« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

The Bloomberg-Washington Post Debate

By: Erick Erickson (Diary)  |  October 11th, 2011 at 10:22 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

The Bloomberg-Washington Post debate was necessary in the same way a child dying or a puppy being run over are necessary in the chaotic misery of the orbit around the center of the galaxy we slowly endure. All remind us that life isn’t fair, there are terrible tragedies, and sometimes bad things happen to us.

But we have endured. And if you haven’t thrown up on your television due to the unsteady camera or the tediously horrible questions, you will be no worse for the wear tomorrow.

MItt Romney won the debate. No one knocked him off his game. He really is that good of a debater.

Herman Cain proved himself a bit of an unstable number two. He is starting to get the tough questions on his 999 plan and his responses sound like they were crafted in the land of unicorns and rainbows — the people will just keep 999 from being changed and we’ll magically alter the structure of the constitution to prevent it from being repealed except by a 2/3′s vote. Um . . . okay!?

Rick Perry was largely a no show in the first half. The forgotten man who once dominated, he’s rapidly becoming the Fred Thompson of the campaign season, despite having the money and support to go forward. The Perry camp really and truly believes the debates do not matter. The problem for the Perry camp is that everyone else believes the debates do matter. And when one small side thinks they don’t matter and one large side thinks they do matter and the smaller group gives the larger group nothing to turn their gaze up and distract them or change their mind — well then the debates do matter and Perry’s staggeringly bad performances (though this debate was far better than the Fox one) are going to make it harder and harder for him to come back.

To be fair, Perry had two good answers. One in response to Bachmann’s attack on him as a former Democrat; the other to Tumulty’s biased question (but they were all biased, some ridiculously so) on Obama as a job killer near the end. Both of these seemed unscripted and very real. Is Perry getting over-managed? If the prepped questions seem worse than the non-prepped, it certainly seems so.

Either the Perry camp must understand the debates do matter and fix the candidate’s problems or they must convince us they are right. So far they’ve done neither and a hell of a lot of Perry supporters are emailing me in abject panic. My goodness, at least get Jindal to help.

The Bachmann glory days are now over. All you need to know is Mitt Romney asked Bachmann a softball question to keep her legitimate and in the game to prevent consolidation of the anti-Romney camp from happening. Bachmann, in turn, asked Perry a question who then asked Romney a question.

The surprise? No, not that Huntsman still has a sorry excuse for a sense of humor. Mormon joke? Really? It’s that Newt Gingrich continues to score solid points and, just as Herman Cain polled well after a solid debate, Newt may get some new life.

But there is one caveat. Hardly anyone saw this debate. So Perry probably has one more shot with the CNN debate. Gingrich won’t get as much a bump as he could have gotten. And Romney holds onto his lead. Cain also buys more time to come up with stronger answers on 999 and also, lucky for him, few people saw he and Romney defending their support of TARP.

But Bloomberg-Washington Post? I’m strongly pro-abortion when it comes to the idea of these clowns EVER hosting another debate.

Tags: , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • bootwearinsmith

    did pretty well for himself tonight. He gave some very solid answers. Why did you think he did so badly?

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

    I think that Perry’s strategy is to just let Herman Cain wear off and assume his old place. Herman Cain had some awful answers tonight.

  • wonkish1

    I’m personally sick of the “give me your 30 second answer to the economy questions” and very much enjoyed the chance to get real answers.

    Also Bloomberg asked very good questions in most cases(Rose was a better questioner than anybody at Fox). And the questions were unique and telling.

    Fox, CNN, MSNBC better take notice because this is the right model for debates.

  • kabane52

    Wrote this post before the debate actually happened based on what he expected to happen. Seriously.

    Perry wasn’t the star of tonight, he wasn’t asked that many questions. But the questions that he was asked, he answered, and he answered well.

    Romney came out with guns-a-blazin for TARP and Romneycare.

  • DerKrieger

    …we can elect enough conservatives to force Romney’s hand should he win. He’s no Democrat but the guy is definitely a Big Government technocrat who believes, like the Left, that he and a handful of wizards of smart, as Rush says, can manage our lives for us better than we can ourselves.
    I don’t think we will find Romney taming the EPA, killing Obamacare, reforming Medicare, or letting us out of the coercive Social Security prison.
    I hope I’m wrong about him.

  • bootwearinsmith

    but his 999 plan will just amount to a tax increase. He would need a 2/3 majority in both houses of congress to repeal the income tax… which is what his plan hinges on. There is no way that the D’s will go along with that.

    Perry, to win this thing, needs to do what made him a titan in Texas. Be the tough, guns blazing, Bad to the Bone no BS Texan. Take it to the other candidates. Show anger over the plight of middle income Americans, and show why he’s the guy to lead us out of our funk. He needs to get TOUGH. GOP primary voters want to vote for him, and if he shows us that he is the no BS gunslinger that we all assumed he’d be, they will.

  • chbroussard

    Why don’t they just get rid of the moderators and let all of the questions come from the audience. Charlie and Karen could not possibly have been any worse if they’d tried.

  • lookingforward

    First, the production quality of this debate could have been improved by putting a high school A/V club in charge. Second, the moderating could have been improved by choosing three people at random from the Manchester phone book. That being said, I thought a format that gave the candidates more time was excellent. We learn very little from questions like “In 30 seconds or less, how will you fix the entire American economy?” This format, with less participants and competent moderators could be great. Newt definitely won the night, as he nearly always does. If we could clone him without all the baggage, he would be my candidate for sure. Perry improved, but not enough. He needs to keep improving and come out strong for the next debate, which will obviously be more widely watched. Romney still looks the most presidential, and handles himself well up there. I just wish I could more easily believe what he was saying. Cain was given tons of airtime, and did fairly well. At times he seemed unnecessarily combative, but he didn’t make any mistakes. I still think his 9-9-9 plan has as much chance of passing Congress as a plan to make Congress a volunteer job. Santorum actually did a nice job of punching holes in what sounds like such a great, simple solution. Ron Paul appeared to be in and out of a coma tonight. Bachmann has to go, and she needs to take Huntsman with her. Somebody needs to tell him that his jokes aren’t funny and his overly animated facial expressions scare people. The field is narrowing, and the next debate needs to reflect that.

  • intensity

    …Perry showed an improvement from last debate and did well…when he got a chance to speak.

    I hope this debate exposes Herman Cain and 999 plan as the radical and unrealistic thing that it is and brings his numbers down.

  • txindependent

    The format of this debate seemed to allow people to interrupt to get a word in edgewise. Otherwise Perry got fewer direct questions. I thought he answered all questions well, especially the Bachmann ‘got-you’ question about his early political leanings.

  • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

    And I think the country keeps right on crashing.

  • joayn

    much (excpt for the inquisitors, natch), and also liked that the entire “debate” was focused on the economy and jobs. Was it perfect? Nope, but it was sure better than the last three.

    And I actually think Gingrich won the debate. Mitt was good, but Gingrich was exquisitely solid. Actually, I think everyone did pretty well, except for Santorum, Paul, and Huntsman.

    I also think Perry did well. I was a little disappointed about not hearing more about his economic plan, but when you think about it, oil/energy is the one thing that can affect every business’ bottom line (think plastic and anything made of plastic, not just gasoline). And the best line of the night was his – to make America America again.

    I think you’re becoming too cynical, Erick.

    P.S. And Mittens did not get any applause, unlike a few others. I thought that was his crowd!

  • onemovoter

    That would really open up the candidates and let them stand or fall on really explaining where they stand.

    I remember watching the Milton Friedman Free to Choose videos from the late 1970′s. He had a small debate format of about 4 people with a moderator who didn’t say too much other than a question. It was great, although I think a 1 on 1 is even better.

    I do hope Erick is able to pull it off with the candidates.

  • sethellis

    While they did a few things right I thought it was the worst run debate so far. There’s a reason why all the wall street firms have CNBC on the TVs instead of Bloomberg. They argued with the candidates, did not distribute the questions equally, and failed to enforce their time rules. It was all on display before the break when Santorum went crazy on everyone. I almost thought they would turn off his mic. Then during the break their commentators portrayed the candidates positions inaccurately.

    That said they were able to get more meat out of the candidates. I also liked the candidates asking questions, although Romney was the only one that seemed to realize that it only helped the asked. Hence the softball question to the least threatening candidate on the stage.

    At the end of the day it changes nothing. The other narratives of the past weeks such as the Mormon controversy, Cain’s rise, and Chris’ endorsement matter more. The only thing I see changing as a result of this debate is increased scrutiny of Cain’s 999 plan.

  • avgjo

    Little children go to heaven, and John Wesley and Matthew Henry seemed to believe (based on Romans 8:19) that puppies and other brute creatures get something nice in the next world. These crappy debates, though….

    I don’t think Romney got much good out of this. For the first time, he had to endure some tough questions re: Romneycare. Expect this to intensify.

    Cain will wither under scrutiny, as I have said before. After that, Perry will likely get back to #2 or #1. If #2, all he has to do is beat Mittens over the head with Romneycare.

    I would love to see a Gingrich surge.

    Tonight, I was happy to hear several of the candidates mention reconciliation as a way to get rid of Obamacare. That needs to be considered seriously as an option.

  • Jim Tomasik

    …I’ll be hanged if he does not know how to sell the d#$% thing.

    He is the only one that has any plan the pundits can point a finger at after the debate and call it by name then talk about it. It was easy for them to talk about it.

    What happened to him going after Romney? I did not see it.

    Rick Perry was not really forceful or aggressive at all.

    Overall, this debate did not change anything in my mind.

  • wonkish1

    If you increase the time for answers you get better answers.

    Bloomberg demonstrated that. And if Erick pulled it off than he would demonstrate that as well.

  • californiagold

    It’s pretty obvious that there are far too many candidates in these debates. The time has come to clear the field down to the top three – Romney, Perry, and Cain. Only then will the voters have the opportunity to see what these guys are all about.

    Would it be possible for Redstate to host an internet broadcast ?

  • wonkish1

    And wasn’t rude to the candidates after asking.

    Karen was a little pathetic though.

  • govreaganfan

    Rick Perry = Fred Thompson in every sense.
    So long Rick, it was nice knowing you.
    Hello Mitt Romney, welcome to the Republican nomination.
    Everyone else can go home now……………………….

  • wonkish1

    nt

  • joayn

    Perry? I only heard part of it – I live with a family of yakkers.

  • wonkish1

    This was the first debate that I could actually sense independents turning the GOP because they could actually hear a thought out conservative argument for once. Instead of 30 second soundbites.

    Charlie wasn’t bad. He didn’t argue with the candidates. He’s actually more respectful than anybody at Fox was with maybe exception of Bret.

  • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

    A brand.

    Great idea, but aim higher. There has to be cable outlet that would pick it up.

  • joayn

    n/t

  • californiagold

    …and that has been the problem with a Romney nomination all along. As Ann Coulter correctly predicted, the evangelical base won’t support Romney, and a significant percentage will sit home in November without a candidate to vote for.

  • txindependent

    About his early days in politics when he used to be a Democrat in Texas..

    He had a good response that in those days most people were democrats when they were young. And Michael Reagan told him that Perry switched Republican before Pres. Reagan did.

  • chbroussard

    nt

  • Jim Tomasik

    http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/night-9-9-9-plan-022011966.html

  • txpat

    because everyone in the media expected him to fall on his face.
    He vastly improved compared to his last debate.
    Cain struggled at times in my opinion and seem set on saying
    999 plan and didn’t expand on it.
    Bachmann needs to go back to congress.
    Huntsman needs to go back to China.
    Paul didn’t go off the reservation tonight. Which was a plus
    Santorum wasn’t a whine tonight and did punch holes in 999 plan.
    Gingridge was great as always.
    Romney was smooth, plastic as always.

  • snowshooze

    Is it out there?
    Thanks,
    Mark

  • onemovoter

    With a bunch of talking point falsehoods in her question to Perry.

    She said that Perry was the campaign manager for Al Gore – which we have proved false over and over, and something about being a democrat before becoming a republican… I stopped listening to Michelle at that point since she can’t say truthful things.

    Perry’s answer was quite good but don’t remember much either, I was busy with something else to keep my mind off the bouncing camera.

  • californiagold

    Trump has pretty much telegraphed his intentions if Romney is the nominee. And yes, he might split the vote which would allow Obama to win, but that’s the problem republicans face if we nominate a big government republican at a time when the Tea party is looking to reduce the size of government.

  • politicalgal1

    In my humble opinion, Romney did not win the debate unless you are using criterion of succeeding at evading the answer to a question. If you ask Romney what time it is, he tells you how to build the clock but doesn’t answer the questions. Watching him deliver a State of the Union address will be as exciting as watching paint dry.

    The few questions Perry got asked, he answered well. WaPo was definitely out for him. In my opinion, he answered all questions as I would expect a conservative to answer.

    Cain is the one who was knocked down a few pegs tonight. When questioned on Bloomberg’s assessment of 9-9-9 being revenue neutral, he told them their assessment was inaccurate. Yet he won’t reveal his secret scoring agencies. When Paul asked him about his radio show comment that the fed doesn’t need to be audited and that folks should just “call the fed”, Cain denied it, even though that audio clip is all over the Internet.

    Newt performed well, as usual, despite the lack of questioning by the moderators.

  • DerKrieger

    …you underestimate how much the base fears and loathes Obama.

  • californiagold

    n/t

  • joayn

    but I think everything I’ve read about it, each person gets a different take. Some say it’s regressive, some say it’ll evolve into a Vat tax. But everyone agrees on one thing: it’ll open the door to higher taxes.

    And Cain’s answer about him not signing any bill to raise it was pretty weak. He won’t be president forever. Overall, I think everyone else over-shadowed Cain with their plans.

  • jonerik

    To me, Perry seemed relaxed and he didn’t stumble over his words. I thought this was a major improvement from the last debate. I don’t think he’s Fred Thompson either. He’s raising money at a good clip – Fred never got rolling. I think Cain’s 999 plan can’t pass muster, and that’s all he’s got really. Romeny is a good debater but what a robot! He still comes across like the kid that sits in front of the class and always raises his hand to answer.

  • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

    Despite is well oiled “Obama is wrecking the country” mantra.

    He won’t take any positions that won’t pass focus groups stacked with Chris Shays and Scott Brown clones, because that’s the part of the country where his fundraising is fattest.

    Ann Coulter thought Christie would be an alternative to Romney. Well, they are one and the same now. WTH did she know?

  • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

    h/t to The Great One.

  • politicalgal1

    Like the fact it was focused on jobs and economy. Liked the fact that each candidate got to ask a question of the other candidates. Like the fact that NONE of the candidates fell victim to the GOTCHA questions.

    Find it funny that pundits want policy specifics in a 1-minute soundbite.

  • popdaddy

    Does anyone think this “debate” was viewed by anybody who might make adifference with their vote? I would not sit at a computer to watch a “debate” controlled by the socialist media. Best wishes to those of you with nothing better to do.

    In regard to the internet instant analysis, don?t have a problem with the thought of Governor Rick Perry being in a position to work with a new GOP administration to ensure states rights issues. He is my Governor and The State of Texas is better for the future with his leadership.

    Conservatives need to focus on the Senate and House races to ensure a Republican majority in Congress. The Silent Majority /Tea Party voters who elect these members in both houses will expect major rollbacks in regulations from out of control Washington DC bureaucrats.

    I?m sorry Rick Perry is not acceptable presidential material but the voters need to focus on the elected representatives to Congress have the power of the election to implement a recovery of American values and exceptionalism.

  • politicalgal1

    I find it amusing that folks in this blog are lamenting the fact they will be voting for Romney. First of all, he will not carry the conservative vote in the primaries. Secondly, it is flawed logic to think he is the only candidate who can beat Obama.

  • californiagold

    For Perry to win this thing, the field needs to be cleared down to a two or three man race. The neoconservative establishment that supports Romney knows this, so they will continue to pump up Herman Cain until the Iowa votes are in.

    For Perry to stop the obvious tag team from defeating him, he’ll need to get his face on TV far more often than he has so far. People need to see Perry in action – the debates do nothing for him.

  • joayn

    talking points now? She must be running out of slanderous rumors.

    When she drops out, she’ll back “you don’t have to settle “Romney. Bet me.

  • paulnashtn

    I thought this was a fairly good format BUT I do not know who that older brown haired lady was but she was SO biased and SO bad the she should never be allowed within 1000 feet of a republican debate or even a newsroom again

  • bonnman

    “Romney is incapable of bold differences between himself and Obama ” that one sentence sums up the problem with Romney perfectly.

  • govreaganfan

    you may be a little biased jonerik…..
    But I’m sure the polls will tell us all what the masses thought.

  • joayn

    Go to the Bloomberg website and click on TV at the top of the page. It’s rerunning now.

  • center77

    and I am not sure what anybody else saw. Romney’s plan is the moderate east coast plan, we tried that, will not work. Perry had very good comebacks to the questions asked of him.

    When they tried to get him on the Reagan video, he had the right answer. Bachmann tried to get him, he answered that question, and then had some more to throw.

    Perry has really hit the right answer on energy. His rivals attack him because they say he did not create jobs, the energy sector did. Well if that is the case, then how is talking about the energy sector not the right way to go.

    What people seem to want is scripted Romney like answers. The media wants flash and drama, but that’s not what we need. We need good answers. Every question Perry got was a attempt to catch him up, and he handled every one of them.

    People are going to have to either except he has the record, and the will to get conservative things done, or they can go with the smooth debater, and watch that person suck up to the main stream media in some silly attempt to be liked. When has Reagan ever had a debate answer that sounds as good as Romney’s.

    Plus, Romney and Cains defense of Tarp is on every site I’ve went to. That is the story of the night.

  • politicalgal1

    Mannerisms and looks very similar!

  • exitsfunnel

    As someone following the nomination as mostly an outsider (I’m a registered Libertarian) it’s pretty obvious at this point that Romney is going to be the nominee. I don’t particularly like him but none of the other candidates are credible. They’re just not. It’s too bad that Daniels didn’t get in and that Pawlenty got out as early as he did. In my opinion conservative, boring and competent would be looking pretty good right now.

    -exits

  • center77

    I am not sure what Erik wants to see from Perry, but I do not think its going to happen. People want to know he can explain his vision. Its the media that has hurt Perry. He had a large crowd at the after debate, and they cheered like crazy I’ve read a lot about this already.

  • californiagold

    There really were no winners tonight. Erick needs some sleep.

  • politicalgal1

    Is looking presidential the qualifier? I find Romney’s answers rambling and leaving more questions. He is smooth as a gravy sandwich, but not much meat in his answers.

  • ThePoliticalHat

    I thought that Rose was the best debate moderator yet (much better then some of the idiocy we’ve seen).

    I like the format. The other two questioners were clearly biased, but the candidates handled it well, for the most part.

    As for who won/lost…

    Santorum was the big loser. His “I want to declare war on China” quote combined with his temper-tantrum means he should NEVER be president. It is sad, because he is probably a good guy, and has some important things to say.

    Huntsman was also a loser. His condescending smarm just can’t be kept in check.

    Bachman was mostly a draw. This isn’t good for her because it doesn’t do anything regarding her downward trajectory.

    Paul sounded decent and had some good points to make. On some things he is really spot on, and it is in those areas tonight he did well. Unfortunately that doesn’t change the things he is way, way off about.

    Gingrich, as usual, came out consistently ahead in the debate. I honestly think that at this point he is angling for a spot on the ticket as Veep. It would be worth it to see him verbally b***h-slap Biden in the Veep debates next year.

    Perry had his best debate yet. I don’t think that this will repair the damage he’s done for himself during the previous debates, and he certainly didn’t shine or come away the unequivocal winner.

    Cain was personable as ever, but he didn’t defend the 9-9-9 plan too well. I think that is is a bad idea, but if he is elected, I doubt a GOP Congress would enact it, so I am not too worried about the plan itself — only what Obama would do with it via his winged monkeys (poor monkeys…).

    Romney may have Romneycare around his neck like an Albatross, and his un-conservative leanings certainly count against him big time, but he is the only one besides Newt that I am certain could verbally b***hslap Obama in next years debates, and the wherewithal to take advantage of “Little Barry.”

    tl;dr Keep Rose and the format, dump the rest of the debate people, and purge Huntsman and Santorum from future debates.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    First,, remember the first question? It was “How do you accomplish anything with a contentious Congress?” No one answered it; they all said “my leadership will yield great results when my plan is passed…which will be passed because my plan is so great.” Cain/Romney were the chief-evaders.

    Second, regarding 999, no one asked the obvious killer-query, namely, why would we want to (1)–create a VAT while maintaining the IRS [remember WSJ puncture-proof], and (2)–create a tax on the poor who can ill-afford to handle this superimposed intrusion on greatly-limited income??? Once Cain is confronted, he is dead-meat; it’s as if the 999-discussion is setting-him-up for the fall.

    Third, Perry smiled throughout, and he slipped-in references to Federalism gently/firmly throughout. Even the shots of him while not speaking [both on the internet and on TV] showed him to be engaged, even when not speaking. This was a net-plus.

    Fourth, it is possible to rectify what happened during recent days [Romney's punch-series intended to KO the opposition, culminating with CC] with what transpired tonight; debates are important but not controlling in the long run. As long as Perry improves, Romney’s plasticity will become more of an irritant, particularly when he is forced to trot-out off-putting quotes regarding RomneyCare.

    Fifth, specifically, as the GOP-establishment coalesces behind Romney and others “notice” that Rick ain’t goin’ away, then he need only rely upon his book for potent examples of runaway-DC; indeed, he was transiently able to do so, without the pinana-effect.

    Sixth, the incidental involvement of Michele/Huntsman/Paul is increasingly easy to tune-out, as some observers have trained themselves to do; indeed, this now even extends to when they pose queries [with Michele the chief-culprit when providing extended-prodromes filled with talking-points].

    Seventh, Santorum [as much as he has been an irritant] made a superb point when he tired economics with family values; this was planned, but effective [and unmatched by everyone else]. I consider him to be a good debater [same with The Newt], but not an optimal candidate [once Rick gets uptospeed].

    I know my bias again emerges, sorry, but the involvement of The Donald and Sarah will be helpful to Rick; ANYONE who disagrees with any of his core-philosophies is invited to study his writings/achievements.. Even the WSJ article this-a.m. didn’t dent him. Frankly, I was amazed that more potent queries weren’t based on selective quotes therefrom.

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    Absolutely agree with that.

    He destroyed the premise of a Tumulty question, skewered the ‘big deal’ the sueprcommittee is belaboring under and used a sharp metophor for the whole sorry excercise of ‘budget negotiations’ … and that was just one 60 second sound bite.

    He also took a chunk out of Romney over cap gains tax cut.

  • govreaganfan

    I think the polls will bear this out clearly as well.
    Sorry so many on this site will be disappointed but sometimes reality needs to rear its ugly head.
    How anyone could think Perry did anything but sink his candidacy tonight is beyond me.
    I could be 100% off the mark, but I will wait and see how the polls show it in a week or two.
    My guess Perry slips to 5th or 6th, at best……….

  • http://nerds4cain.com Brookhaven
    • Huntsman’s Morman comment came across as a cheap shot.
    • Perry was great & lousy. At times he looked like he was almost out of it and gave almost incoherent answers, other times he was sharp and gave great answers.

      I think he missed a huge opportunity by not having his jobs plan ready. Instead he just hinted about a plan involving energy production. I think he really could have scored some serious points in this debate had he been ready with it.

    • Cain got hammered on the 9-9-9 plan, but they spent so much time talking about it that it gave the impression nobody else had a plan (other than Perry, which is why I think Perry missed an opportunity to stand out if he had been ready).

      Cain was right to point out the other plans pivot off the current tax code, but never adequatly explained why getting rid of the current tax code is important (and it’s important people buy into that concept if they are going to buy into Cain’s plan).

    • Santorum had a good point about families and poverty numbers.
    • Romney looks and sounds great at first. But then you realize he’s talks forever, but never says anything.
    • Gingrich burnt the house down. Literally, burnt it down. If he didn’t have so much baggage he’d be beating the snot of everyone else. At some point though, people are going to ask the obvious questions: (1) does he really have more baggage than Mitt Romney, and (2) if the country is really in as bad a shape as we think it is,shouldn’t we say the hell with the baggage and nominate the smartest guy in the room?
    • Bachmann’s 666 joke fell flat (probably because I’ve heard it 6,734 times), but I thought otherwise she did OK.
    • Ron Paul was in his element with economics, but he’s such a purist he just can’t resist taking answers one step too far.

    Cain’s 999 plan dominated. It dominated so much, that it drowned out the other candidates economic plan. You almost got the impression they didn’t have one.

    Like I said, Perry missed a big opportunity by not having his plan ready and only hinting at it. All I remember is he is going to introduce an energy based jobs plan.

  • californiagold

    ….for numerous reasons, one which is that Obama is pro abortion, and Romney was, and might still be.

    With the general election over a year away, there will be plenty of time for a credible third party conservative candidate to enter the race if it’s Romney vs Obama.

  • SoFiMil

    a major reason Evangelicals won’t support Romney is because he’s not a conservative, and barely a moderate. Evangelicals do indeed make up the base and are the worker bees. A conservative LDS candidate would get signicant more support from Evangelicals than Romney will ever get.

  • center77

    did not ever look like he was going to win. Mr. New York competed in Florida only. The idea that Perry is either is just lame.

  • http://nerds4cain.com Brookhaven

    That’s why noone asked the “obvious” question.

  • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

    So he can’t close the deal on the other 75% of Republicans.

  • californiagold

    Christie would have been an alternative to Romney, and probably would split the Romney vote, paving the way for a conservative to win the nomination.

    Coulter is also correct when she said Romney would lose to Obama.

  • explodinghead

    exitsfunnel: If I have to hold my nose and vote for Herman Cain to stop Romney from becoming the nominee I will. As for the libertarians in our midst, Romney will take away a lot more of your freedoms than a more Conservative nominee would (think Romneycare).
    Romney is the least credible if you consider his flip flops. I take it from your comment on Daniels that you are more of a fiscal conservative and afraid someone more conservative than Romney would take away your individual freedom.
    FYI, we are all about individual freedom in Texas and Perry is our Governor, Massachusetts (Romney land) likes to take away indivual freedoms and replace them with government help. Texas is doing really well on the job front, how much more competent do you need?

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …Cain was ALMOST confronted with his flipflop on auditing the Fed; once it was generally agreed that useful info has emerged [e.g., $ to European banks], he slipped in his home-court. Remember how the appreciation of Volker seemed [by consensus] to supplant his idolization of Greenspan?

    Cain was against an audit before he was for it…sorta like quotes from POTUS-campaigns of the past.

    Someday, there will be a debate focused on the SCOTUS…and Perry will then shine. BTW, this would have been grist for the first question, citing Scalia’s recent quotes on why the Founders/Framers WANTED this balance-of-power to stop a rush-to-judgment based on sudden public opinion gushing.

  • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

    Or maybe I saw that at my oil change place.

  • govreaganfan

    Perry is open border.
    Perry is pro illegal workforce.
    Perry is pro illegal magnet state (see in-state tuition giveaway).
    Perry is anti “papers please” law.

    Need I go on……

    Why do people here support him so, I never figured this for a RINO site?

    What gives?

  • center77

    and Perry did awesome. He supported a balance budget amendment to the constitution. That’s big and good news. He did very well. The debate was on channel 353 on direct Tv.

  • septembergurl

    I thought the seated arrangement was good, lighting terrible, but the questions OK. Rose was actually pretty good.

    My scores, in order:

    1. Romney. No one landed a punch or mussed his hair, that counts as a win for the frontrunner. He was weak on his jobs plan but otherwise, well, he was Mitt…

    2. Gingrich. I want to have your baby. I’m not kidding. Awesome display of erudition, creative thinking, incisive rhetoric. You other guys, pay attention, you can learn from Newt.

    3. Huntsman. Good job whacking Romney AND Cain. He made a good case against Romney as a faux job creator — Mitt actually is a takeover guy meaning he fires a lot of people to get the bottom line in order, rather than creating jobs. Good point not made against Mitt enough. Pizza — 999 — good one. Ha ha. Sorry but Herb’s plan is just stupid, why so many embrace it. Good job. Try not to look so bored though. Great tie as always.

    4. Paul. OK this is his strong point, but I kind of liked him tonight. No foreign policy nonsense. Solid stuff. Wow, he whacked Herb on the Fed. Yikes. He’s right about Greenspan. Dumb answer by Herb.

    5. Perry. Nice job tonight. Nothing exciting, nothing dramatic, no big takedowns, just correcting the record, laying out his ideas, etc. Maybe the seated format helped him, but this is the best I’ve seen him in a debate. Memo to Perry’s team:– let Perry be Perry. Let his passion and sincerity come through.

    6. Bachmann. now this is the Bachmann I expected in the last few debates but did not see, instead I saw a big-hair harridan screeching about STDs. Tonite we heard from the tax lawyer and policy expert. She is smart and focused and we saw that tonite as we rarely do. Love the updo!

    7. Cain: In spite of the obvious setup where he was the pinata tonite, he performed poorly, getting annoyed a few times and handling some questions badly. If you’re asked which Fed Chairrman you like, the answer is not Alan Greenspan. Good God.

    Let me add that the 9-9-9 plan is the dumbest economic plan since Henry George and the Single Tax in the 19th Century.

    8. Santorum: I actually wanted to put him ahead of Cain because I found his weird intensity kind of entertaining tonight. social isues and foreign policy are the topics he likes, so he added little.

  • center77

    waiting until it matters. People will get sick of it if they see someone too much this early. He has his plan coming out, and he will be on the road. He has silenced the debate worries. He can give a solid performance, and that’s all he needed to do.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    Perry said, “Mitt’s been running for 5 years, but i’ve been only running for 8 weeks.” His plan will be introduced during the next 3 days, and he can then discus it in greater detail. He refused to be pressured, although he kept returning to energy policy [and ObamaCare] as key-components thereof. Wasn’t it cute that Mitt couldn’t summarize his tome?

  • center77

    but so many times did I hear the same thing the last time. Romney was going to win. McCain had no chance. The only way Romney win is if people think they have no other person. Romney needs 8 people in the race. Conservatives need to start getting behind the one true not Romney candidate, Rick Perry. If he goes head to head against Romney, he wins by 30%. The best hope for Romney is to keep as many of these also rans in the race.

  • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

    How can he be an alternative if he is the same guy?

    She did not want Christie to get in because she wanted him to split Romney’s vote and hand it to Perry, or someone else. She expected Christie to win.

    Ann Coulter has a Mason Dixon Line which stops at the Pennsylvania border. She has an accent problem.

    And Coulter’s boy toy Christie would still leave evangelicals out in the cold.

  • txpat

    That dye job must have come off the super market shelf.

  • center77

    to show the last debate was the fluke, and because it was his first couple on the national scene, people will except that. I find it funny, Perry was down by a whole lot in his last election, but came back and destroyed his rival.

  • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

    If Romney had a soul, he use his own talking points, rather than stealing them from the left.

  • joayn

    was a great line. Loved. It.

  • politicalgal1

    The one question I would like Herman Cain to answer is how his plan is going to be a good deal for senior citizens living on fixed incomes. Does he expect them to all go to consignment stores and day old bakeries? This is definitely a tax increase for them.

  • californiagold

    She ran with the Tea party label to advance her own career, yet has attacked fellow tea parter member Rick Perry from day one, while playing nice with Romney. At one point tonight I was starting to think Romney and Bachmann would lock lips after he asked her that softball question about her economic plan.

    Romney: Congresswoman Bachmann, my question to you is what would your plan be to address the serious problem of unemployment in America.

    Translation: Michele, I’m teeing up a softball question….don’t forget to attack Perry with your answer. Thanks, your’s truly, Mittens.

  • explodinghead

    Sorry, septmebergurl, but Huntsman makes me want to slap him every time he puts on that inane smirk and rolls out the comedic one-liner that was pre-written for him by his debate handlers. Give me a break, the guy is a slime bag.

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    “I would love to see a Gingrich surge. ”

    If Cain stumbles, that may well happen. It’s his “TURN”.
    Either him or Santorum, who frankly did quite well.

    But I do not believe will ‘wither’. He gave a very good account of himself.

  • wonkish1

    nnntt

  • center77

    Obama will get the whole media backing him. A great speaker cannot beat Obama, only a great record, and a person that people will trust. Everyone knows Perry has stood up to all the others smearing him. He is getting better and better at the national things. Mark my words, he had a huge night in many peoples eyes.

  • politicalgal1

    Slick Willy comes to mind!

  • intensity

    ….I think our man did well tonight.

    He did’nt hit the ball out of the park, but he is definitely one of the top few in this election.

    More importantly, I think Cain got his 999 turned upside down(pardon the pun). There will no doubt be less serious Cain supporters after tonight, which will help Perry.

    And can anyone tell me more on Perry’s…calm, cool approach to elections?? I think he’ll win because Romney and Cain will implode on each other.

    Perry ’2012

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …perhaps because I’m a male; I don’t want to impregnate Michele.

    They all did reasonably well, except Cain, for reasons aforementioned. The Newt was responsible and instantly-reactive, but I didn’t hear an economic plan that supplanted those of others [even if fragmentary].

    The sit-down format helped Rick, but the lack of humanity of Mitt [even in the last query] was palpable.

    Huntsman blew the “$9.99″ with the Mormon-reference.

  • wonkish1

    That haven’t officially decided on a person yet.

    So yes this debate does matter.

  • txpat

    He will not do well in the Bible belt.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    and, BTW, I think EE’s reaction reflects disappointment that rick didn’t wipe-up. I advise EE to stay-tuned, we’re in this for the long-haul….

  • politicalgal1

    when she tried to accuse him of increased spending and increased debt as Governor of Texas. Anyone knows that when you have a large influx of people moving into your state that there will be increased demand for infrastructure and public services. His answer that Texas has the 2nd lowest debt per capita put her in her place.

  • redmymind

    If “winning” the debate for Romney simply amounts to this whole fast-talking, quick come-back routine of his, I’d say that’s a rather “thin” definition. This “Ha-Vahd”-educated polished politician gig is getting a little old for me, as I’m sure for many. I couldn’t help but feel how fake he sounded all through the debate, and that’s really the problem for Romney: that no matter what he tries to say or how “impressively” he tries to say it, he’s got a big credibility problem that has a “cancelling out” effect that automatically kicks in every time he opens his mouth.

    I am still very much for Perry and think that he’s the real deal, but I think he should have been more aggressive and “in-your-face” against Obama-Lite and Mr. Radio-Talk-Show-Host-Turned-Wannabe-Commander-in-Chief.

  • capitalistpig

    Why?Because she slammed Perry for being a Democrat,yet she worked for Peanuthead Carters campaign in 1976 AS a Democrat.
    Dont believe me?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qxsyfns0N_k

    http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/69153-bachmann-was-a-jimmy-carter-democrat

  • wonkish1

    “Keep Rose and the format, dump the rest of the debate people, and purge Huntsman and Santorum from future debates.”

    Exactly right!

  • txpat

    Was she the young one, the sea hag?

  • SoFiMil

    when the candidates questioned each other I’m guessing the rules didn’t allow for a response to the response. E.g. Perry asked Romney a question re jobs and Romney included in his response that Perry had 1 million in the state of Texas who didn’t have health insurance. There’s some good ways to explain this, but Perry didn’t get a chance. He’d swung and missed badly at this opportunity a few debates ago. Have to believe he would have hit a homerun if given the chance.

    I thought the moderators did a good job as well, and deserve plaudits with CNN for a well-run debate. And I’ll give credit to the candidates as well for bring well behaved. Even Santorum. I thought his final answer was spoken in just the right tone, was well-timed, was spot-on, but at the same time contributed and didn’t distract from the discussion.

    Also loved how the moderator cut Michelle off after 30 seconds on her last answer. In addition, her incessent invocation of the noble job of motherhood and being a foster parent is extremely annoying. Okay, got it. John Kerry served on Vietnam, and Michelle was a foster mom.

  • center77

    believes that garbage. No open boarder, just one that is friendly to product coming through. Not pro illegal worker, he is just pro jobs period. Right now in Texas, they have a lot of fruit that will not get picked. This hurts us, because Americans are lazy sometimes. The in-state thing is much more complicated than some people can grasp apparently. These kids are not getting a free ride at all. They are what we should want them to be if they are going to be here. Perry is anti having the law in Texas, because Texans dont want it. If you want it in your state, then work for it. If you are a Texan, then change peoples mind. More people did not want it.

    You Paul fans are really silly, it is not Perry’s fault you guy sounds like my crazy uncle.

  • txindependent

    People are looking for the best candidate who is conservative, but can also beat Obama by appealing to independents in the general election. Perry is a 3-term governor with a message of job creation in his state. He’s also notorious for winning elections. People have high hopes for him.

  • wonkish1

    VAT is hated by those on the right because the average buyer can’t see the tax when they make a purchase.

  • intensity

    …when do you think the others, especially Cain, will start dropping out??

  • capitalistpig

    instate tuition for children of illegals.
    http://minnesota.publicradio.org/collections/special/columns/polinaut/archive/2011/09/in-state_tuitio.shtml

  • kowalski

    .

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    is from 6:37 a.m. on Monday @ http://www.redstate.com/martin_a_knight/2011/10/07/rick-perry-the-problem/

    Rick tried to enjoy himself; i continue to adore his involvement.

  • rightwingmom52

    first three packages. It’s offered on its 250 channel package and up. I called to see if I could buy Bloomberg just for the night, or if they were offering the debate as a PPV. Best they could offer was buying an upgrade for an entire month. I checked around and didn’t have any friends or family who have this package, so I’m guessing there are a good number of folks who didn’t see the debate.

  • kowalski

    This is about the phase where the Consultant Class starts to exert absolutely irresistible influence over the field and tonight’s debate was a perfect beginning to that.

    Soon we will choose from the choices we’re allowed to choose from, as usual. It’s not a terrible field. We’ll feel like we’re actually choosing something, I guess.

  • wonkish1

    Granted I look at Greenspan the same way that Tom Hanks looked at Mr. Rooney on Road to Perdition. I loved Greenspan for a long time and then the little bastard lowered interest rates to 1% for 4 F*ing years. I may frown when I lay into Greenspan, but it doesn’t mean that laying in isn;t deserved.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …is not made for attacking other Republicans…try as he might!

  • clintonformccain

    I thought Perry did quite well tonight. Stayed on his jobs message. Responded well to attacks. No stumbles.

  • gator_hoo

    The one thing I really like about Perry’s energy point is that it is a non-government point. It really strikes me as odd for so many small government conservatives are looking for a candidate to articulate a governmental answer to the question.

    To the extent that the energy question reflects that he intends to just get government out of the way of the economy, (one thing anyone who has followed his record in Texas with regards to environmental regulations can see), I think it is about the best “plan” on the table.

  • wonkish1

    He has a PBS show that caries his own name. Republicans actually like going on his show because he’s always been historically very fair and a good interviewer.

  • jonerik

    Perry is NOT an advocate for Open Borders. His view of a fence covering every inch of the border is not the same as Tom Tancredo’s, but Perry has effectively become a border warrior over the past three years. The state spends $400 million to enforce border security.

    Perry has never shown an inclination towards maintaining or fostering a workforce comprised of illegals. Show the proof on that.

    Its highly debatable whether in-state tuition at the college level for children of illegals creates a ‘magnet state’ effect. A bigger draw is Sanctuary Cities. Perry introduced legislation to end them in Texas.

    Anti ‘Papers Please’ laws? Oh brother. The law passed by Arizona wasn’t right for the state of Texas in Perry’s view. Basically he didn’t believe that turning patrol officers into ICE officers would be very helpful. When the Feds sued Arizona over their law, Perry enjoined the lawsuit on Arizona’s side.

    I support him for his Conservative views and actual practices and accomplishments.

  • SoFiMil

    I hope there’s much more criticism from the pols on this than I’ve seen so far in the post-debate analysis.

  • rightwingmom52

    on his immigration views which pretty much debunks everything you mention.

    here

  • govreaganfan

    You can spin Perry’s pro illegal support any way you want, it does not matter. I think it might have been more intellectually honest just to say you are pro business and support illegal workforces…. I could understand that.
    Wow, no wonder you all hate Obama so much, given deportation under him are above those of GWB (another Texas Gov by coincidence).

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …that someone in the audience was yelling, near the end?

  • Aaron Gardner

    I was sitting in the Beta frat house at Dartmouth watching the debate with a group of Perry supporters, and some uncommitted voters as well. After the debate we did a quick poll of the group and no one was really willing to say anyone one.

    That said, two sentiments prevailed. Romney is a flip flopper and Cain’s 999 plan was mentioned way to many times.

    A bit later Gov. Perry came by and gave a pretty good stump speech and made a point to shake hands and talk to just about everyone in the room individually, even if only for a few minutes.

    I also saw a lot of heads nodding when I noted that Santorum came off as petulant.

    Everyone liked Newt’s answers but it also seemed that everyone didn’t see him as the winner of the debate.

    Overall, I think the crowd saw this as a draw.

  • kowalski

    That it’s going to be either Mitch Romney, or Newt Herman, or Michele Palin, or Rick Cain, or Perry Huntsman or Paul Rose or Ron John who is going to be the next Republican nominee. And they will be able to tell you approximately as much about what was said and mattered in this debate tonight.

  • joayn

    nt

  • capitalistpig

    Im very skeptical on the 9-9-9 plan.The more I read about it,the less I like it.I cant imagine paying 9% sakes taxes on purchases.Can 9-9-9 realistically have support in Congress even with a GOP majority in the House and Senate?o.0

  • govreaganfan

    He said we didn’t need a border fence, cant get much clearer than that. I’m dont feel a need to justify why I support a controllable border to the people of this site (who obviously do not feel as I do).

    But be intellectually honest at least.

  • redmymind

    Maybe you’re right. I was projecting too much of my “combative” self into the Governor. Good point, Doc. But then, Perry should capitalize on what does work for his personality type.

  • capitalistpig

    9% sales* taxes

  • onemovoter

    When she went to ask Perry a question, she quoted several lies about Perry that we have debunked here at RS. The one about Perry being a campaign manager for Al Gore was the biggest one I remember.

    This is Bachmann’s biggest problem, her propensity to bring up false and misleading lies. This is the reason she exploded and crashed and burned.

  • SoFiMil

    1 person yelling will be reported as 1 person yelling. Yet 2 people booing was reported as *everyone* booed.

  • wonkish1

    But instead that for those maybe few hundred thousand independents and slight Democrats watching this last night, they had their first opportunity to actually see a conservative argument not just a conservative talking point. And I bet for quite a few of them they were surprised by how reasonable conservative arguments are.

    But I agree its hard to pick a clear winner.

  • californiagold

    Polls consistently show Romney getting only 25% of the republican vote. That means 75% don’t want him to be the nominee.

    The Romney gang that has been planning this run since 2008 knew that the only way Mittens could win the nomination was to split the conservative vote in Iowa, South Carolina, etc… And for months Romney’s plan was working perfectly. Then Perry entered the race and blew past Romney in the polls. The Romney gang’s plan was going up in smoke…they needed drastic action. Enter Karl Rove and Fox News….

    Rove and Fox provided the TV attacks on Perry to bring Perry’s negatives up. On day one of the Perry campaign, Karl Rove provided the red meat, and since that day, Fox News has been an advocate for Romney, while attacking Perry. But there’s more…..

    Romney needed an attack dog or two at the debates to do his dirty work. He didn’t want to attack Perry alone (wouldn’t look presidential) but if a conservative attacked Perry at the debates, that was fine with Mittens. Enter Bachmann and Santorum….

    While the economy tanked, the early debates were filled with talk of vaccines, illegal aliens, and corporate cronyism – all directed at Perry by Bachmann and Santorum. Romney couldn’t have been happier…..the attacks caused Perry to drop in the polls, while Romney didn’t even get a scratch.

    Now it’s Herman’s turn…..even though Herm has no chance of winning the nomination, and doesn’t even have the time to campaign (competes with the book tour you know), ole Herm will continue to talk about the 9-9-9 plan and might even announce Mitt as his choice for VP. (Wait, he already did that) But after the South Carolina primary, Herm will go back to his book tour and talk show career, knowing his job has been done.

    In the meantime, Barack Obama and his billion dollar campaign war chest are pleased as punch with Mitt Romney as the republican nominee. Mitt might be flipping his way through the republican field, but Obama will expose him as the phony he is (Barack is an expert on phonies) leaving conservatives without a candidate they can support in 2012.

  • onemovoter

    I did see the democrat for Carter story but didn’t know about the tuition issue. That would really hurt her in Iowa. Think she’s polling about 10% or better there in Iowa at the moment.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    .

  • Doc Holliday

    judging him by his own standards. The problem is he is a poor debater and does not speak well. I think Perry’s biggest problem is he is in many ways a GWB clone. Sure, GWB won the presidency, but he did not have to follow GWB.

    I am surprised few have mentioned how similar Perry and W are. We joke about Perry talking about Texas all the time, but did GWB not do the same thing? We mention Perry is not particularly well spoken, again, like Bush.

    But at least Bush had very strong views, he was always confident. I still have no idea why Perry wants to be president and what he plans to achieve. He is like a new kid that joined the crowd without ever introducing himself.

    I think he still has a chance because he has a lot of money and infrastructure backing him. The same people that backed W are backing Perry. The only other alternatives are the less than conservative Romney, and the risky Cain. But Perry really has to come on strong, he needs to stop being so polite and take control of this race, if he does not, he will be another Fred Thompson.

  • SoFiMil

    : ) Much like Dubya, just a downright decent guy.

  • http://www.mullinslawoffices.com/ Jim Mullins

    More to the point, Bachmann’s only reason to remain in this race is to finish her kamikaze mission against Perry. Thankfully, Perry was no longer in the middle of a circular firing squad and weathered this debate FAR better than any of the previous ones.

  • Doc Holliday

    I have agreed with most of his analysis of the horse race. Romney won the debate because he did not lose, he is leading, and only Cain is near him, but he did better than Cain.

    Gingrich is by far the smartest, and most skilled conservative in the group, his problem is that too many are afraid to nominate Newt Gingrich. Newt could still make a run because everyone knows he could mop the floor with Obama in a confrontational debate.

  • lineholder

    that seems to be the consensus on this debate, i.e. that it wasn’t a bad debate per se but none of the candidates solidified much past where they had been prior to the debate. We’ll see how true that might be I guess, because there’s bound to be some sort of poll coming out soon.

    Anyway, glad to see a few objective opinions like your own about this one tonight, because from the looks of this thread, there’s just way too much emotive reasoning going on.

  • Doc Holliday

    and you are wrong, Romney would defeat Obama, any of our candidates can defeat him.

  • lineholder

    You said that you’ve read a lot about the crowd’s response to Perry after the debate, correct? If you have a link, can you share it, please?

  • Doc Holliday

    the others had no plan. I know I would like a 9 percent income tax rate. I know companies would be very happy to pay only 9 percent. And I have always supported a sales tax in lieu of income taxes. It is a good start. Those who say it is unrealistic don’t get that you have to ask for everything to get something.

    I want a sales ONLY tax and nothing else. 999 moves us in that direction, it has to be better than what we have now. Of course, I really don’t care how the shift things around, taxes must be lower, and the tax base must be broadened.

  • rightwingmom52

    we don’t need a border fence. Here’s his answer on immigration from the first debate linked here. Here are Perry’s comments from the transcript. He did not address the fence issue at all.

    PERRY: Well, the first thing you need to do is have boots on the ground. We’ve had a request in to this administration since June — or January of 2009 for 1,000 border patrol agents or National Guard troops, and working towards 3,000 border patrol. That’s just on the Texas border.

    There’s another 50 percent more for the entire Mexican border. So you can secure the border, but it requires a commitment of the federal government of putting those boots on the ground, the aviation assets in the air.

    We think predator drones could be flown, that real-time information coming down to the local and the state and the federal law enforcement. And you can secure the border. And at that particular point in time, then you can have an intellectually appropriate discussion about immigration reform.

    For the President of the United States to go to El Paso, Texas, and say that the border is safer than it’s ever been, either he has some of the poorest intel of a president in the history of this country, or he was an abject liar to the American people. It is not safe on that border.

  • lineholder

    Site rules.

  • onemovoter

    If you had half a brain you would know that it’s impossible to build a fence on certain parts of the border.

    We are being intellectually honest as others have shown with pictures of the border the Rio Grande that is as big a canyon as the Grand Canyon. I’d really like to see you build a fence in that. I’d also like to see the ranchers come after you when you cut off water source to their cattle.

    What you should do is start watching the History channel’s Border Wars show that shows how boots on the ground with air assets is proving to be much more effective than the fence full of holes.

    People here at RS are smart and see through your BS.

  • Doc Holliday

    there is no proof at all it opens the door to higher taxes. Those that say a national sales tax would be permanent but the income tax rates would increase are being partisan or not understanding reality. If the income tax can be raised, why can’t the sales tax be lowered, it can’t be only one way. The sales tax would make everyone pay, illegals, etc. It might even turn some poor people into conservatives.

  • snowshooze

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/republican-debate-transcript/2011/10/11/gIQATu8vdL_story_4.html

  • Doc Holliday

    Seniors don’t have capital gains? No, Cain’s plan would be a tax decrease for everyone but those who don’t pay taxes.

    Most of these tax plan debates are like a three card monte game. The states do the same thing. One state will have no income tax, but a higher sales tax. Another state will have a low sales tax, but a higher property tax. It is the old bait and switch.

    If we get a Republican president and Congress, we are not going to allow a tax increase. Overall taxation must go down, the federal budget must go down, any conservative with a clue gets that. A Republican that breaks that promise, will pay dearly.

  • californiagold

    I believe I was the first on RS to show concern about Perry’s immigration policies. But after doing extensive research, I am less concerned about Perry’s immigration views than I am of Romney’s.

    The reality is, Perry is correct when he states the “fence” at the border would be worthless without boots on the ground. In SoCa there is a fence, but there is also complimentary human support to stop illegal immigration. That’s what Perry supports.

    having said that, we wouldn’t have this huge immigration problem if it were not for the Reagan,Bush, and Clinton policies that were ineffective at best.

  • Doc Holliday

    please cut the field down ASAP.

  • californiagold

    …she lost credibility about three debates ago.

  • clowngirl

    …or maybe I just want to think that but so much of the party seems to not want him as nominee, it stands to reason that when the field whittles down a bit he won’t be able to hold a plurality.

    Has anybody seen much data on how commonly Romney is a second choice?

  • snowshooze

    The Federal Government in the first place.
    If you let it out of your hands to them… they will steal as much as they can before they give ANY of it back.
    So don’t let them even touch it to start with. Keep that State money IN the State, and keep them out.

  • rightwingmom52

    to higher taxes, is it not?

    I’m not totally convinced 999 is the way to go, but I have a difficult time finding anything to like under the current plan which confiscates a good amount of my income.

  • clintonformccain

    Perry has 12 years of experience as governor of the second largest state in the country. Personally, I view real actual governing experience as a big plus in the President of the United States. The lack of experience of the current President has been an unmitigated disaster.

    He’s hardly Fred Thompson. And, frankly, I don’t think he has to come on strong right now. I think sitting back in third place and letting the flavors of the month take a few slings and arrows is a good place for him to be. This race is so unsettled.

  • californiagold

    Although the 9-9-9 plan will never become law, it is far preferable to the current system.

    The elimination of the income tax, as well as other taxes should make fiscal conservatives very happy…yet some of you still complain.

  • nvrepub

    nt

  • californiagold

    With Perry out, the party will unite behind Romney, while attacking Cain, or whoever else might be in Romney’s way.

  • snowshooze

    He stammered out a meandering block grant something or other.
    He never pointed out that some do not , or want insurance, or that insurance is NOT health care… it is simply insurance.
    But nobody else has said this either.. as far as I know.. aside of myself.

  • paladin1

    for the big government spenders they are. When asked a very direct question regarding the Obama stimulus spending, Romney waffled repeatedly around the edges of the question and refused to declare that the bailouts were a mistake. First he said that no individual companies should have been bailed out. Then however, he said that we could not allow the economy to fail. Shortly thereafter, Cain echoed Romney’s message that the economy could not be allowed to fail and refused to state that the bailouts were wrong. Both of these candidates separated the economy as a whole from individual companies and corporations, therefore they were able to create the facade that the bailouts as individual entitiies were undeserved and still give room for their use of bailouts under their potential administrations under the guise that the economy as a whole cannot be allowed to fail. Concealed in this verbal subtlety is the implicit suggestion that they would support bailouts if needed (so the economy won’t fail) but that the individual companies and banks that were bailed out by Obama were just bad choices and that their choices of businesses to spend $800 billion dollars on, would be better and would produce the desired results. Both men were incapable of supporting the basic capitalist tenet that businesses that succeed should be fostered and allowed to grow and hire new workers by a reduction of restrictive government rules and regulations, expensive health care costs (read Obamacare), and less regulated monetary policy, while businesses that fail–should do just that. The concept they both support tacitly is that some businesses ARE to big to fail and that is a fallacy no conservative voter should support.

    Governor Perry, on the other hand, called repeatedly for reducing regulations and an expansion of energy production with the resulting boom in long term, high-paying jobs in all facets of the energy field. With the huge energy resources of Texas and the energy jobs consistently held here for decades, a Texas governor knows energy jobs. I am anticipating the expansion of Perry’s plan in the next three days and am certain that it will be practical, workable, and include more facets of employment besides energy production.

    Rick Perry began his road to comeback tonight with his debate performance, providing two coherent, logical, and well-spoken answers to trick questions, especially the comparison of the Solyndra debacle to the successful use of the Governor’s Enterprise Fund to bring companies and jobs to Texas at an unprecedented rate. He handled the question well, answered with sincerity, and stated the facts. Well done, Governor Perry!

  • uncmike

    I spend way too much time following events such as the so-called debate tonight. For those of us addicted to this pastime, we hang on every new poll, every campaign event, every debate, every perceived gaffe by a candidate, every endorsement of a candidate, and so on. Because of this, we probably accord far greater weight (too much, to be honest) to these events than does the majority of folks who will enter the polls next year. For example, we may think that because Perry or Cain or whomever muffed a certain question, that spells certain doom for him when, in fact, that will have virtually no bearing on the eventual political outcome. Just think, a couple of weeks ago, the press was all ablaze over the topic of Gardisil and how that would do Perry in. It didn’t, and if you were to ask the man in the street to discuss Perry and Gardisil today, you’d probably get a “huh, whaz that?” The primary season still has several months to go until we get to the real campaign when voters (except in Iowa where they caucus) will start paying attention and making up their minds. At that time, the campaigns with money and support will start to fill the airways with their attacks on their closest rivals and Joe Sixpax will process that information to beging deciding whom he will vote for–if at all. These ads will have a major impact on the final outcome, not some point Cain or Gingrich made tonight in an event watched only by a small cadre of us political junkies.

  • SoFiMil

    I can live with the differences. And I know what I’m getting.

  • snowshooze

    Or steering the debate.
    They do not know the questions to ask.
    They try to score gotcha points.
    They have no grasp of the issues.
    They don’t even understand the issues.
    They need to stick to reading the news in front of a camera.
    A parrot has more brains.

  • redmymind

    I think folks who don’t have half their brains tied behind their backs see what Slick-50 (Romney) is all about. I can’t say too much for those intellectually shallow enough to actually be dazzled by his fancy debate footwork, but after a while it does get quite old and heard-it-all-before-ish.

    Try as he might to be dismissive of Governor Perry, he knows very well who his biggest threat is in the race to the nomination. If Cain’s his real rival, as these polls would have it, then why does he keep attacking Perry, who’s supposedly a distant third in the race?

    More folks will soon see Slick-50 for what he really is–well before he even thinks of setting foot in the Bible Belt! Amen to that!

  • tea4me

    Except his last question…it was like he wasn’t there. The Fred Thompson analogy is perfect.

    Cain already reached his high water mark. 999 will do him in. No conservative will support another taxing mechanism. Bachmann nailed him tonight. It’s all downhill for him now.

    As Mark Levin reminded us tonight…70+ percent of the Republican base wants anyone but Romney. As well as he was set up with questions tonight. And as well as he answered them. I don’t see him going above it.

    In the end, it will come down to which conservative can consolidate the vote. And I still think it could be Bachmann, as she wins the evangelicals in the Iowa Caucus.

    But it could be Gingrich or Santorum too. Neither have been damaged in these debates, and have in fact performed very well. And either could be the last one to surge in the polls before the Primary. Which would be perfect for them to come from behind a la McCain last year.

    Get that surge when it’s too late for the rest of the field to do anything about it.

  • lineholder

    the Republican establishment? I have no doubt that this may be the kind of scenario they are hoping for, but I live in the SE, and txpat’s comment is accurate for the most part.

  • clintonformccain

    Or Gingrich. Or Santorum.

    They have no support and no money.

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

    1. A third party candidate from any spectrum on the right reelects Obama.

    2. There are NO credible conservatives who aren’t currently running.

  • tea4me

    …

  • snowshooze

    I only caught the last 5 or 10 minutes… but then I dug up the transcripts and read them up to where I came in.
    I sure hope you are realizing some interest in your generous offer to host the candidates for in-depth interviews.
    I wasn’t impressed at all. I read your comments about it here, but went ahead and read the transcripts… I did not find it to be a rewarding expenditure of my time. I guess I had to read them so as to know what was really said to what is being fabricated…but I would be generous if I ranked this with a letter grade of a C-
    If they want to host a debate, that is great, but why let a pack of complete idiots ask the questions? Or steer the conversation?
    Ah well… it was their money…

  • tea4me

    …Or Rick Thompson…er Perry…either.

  • SoFiMil

    I was only able to listen to the debate via Bloomberg Radio, and thought I heard Romney’s quip on the 999 plan as the Prince of Peace. Not until they played highlights afterward did I learn it was actually the “price of pizza.”

    Huntsman…ughh. Ackward.

  • snowshooze

    Hats off to WaPo and Bloomberg… what could you expect.

  • paladin1

    be lowered but by the same token could be raised as well, just as the personal and corporate income taxes could. I cannot support a national sales tax as I really believe it opens a Pandora’s box of tax that can never be fixed in place and that we can never be rid of, even if it were possible to pass this plan in the first place, which I doubt. As you say, there is no proof it opens the door to higher taxes but as well, there is no proof it doesn’t and history is on the side of taxes rising.

  • SoFiMil

    A performance like tonight in the last two debates would have done wonders for Perry. Although he wasn’t sterling, it also wasn’t a disastrous performance. Kudos to Perry for his perservearance. Looking forward to the Perry I know and love in future debates as well. Back on track!

  • Doc Holliday

    and taxes will most certainly rise more if fewer voters are required to foot the bill. A sales tax helps because it makes EVERYONE pay, illegals, tax cheats, visitors, etc. Also, it is pro capitalism to greatly reduce taxes on earnings. If we must have taxes, have them be on purchases, don’t dis incentivize earnings and production, better to incentivize saving, through sales taxes.

    I don’t care how they do the taxes, but I prefer a sales only tax. I am tired of welfare for CPA’s and lawyers, because that is what the tax code is. But my only goal is to reduce taxes, spur economic growth, and reduce the government. At least Cain was smart enough to come up with something people can understand. People know Cain’s tax plan, they don’t have a clue about the others.

  • SoFiMil

    NT

  • txpat

    He has 17 million plus reasons on why he will not bow out.

  • snowshooze

    Than the debate..

  • Common_Cents

    Perry keeps throwing out the “let’s get America working again” stuff. Yeah, we got that. Give us some specifics!

  • Common_Cents

    and he’ll catch fire.

  • snowshooze

    And he did not answer..and went off on the block grant thing…
    He should have noted that insurance is not health care.
    Not everyone wants it, or needs it.
    Not everyone saves money by buying insurance. In fact, most LOSE or the Insurance company would go under.

  • Common_Cents

    Perry should have at least covered his main points of his plan. He only offered energy development.

  • paladin1

    that a sales tax forces, because everyone buys goods and services. That is the same argument used here in Texas regarding illegals; that they do pay taxes because we have a state sales tax and they buy things. It is true and a valid point, however I believe a flat tax on all income earners, corporate and personal, without deductions, is a better and safer way to force the buy-in and not add a new type of tax to the Federal arsenal. Your arguement is valid and the sentiments regarding welfare for attys. and CPAs echo mine; I am just leery of the balancing act that the two pronged personal income tax and sales tax presents to greedy legislators when they find they are not raising the amount of income projected by one prong of the plan, and have the ability to raise one tax while lowering the other. Worse yet, raising one and holding the other at the same level. Having two taxing opportunities certainly gives rise to manipulating one or the other in order to pacify those who say a sales tax is regressive to the poor. It would be the perfect opportunity to unbalance the system by raising the income tax rate, reduce the sales tax rate, and then claim more equitable tax gathering and simultaneously opening up the exact same system of tax inequities we hate. Just my thoughts and no attack intended on you; we seek the same goal.

  • Common_Cents

    For a little reference this go round. It ain’t over til Roseanne Barr starts warming up to butcher the National Anthem.

  • snowshooze

    And imagine the thousands of pages in a bill covering 59 points.. with all the legal language… and after the amendments…it would be stuffed pork.

  • Change Jar Conservative

    What is that break going to be?

    Who knows.

    Christie has endorsed.

    Who will Haley, Palin, and DeMint endorse?

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    I think if the IRCA had been enforced we’d be much better off.

    But it wasn’t.

    Perry’s “problem,” if there is one (and I’m skeptical), is that he insists federalism matters even on issues we care about, like illegal immigration.

  • Change Jar Conservative

    I’ve talked to my Dad about any transition to a sales tax being bad for seniors.

    His response, “Change always hits someone. If it’s good for the country then I’ll figure it out and live with it.”

    Senior remain people from the greatest generation and their children. They aren’t afraid of change.

  • Change Jar Conservative

    that would keep the rates tied together or repeal the tax plan altogether.

    If you could force it legally that there could be:

    a) no additional taxes added into the system.
    b) make the rates float together at all times

    then congress would have to raise taxes on every body to raise taxes on anyone.

  • Common_Cents

    Because are any important people going to endorse Gingrich as a 3rd or 4th place guy now? Probably not. He needs a boost in polls from debate performances like Cain got. I’m surprised he didn’t mention his Contract with America in the debate once, if not multiple times.

    He’d be perfect to endorse the precinct project to get people involved. Even though he is right, he should come across a little more civil on firing of bernanke and geithner, until he gets the nomination. Tons of money and power reside around the Wall st/Fed/Treasury complex and its tough to win w/out some semblance of their blessing. I’d keep it a bit under my hat until after the nomination.

  • eward8

    Perry has a different speaking style than Mitt. He’s thoughtful and has an easy Texan drawl. I disagree with Erick that Perry and his team do not take these debates seriously. His answers were good. The problem with social media (Twitter, FB, & blogs), we expect the candidates to talk as fast as we Tweet or blog.

    Bachmann is articulate/smooth but her answers come across as soundbites and inauthentic. My take on Mitt, he’s good but all the Obama hacks in the LibMSM want him to be the GOP candidate. He has to be a fighter to beat the Obama slime machine and I don’t see it yet.

    Congrats to Gov. Perry & Larry Sabato you get a F for scoring this debate.

  • wbf

    I think Erick’s idea would be the best format for conservatives to get a better view of the candidates. I hope he can pull it off too.

  • bzip

    I completely agree with you. Romney didn’t win and was pressed hard (though he didn’t lose either).

    Cain really had to defend his 999 plan and he had very weak answers to many questions including the fed audit question.
    Cains 999 plan was exposed the way it should be, a new tax hike lousy idea.

    Perry I thought did really well, so what if he hadn’t release a complete detailed plan he is going to this week. Does it matter it is coming out shortly and he in fact go in the race late so its not too surprising he is running behind.

    I tend to think in a general election debate Perry will do well as he will have a lot more time to answer questions (I think that favors Perry better then these short quick answer sessions..

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    Perry is conveying an engaging personality, reminiscent of that 2004 criterion: “With whom would you rather share a beer, Bush or Kerry?”

    He has integrated The Newt, in that he is not apt to attack his colleagues; the only advantage Romney now thinks he has is the ability to play the front-runner and to pivot to attack BHO…but his ability to project “it’s all over” will wear thin over time. If all the minor-players can survive, so too can Rick…and he will be there to attract the TEA-Party Movement [and, perhaps, the support of Sarah and The Donald].

    We cannot bow to the MSM’s desire for a cage-fight.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    As these debates grind along, and as Rick keeps gaining $-support [while other more conservative candidates fail], the “anti-Romney” will prevail.

  • davesinsanantonio

    LOL!

  • davesinsanantonio

    The 16th Amendment is repealed, and not before. The absolute worst case would be passing a national sales tax on top of the income tax, and then hoping the income tax would be done away with. Fat chance with that, because that would take a 2/3 vote of each house of Congress and then ratification by 3/4 of the states.

  • SoFiMil

    ..

  • trutexan

    but I saw more “Buffering” across my screen than any substance at all – and I’ve got high speed internet. I was so disappointed I just settled for NCIS.

  • eward8

    I like Gingrich and Santorum but neither one of them will be the nominee. Newt is the best debater and thinker but the likability factor will not attract the national electorate. How can Santorum be a contender when he lost his senate seat in his home state by a wide margin?

    Bachmann is smart but comes across as too strident.

    I agree with the others Perry did well. Mitt is Obama lite. I can see the Obama campaign “Palinalizing” Mitt. In short, Romneycare is his Achilles Heel. One more thing, Mitt is too afraid to speak the truth how radical Obama is. He is a socialist! Reagan wouldn’t be afraid to say it.

  • wbf

    He has a wonderful, charming personality, great communication skills, and a compelling story!! Who cannot like him?

    Herman Cain knows how to sell. He started off selling and has honed his skills. He knew a simple plan would catch peoples’ imagination. He knows marketing.

    I believe he is sincere and loves our country and has its best interests at heart. I also believe the other candidates are sincere and love our country and have its best interests at heart.

    But can we elect someone who has never held elective office to the presidency? Who has no record in government that we can actually see?

  • wonkish1

    1. As you said a very strong debate performance that leads to a big rise in his poll numbers.

    2. Cain makes a big mistake and almost all of his support goes to Newt. Polling is now increasingly confirming this. Note: Cain did a pretty good job last night, so is it actually going to happen to Cain.

    3. Newt picks up the Union Leader endorsement in New Hampshire. The Union Leader has been known to pick outside of the top 2 candidates and the editor when asked about only has something positive to say about Newt. That endorsement was worth about 15-20 pts for McCain in 2008. Even if Newt lost he would go into South Carolina strong.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    He concurs in his book with this sentiment but, accepting current reality, seeks to recover some of the monies sent by his state’s taxpayers to D.C.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …and he maintained his “Federalism”-theme covertly, throughout.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …both with the positive and negative commentary.

    If Perry had made a gaffe, it surely would have been highlighted on MSNBC; rather, the commentary was how Mitt looked past Rick to address Michele. Illustrative of its bias is having ignored a point on this blog which illustrated why Mitt purposefully wanted to pitch her a soft-ball. Also, his “don’t interrupt me” arrogance emerged, surely not easily digested by the non-elitist “TEA Party Movement” listeners.

    Meanwhile, the true-conservatives will begin to learn how deeply Perry shares their view of government…”Main St.” over “Wall St.”

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …and this should help reassure EE. Nevertheless, we need to monitor the content to learn attitudes.

    In this case, Mitt/Hermann confirmed their big-business ties; truths emerged.

    Rick’s personality also emerged, again contrasting with his competitors.

  • jiminga

    1. Perry was a one trick pony, always reverting to his “energy independence” meme for almost every answer.
    2. Herman Cain’s praise of Greenspan was laughable. He should have pondered the question and answer a little longer.
    3. Jon Huntsman is just plain not likeable and he needs a better joke writer.

    Bonus thought: Newt was obviously shooting for VP.

  • jlsankot

    I thought, for a while there, it was the Mitt Romney Show. He definitely got more air time than any of the others. When the other candidates had to “push in” to get some attention, I thought it was pretty pathetic.

    This format worked “better”, but still not the debates I remember way back when. I think the narrators are the result of “modern” education, which is also pathetic.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …perhaps because a lot of people were burned while rationalizing his glibness…and liberal spending.

    He has relied upon “welfare reform” – believe it or not – for TWO DECADES. I heard him speak a year before he ran for Senate the first time, @ a hotel south of the Philly airport [having been invited to attend by a Cato-oriented fellow-physician] when he was the darling of the emerging activists [who were beginning to become dismayed with Bush-'41, BTW]. He was lucid, but was playing off of this type of pragmatism to convey his ability to achieve a tangible outcome.

    This buoyed him, even during Clinton, but his book ‘["It takes a family"] was mistakenly touted [including by myself, when I went to a book-signing in Bryn Mawr] as a counterpoint to Hillary’s ["It takes a village"].

    He alienated to many people who otherwise loved his policies [particularly regarding the middle east], and even his surrogate senatorial-candidate is being ignored currently.

    He’s hanging around, hoping for others to falter, but Rick won’t.

  • avagreen

    It’s amusing to read old polls to see who was on top, and now completely forgotten.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …despite his roots in Bucks County. His elitism is difficult to mask, even when talking one-on-one, as I did when he spoke a few years ago @ the PA Leadership Conference.

    And when he was recently @ the Constitution Center touting his flick, the reaction was [politely phrased] luke-warm [on the blogs]. For documentation of how his stridency is grating, I again recall his sound-bites on FNC regarding Libya. Whatever BHO did was terrible, even when he [belatedly] helped NATO with its initial bombing program. This is a guy with a strong knowledge-base, who abuses it in a transparent attempt to grab headlines.

    Witness his attack on Dodd/Frank. He issued it, properly attacking politicians and defending it by citing Countrywide and Fannie. But he did not provide balance. WE KNOW of fraud/abuse in the big-corps [noting, for example, a piece on O'Reilly attacking the former head of Merrill-Lynch]. This should have been cited for balance, even if it risked turning-off a $-raiser or two.

    We must not forget that 90% of the positions of these guys are good and shared. That’s why it’s the constitutional-conservative underpinnings of Perry that endears this listener.

  • daniel22

    the tax system in this country is needing to be replaced. I do not think that politicians would allow the income tax as we know it go away. Doing so would not allow them to pick winners and losers.
    A national sales tax would enforce a general buy in as misspent funds would directly affect voters in the money coming out of their pocket. As a note before the past House elections Nancy Pelosi was salivating over a national Value Added Tax. There was no talk of income tax reduction from her either.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …using energy independence as an example.

    Otherwise, concur.

  • beach91

    with my 3 teenager sons. They kept asking me questions about the candidates since they don”t know the names of them. I was laughing hard when they told me that Romney was the ‘Ken’ barbie guy. That is how they identified him! Frickin’ funny.

    Anyway, I think Perry did all right and seemed to be somewhat low key. Romney was a slick car salesman as usual. Cain is getting peppered now with his 999 plan and that needs some good vetting. Santorum needs to just go away..every time he speaks I wonder if he is going to pull a gun and shoot someone. Bachman needs to go away too cause when she speaks now it is really annoying and she adds nothing. Huntsman…well..his jokes are so lame that I feel embarrassed. Gingrich is really awesome and definitely needs to be a part of the next Repub admin or a VP.

  • avagreen

    1. Develop our own energy, which would cut costs and make jobs, stop the dollar drain to foreign countries.
    2. Cut regulations that are strangling businesses, and would
    3. Allow new businesses to start up.
    4. Cut spending
    5. Asked if he might accept a budget compromise that could involve raising revenue, as President Ronald Reagan did, Mr. Perry suggested that he would not.
    6. Cut spending.
    7. Pass a balanced budget amendment.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/12/us/politics/republican-candidates-in-debate-divide-on-economy.html?_r=1&ref=presidentialdebates

  • davesinsanantonio

    I doubt he would be their second. But, maybe that’s just me.

  • davesinsanantonio

    If he was a true conservative in his core, or if after ’08 he had swung right instead of left, he would be getting more support than just 20% of the party, and endorsements from actual conservatives (Christie is not a conservative!). There is a reason that “not-Romney” does so well in the polls. It is also the reason that he would not win the general. Understand this, there is a reason the MSM is on his side and wants him to be the candidate.

  • davesinsanantonio

    to Washington, it is take from the taxpayers paychecks before they get it. The feds then send a little bit back to the states, usually with lots of strings attached, to appease them some. The states have little say in the matter.

  • avagreen

    1. Develop our own energy, which would cut costs and make jobs, stop the dollar drain to foreign countries.
    2. Cut regulations that are strangling businesses, and would
    3. Allow new businesses to start up.
    4. Cut spending
    5. Asked if he might accept a budget compromise that could involve raising revenue, as President Ronald Reagan did, Mr. Perry suggested that he would not.
    6. Cut spending.
    7. Pass a balanced budget amendment.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/12/us/politics/republican-candidates-in-debate-divide-on-economy.html?_r=1&ref=presidentialdebates

  • avagreen

    Wow! I didn’t know that, either.
    Gotta bookmark that one.

  • davesinsanantonio

    Businesses that succeed do so for a reason, or for several reasons. Businesses that fail do so for one or more reasons. When those businesses fail their assets are sold off to other businesses who then put them to work again is some capacity. People who lost their jobs go get other jobs and get back to work. The market forces businesses to be efficient and competitive, or they fail. No business is too big to fail. True, some huge failures would be disruptive, but the market would put those assets and people back to work somewhere, and the disruptions would smooth out over time. The fallacy of government intervention in the market says that government made of of people can somehow prevent problems in a market made up of people. The market works, but government power distorts markets. Those distortions can be enforced for a while by the power of the government, but eventually the market forces become overpowering, and when that happens the market “correction” is no longer “disruptive”, but usually becomes catastrophic! In the long run, market forces are far more powerful than governments. Just look at the whole Soviet bloc system for examples of that.

  • wonkish1

    John Thane had only taken over at Merrill after the firm was already taking huge losses on its real estate portfolio and only few months before the $hit hit the fan.

    John did a great job trying to steer Merrill through that mess and did right by Merrill stockholders to sell at the price he did. The tarnishing of Thane after the crisis has been wrong.

  • diehardcon

    and it’s unbecoming for an astute analyst. Rick Perry’s performance was not as you would have readers believe. Most here have so indicated. You must recall your original statements after he declared, that he does not need to hit home runs in the debates, but he must avoid errors. THIS IS STILL TRUE. It will never be realistic to expect him to run circles around the group; it is also unlikely he will show much emotion. We need to retain confidence that he is, after all, the best prepared candidate on the things that most matter, i.e., the long record of accomplishment, and proven commitment to the major conservative principles. This is the big picture background that most voters will see when they make their choices. It is frustrating to see him move slowly in the modern fast-paced communications environment, but as his vision gets fleshed out, it will become clear that he is the one who has actually done what he is proposing, on the largest scale, for the longest time. The energy reference he made is not to be underestimated in this regard; it is a major core national problem which has not been previously hit upon by the others, the solutions for which will simultaneously attack several pressing economic issues, including power, jobs and transportation. We must have faith and patience.

  • jbt1971

    I’m worried Perry looks & talks too much like GWB. I think this would be a big problem for GOP if he becomes the nominee. Also, almost every answer he had made reference to Texas. That’s ok as long as he can clearly express how the Texas accomplishments will transalte to the entire U.S. and I think he’s struggling with that aspect of his message right now.

  • Scope

    I didn’t see the debate. When Perry talked about Block Grants was he referring to Medicaid? I believe he has been saying that states should get the grants and then design the best way to cover those requiring Medicaid in that state. Right now the federal government is very much involved in who is covered, and dictates to the states who must be covered. Is that correct?

  • Jim Tomasik

    and look where we are at. I’m willing to give him a shot.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …because of his misrepresentations after he took-charge “only few months before the $hit hit the fan.”

  • deuke

    Thank you politicalgal, for saying again what needs to be said repeatedly; Mitt Romney does not have the majority of conservative support, despite his wishes they did. He is not the candidate to beat Obama.

    Despite the hesitancy to pick Herman Cain by some, because of his “999″ tax proposals, or not having answers to questions about foreign policy readily at his fingertips – when he should, rightfully; next to Gov. Perry, either could knock Obama out of the park like Cruse knocked a grand slam the other night.

    My dog could beat Obama, if given enough lip to chew.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …emphasizing that the low-key approach can prove endearing…and authentic.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    we’re in this for the long-slog

  • eyesopen007

    the credible conservative candidates that ARE currently running?

    Not Mitt Romney, a squishy moderate, not a conservative.

    Not Rick Perry, a George Bush Republican, not a conservative.

    Not Herman Cain, a businessman that wants new taxes and doesn’t seem to understand government and the Constitution, and therefore not a conservative.

    Not Michelle Bachman nor any of the others that are too low in the polls to possibly be credible.

    Who did you have in mind?

  • Scope

    and I’ve long liked Perry’s economic ideas of lower taxes, less regulation, lawsuit reform. I wondered why no other candidate has had anything to say about the very popular belief in drill here drill now that so many want. I’ve thought for a while that if Perry added the element of using our own natural resources, it would be a huge job creator. It’s like he gave me a gift to hear him talking about it.

    Romney will have a hard time with the energy sector discussions as he has come out saying that he believed that Global Warming was real and man made. He won’t have a leg to stand on with any energy policy except promoting green energy. That’s yet another comparison of him to Obama.

    Perry can hit this out of the park as most conservatives are anti-environmentalist tree huggers.

  • eyesopen007

    Not Newt Gingich (as much as I love the guy) who is just plain wrong on “climate change” and who endorsed the individual mandate on health care, not to mention making far too many really bad choices in his personal life, so is no longer a “credible conservative”.

  • eyesopen007

    Ann Coulter is not a “credible conservative” either, and neither is Chris Cristie.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …and this is the type of observation that one can anticipate Rush will help the world recall.

  • Querent

    Those of you who think Perry did well last night are just seeing what you want to see. The debates are designed to show who has leadership skills. Perry sat meekly, looking like he was lost. When he was asked a question, he rambled. He jumped subjects. He showed no grasp of the subject, and seemed to be feeling around for a grip on his talking points. Frankly, he looked like he was out of his intellectual depth.

    The candidates who did best were Romney and Cain. Romney behaved graciously and naturally. He seemed friendly and receptive, but showed toughness when challenged, without being dismissive or superior about it. He acted like a leader, one self-confident enough to pass up the opportunity to snark on those challenging him. He also displayed an understanding of the connections between his own positions and the objections raised against them.

    Cain showed natural leadership abilities, but his understanding of the issues is suspect. His lack of experience in government shows, and makes him unrealistic. His forcefulness is just this side of pushy. He handled himself well in the debate, but he has yet to prove himself a heavyweight on policy.

    I have a soft spot for Ron Paul, but his personal mannerisms are not attractive. He sounds querulous. His voice inflections are those of someone used to being summarily rejected, and he can’t seem to organize his statements in a dynamic or efficient way. He frequently follows his point with a statement which makes him sound weak or unfocused. Also, he looks off in strange directions while he’s talking, making me wonder who he’s talking to. He sounds goofy even when he’s talking sense.

    I have a hard time seeing how anyone could think that Gingrich did well. Gingrich behaves rudely and peremptorily toward anyone who pushes his buttons. People don’t want a president who’s a jerk. Gingrich never lets us forget that he thinks he’s intellectually superior to the rest of us, in spite of the utter lack of evidence for that belief. Gingrich is more interested in the mechanics of the modifications he wants to do on the government than he is in being engaging or in presenting himself well. I don’t believe that Gingrich is ever going to be the flavor of the week. His moral turpitude is repellant to too many people. If his wives (!) can’t trust him, how can the voters?

    Bachmann is so empty-headed that her lies echo on the way out of her mouth. She doesn’t have the political acumen to get anywhere near the nomination.

    Huntsman is a nobody. I fail to see what he offers conservatives.
    Santorum is abrasive, unappealing, and a NeoCon. And those are his good points.

    I feel like I’m leaving someone out, but then we all feel that someone is missing from the stage, don’t we?

  • eyesopen007

    “smooth as a gravy sandwich, but not much meat”

    Can I use that?

  • tlhanger

    No, Seniors would NOT be hit hard and I am a senior. Study the plan and if he can get the income tax to go away, you and everyone get their entire check. You do not file these awful income tax forms, except for short form and only 9 %. When everyone has a dog in the hunt we will prosper again. Social Security and Medicare will be funded again. We will be America again.
    Cain did great!
    Mitt may speak well, but so does Obama-no substance.

  • eyesopen007

    here in the state of Washington, and in my lifetime it has gone from 3% to over 9%. On the whole, governments do not lower taxes, they raise them.

    And Cain (and his supporters) doesn’t seem to understand that the only way to assure that his 999 tax rates won’t be raised over time is to make it a Constitutional Ammendment, and that just ain’t gonna happen.

  • bzip

    Cain has never held office, no record to look back to and see what he would do – but Cain’s 1st policy the 999 shows us a great deal about the judgement Cain and what kind of thinking he has. Come on, a new national sales tax- just wonderful.

  • sharp

    My goal is to pick the best of: Perry, Cain, Bachmann, Gingrich, or Santorum ( I would be happy with any one of them. )

    I am on the verge of sending money to Newt.

    Did you hear his Value Voters speech – on putting the Supreme Court in its place?

    Newt is a fighter. Perry is not.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …are predicated on the honesty you evince.

    To answer the last question on behalf of my son, “Johnson.”

    Will counter your perceptions of Perry and Romney, typing on the same plane you created. The rest of your comments appear generally on-point, although a conversation might clarify some of them [e.g., Cain's fatal 999]. Note how your views are SUPPLANTED by contrasting/opposite descriptions, yielding contrary conclusions:

    “Those of you who think Perry did well last night are just seeing what you want to see. [WE DIDN'T SAY HE DID 'WELL' WHEN WE NOTED HE DID 'OK.'] The debates are designed to show who has leadership skills. [RATHER THAN FOCUS ON THE SUBJECTIVITY OF 'LEADERSHIP' IN THIS REGARD, DOES NOT 'CONTENT' CARRY IMPORT?] Perry sat meekly, looking like he was lost. [PERRY POLITELY INTERACTED, WITHOUT BOMBAST.] When he was asked a question, he rambled. [PERHAPS YOU ARE RECALLING A DIFFERENT DEBATE; HIS MESSAGE WAS CONSISTENT AND UNIQUE AMONG HIS COMPETITORS.] He jumped subjects. [NOTING HOW MITT AVOIDED THE FIRST QUERY ABOUT CONSENSUS-DEVELOPMENT--RELYING UPON TALKING-POINTS, AS DID CAIN--PERRY'S DIRECT ANSWERS TO SOME OF THE GOTCHA-QUERIES CONTRASTS VIVIDLY.] He showed no grasp of the subject, and seemed to be feeling around for a grip on his talking points. [HE CONSISTENTLY RELATED THE DIRECT QUESTION TO LARGER PHILOSOPHICAL FORCES, WHICH WERE CITED BUT UPON WHICH HE CHOSE NOT TO DWELL.] Frankly, he looked like he was out of his intellectual depth. [SADLY, THIS IS REMINISCENT OF THE 'BUSH IS DUMB' ATTACKS OF 2000.]”

    “The candidates who did best were Romney and Cain. Romney behaved graciously and naturally. [YEAH, WHEN HE INTERRUPTED PERRY ALOOFLY RATHER THAN ANSWERING HIS QUESTION.] He seemed friendly and receptive, but showed toughness when challenged, without being dismissive or superior about it. [VIDE SUPRA; WHAT DEBATE WERE YOU WATCHING, AGAIN?] He acted like a leader, one self-confident enough to pass up the opportunity to snark on those challenging him. He also displayed an understanding of the connections between his own positions and the objections raised against them.. [THIS IS THE BYPRODUCT OF ELITISM, UNJUSTIFIED BY WHAT HE ACTUALLY SAID.]”

    The more i blog on these issues, the more i adhere to Rick.

  • eyesopen007

    but Perry didn’t do “awesome”. He was slightly better than in the previous debates, but the bottom line is, he is still a George Bush Republican when the country needs a Ronald Reagan Republican.

  • Wayne

    on my way to a meeting yesterday (yes, a business meeting in California, amazing isn’t it) and a young woman who’s family heritage goes back to Madison was articulating what was wrong with the field of Republican candidates. It was refreshing to hear a young person with knowledge of American history.

    I don’t want to bore everyone with a point by point blow of her assessments, but leave it to say that her opinion of Romey is that he is Obama “Lite”. He’s still a liberal in comparison to traditional conservative values. And, in my opinion the Republican party has compromised so much with the Democratic Party that it now resembles the Democratic party of the mid 50′s. That’s were compromise has taken us. The Democratic party is now the Socialist Party.

    We really have a sad assemblage of choices to replace Obama with. But if I had to choose today it would be Newt and any other candidate but Romey for his V.P. Trouble is, Newt obviously likes Romey.

    I’m going to work, where at least there is one place I can make a difference.

  • Querent

    if you start by supporting Perry and disliking Romney, then you see Perry do well and Romney behaving badly. That’s not what I saw.

  • SoFiMil

    Thanks!

  • eyesopen007

    everyone, and I mean EVERYONE, is in on the conspiracy to hold poor Ricky down. The JBS never did it better.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    [btw, i still have a photo of myself between toomey and romney when the latter endorsed the former]

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …but i still prefer rick

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …even if he has a policy of not formally weighing-in during the primaries.

  • westcoastpatriette

    I’m starting to see his laid back style as a reflection of his self-confidence. And I disagree with Erick on the importance of the debates. Perry looks like he is at the prom only because it would be rude not to show up but he simply is not threatened by the process nor any of the other candidates.

    Remember, he has never lost a race. He knows how to hold back until it is time to push ahead. And the field is too big right now to worry about all the other horses. Watch him. The others smell his confidence, too, and that is why they attack him so. Can’t wait to see what happens next.

  • eyesopen007

    he only had a “huge night” in the eyes of those that already supported him. I doubt very seriously that he pulled in much new support.

  • sharp

    Newt is absolutely right on Bernanke & Geithner – and the most forceful.

  • tngal

    While the roundtable format had improvements over the past debates, there were times the whole package came off cringeworthy.

    Tumulty? – Sorry, but that woman does not need to handle debates. Sometimes she actually came off like acting as if she was one of candidates rather than a moderator. Ask a succinct question then get out of the way.

    The kids? – Really?!? I realize they were ads, but using them to explain debt was just silly. I suspect the next debate will feature cartoon animals marching with placards explaining foreign policy.

    Slighting of Candidates? – Its not as if they didn’t know how many people would be sitting at their kitchen table. They all but ignored a couple. Gingrich and Santorum come to mind. They could have managed that a little better.

    Lights, camera, sound? – At times all three came off as second rate. Sound was the worst of the three.

  • http://nerds4cain.com Brookhaven

    A VAT is a tax that is added at every stage of production.

    Dairy farmer sells milk to processor; a tax is added.
    Processor sells milk to wholesaler; a tax is added.
    Wholesaler sells milk to grocery; a tax is added.
    Grocery sells milk to customer; a tax is added.

    A sales tax is only added at the end of the cycle.

    Dairy farmer sells milk to processor; no taxes.
    Processor sells milk to wholesaler; no taxes.
    Wholesaler sells milk to grocery; no taxes.
    Grocery sells milk to customer; a tax is added.

    There is a huge difference between a VAT and a sales tax. In truth, an income tax has more in common with a VAT than a sales tax, as a income tax (just like a VAT) is embedded in the product price at every stage of production.

    Dairy farmer sells milk to processor; an income tax is added into the price.
    Processor sells milk to wholesaler; an income tax is added into the price.
    Wholesaler sells milk to grocery; an income tax is added into the price.
    Grocery sells milk to customer; an income tax is added into the price.

  • Scope

    He was really hard hitting against Romney, and pointing out over and over that Romney is not a conservative. He said that if Romney wins the nom. Obama will take him to the cleaners. With the revelations that Romney’s Romneycare advisors were in at least a dozen meetings when Obamacare was being crafted is an ad that writes itself. He also pointed out that Romney, with his Bain Capital is Wall Street that the liberals keep hitting while secretly propping them up.

    Rush said that Romney is Wall St., while Perry is Main St. He slipped in the comment that Perry is the only real conservative in the race. You can read that on the transcript posted at RCP. He did the same with saying that Fred Thompson was the only conservative on the stage in one of the 08 debates. Rush knew that Fred didn’t have the will, the staying power, or the money that Perry has. Hopefully Rush will get more vocal in support of Perry without actually endorsing him.

    Rush is doing everyone a great service in fighting the Republican establishment and their attempts to shove Romney down our throats.

  • http://nerds4cain.com Brookhaven

    This was a debate on the economy Had Perry been ready with his jobs & energy plans a lot of the after debate talk would have focused on Perry’s plan. As a Texas gov, he does have some gravitas in the energy area.

    He may not even have time to discuss it in the next debate.

    A huge miss on his part.

  • avagreen

    in direct contrast to Cain and Romney.

    Perry even tried to give a rebuttal to one of Romney’s sneering remarks and was not allowed by the mod who allowed Romney to continue on with his point, and then quickly went to the next question. Whenever Cain or Romney’s names were mentioned, they were allowed rebuttal after rebuttal. To the point, it seems to be two monologues the whole debate.

    So, to any inference that somehow Perry wasn’t performing to some standard, lay it at the feet of the mods that…
    1.Put him on the other side, and ignored him even though he’s one of the top three contenders,
    2. but, allowed Paul (who isn’t) to speak more,
    3. Refused to let him (and Santorum, Bachmann ) speak when he tried to (even Santorum mentioned that Santorum wasn’t being allowed to speak).

    If anyone has fallen for this ploy and can’t see what happened, speaks more of a bias than any fans of Perry.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …but what you typed isn’t surprising.

    http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2011/10/11/state_of_the_race_establishment_and_the_regime_rally_around_mitt_romney

    It’s amazing that Romney is so transparent in soft-soaping both Cain and Bachmann.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    and, coupled with other postings, suggests the need to ensure that Romney isn’t permitted to steamroller the TEA Party Movement.

  • Jim Tomasik

    A VAT is a tax on steps through the process of production and adds greatly to the compliance burden on businesses.

    A point of sale consumption tax (such as the FairTax and Cain’s 999 plan) is listed on the receipt paid for a new product. It is transparent where the cost of a VAT is hidden from the consumer as part of the sale price of the product.

  • wonkish1

    The guy was out looking for capital injections, roll its debt into longer duration, and systematically reduce the mortgage portfolio from the day he arrived.

    But as he put it, it was like taking the helm of a very expensive yacht in the middle of the ocean that has a hole in it. Your trying to bail the water out, but water seems to be rushing in faster than you can get rid of it.

    You want to pick people for being a$$holes and retards pick Dick Fuld(Lehman) and Jimmy Cayne(Bear).

    Thane is a very smart man and he didn’t deserve the attacks on him after the crisis.

    And the truth is that there wasn’t some group of people that saw this coming and didn’t care to avoid it. That “inside job” theory is an outright lie. One that is peddled by people that after the fact think it was so “obvious” when they never saw it coming themselves. Warren Buffett right after the crash summed it up quite well. “Everybody including myself(Warren), had come to believe that real estate can’t have a serious crash because the population keeps on growing and you can’t really create any more land.” This saying was so common pre-bubble within investor communities it even made it onto an episode of the Sopranos.

    On Wall Street it wasn’t sinisterism it was incompetence and a set of false beliefs. Even though we would much rather(myself included) have someone to lynch for wanting to take down the system. In reality there is no person.

  • Scope

    to treat Perry like he was a third tier candidate, or the red headed step child?

  • uncmike

    to monitor these current events so that we, at least, can help spread the word. I must admit how much my views have changed over the past few weeks. I once thought well of most of the candidates except Ron Paul who is too extreme for me. But then Bachmann disappointed me and now Cain has too. Playing the race card against Perry was a bridge too far in my view. Also, witnessing how Romney’s handlers have become so vicious in their attacks on Perry has turned me off of him as well. I’ve also learned more about the big business ties Romney and Cain that you mention, and they bother me. Events yesterday have greatly lowered my regard for Chris Christie because he now looks more like an establishment guy than a conservative. Come November 2012, all of those who long to roll back the mess created by Obama and the Democrats may have to do a real gut check.

  • 2warabnvet

    most slick-tongued snake-oil salesman may not be in our best interests. Consider the principles of the individual.

  • http://www.va5thdistrict.blogspot.com va5thdistrict

    better answers when it comes to his 9-9-9 plan but so far he is the only one that is willing to make radical changes in a severally broken system. Cain stated it best last night:”The politicians want to pass what they think they can pass rather than what we need which is a bold solution.”

    If we send another politician like Romney or Perry to DC the only thing that will happen is that we will slow this countries slide into oblivion. Over the last two decades we have seen what compromise has done for our country. Maybe someone like Cain won’t succeed but I would rather try something bold as opposed to slowly rotting which is what this country is being allowed to do.

  • avagreen

    The economy in Texas, with it’s 2nd lowest debt per capita, booming economy, stable housing markets, low taxes (including no personal income tax), business-friendly environment, tort reform to decrease frivolous lawsuits, etc. doesn’t back up your statement.

  • Scope

    of Ron Paul supporters in Va 5th district. This sounds like one of them. Unfortunately these are my neighbors.

  • cbartlett

    first and foremost. He wants to reduce the power of the federal government and all of its rogue agencies. I’m ready to vote for anybody that will not only proclaim that, but back it up with action like he has done in Texas. And BTW – the in-state tuition thing for illegals IS much more complicated than non-Texans realize. It is ONLY access to in-state tuition RATES, we’re not actually paying for them to go to college like stupid California does! These kids are in this country because their parents drug them here in order to get on state welfare. The alternative to giving these the kids a CHANCE at an opportunity like this is to perpetuate yet another generation of 16-yr-olds dropping out of school to have an anchor baby so they can stay and continue to suck on the system like their parents. We Texans are getting tired of paying healthcare and education for all of these people and the feds sure aren’t sending them back to Mexico like they should be. Perry doesn’t say it often enough – 181 out of 185 legislators supported this idea in Texas. He says it was right for Texas and never said that the rest of the country should do this unless they want to. Power back to the states is the RIGHT answer

  • certainlytruth

    All you need to know to stop Mitt Romney is in this book: ?Can Mitt Romney Serve Two Masters??. It?s a must read if we are going to stop this flaming liberal dressed in Republican clothing. He has such deep pockets and has spent all of his time for the last 6 years raising money and greasing the palms in turn for their financial and grass roots and media support. Please spread this book far and wide in order to stir the American people to the truth on Romney.

    http://www.amazon.com/Can-Mitt-Romney-Serve-Masters/dp/1449711995

  • cbartlett

    Obama and his machine will eat Romney or Cain alive. Perry is experienced with opposing slimeballs – he is patient with the process. I’m just worried that this primary will be decided by too few states who don’t necessarily reflect the sentiment of the entire country. It was extremely disappointing that by the time Texas went to primary last time, we only had McCain to choose from. Kind of feels like we don’t really have a say in this at all. Did our founding fathers really see the process working this way or have we screwed it up somehow?

  • cbartlett

    Why haven’t these two things come out before? Like in a debate? How can they slam Perry with these and look the other way with Bachmann? There is something wrong with this system!

  • cbartlett

    And Perry needs to articulate that in a VERY strong way. The best “quick” sound bite is that the federal government should never be in the business of picking winners and losers. Right now, tax code and many, many other federal regulations DO pick winners and losers. Another reason we also need to concentrate on getting true conservatives (no RINOS either) in both houses of Congress. White House is not enough.

  • mtbrimstone

    principle, as you said, that “when those businesses fail their assets are sold off to other businesses who then put them to work again is some capacity,” since he worked for Bain Capital and they helped create Sports Authority (from a merger of Oshman’s, Sportmart, etc) and Bright Horizons Family Solutions (from a merger between Bright Horizons and Corporate Family Solutions), just to name a few. A candidate with so much “private sector experience” should be able to grasp market fundamentals.

    “They understand that in the business I was in, we didn?t take things apart and cut them off and sell them off. We, instead, helped start businesses, and they know some of the names. We started Staples. We started the Sports Authority. We started Bright Horizons children?s centers. Heck, we even started a steel mill in a farm field in Indiana, and that steel mill operates today and employs a lot of people. So, we began businesses. Sometimes we acquired businesses and tried to turn them around, typically effectively…” Mitt Romney (Bloomberg Debate, 10/11/11)

  • wonkish1

    I mean I’m rooting for Perry to do well in the debates just like most folks, but

    The ONLY one??? I mean that is just awful Bull$hit right there. No offense.

  • poquinn

    and so did all the other candidates. All conservatives agree that all those things must happen.

    Herman Cain is still the only one offering a paln to accomplish just a part of those issues.

    I don’t believe Romney will even attempt to push for repeal of ObamaCare which is why the MSM is promoting him as the front-runner. Chris Christie’s support of Romney should also scare true conservative republicans from backing Romney. Really, it should send them running away screaming.

    And, given Perry’s stance on illegal immigrants, I doubt he would push for its real, too.

    Bachmann and Cain are the only ones who I believe would have the guts to do it. And of the two, I believe Cain is the only one that could win the nomination and go on to defeat Obama.

  • poquinn

    “paln” should be plan and “real” should be repeal. My apologies.

    Guess I’m getting too worked up over this stuff to read what I type before clicking post.

  • poquinn

    He’s promoting scrapping the current tax code and replacing it with his 999 plan. That’s a far cry from “new taxes”.

    A consumption tax is exactly what should be installed in place of the current progressive tax code. Rich people who consume more, pay more. Poor people consume less and pay less, letting them keep more of their hard earned cash.

    Given his upbringing and his many successes in the business world, he (aside from Marco Rubio) is the perfect candidate to re-unite this country.

    No one else on that stage last night could better represent that the American Dream still exists than Cain.

  • soljerblue

    and with just about the same amount of nourishment.

  • carolynr

    Maybe you need to see it with a new set of eyes. Perry did not do bad at all…but Romney was caught in a few…well misspeaks and Cain…he wasn’t able to defend his 9/9/9 plan very well. Congress would have that up to 20/20/20….and we’d be done.

  • wonkish1

    Objectively as I could Romney, Newt, and Bachmann(surprisingly) went higher than I originally marked them at. Cain stayed the same. And Perry and Huntsman went down from my original viewing. It doesn’t mean that Perry didn’t do way better than the last one because he did. But subsequent viewing had my cringing a little more at some of Perry’s missteps than the first time around.

    Just saying. Your theory that subsequent viewership will help your candidate might not be true. It wasn’t in my case.

  • avgjo

    Santorum did do quite well.

    Cain stumbled on the question re: his economic advisors. He was clearly shaken when pressed on the question: ‘Cleveland, Texas’.

    His Greenspan comment was awkard.

    And he got beat up pretty bad on 999. He apparently hasn’t thought through the implications of it.

    And that’s without anyone yet beating him up on the lies he’s been caught in: his Muslim comments, flip=flopping on Awlaki, what he said about Perry, walking back comments he made about the fed and again last night to Luap Nor (whose fan I am not).

    Praying for ya’ll in Texas.

    Thanks.

  • kenchely

    Plainly the best debater up there has been Newt Gingrich all the way through. That probably won’t get him nominated; it didn’t get Alan Keyes the nomination a couple of cycles back when Keyes dominated some early debates. But it gives us a standard to which the other debaters can look.

    Other than Gingrich, I think Romney has done best. He looks and sounds presidential. If he goes after Obama as hard with the president sitting there as he does when the president is absent, Obama could have a very bad time in debates with Romney.

    Cain for the most part does very well. Occasionally his lack of political experience shows. On the other hand, that cuts both ways; those lacunae in his experience are things that may actually endear him to voters as “not just another politician but a man like us.” He has the common touch to a greater extent than any other.

    Paul has some great moments and some moments when he looks and sounds like a kook.

    Santorum says what every social conservative, including me, thinks. He does fine. But he’s not going to be the nominee; they’re not going to pick a guy who lost his home state by a million votes.

  • tea4me

    Should we be surprised?

  • wonkish1

    Sorry got to disagree with you there.

  • rightwingmom52

    He wasn’t thought of as crazy til a little later.

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

    From the beginning, the ONLY potential candidate we’ve seen with an actual record of conservative accomplishment is Mitch Daniels. I would also prefer Tim Pawlenty’s record to any of the above.

    Other than that, zip. Oh, and Michelle Bachmann – who I liked for a while – turned out to be a fruit loop.

    My point is simply, we’ve got who we’ve got.

  • SoFiMil

    albeit Perry may fumble around for words. Cain vs. Obama or Romney vs. Obama will not be about the issues, but will be all about word-smithing. Independents who chose to will have to pull out a microscope and sift through claims and counter-claims of fact checking. It will be a he said/he said election.

    With Perry as the nominee, Obama will still wordsmith, and pundits will be awed at his maticulous attention to detail and splitting of fine hairs, and his ability to distinguish between the word is and *is.* But the race will come down to spin on whose telling the truth. Perry’s not-so-stellar performances will actually make the issues the prominent difference.

    Sure, there will be plenty of talk about how Obama is right because some esoteric analysis dealing with trillions of dollars which most people cannot even begin to put into context or comprehend. What’s left is pure ideology which will not be overshadowed by glib talk by Romney. Cain, or Obama.

    Perry has much to improve on, of course, but his performance last night was adequate. I’d much rather have a ideology vs style election than a style vs. style election.

  • SoFiMil

    2nd paragraph – race will not come down to…

  • snowshooze

    nt

  • snowshooze

    Thanks.

  • cristanti

    But he did. When he first came out he went after Romney with a vengeance, he attacked. All the questions weed thrown at him. He was everyones target. They bashed him for being so aggressive now thereof all saying hd seemed out of it. I’m sick of these so called GOP establishment they have not seem the real Perry, the tough hands on Gov that has been our Gov for over 10 years, I don’t recognize the man I see in these debates. He’s a hell of alog more conservative then Romney. But the elite GOP don’t want Perry. It’s all Romney. Sad

  • http://nerds4cain.com Brookhaven

    working on ballistic missile guidance systems for the Navy.

    He then went to work for Coca-Cola as a systems analyst (designed software systems).

    He then went to work for for Pillsbury and rose to VP of corporate data systems (ran the computer and data processing for the entire company).

    I’m not sure I’d call any of those a sales job, would you?

    Herman Cain did NOT start off as a salesman. He started off doing.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …I have been told by a New Jersey resident to moved over the Schuylkill that CC had severe problems before he became US-Att’y. I’m also told that I’m not to be told anything else about this information for political reasons. Perhaps someone may be able to research these data.

    I do know that CC suspended all fracking for a year, due to environmental concerns; whether his Muslim-judge appointment was problematic also requires study. And his primary-opponent [Steve Lonigan] has purchased radio-time in Philly to claim that CC has continued profligate spending [exclusive of efforts to reign-in the unions].

    I do not convey inuendo; I am providing an internet-dump, assuming anyone may wish to confirm that CC isn’t a true-conservative. The bottom-line is that this endorsement is being played-up to create a “cascade” narrative; Rick is in it for the long-haul, so I don’t consider it to carry the potency that endorsements from others would convey [The Donald, Rush, Sarah, Giuliani, DeMint].

    A superb discussion of these issues is elsewhere; don’t be dissuaded from reading the commentary by the article’s title, for there was near-consensus of the need to condemn Byron:

    http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/article/after-another-bad-debate-rick-perry-finished#disqus_thread

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …when you start your defense with “The guy was out looking for capital injections, roll its debt into longer duration, and systematically reduce the mortgage portfolio from the day he arrived.” Was this information of sufficient import to have been conveyed to his company’s investors?

  • eyesopen007

    more conservative than those guys.

    However, he is LESS conservative than the other candidates this time, and should not be the nominee any more than McCain should have been in 2008.

  • http://www.whyromney.com Ryan Larsen

    I’ve always liked Keyes. I remember those debates in ’96, he kept ‘em lively. btw, I now have an official diary.

  • OregonConservative

    So Mark Levin says that “70+ percent of the Republican base wants anyone but Romney” because Romney’s national poll numbers are below 30 percent. By that same logic, does that mean that 80+ percent of the Republican base wants anyone but Perry since he’s now below 20 percent in national polls?