be the most effective president we’ve had since Reagan. If the South lined up behind him after nominated, he’d have a strong base of support since he would appeal to some Northern states and possibly even states like California. Perry or Palin would have a strong Red vs. Blue geographic divide like Bush had making it harder to Govern.

    I know: “RINO” “New Jersey” “2nd Amendment”….making a political analysis on how effective he could be as President for our causes overall versus the others.

  • red_oakster

    If Perry is disciplined and can perform well in debates, he has big advantages over Romney. The biggest is that he’s a no-nonsense conservative whereas Romney’s conservative credentials will always be in doubt. Republican primary voters will settle for Romney if they must, but they prefer someone else. Perry is the obvious someone else.

    That said, Perry must prove he can take the hits while avoiding unforced errors. Rove’s criticisms thus far haven’t touched Perry. In contrast, Perry’s description of Bernanke as treasonous was politically dumb and self-destructive. They give ammunition to those who say Perry isn’t ready for prime time competition. And I say this as someone who prefers Perry to both Romney and Bachmann.

  • clarioncaller

    In my opinion :

    -Romney is a construct of the mainstream media…and Republican Progressives. He is the new John McCain .. the 2012 version. For the RINO’s…the Progressive Republicans..the Democrat lite Republicans…he’s their man to hold Progressive accomplishments in place…as opposed to a Bachmann who would undo some of the hard won accomplishments by Wilson.FDR and Obama.

    -the Republican electorate(in the main) will have none of it. They have seen the true face of Progressivism and its threat to destroy the America we have known. I hold a very contrary view to the writer. I think Romney is literally a dead man walking. Money may sway some of the uninformed. Republican primary voters…..they are NOT uninformed…..and their mad as hell.Whats going to happen to Romney in the elections..isn’t going to be pretty…but in my opinion just want the country needs…rejection of another Progressive.

  • funwithknives

    and believe me they are some of the finest people I know. they are always engaged and wish for basically the same as you and I. To be left alone, to do as they see fit. We had his dad as Governor for quite a while and he was always ready to listen and debate. His statement about brainwashing was the first I can remember where the Media really went after someone and Lit ‘em up, but then again I’m only 57, and dirt is still older than me.
    I once had a Converted Mormon repeatedly encourage me to believe in a Creator no matter the creed. Telling, NO? I took him up on it, and while I don’t profess, Nor witness , I did round off a few corners. I did take up on the statement that “The Lord is in all our hearts”. But some times you do have to wonder: “REALLY? EVERYONE?”

  • snowshooze

    Perhaps he doesn’t really feel the need to come out yet, and were I him, I might be content to hold back from the fray, save the money and while away the hours with an occaisional shot at Obama.
    Also to be considered..
    The Electoral College.
    ( If someone might be able to make a baseline breakout on that… I would find it interesting)

    Plus, who will the RNC select? Will they go with big bucks so they can save their money for important stuff like conventions, office buildings and trimmings for the sandbox, or will they sway and actually support someone that needs the help?

    I think one of the best things that has happened recently is Reince.

    This change in the Chairmanship was long overdue. We need a dedicated professional in that position, and it appears we have one.
    Romney will come down from the mountain. And he will come down with guns ablazing, and I will expect nothing short of an excellent campaign.
    It will be highly polished, trendy, flashy and fun.
    He may ressurect Elvis.

    Perry will have to win on points. Fortunantly, he has them.
    And Perry cannot sit on his duff. I am glad he is already shooting in all directions, and it appears his aim is just fine.
    He is so many levels above McCain, I, well….
    So long as Perry can continue to show solid leadership and a clear direction, he will do fine with us, but that isn’t the whole battle.

  • leroywhitby

    Palin does what you are talking about in your post the most of anyone. If she steps in, the whole game changes.

  • silentcal2012

    The Repubican primary is a national primary, not a red state primary. Someone on another thread mentioned that Romney cant win because he will get wiped out in southern primaries, which might be correct if the West Coast, New England, Mid-Atlantic, Rust Belt, Upper Mid-West and Mountain West. Those who have the attitude that Romney cant win because he cant carry the south or the evangelican vote are the reason he probably will win, Romney has a broad base of support, and a lot of good Republicans are sick of that parochial attitude. Republican votes in Seattle, Sacremento, Las Veags, Chicago, Newark, Hartford… are worth just as much as Republican votes down South.

    And Romney has the Whitman/Fiorina machines in CA.

    I heard one of Perry’s associates in the press state that Perry is no Bush because Perry is 100% Texas and Bush was 50% Texas and 50% New England. The guy was actually braggind about that while Perry was on his way way to campaign in New Hampshire.

    Provincial minded idiots.

  • silentcal2012

    The Repubican primary is a national primary, not a red state primary. Someone on another thread mentioned that Romney cant win because he will get wiped out in southern primaries, which might be correct if the West Coast, New England, Mid-Atlantic, Rust Belt, Upper Mid-West and Mountain West. Those who have the attitude that Romney cant win because he cant carry the south or the evangelican vote are the reason he probably will win, Romney has a broad base of support, and a lot of good Republicans are sick of that parochial attitude. Republican votes in Seattle, Sacremento, Las Veags, Chicago, Newark, Hartford… are worth just as much as Republican votes down South.

    And Romney has the Whitman/Fiorina machines in CA.

    I heard one of Perry’s associates in the press state that Perry is no Bush because Perry is 100% Texas and Bush was 50% Texas and 50% New England. The guy was actually braggind about that while Perry was on his way way to campaign in New Hampshire.

    Provincial minded idiots.

  • izoneguy
  • leroywhitby

    Perry took over for Bush when he ascended to the Presidency. Perry has never won a big race except as an incumbent.

  • acat

    Your requirement sets the bar ridiculously high.

    Mew

  • Common_Cents

    and could change the race in a hurry. Or obviously if she get’s in.

  • msctex

    . . .she scares me a little too.

  • rightwingmom52

    Plus Perry winning in Texas 3 times is probably as close to the big one as you can get until POTUS.

  • JSobieski

    If you count Romney’s presidential run and don’t count Paul’s presidential runs.

  • izoneguy
  • izoneguy
  • CMaree

    in terms of news buzz and trending twitters, then Romney will have his week or two in the spotlight. If he moves into the top spot, expect the buzzards of main stream to peck at him.

    Unless someone new drives into the race with flag emblazoned on a Motor coach bus built in the USA.

  • acat

    As I’ve said before, I do not believe Perry is the most conservative nor best potential President we could get.

    I do, however, believe that he’s the best *candidate* we could get .. and since we haven’t gone the route of having Congress hire a “manager in chief”, a model many smaller municiaplities find useful, we need a great candidate who will make a decent POTUS.

    Mew

  • JimmyGee

    What has he learned from that? Keep his mouth shut, keep his powder dry. That is a strategy based on fear. He doesn’t want us to know him. In many ways, the tactic I see Romney using is much the same as Obama; vote present, don’t take a stand.
    Admittedly Romney would be better than the vacuum-in-chief we have now in the White House. But if Romney becomes the GOP candidate then that only proves that the GOP establishment has learned nothing the past 4 years. This country does not need another “moderate” leader. Furthermore, the country is hungry for a true conservative that acts on their conservative principles, and will lead this country to real positive change. The GOP establishment is AFRAID of such a leader!
    This country, if it can last until BHO is done in 2012, will need profound changes in how the Government works, entitlements, taxes, budgets, national security. I don’t see Romney being that man.
    Look at it this way. I live in Wisconsin with all the union/socialist/ and Obama’s own Organizing for America upheaval the past 7 months. The hostage taking of elections and multiple recalls lead by the same people. Now extrapolate what happened in Wisconsin to the national level. Again, I don’t see Romney being the Man to stand up to that kind of pressure, much less what happened here in Wisconsin. Romney could not have done what Governor Walker did here in Wisconsin. In fact, Romney went the OTHER way towards socialism with his own version of Obamacare!
    I see this race to be Romney, Perry, or Buchmann. Of the three, the ONE I see LEAST likely to make the changes the country requires is Romney!
    Would I vote for Romney, of course. But as i said in another post, I will probably break out in hives doing so. I will have to take an oatmeal bath to calm the itching.

  • minister_of_war

    Perry4Prez-

    Since you obviously have no understanding of what it means to be “Christian”, you can’t say that Perry will be the best choice because of the ridiculous notion of your “3 C’s”.

    A Christian is someone who believes that Jesus of Nazareth was the Son of God & is the only Savior of the World who came to save us from our sins and based upon that belief tries to follow the teachings of Jesus. Romney believes this & tries to live a good Christlike life, so Romney is a Christian. And so is every other candidate running for President as a Republican right now. Nobody is perfect, but as a Christian would understand, only one perfect person ever lived and that was Jesus Christ Himself.

    In fact, Gingrich is a Catholic Christian, Cain is a Baptist Christian, Bachmann is an Evangelical Christian, Perry is a Methodist Christian, Santorum is a Catholic Christian, Ron Paul is a Baptist Christian & Huntsman is a Mormon Christian. I’m sorry if I left anybody out, but I can’t think of a single Republican candidate who is running for President who IS NOT a Christian.

    But for the sake of argument, let’s say for instance that a Jewish man like Eric Cantor decided to run for President. Are you saying that Cantor would automatically be disqualified for the office of President because he was not “Christian” even though Article VI of the Constitution strictly prohibits a religious test for public officeholders? Apparently, you didn’t know this or just don’t care about the Constitution except where it fits your purposes. I’d like to say that you’re a bigot, but that would be too obvious.

    You not only don’t want someone as President who is does not profess a non-Christian belief system such as Judaism, you also want to be the one who decides who’s really a Christian in the first place or which “Christian” faiths are actually “Christian” faiths at all. I have a better idea for you. Leave those arguments to your pastor or other religious leaders, and leave them out of the Presidential race.

    Regarding your other 2 C’s: being a Constitutionalist, obviously you don’t care that much about this as I mentioned above with my reference to Article VI of the Constitution. But there are many candidates who claim this mantle on the Republican side. Bachmann & Ron Paul are a couple of the most commonly self-proclaimed “Constitutionalists”. It is our job as voters to decide who will be best at protecting & defending the Constitution. Regardless, any of our announced Republican candidates will be vastly better than the current occupant of the White House, who has openly dreamed of running a United States that was governed more like Communist China.

    The last of your “3 C’s” is also something that many of the current candidates are claiming to be: Conservative. It is our job to do decide who is the most Conservative candidate who can also get elected. And we have plenty of time to vet our candidates & decide who should go up against the first President we’ve ever had who hated America.

    Regarding Rick Perry, I’ve liked Perry for years. But it would not be a good strategy for Perry to win the nomination & get elected President of the United States on a campaign of “Mitt Romney’s a Mormon, so he’s not a Christian but I am”. Mike Huckabee tried that 4 years ago & was truly despicable for it. Huckabee’s anti-Mormon campaign in Iowa has a lot to do with why we got stuck with McCain in 2012 & why we are stuck with Obama today. Let’s keep the campaign to the issues & a candidate’s personal faith should not one of them – unless you don’t believe in the Constitution that is.

  • unclefred

    Despite the “independent” vote, most of the expected primary voters in NH have already made up their minds if they support Mitt. The majority of the states Republican primary voters, would very much prefer an alternative to Romney. Even among those who tell the pollster they plan to vote for him, in many cases, it is a “hold your nose” situation.

    Perry needs to be the strong conservative voice and coalesce the “please not Mitt” vote behind him. That will be about 1/3-1/2 of the previous Romney vote, the undecideds, and a goodly chunk of everyone else’s current support.

    The fly in Perry’s ointment is that the better he does in NH polling the more the “independents” are going to line up behind Romney.

    Romney has a large well organized machine in NH and plenty of dollars to spend, but that won’t make as big a difference as it would in a large state dominated by TV ads.

    The activists in the “not Mitt” group really do not like him at all. If Perry can tap into them and get them behind him, he’ll be able to get a large group of people pretty quickly. Does his staff know how to manage that effectively in a short time? Will he have the cash flow to compete right away in the early states? If the answers are yes will he elect to do so? Time will tell.

  • clarioncaller

    It’s early…one poll…things can happen

    BUT

    Perry 29%
    Romney 18%
    Bachmann 13%

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012/election_2012_presidential_election/gop_primary_perry_29_romney_18_bachmann_13

  • minister_of_war

    I think that the Republican debates will be very important from here on out. It will be interesting to see how Perry & Romney interact on the stage together. It will be fitting that their first debate together will be at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library. We’ll be able to see there who the successor to President Reagan’s legacy will be.

    And if any other candidates are going to jump in this thing, I think that they had better get in before that debate, because a lot of people will be paying attention to how Presidential Perry & Romney or even Bachmann seem during that face-to-face showdown.

  • acat

    I suppose I could go look around on YouTube, but .. that I don’t remember any great lines tells me .. there weren’t any.

    All Perry needs is one “There you go again…”.

    Mew

  • jkines

    Some valid points are made here in the pragmatic sense of campaigning especially with regards to money and the spectre of Rove. However, I still believe it is Perry’s race to lose **if his fundraising realizes the potential indicated by his fundraisinf history.**

    Obviously, if Perry stalls financially, he is done, but that is true of any candidate sooner or later. Perry is the best candidate at this time to compete with the Romney machine and he has some historical GOP primary logistics on his side.

    Perry has a good chance to be competitive in Iowa, and while New Hampshire is a sure Romney win, Perry stands a chance to do very well in the South. In fact, I would not be surprised if this race parallels Clinton/Tsongas when Super Tuesday gave Clinton a huge delegate lead and effectively ended the chances of Tsongas, once thought to be the frontrunner for the Democrats in 1992.

    Furthermore, Republicans historically close ranks around a candidate once he separates himself from field and establishes a delegate lead. The first real chance in this race for a substantive delegate lead to take place will be the Southern primaries, and Perry has the best chance to take a sizeable lead here.

    Even if Romney wins Iowa and New Hampshire, with the former being by no means a sure thing, whereas the latter any realist will concede at this point, Nevada, Florida, South Carolina, Super Tuesday, and Louisiana will give Perry a very good chance to open up a sizeable lead on Romney. With the lack of intensity of Romney support, if he does fall behind significantly in the delegate count, his support could quite quickly crater even further,

  • minister_of_war

    Romney lost one race against multiple-term incumbent Ted Kennedy in an uphill battle against the Kennedy dynasty on their home turf. But it was the closest race that Ted Kennedy ever faced.

    Then Romney lost in the wide-open race in 2008 to the “CHRISTIAN LEADER” who then allowed us to get stuck with McCain and therefore Obama.

    I’m not downplaying Perry’s accomplishments or election victories, because I think this his primary shellacking of US Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson was impressive, but I don’t think that Romney can be seen as someone who hasn’t won anything yet. He was elected Governor of Massachusetts as a Republican, so he can even win in very liberal Democrat States.

    Either Romney or Perry will wipe the floor with Obama at this point. And either one of them will be so vastly superior as President of the United States to Obama that it’s not even something that we can quantify with numbers.

  • minister_of_war

    … How is that not winning a big election?

  • minister_of_war

    I don’t think that she’ll be endorsing anybody in the Primary.

  • izoneguy

    The 2nd largest state with the 2nd largest population in the US?

  • izoneguy

    in the next administration

  • acat

    and not endorsing until there’s some big Dem news she wants to knock off the front page.

    “Obama to retire a one-term president! {GOP challenger} to face unknown Dem!”

    “Palin endorses {GOP challenger}”

    My guess is Palin will endorse after it’s apparent who the nominee is going to be to Red State, but before the rest of the country figures it out.

    Mew

  • Finrod

    I have nothing solid for saying that other than the conjectures of people better-connected than I am, but I’m expecting Palin to not run unless Perry’s campaign crashes and burns. That would give her an opening to enter. Otherwise she’s competing with Perry and Bachmann and Cain for votes, whereas moderates will largely go to Romney.

  • Finrod

    .

  • msctex

    n/t

  • snowshooze

    Were I in her shoes…who in their right mind would want to be President when they already have the world by the tail?
    It is a headache job. I don’t think Sarah really needs the money.
    It would wreak havok with hunting and fishing.

  • minister_of_war

    … or that she splits the vote with Perry & allows Romney to squeak to an Iowa victory. If Bachmann or Romney wins in Iowa, then Romney can still assume that he will win in New Hampshire since Perry won’t be able to claim momentum going into New Hampshire & Bachmann likely won’t compete well there.

    If Bachmann loses in Iowa, she will drop out of the race at that point & probably go back to running for her US House Seat. If she loses to Perry, then Perry will consolidate many of her voters to be his own in other States as long as he hasn’t offended her core supporters too much. Perry might even be able to use the momentum from an Iowa victory to win in New Hampshire & sweep the primary competition. But if Romney ends up squeaking out the Iowa victory, then the entire race is basically over at that point.

    If Bachmann wins Iowa, then Romney will win in New Hampshire & Perry or Bachmann will likely win in South Carolina or if Bachmann & Perry split the vote, Romney could squeak by again.

    So, if Bachmann wins in Iowa, as Romney would prefer if Romney can’t pull out the victory there himself, the race would come down to the Florida primary to decide if Romney or Perry will be the nominee or if Bachmann wins both Iowa & South Carolina at the point, she will make it a 3 person race for Florida & the nomination.

    My point is that Perry has a lot riding on Iowa, but not everything. Bachmann has everything riding on Iowa. And Romney has almost everything riding on Perry not winning in Iowa. After that contest, as long as Perry does not win Iowa, the big race will be in Florida and whoever wins that contest should go on to being the Republican nominee in 2012. So, Perry’s entering the race turns all eyes back to Iowa & all eyes toward Florida if Perry doesn’t win in Iowa.

  • perry4prez

    @finrod, everything I have read about President Carter says that he was personally a very devout Christian. I don’t have a problem with him in that regard. But he was not a constitutional conservative,which are my other criteria.

  • perry4prez

    @acat, I am perfectly entitled to de-lurk when I find an inspiring candidate for once.

    I would rather have a president of faith, because America was created as a Christian nation and from that all our Constitutional principles flow. I am of course not in favor of a religious test for holding office if you win an election, but the question is who would we as citizens vote for. Would you vote for an atheist for president? I could live with Romney if he were otherwise a Constitutional Conservative but he isn’t. Why are YOU defending him? As Governor of Massachussetts, he created more entitlements which are bankrupting our Nation, and he made government a bigger part of our lives. Just because Pawlenty wouldn’t call him on it doesn’t mean we can’t.

  • minister_of_war

    … but the thing that I remember most about Romney during the 2008 Republican debates was that he always acted like the adult in the room. McCain looked like an angry old man who was about to blow his top at any point. He definitely did not like Romney while on stage with him at the debates.

    Giuliani didn’t like Mitt too much either, but Giuliani’s best lines were when he went after Ron Paul’s ideas on foreign policy. Giuliani still looked a bit like a bully though sometimes in how he beat up on poor Ron, especially since Ron Paul was always a very polite presence on the debate stage even with his questionable views on foreign policy.

    Huckabee looked like the class clown. He got the one-liners in almost every debate. But they were never serious one-liners. He had his joke about John Edwards expensive haircut. And that’s pretty much how he debated.

    Romney was the one who always looked Presidential. And the debates this year haven’t changed that perception at all. Romney looks like a person who is methodical & not rash. I think that the fact that he doesn’t seem to lose his temper easily would serve Romney well as President.

  • JSobieski

    He was the favorite in Iowa which he lost. Then he was the favorite in NH which he lost. He won Michigan by promising industrial policy to save the auto industry.

    Romney lost more states than McCain or Huckabee.

    Romney has been victorious once, and he didn’t even try to win re-election. He has a lot of practice losing elections, particularly for someone with a lot of campaign money and a front runner status.

    What are Romney’s reasons for not seeking re-election? Did he feel that the ship of Mass. was now on the right path?

  • perry4prez

    @minister_of_war, the reason I care about whether our president is a Christian is because because of first principles. It is from our faith that the principles of Liberty flow. That is why the Declaration of Independence says that it is self-evident that men were endowed BY THEIR CREATOR with inalienable rights.

    You ask me whether I would support a Jewish candidate for president, who was otherwise a constitutional conservative. The answer of course is that I would, because Judaism is a special case as it is the forerunner of Christianity. Jesus of Nazareth himself was Jewish. But I could not accept candidates who claim to “imrprove” on Christianity. Would you vote for an atheist or a Socialist?

    With regards to Romney, he appears to live his life in a Godly way, which is admirable. But Mormons believe in alien life and that the sufficiently devout can become gods on other planets. This is too much like polytheism and is very far from accepting Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior. If Romney were a Scientologist would you still be defending him?

    You also ask whether I favor imposing a religious test for office in violation of Article VI of the Constitution. Obviously I do not. Any candidate who duly wins an election and takes the oath of office should not be subject to a religious test. That is why President Obama is in office despite the fact that many of his beliefs are not Constitutional. But it is one thing to say that the government may not impose a religious test, and another to say that I, as an individual voter, cannot take faith into account when marking up my ballot. We may have to let that Scientologist take oath of office but we do not have to vote for him.

    I agree with you that Governor Perry’s campaign should focus on jobs and getting Washington DC out of our lives. But he must never downplay his faith, and he understands this. I also agree that Bachmann would be a great candidate. I like some of the stuff that Ron Paul says but his willingness to let Iran get nukes is a total non-starter and not the first time he has spewed crap like this. With Governor Perry others will respect our Nation again, because we will be strong. Do you deny any of this? Because that is exactly what Ronald Reagan believed!!!

  • acat

    Technocrat.

    Smart, unflappable, mature, slow to anger.

    There’s nothing wrong with any of these adjectives, but there is something wrong with both of the men they apply to, in this example.

    Mew

  • carolina

    They are THE ESTABLISHMENT. They are not in elected postions, but they hold the purse strings. ‘They’ have groomed Romney for 20 years (or longer).
    ‘They’ want to retain control. Romney is ‘their’ guy. Perry is an upstart in ‘their’ eyes.
    I think Eric is correct.
    I, personally, prefer Perry. However, I think it will be a miracle if he can overcome the Establishment Machine.

  • carolina

    They are THE ESTABLISHMENT. They are not in elected postions, but they hold the purse strings. ‘They’ have groomed Romney for 20 years (or longer).
    ‘They’ want to retain control. Romney is ‘their’ guy. Perry is an upstart in ‘their’ eyes.
    I think Eric is correct.
    I, personally, prefer Perry. However, I think it will be a miracle if he can overcome the Establishment Machine.

  • Tavern Keeper

    My rebuttal –
    http://www.redstate.com/thelefty/2011/08/17/why-its-not-romneys-race-to-lose-rebuttal-to-post/

  • 1stRichard

    During a debate Romney in my opinion lied about taxes, if you consider fees the same as taxes and this had me again yelling profanities at my television. Worse was the lack of anyone challenging this lie. I know we must play nice and all so I will omit the thousands of others Romney needs to be challenged on. My question is why Romney seems to be getting a free pass on so much and others are not, it seems that something more is going on other then playing nice.

  • snowshooze

    I agree, he needs to be called down for a nice little chat.
    But MSM won’t do that.
    Now with Perry jumping in, and the battle of the polls… the mud is going to begin to fly, and so it has.
    The candidates must attract $$$$
    And they have to fight for the nomination.
    They have been chummy to mum so far… but there is a finite number of dollars to be had, and position is the key to getting them into your hat.
    That means a fight.
    I see stormclouds on the horizon..

  • averagevoterdotcom

    I posted weeks ago that if RP gets in it will be war.
    It is all Rick v Mitt from here.
    Perry will dismantle Romney by January.
    Palin will endorse Perry.
    Perry is a wrecking ball with genius instincts.
    Perry will demolish Obama next Nov.

  • barleycorn

    Do you have any idea how ridiculous your argument is?

    “But for the sake of argument, let?s say for instance that a Jewish man like Eric Cantor decided to run for President. Are you saying that Cantor would automatically be disqualified for the office of President because he was not ?Christian? even though Article VI of the Constitution strictly prohibits a religious test for public officeholders? Apparently, you didn?t know this or just don?t care about the Constitution except where it fits your purposes. I?d like to say that you?re a bigot, but that would be too obvious.”

    The Constitution prohibits the government from applying a religious test. Individuals however are free to support or not support candidates on whatever grounds they see fit including religion.

  • audax

    We don’t need another Rockefeller clone:

    http://www.redstate.com/audax/2011/06/16/romney-he-tries-hard-to-sound-like-ronald-reagan-but-he-thinks-like-nelson-rockefeller/

  • audax

    My June 16th Diary:

    http://www.redstate.com/audax/2011/06/16/romney-he-tries-hard-to-sound-like-ronald-reagan-but-he-thinks-like-nelson-rockefeller/

  • radicalrighty

    For anyone feeling elation or despair over their candidate’s latest poll position, here’s one word.

    Rudy. For about a year prior to the ’08 primaries, he topped the national GOP polls. Then was an also-ran.

  • gaudium

    Mitt Romney is a good old boy and has been the front runner for months on end thanks to our Socialist Lame Stream Media. In 2008 the Media picked the Republican candidate and they want to do it again. Romney is just a little Obama; he is a RINO that should be running as a Liberal. Romney is conservative only when it is necessary and that changes depending upon where he is and who he is talking too. Romney care and Obama care both stink and both Socialist Programs need to be repealed.

  • clarioncaller

    I continue to disagree with Erick. I think you thinking reflects YESTERDAYS THINKING. Hey he’s got money …he’s got name recognition…he’ll be a formidable factor(speaking of Romney)

    First ..I would say you have not gotten close to understanding the mindset of who’s showing up in the Republican primary’s. Without detailing my perceptions..suffice it to say this is not 2008,2004 etc etc.Today’s primary voters are informed..motivated and are ready to walk with bare fee on broken glass to get to the polls.

    Second,I think you do not take into account the Conservative states voting early in the process and how poorly Romney may do and the impact this will have going forward in states that may have been easier for Romney to win but now aren’t.

    Third..its what Romney IS. the inspiration for ObamaCare…and a believer in global warming for starters.

    I’m frankly stunned we think we are being serious having this discussion.I think it reflects poorly on the assessment of the electorate…it’s yesterdays( four years and beyond) thinking.

  • ddrinsp

    Conservatives have been looking for an alternative to Romney and for now they are hooking up to the Rick Perry Train. Rick Perry is a Conservative and a Constitutionalist . . . Conservatives do not like Romney’s flip-flop on just about every issue. However, with the backing of the GOP’s elite and establishment and his next-in-line status, Romney will be difficult (but not impossible) to beat for the Republican nomination. From my vantage point, it appears Perry is the only one who just might.

  • izoneguy

    Trying to paint Perry as some kind of flim flam man. They say his brand of
    “corporate cronyism” is a lite version of Obamanomics.
    Excuse me?
    I would much rather be helping Boeing create jobs than to unleash the NLRB on Boeing to destroy jobs. Obama’s cozy relationship with unions must be destroyed and then unions in general need to destroyed.

    Public sector unions should be outlawed. Look how much grief the bankrupt postal service is getting from the unions. Soon the postal service will grind to a halt and they won’t have lost only 120,000 jobs. The whole enterprise will be gone.

  • sharp

    Your statement is very matter of fact – Perry?s description of Bernanke as treasonous was politically dumb and self-destructive.

    Well, I agree with Perry’s description. And it shows some fight and actual opposition to the administration, which I also like/ agree.

    A lot of people have discussed Perry’s brash comments and agreed with you, but my instant reaction to his statement was positive.

    Give ‘em hell, Rick.

  • 4dees

    Romney is simply another John McCain or Robert Dole, in that the Republican elite have decided it’s “Romney’s turn”. Romney was a Loser in 2008, and he will be a loser if nominated to run against Obama in 2012. Romney is a moderate, and that is not what this country needs in 2012.

  • rcastonjr

    about Rove. I find myself being completely disgusted by his BS. And what’s worse is Fox News seems to be after Perry for some reason as well. That leaves no media that actually likes Perry. Rove, however, just pisses me off. He certainly is a part of the good old boy Republican establishment, you know, the same one that got Murkowski re-elected and helped get other Tea Party candidates beaten allowing that POC Reid and others to remain in office. . The Republican establishment needs to destroyed. Don’t know how, other than elect someone that is clearly outside of the establishment which leaves very few options. But I am sick of people like Rove getting on TV and criticizing these candidates when all he is doing is using Republicans to line his pockets. Can’t stand the guy. So how do we render him ineffective?

  • gunslingr45

    1-Michele Bachmann YES
    2-Jon Huntsman NEVER HAPPEN Obumber plant IMHO.
    3-Ron Paul ONLY if Mitt or one of the other RINOS get the nomination.
    4-Rick Perry YES
    5- last and most least Mitt Romney NOT IF YOU HELD A GUN TO MY HEAD.

    Now that we have that cleared up, I have to decide where to put my 2 cents worth (donation.)

    “The fore horse of this frightful team is public debt. Taxation follow that, and in its turn wretchedness and oppression.” – Thomas Jefferson

  • oldpedler

    Rove would like to be king maker of the Republican Party. He seems to get network exposure, including Fox, for no other reason than he pulled the strings on Bush making him a “political expert”. Refusing to support true conservative candidates, while dissing those that don’t allow him to call the shots has completely turned me off. I was a Romney supporter, only because he seemed to be the best chance to get Obama out. Karl fixed that. I will support any true conservative, be that Perry. Bachman, etc.
    I have been voting since 1958 and only remember two honest politicians before Reagan. They were McGovern and Goldwater, both of whom presented themselves as exactly what they were. Both also got beat by two of the most dishonest candidates ever. Think about that when someone flip flops on issues.

  • tankertodd

    As someone who got excited about Fred Thompson’s entry into the last race (and even donated some bread to him) only to watch his failure to launch, I can agree that the Perry rocket needs time to clear the gantry and accelerate before we can judge him to be a front-runner.

    Thompson was a front runner too, if I recall. For about 10 minutes. Five of those minutes are probably attributable to Law and Order fans, and the other five to his hot wife.

    But I also think it’s a reasonable bet that Perry is the front runner in November. But the comment about needing to transform from a regional candidate to a national one is very key.

  • tankertodd

    The pendulum has swung back sufficiently to justify staying the hell away from any moderates. We need someone more to the Right on fiscal policy for sure. I don’t care much for the social issues myself, but recent riots are changing my mind a bit in that regard…

  • mspector

    But just because He is present does not mean He is acknowledged. Just because He is acknowledged does not mean He is respected. Just because He speaks does not mean He is heard.

    We are founded on the Judeo-Christian ethic. I want a President who, among other things, understands the significance of that in our civil society.

  • avgjo

    And with all due respect to EE, Dick Morris and others, a ‘southern’ candidate is much more in line with the majority of the country than a NE liberal like Romney or Christie. THEY’RE the regional candidates.

  • avgjo

    one of his opponents in the GOP primary actually begins to discuss his abysmal record as Gov. of Ma.

    And I can assure you, Perry can raise as much money as Romney, if not more; he has Texas oil money and lots and LOTS of grassroots support if he becomes the nominee. I frankly wouldn’t be surprised if he outraised Romney in the primary.

  • patriciakelley

    Think about it! Why bother yourself with brain activity? Romney is simply boring. Start from that premise.

  • red_oakster

    Perry’s case for sound money is terrific. But he needs to persuade the GOP and independents that he’s the right guy. To accuse someone you disagree with of being treasonous undercuts the force of the argument. I see Perry has backed away from trying to defend the remark.