« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

I Voted for Rick Perry

By: Erick Erickson (Diary)  |  March 6th, 2012 at 01:57 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

I wasn’t going to vote at all. But then all sorts of people, including Donna Brazile and Sean Hannity, started in on me about my “civic obligation.” Frankly, I wish less people voted. But nonetheless, I voted. I was the only person in my precinct in the middle of a city that usually sees steady turn out.

No one in Georgia seems to want to vote except the die hard supporters of the various candidates.

I did not want to vote for Romney. But I did not want to vote for Santorum or Gingrich or Paul. Choosing between them has been like choosing the tallest midget. I have been left uninspired for various reasons by each.

So I went with Rick Perry. Consider it a protest vote. But at least, unlike many, I went with who I liked as opposed to voting for someone to be against someone else or some other strategic pattern of voting.

What a mess this primary season is. At least soon we’ll be able to focus on Barack Obama instead of the hand we’ve dealt ourselves this primary season.

Tags:
Get Alerts

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • Money

    I voted for Fred Thompson in 2008 under the same circumstances. When will the Republicans fix the primary system so that our best candidates aren’t weeded out by the time the majority of conservatives have a chance to vote? And what can we do to be a part of the solution?

  • Tavern Keeper

    FWIW. I know that’s not politically-correct to say and the “duty” to participate in government is something that has typically been a conservative cornerstone.

    Something else that is a conservative cornerstone is original intent. The Framers clearly didn’t see voting as an inalienable right. Its arguable if not probable that they believe a large uninformed but active electorate could do more damage than a small but well-versed one.

    Civic duty is not stepping to the ballot box and impregnating a chad. Casting the vote is simply the a RESULT that is within the circular notion of civic duty. The majority of the circumference being occupied by contextual understanding, and proactive self-education.

    Cheers to EE for outright stating he wished less people voted. A big uninformed voting populace does not a republic make, but it does smack of mob rule.

  • joereagan

    The media will be looking for other narratives, but if you look at the polls, Newt Gingrich may actually come out of Super Tuesday with the most delegates of any candidate. He’s going to win Georgia, the day’s biggest electoral prize, in a blowout. The polls in Ohio and Tennessee are showing a three way tie. Remember that all of these are proportional primaries.

    The other main thing I’m interested in seeing is how well Ron Paul does in VA. He doesn’t have a lot of support in the state, but turnout is going to be monumentally low because of the lack of options. If his supporters are fired up enough, there could be a big surprise there. Maybe not a win, but much closer than the polls suggest.

  • bzip

    You made us Perry supporters Proud today, Erick. I always have said, vote principle and Perry is by far the best most principled conservative who has fought long and hard against big gov’t and for conservatism.

    Thank you Erick for seeing the light.

  • jaykali

    Congratulations.

  • earlgrey

    where they elect the leaders of the local party. That is the rule in my county.

  • dpmaine

    It may not be a popular solution, but I have thought about this one a lot. I think it’s a three tier solution:

    a. Break the NH & Iowa strangehold, End of story. All of the supposed pro’s of these states are wrong.

    b. End the caucus system. Caucus are no way to run an election. You win elections by voting. It makes no sense to overreward the super organized, but fringy candidates, just because they can come up with a way to game the caucus system. See Rep. Paul.

    c. We need to reward states that actually vote for our candidates in the general election. Why is California important to the process? Why is Vermont equal to South Dakota or Wyoming?

    One way to reward states is to move to a regional primary system. If we had, say, 6 or 7 primary zones, each zone could receive attention. By having the zones be geographic, candidates could avoid the silliness of flying all over the place – and thereby reducing the overhead needed to run a competitive campaign. Within each primary zone, delegates should be based on a mulch-election cycle average, with states that are more reliably Republican gaining more delegates (maybe more Super-delegates?), and states who are less reliably Republican having fewer delegates [relatively speaking]. The formula would have to be worked out, but something measures the difference between the national trend and the state’s actual vote. States that are R+10 should be more valuable then states that are R-10.

    Actually, we could just randomly pick from a list of GOP activists. Anything is better than the system we have now!

  • mbauer

    Id just like to say how flat out angry I am that the only people on my ballot are Ron Paul and Mitt Romney.

    Call the other campaigns incompetent or whatever, it just really makes me frustrated more with my state GOP.

    For a national election, the national leaders of the party should dictate who is on a ballot, and it be the same in all 50 states. Or at least, that’s how I feel at this angry moment.
    I’m told writing in isn’t even an option.

  • WA_Cowboy

    but I would have also been turned away from the Caucus in my neck of the woods here in WA.

    http://www.redstate.com/rcstrang/2012/03/03/the-washington-state-caucus-a-first-timers-experience/#comment-23

    http://www.tri-cityherald.com/2012/03/04/1850462/1500-kept-out-of-benton-co-gop.html

    and I’m coming to the conclusion that this is why I didn’t vote in the 2008 primary. There was no candidate who I felt represented my values. Sadly, I feel the same way this year.

    I’m all about forgiveness, but I have a hard time voting for a guy who cheated on his wife — twice. It’s hard to trust someone like that. Sorry Newt, you’re good in many ways, but your flaws are worse

    I like family values. If families did a better job of being families many things in our country would be better off. But I can’t support someone who has lined up with Big Labor more than once in his career. Sorry mr Santorum.

    I like shrinking the government and the constitution. I’m even for not sticking our military nose into other people’s business. But I’m not an isolationist and isolationism doesn’t stop wars from happening. sorry Ron Paul.

    Finally, I like the thought of being rich and making tons of money. But I’m also for principle, and Mitt Romney has none of it. Sorry, Mitts.

    I’d rather “throw away” my primary vote on a man who I can support in almost every issue than half heartedly pick a guy who I don’t really know will be the right choice.

  • Ender

    to come with the most delegates.This shows all the realistically possible scenarios based on the polls, and nowhere is he near the most.

    http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/06/a-guide-to-super-tuesday-scenarios/

    Can he do well? Of course. Can anyone beat Romney on delegates tonight? Very unlikely.

  • mbauer

    Newt may be the super tuesday sleeper candidate, but if you look at the delegates state by state, even if he has a great performance, he won’t get the majority of the delegates.

    He will almost certainly get zero in Vermont, Idaho, Massachusetts, and Virginia. Between them that is about 120 delegates that will mainly go to Romney.

    Best case scenario for Newt is that he beats the polls and gets a true majority in Georgia (about 70 delegates then), ekes out a win in the TN 3 way race in TN (20ish delegates), and makes Oklahoma competitive, perhaps almost winning (we’ll say 15 delegates). We can also generously say he takes about 15 delegates in Alaska, North Dakota and Ohio.

    I don’t see him getting more than 120 delegates for the entire night on a great night. Mitt’s downside scenario is likely near 140 or so. But hell if you support Newt I’d call that a win.

    The rest of the March calendar is VERY favorable to him. I do think he could get a majority for the month of March (or at least a plurality). I think it depends on him winning TN, and getting 2nd in OK, in order to prove his campaign is viable.

  • jon11

    given that americans self identify as

    40% conservative
    40% moderate
    20% liberal

    we’d win a lot more general elections if there weren’t so much apathy out there. Low turnout affairs aren’t usually indicative of where the broader electorate is. Thats why santorum won the three satiates he did in february and why ron paul always does well in caucus states.

    anyway, we’ve all got to vote our consciences. Perry didn’t seem ready for prime time, to put it kindly. He had plenty of money so he wasn’t outspent by anyone. His problem was the debates.

    A lot of candidates from conservative states struggle on the big stage because they don’t get challenged at home. A bit like Oregon beating everybody in the pac 12 only to get pounded when they face a worthy adversary like LSU or Auburn. That was perry’s problem. He won a primary against kay bailey hutchenson by talking up secession.

    that might play in texas…and possibly in south carolina…but in America you’re going to have to be able to do a little better than that.

  • Ender

    in Ohio showing a 3 way tie. In fact they show Newt in far far 3rd place. What are you talking about?

  • WillWong

    and here you are messing up his plans!!!! :(

  • westcoastpatriette

    good laugh

  • gracie

    OK, I don’t have to get it; it’s your vote so stay away haters.

    Here is the deal: Rick Perry remains my number 1 favorite choice for a Commander in Chief. But since he is a protest vote…..

    You just interviewed Newt; I heard itin it’s entirety on your radio show. He had dozens of ideas of how to fix this country and just the one for Inaguration Day send a thrill up my leg! He plans to fire the Czars and re-institute drilling…before lunch! (probably the Pipeline)

    He is the one person I believe would dismantle Obamacare in it’s entirety and who could figure out how to do it! His tax plan, de-regulation, plan to analyse and cut the Federal Gov are all excellent and well thought out. I believe he would appoint good people for his administration as well as judges and no I do not feel he would institute cap and trade.

    No he is not perfect. But in the article by Dan McLaughlin last week it was explained just how hard it would be to get to a brokered convention and then after that how difficult it would not to end up with Romney anyway…so much for my dream ticket Jindal/Ryan or West! Of the four it would seem that Newt would take quick and decisive action to bring this country back. The more votes he gets the better chance we have to get rid of Romney.

    If you encourage people to vote for Perry (God love him) how are we going to get rid of Romney??
    JMO

  • Change Jar Conservative

    1) Rotate the first states that vote. There are lots of plans out there.

    2) Have the number of delegates for any states that allow non-Republicans to vote.

    3) Only allow RNC sponsored debates that have moderators that are conservatives/Republicans.

    PS I voted for Romney under the premise of “let’s end this mess”.

  • rickey5825

    Voting for someone who is no longer running is STUPID!Good job wasting your vote moron!

  • unclefred

    Your problem is not that some states go first and others go last, it is that your preferred candidate dropped out before you could vote.

    A small number of regional primaries make money and large organizations more important early not less, and would work to prevent someone with little money from getting any start.

    It also would make the first regional primary much more important because an initial misstep would have far greater consequences.

    If you want to value states differently you may not get the results you think. You can argue the case that states that are not winnable by the GOP should be devalued, but so should safe GOP states, since you are going to win them anyway. The states that would be most heavily weighted would be the swing states since they are critical to the election. On balance have some primary voters count more is a BAD idea.

    One good idea would be to end “open” primaries, and require that someone be a registered Republican for at least a year before the primary. Let each party pick their nominee without “help” from independents or the other side.

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

    …because the issues are too grave to yield a “protest vote.”

  • Change Jar Conservative

    2) above should be Halve* the number of delegates for any states that allow non-Republicans to vote

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

    …because, perhaps, EE is spending too much time cavorting with [and being infested by] the CNN-crowd.

  • burke

    Many of the people being polled don’t even know they mean by those terms. Actually what ideology people identify as shifts pretty noticeably based on who’s in power/election year/what the people polled have for breakfast. One political theorist persuasively argued that a large percentage of people aren’t ideological at all. They go about their business, and vote occasionally, based on the zeitgeist, or what the norm is in their community. We might have more informed policy if only people who really had well-considered views voted — but there’s no fair way to determine who those people are, unfortunately.

    Not even bothering to go vote in my primary today. I would’ve voted for a inactive candidate, too, had I bothered: Huntsman.

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

    …perhaps this is a reaction to having prematurely pushed him away.

    Maybe it’s time for EE to tell us “the rest of the story” regarding what happened immediately prior to SC-primary.

  • rabun1016

    I loved Fred in 2008, but its a dangerous protest to do what Erickson did. Certainly helps Obama by insuring all the republicans are out of cash by election time.

  • joeyjojoshabadoo79

    nt

  • joeyjojoshabadoo79

    His cons are as glaring as his pros, and dont need an explanation. Same for the other candidates.

  • independentconservative

    He’s not going to get all the delegates in these states as they are proportional. He’s supposed to win GA! So what. he’ll get 50 or so of their 76 delegates. Big deal.

    It allows him to stay into AL and MS which he figures he’ll also do well. The modern day John Breckenridge is all he is.

    All the Keeber Elf is trying to do is stay in until Tampa so some of his platform can get picked up by Romney once he’s the nominee. That and maybe a speaking role at the convention is all he can Paul are doing. That’s their strategy.

  • rabun1016

    There has been no one running more negative ads in Georgia than Newt Gingrich. Not even close. Voted for him eight times but never again.

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

    …because I adored Perry, but would have voted for The Newt.
    I came to the Gathering to watch him announce, and I spent January 1-4 in Iowa, functioning as a surrogate; I ALMOST went to SC, but was dissuaded by The Newt.

    I was committed, but I abide by Perry’s judgment…and The Newt has not disappointed me.

    Note his performances on CNN/ABC/NBC/CBS/CSPAN on Sunday; he was focused and nimble.

    I’m hoping for Mitt to be Santorum, expediting emergence of the proper anti-Mitt.

    I care not that fewer people voted; I care about who will be inaugurated in 2013 and, thus, be empowered to fight Islamism and appoint SCOTUS justices.

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

    …as Mitt and Santorum fall.

  • vickmcc

    I wanted to vote for Rick Perry, I haven’t been excited about the election since he said he was “reevaluating” in Iowa.

    I almost didn’t go vote today, but my college-age daughter, after hearing a radio spot on Newt, said “I’d never vote for him. He’s the reason Republicans have a bad name.”

    I thought about that and agreed with her. Yes, Newt is the reason Republicans have a bad name–with the MS media, with Democrats–Because Newt Took the House of Reps away from Dems for the First Time in 40 Years!” That’s why they hate him and us.

    So I found motivation to go vote for Newt, and took my college-age son and daughter along to vote for him, too. At least he got 3 votes here in Oklahoma today–maby much more.

    And, Rick endorsed him—

  • texashistorian

    Has Romney 32, Santorum 32, Gingrich 24, not a 3 way tie, but factor in margin of error and Newt is close.

  • dpmaine

    >A small number of regional primaries make money and large
    > organizations more important early not less, and would work to
    > prevent someone with little money from getting any start.

    I hadn’t thought of it that way. I like to think that regions with a small number of states (less than 10, at least a few) would allow a candidate to bootstrap into contender status. It just might be that this isn’t an achievable goal?

    > It also would make the first regional primary much more important
    > because an initial misstep would have far greater consequences.
    I think this is another intractable problem, or close to it. Screwing up will always be screwing up. With the way the media deck is stacked, a candidate who falters early will never have a chance – (see Rick Perry). The media loves a narrative , and lacking one, they’ll find a way to make one.

    Maybe we need to re-evaluate the goal of the primary. To my mind, it’s not necessarily to find the most electable candidate, but to find the right candidate. Hopefully they overlap. But if you look at 2008 as a guide, early on Pres. Obama was seen as an also-ran, maybe a good VP choice. It was only through a really strong ground game and good donor network that he lasted long enough to take over front runner status, and get anointed by the media.

    I totally agree about open primaries. This is a 100% self-inflicted wound that we should close up immediately!

  • donmyrick

    I voted for Newt, though I would have preferred Perry, Bachman, or Cain. What sense is a protest vote in this circumstance? Will it chasten earlier voters in other states? Will the RNC take note and change something?

    No. Those of you who haven’t voted yet, pick what you think is the best of the remaining four and vote for him.

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

    Let’s hope your views are infectious [and thank your daughter]!

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

    …because I’d heard [within the past 24 hours] on FNC that Mitt is dominating there, as well, and that ~95% of his ads are negative.

  • dpmaine

    Do you think Gov. Perry would take a VP nod from Gov. Romney, as a nod to Speaker Gingrich at the convention?

    If Gov. Romney does win the nomination, there are certainly a lot worse picks for VP!

  • westcoastpatriette

    that Erick winds up voting for someone who he helped push out…??? Kinda hard to wrap my mind around that one.

  • joeyjojoshabadoo79

    Hell, staying home and not voting at all would have sent a stronger message.

  • gracie

    It would upset their agenda and teach them a lesson. Whoever says the establishment Pubs do not have control of this or do not exist is nuts.

    But that’s just me. Just think I can’t vote until May 29th!!

  • http://online.logcabin.org/about/ suzieQ

    I live in Utah, so it won’t matter by June 26, anyway. I was a Palin supporter back when there was a ton of speculation she would run. After that I was a Bachmann supporter, and I’ll probably still vote for here as a write-in in June.

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

    Newt’s ad [on energy] which has been promoted [and heavily expensed, despite its length]:

    http://blog.4president.org/2012/2012/03/newt-2012-releases-new-television-ad-250-plan.html

    This contrasts with the involvement of Santorum:

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/sns-la-pn-rick-santorum-tries-to-undercut-newt-gingrich-in-georgia-20120301,0,2060145.story

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

    …but it must be emphasized that The Newt has empowered Perry to push the Federalism component of his platform…to good effect.

    Remember, Rick and Anita prayed on this issue, and they merit respect; having spoken directly with Anita for ~15 minutes on 1/1/2012 in Des Moines, I can attest to her morality, focus, humanity and commitment.

    I respect their judgment, and so should all Perry-supporters. I have not blogged on the aforementioned blog-site because I don’t want to detract from this cadre of the Perry Posse, but it is mandatory to see the big picture…and to function accordingly!

  • Aaron Gardner

    Seriously, get a life.

  • dpmaine

    There are a lot of problems with him as a candidate, and his interview shows some of them, at least in my opinion.

    Firing the Czars is a purely symbolic action. For one, they are all administration officials. Mass resignation on inauguration day is all but assured. It’s not the least bit controversial, or bold, or anything different from the past. It’s simply how it works – President gets you your own department heads and your own special advisers [czars] when you take Office.

    So it’s a great symbol, but it’s just that – a symbol. Symbols are helpful, but the country is in big trouble.

    I love so many of his ideas, but they definitely appear to be just that – ideas. At some point – and soon – I think Speaker Gingrich needs to refocus on plans. He is at his absolute 100% best when he focuses on the very concrete things we can do to improve the mess we are in!

  • krish

    I am highly annoyed with Erick for what he did! He should have voted for Newt since Perry endorsed Newt.

    You have shown the way to many who will not vote for Mitt Romney! Election will be between MA Liberal Fraud who talks like a conservative vs. Socialist (at least more honest with his base!).

    Hope others do not follow Erick’s example – please vote Rick or Newt whoever is running 1st or 2nd in your state.

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

    …which is why I had promoted Toomey.

    If it were necessary to stop Mitt, I’d been promoting “Neutorum”…but Santorum’s recent performances [note FNC on Sunday @ 6:30, when he tried to defend his belief-related posture that sex should only be occurring to procreate] were stuttering.

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

    …and needs us to help him return to his roots!

    Seriously, I think he should come clean regarding the machinations that led to the Thursday-a.m. withdrawal; we would all benefit from awareness of the inside-baseball, and awareness thereof could help explain his announced-decision.

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

    …who endorsed Mitt and who is running against A.G. Cuccinelli for Governor; allegedly, he rigged the petition process [according to accounts on RS, per memory].

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

    …related to Huntsman [who has continued to deliver his progressive commentaries following withdrawal] and realism [which demands that one CHOOSE in a representative-democracy].

    We already know that no one is perfect; recall Churchill’s commentary on our form of government [worst, except for all others] and deign to bite the bullet.

  • redmymind

    I felt the same darn thing about EE. I knew EE was sympathetic to Perry as far as ideology and all, but during the final days of Perry’s campaign, I did sense that EE’s analysis painted a hopeless picture of Perry’s chances.

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

    ex-candidates…Redstate turned pink today…smile

  • vangoghssister

    The deal at Red State is you vote your conscience/values and for the candidate who best represents those in the Primary, then you vote for the candidate who becomes the nominee in the general. That is what EE did and thank goodness he sticks to his beliefs. He will be the first to tell you he will vote for the eventual nominee, even if he has to hold his nose while doing so.

    Thank you, EE, for showing your integrity in telling us who you voted for and why. It was not necessary and certainly none of our business.

  • Aaron Gardner

    Every vote not for the winner is a wasted vote, no?

  • mikelindell2

    EE, disappointed in you. You should have just voted for Reagan if you were looking for the dream candidate who is not running. Perry endorsed Newt, and for good reason. Only candidate in this race who has acted like a conservative when given a chance in public office. Not only did he act like a conservative, he accomplished huge conservative things. It’s not like his plans now have gotten any less conservative, if anything they’ve become more conservative. He’s the only candidate proposing a flat tax, only candidate proposing personal social security accounts, only person who wants to zero out capital gains tax, etc. The most articulate, most experienced, most conservative, most accomplished candidate who is proposing the best ideas deserved your vote today. Newt is a conservative hero.

  • Whacker77

    When the primary rolls around to Kentucky, I will write in Jeb Bush’s name. I won’t vote for these clowns in the primary. I will hold my nose in the Fall, but since I always vote straight party, at least I won’t have to actually vote specifically for Romney.

  • mikelindell2

    Newt is by far the best of these guys.

  • joeyjojoshabadoo79

    If you’re planning on voting for the eventual nominee in November, what is the point of a “protest vote” in the primary? Just pick somebody you hate the least. What are you afraid of?

  • johnCV

    The turn out (locally, but I suspect everywhere) is hovering around 5% of registered voters. VA does not allow write-ins, so it’s Paul, Romney or stay home. Given the damage that I think either could do, it was the lesser of two lessers.
    Yeah, I know – I’ll vote for whomever wins the republican primary in November, but I feel it’s like deciding between the bar or the fantail on the Titanic. Only Paul is honestly addressing the economic issues we face, but he would likely kill the country on every other front. The rest all have a few good points – and all are orders of magnitude better that the commie-in-chief – but if they can’t/won’t fix the problem, how will we be better off in the long run? That clinking sound you don’t hear is the can falling off the end of the road….

  • duramater

    nt

  • Ender

    You gotta be very creative to dismiss every other poll and think that margin of error in this case will be in Newt’s favor. Amazing.

  • Ender

    Come on.

  • duramater

    Perry was my only desired candidate but I had to vote for what was offered (even though Perry was still on my state’s ballot).
    MY votes is too valuable to waste and so is yours.

  • westcoastpatriette

    Erick advised Perry (in a diary here) to be a hero and step out of the race the day before Perry dropped out and now he feels the only person to vote for is Perry. Strange. Everybody is acting strange in this primary.

    We all have different ways of coping with this mess, I guess. For me, it took me a while to even say that the best one left is Gingrich (especially, since I was so strongly against him in the beginning) but at this stage, I truly believe he is the strongest one left and I cannot see the value in registering a protest vote for someone not even in the running. OTOH, I understand where Erick’s coming from because I have been very tempted to not vote at all since Perry dropped out.

    Not that you and me here in the west will even have a choice left by the time June rolls around!

  • texasref

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71657.html#ixzz1oNG1kdfn

  • Aaron Gardner

    It is Erick’s vote. He can do with it as he sees fit.

    You sound like a lefty idiot demanding that Erick vote only for someone you approve of.

  • texasref

    and then you complain about what a mess the primary season is…you’re the one prolonging it, and you know what, ironically that isn’t so terrible. At least this way Romney, if he wins the nomination, will have had to earn it instead of having it handed to him on a silver platter back in November–free of the mess you are complaining about

    Honestly, Erick, I would have respected a vote for Santorum more than this. That’s strong language by me, just so you know.

  • texasref

    :-/

  • texasref

    Erick’s misses are still rare enough that he is almost in Rush Limbaugh territory of percentage right, and no danger of this being pinkstate anytime soon.

  • texasref

    kinda missed an important word at the beginning…”HOWEVER,”

  • Jack_Savage

    Ummm…OK…

  • tngal

    That’s where I would have gone if I went the write in route. Instead, I voted for Newt as he could use a little push here in the Vol State. Hoping to keep him in via delegates until the convention – then its go for brokered!

  • stroker97

    Way to stand up and show that you really don’t have a backbone! And here I thought that RS was the only fair webpage that gave credible coverage of Newt! I guess that gig at CNN has influenced your prospective more than you’ve let on. Voting for someone who’s not even in the race and announcing that on your blog to try to influence others to do the same is despicable! You’ve shown that you don’t really care about the primary process and have helped the least conservative candidate (Romney) win!

  • Aaron Gardner

    Yawn.

  • Adrian

    so that Massachusetts wouldn’t go 100% Romney. I like Newt and I like think he still has a chance to win. I also like to think Santa Claus is real.

  • stroker97

    How long do I have to be a member to voice my constitutionally provided freedom of speech. Who the hell do you think you are anyway? I have as much authority to complain about a stupid decision as you do.

  • dpmaine

    How did the GOP fail so badly that the only two choices in Virgina – a state that we really need to win in most electoral scenarios and is purple/toss-up state, basically got skipped over?

    What a travesty. We should be spending zero dollars in Oklahoma, Alaska, Georgia, etc and all of it on Ohio and Virgina. And instead of being all negative, all of the time, we should be running pro-GOP messages.

  • tnguy

    ….but a lot of conservatives in the media – most notably Hannity and Limbaugh – won’t endorse anyone, won’t say who they voted for or anything else. Sad that the conservatives leave their stones at home, while centrist republicans (like the gang at NR), have no qualms whatsoever about jumping on the Romney bandwagon.

    Conservatives in the media don’t want to get the cold shoulder from the eventual winner if they pick the wrong guy. Limbaugh eventually endorsed Romney in 2008, only because he had long burned his bridge with McCain, and only made the endorsement after everyone else was out. Rush said himself (I believe it was late last year) that he didn’t endorse a candidate because that guy might lose….as if his credibility is more important than the future of the country. He also commented last year that Perry was the only candidate the left feared, since Palin sat out, yet sat idly by as the republican establishment, Romney, and Santorum ripped Perry. Limbaugh has many fine qualities, and so does Hannity, but no one should pretend either is a leader.

    When history records the lasting legacy of the 2012 election, it will – once again – be something we look back on and wonder what America (and conservative “leadership”) was thinking.

  • trickamsterdam

    That’s why even though Santorum got the same amount of delegates in MI it was still such a brutal loss for him (and for anyone who dislikes Romney). No headlines, no momentum.

    Newt winning by ten is basically the same as winning by 12. If he had to scratch out a victory yeah that could hurt him. But any very solid – landslide win is fine. So I don’t think EE’s vote will have the negative effect some seem to think…which I think is probably why he felt comfortable making the protest vote.

    What’s really key to Newt’s survival is that Romney loses OH. I’m not saying that to try to convince people to do anything. I doubt most of you are in OH and anyway I assume that on the “day of” everyone will basically wake up knowing what they’re going to do.

    I just don’t see any way to stop this guy long-term if Romney wins OH. The reason is the Establishment is looking for any reason to declare this over and lie to themselves that “everything’s going to be alright” (even though I think they know in their heart of hearts that Romney is a loser).

    So they’ll tell themselves this is proof he can win in the Rust Belt even though he’s not going to be able to out spend Obama five to one like he’s doing to Santorurm and like he did to Newt in FL.

    It is a little odd that EE called on Perry to drop out for Newt and then didn’t vote for Newt. But a lot of people if they’re honest have changed along the way.

    Before FL I was quite happy w/ Romney as my back up and now I hate him more than the Dallas Cowboys and never in a million years did I ever think I’d talk up Rick Santorum having grown up in Philly considering him beyond a joke.

    War does funny things to men. ;)

  • avagreen

    Today is ?Super Tuesday,? and Texans SHOULD be voting. However, due to the redistricting challenges, Texas voters will be voting almost three months later on May 29 and will likely have little to say about our presidential nominee. Texas holds the second highest cache of delegates to the Republican National Convention with 155 (behind California?s 172). Instead of 419 delegates representing 10 states, there should be 11 states with 574 delegates up for grabs, making Tuesday, March 6 even more ?Super.?

    At the heart of this snafu are the much-debated redistricting maps which were passed by Texas? 82nd Legislature, which had a Republican super majority. Regardless of how they drew the new maps, they were destined to be challenged by the Democratic minority. You see, a large part of the strategy here is to use the antiquated Voting Rights Act to silence the Republican majority from having an impact in the Presidential nominee, as well as to gain the maximum number of Democratic seats in Congress and the Texas Legislature. Case in point is Texas State Senator Wendy Davis of Tarrant Co., one of the plaintiffs from the recent litigation regarding fair representation of minorities. Davis claims in an interview with James Henson, Director of the Texas Politics Project at UT-Austin that her district was ?the only Senate district that was drawn in a way that did not protect the incumbent.? Interesting thing is, Wendy Davis is not a minority herself….

    http://www.texasgopvote.com/2012-republican-primary/super-tuesday-lowercase-s-003931

  • Common_Cents

    So there is disagreement with Perry that Gingrich is the best remaining candidate? Did Perry have poor judgement in endorsing Gingrich?

    I’d like to hear the rationale on that.

    What are the alternatives that really have a chance? Another outside new candidate? That is a long shot. I’d like to hear Erick’s views on that.

    Gingrich and Santorum need to have a talk tomorrow, agree to work together somehow or agree to take each other out so there is only one going head to head w/ Romney to make it a realistic race.

    Going forward, Gingrich would have the advantage against Romney.

    overall, gingrich has a tougher time in primary but Santorum and Romney would have a tougher time in the general.

  • Eyeofnewt

    I come home after a long day in the salt mines just to log-in and see this. So apparently Erick helps Romney by voting for someone who isn’t even in the run. Makes no sense to me.

  • Aaron Gardner

    Your time here is going to be fun.

  • gracie

    Sorry I have forgotten the name and it did not come up on Google. It is very specific. He has a thirty min video on his energy plans.

    OK I will give it to you re: the Czars. BUT there are a number of actions he plans to do before the Inauguration luncheon, perhaps one having to do with Ocare. I do not remember anyone desiring to get to work that fast.

    I get what you are saying about ideas needing to be formulated into specific plans. But I feel like I am hearing these plans in the interviews of late and the debates. He plans to hit the ground running and his plans are more specific than the others! It so happens that his plans are my priorities!

  • http://www.WILLisms.com WILLisms

    For the Perry fans, he’s in a fight right now with Obama. Perry and the GOP legislature said no more funding abortion facilities. Period. Obama said “well, then we will yank your women’s health care funding” (even though Texas is a big, growing donor state, getting back only $.94 per dollar sent to Washington).

    Anyway, @TexGov on twitter and http://www.governor.state.tx.us/initiatives/womens_health have some info.

  • gracie

    Not sure Newt would answer the phone since Erick is from his home state but did not vote for him.

    Just sayin…

  • stroker97

    what you meant by “moral authority”? Are you the “All Powerful” gatekeeper at RS and therefore, can pass judgement on who can and can’t come on a free and open website and make comments? If you have a point to make about my comment then make it.

  • trickamsterdam

    I think I’ve figured out why the Democrats seem to respect their base more (lately) than the Republicans.

    Most of their big donors (e.g. Hollywood) are genuine liberals and want people like Obama or Hilary.

    Our big donors seem to be mostly sightly to the right of Michael Bloomberg.

    That creates a disconnect w/ the Base and this time I think the disconnect really costs us (in November).

  • vangoghssister

    I see neighbors I don’t see very often, have a little visit, it’s fun! I am glad it’s over though. Polling place was nearly full, but moved quickly. I think that’s the shortest ballot I’ve ever marked! I wonder what the Democrats are voting on in Oklahoma today? I haven’t looked it up.

    Now on to the bigger fight!

  • stroker97

    that EE called out Perry to drop out for Newt and then doesn’t vote for Newt. Nothing has changed between now and then, in terms of the choice of candidates, so what caused EE to change his perspective. Hmmm, something seems to be missing here!

  • texashistorian

    in transposing the numbers. And I am not trying to argue with you about Newt here- just pointing out that at least one poll (and the only one I have seen) has Newt closing in.

  • renl57

    In some states like NH, open primaries are mandated by state law.

    The GOP could somehow penalize the delegation that results from the NH primary. But they can’t legally close the NH primary.

  • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

    lineholder’s comments are here.

    See #6 at Newt’s site here.

    Newt’s website is far better than those of the other candidates. He lays out exactly what he would do starting on Day One.

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

    IF my Neutorum-concept takes hold, you would be afforded the opportunity to support the individual who would be POTUS/Veep nominee; peruse my Diary for rationale.

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

    Maybe waste is too broad, since it tells us a little about EE’s priorities…smile

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

    …which would serve to marginalize Mitt, exposing his negativity by promoting positivity [behavioral, not just rhetorical].

  • texasref

    One of the best lines Ive ever read on redstate is:

    “Sad that the conservatives leave their stones at home, while centrist republicans (like the gang at NR), have no qualms whatsoever about jumping on the Romney bandwagon.”

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

    …where I rebutted the suggestion that The Newt had gone-negative.

  • texasref

    so slow your roll, compadre.

  • runner12

    today as well. I had to weigh whether I was going to vote for who I think would be the best President we have seen in a long time (Perry) who is no longer in the race or somewhat holding my nose and voting for someone else with a slim shot at enacting the SMOD (brokered convention).

    I opted for SMOD and voted for Newt. Was it the right decision? I am not completely sure. But desperate times call for desperate measures. I want to take away as many delegates from Mittens as possible to at least have the chance at a crap shoot at a brokered convention.

    Hopefully by the end of today someone can begin paging Gov. Jindal.

  • lapert

    This is a perfect example of an idea he probably picked up at a vendor-sponsored weekend seminar that he barely understands and running it off the cliff.(or maybe in this case the whispering in his ear of a big donor who would stand to benefit heavily from it, I believe Mike George is a supporter of his).

    Lean Six Sigma is one process improvement framework (certainly not the best in all given circumstances) that is a great buzzword these days and makes consultants very rich. It is and has been used across government agencies, like most process improvement engagements in government you tend to see short term efficiency improvement at a smaller scale than hoped for and little long term improvement – but man, would I make a fortune off of a mandate for its application in federal agencies with little required sales effort. And it is an impressive sounding buzzword for those who don’t have experience with it so it can make you sound smart as long as you aren’t called on the details.

    Anything short of specific plans on which aspects of the government’s mission you will reduce/eliminate isn’t really addressing the spending issue.

  • texasref

    you’re a Romney supporter

    Cuz only a Romney supporter would find that even plausible as any sort of “nod” to Gingrich

    The only “nod” to Gingrich that Romney could give would be to be on the ticket together.

    If Perry is going to be anybody’s veep, it will be Newt’s.

  • Common_Cents

    They are pretty excited for March and beyond.

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

    If you think everyone agrees with you that this race is Romney vs Not Romney, think again.

    Some of us refuse to swallow whatever pathetic candidate you put up just because it’s not Mitt Romney.

  • WillWong

    in the last few days, you even sat down and had a great conversation with Newt which you put on RS Front Page. While you did not come out with a full endorsement of Newt, your actions spoke volume for his candidacy which is why your vote for Perry came out and hit us like a bolt of lightning! Totally unexpected! A curved ball! And doesn’t make any strategic sense at all!

  • texasref

    And they are going to have to announce by this Friday.

    WE MUST STOP THE MITTMENTUM.

    I’m a gay man who actually prefers SANTORUM over Romney so that should tell you just how awful it would be for Romney to be “the guy” to debate Obama this fall.

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

    [natalie wood's star-d?but flick]

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

    …because Mitt winning in Ohio enhances The Newt as the anti-Romney, and because I renew my request for a backgrounder from EE regarding his private machinations.

  • texasref

    !!!

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

    …and he can serve as a formidable anti-Mitt.

  • texasref

    Do we unite behind Santorum?

  • texasref

    Just want to make sure I understand you correctly. Are you sure she didn’t pull it for Romney or Santorum? ;-)

  • nancysabet

    You made us Perry supporters Proud today. That was an honorable thing to do. You voted for the best and most qualified.

  • texasref

    wouldn’t Romney enter Tampa with a mere plurality of delegates and have to compromise with Rick and Newt to get a majority?

    Not to mention that Newt or Rick could pull some of those delegates potentially to secure a majority. At any point starting tomorrow all the way up to the convention, Newt and Rick could shake hands and announce they are the top and bottom of the ticket, in either order. They could even do a ceremonial coin toss like at the Super Bowl for all I care. And agree that after one four-year term, they will switch spots in the re-election.

    I’m just being desperately creative in the face of what looks like Massachusetts Moderate Inevitability.

  • Aaron Gardner

    ntntnt

  • lineholder

    If you are, then yes, this is a statistical tool that could be used to improve efficiency in government. Lean Six Sigma, or L6S, has been around for a while, and it’s been proven to be effective, but there are people who don’t see it as being enough. I think it would be a great place to start.

    I was really hoping that Erick would post the second part of Newt’s interview because I wanted to hear what Newt specifically has in mind on this. That has happened as of yet. So all I can do is speculate.

    We have a very ‘top-heavy” government. Agencies that are too broad in scope. Agencies that are outdated. Agencies that duplicate each other in function. Some of these agencies we genuinely need. Others we don’t. And ALL of them are “top-heavy” when it comes to administrative personnel.

    Every time the Dems present a new “initiative” or a new regulatory measure, they usually find a way to set up new agency or department that goes along with that initiative or regulatory measure. These agencies don’t communicate well each other, so a lot of jobs functions are duplicates, even with separate agencies.

    Plus, the Dems obviously don’t believe in new technology or moving the government into this century, because a lot of the job functions that exist are “spoon” jobs when a “shovel” would be much more efficient. If using new technology means reducing employment of ten employees to five, even if it is more effective, they won’t do it.

    We have a lot of “fat” in our government. That’s what Lean Six Sigma deals with….getting rid of the fat and setting up an efficient process across the system as a whole.

    Would it solve all our nations problems? Not by a long shot. But it truly is a great place to start.

  • Bill S

    But I am. And you don’t have any “constitutionally provided freedom of speech” on this site. We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone who we bloody well please…especially if they act like a jerk. You’re on your way there.

  • gracie

    and really seemed to like it. I also tried Newt’s site but it was so busy I could not get on. And thanks for bringing the links.

  • lineholder

    I’m surprised, with Romney’s private sector experience, that he didn’t think of presenting this type of idea himself.

    L6S would be an excellent place to start. And I think you’re probably as aware of that as I am. You’re just ticked off because Newt is the one presenting it, not Romney!

  • Aaron Gardner

    Just got back from voting for Perry here in VT where every vote for a conservative is a protest vote.

  • trickamsterdam

    “Crap Shoot” should be Mittens’ new nickname.

    Because he goes through policy changes and even whole identities “faster than crap though a goose”.

    The only thing that never changes is his personality. And that is because there is none.

    * “crap through a goose” stolen from the opening speech in “Patton”

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

    …is precisely what I proposed, a month ago.

  • gracie

    It was a very quick one with a lot of information asked and answered.
    And yes that is what I was talking about I remembered your very excellent explanation of it.

    I am weary of people saying Newt does not have any plans! It appears that Newt is the only one since Perry to be getting serious about cutting gov’t.

  • Finrod

    The 1% that voted for Rick Perry, that is. :-)

  • mbrat42

    Only 2 choices in VA, so I voted for Paul. Yes, right or wrong, it was a protest vote.

  • gracie

    I honestly don’t envy you.

    And just how do you know that Newt does not know the details?

  • Ender

    it would certainly add to the fun

  • trickamsterdam

    The problem is being the “anti Romney” isn’t enough. Romney’s too strong right now.

    His “electablility” argument needs to be destroyed (which would have happened if he’d lost both MI and OH…and still might happen if loses OH). Without that argument he’s nothing. He literally becomes a fringe candidate like Paul

    So he needs to be weakened first then destroyed.

    Otherwise the Establishment will keep helping him. I mean Coburn endorses him? That’s only because they think he’s going to be the eventual winner and still believe he might have the best shot in November. Not saying the Coburn thing is a difference maker but there are a million little things like that.

    The strategy I would have pursued [for Newt] is getting rid of Romney first then going after Santorum. Newt can beat Santorum one one one because he’s smarter more charismatic and has the better resume.

    Most importantly they’d be on equal financial and organizational footing. Also the Establishment is indifferent to which would win or lose.

    Probably w/ Romney’s destruction another candidate would have entered the Race but if I were Newt (but not the eye of Newt!) I like my chances against Santorum and then some late-entry candidate the R voters might not accept and who has no organization rather than against Romney.

    Romney until he’s weakened will keep playing this game where he out-spends his opponents and beats them down w/ MSM surrogates. Only to have the same game played against him successfully in November if he’s the nominee.

    If Romney wins in OH is a disaster because Romney as the nominee is a disaster.

  • jermane2020

    nt

  • lineholder

    Not only from the side of reducing the size/cost of government but also in the fact that it could provide a burst of development in the private sector in everything from software applications to industrial machinery.

    Yes, taking the nation from “spoon” level to “shovel” level could do us a lot of good in more ways than one.

  • gracie

    No snark intended.
    I just don’t think I will be able to do that when May 29 rolls around!

    That was cool today that you were singled out by DeMint to receive a copy of his book! You will have to give us a report.

    Condolences for living in Vermont. Although you do get to ski so maybe it’s worth putting up with the liberals.

  • gracie

    :)
    It has been building up for some time. Remember the legal arguments when she admitted that she does not have a law degree.

    I’m sure I am in for it.

  • lapert

    I certainly don’t know everything about everything, but I am a consultant. I have (and am currently) engaged in process improvement efforts in federal agencies, I have sold tons of engagements in the private and public sector using Lean, Six Sigma, TQM, etc. This isn’t new, this isn’t new to government (heck Al Gore pushed a ton of it as VP).

    Chasing efficiency in government operations isn’t a bad thing, but it is pennies. The inherent nature of government operations prevent it from having lasting impact the way it does in the private sector (and by that I mean specifically the lack of a profit measure).

    It is for consultants thought the equivalent of SOX for accountants – a treasure trove of money (or as it was called at the time a full employment act).

    Bottom line, it isn’t a necessary nor sufficient aspect of meaningful reduction in the size of government – when he tells me which parts of the government mission he is killing in year one I will start to take it seriously. If all he is doing is pushing consulting engagements it is empty ideas.

  • Bill S

    And Leon just kicked off a CoverItLive live blog / chat.

  • lapert

    Lean Six Sigma was invented in 2002, Romney was already out of the private sector by then. Fusing Lean, a process improvement framework, and Six Sigma, a quality control framework, together has limited applications in the service-heavy federal sector – in the place where it does have real application it has already been tried, is being tried or is heavily being sold by the big consulting firms.

  • lineholder

    I can agree with you that with Newt, as it true with every candidate, the “devil is in the details”. It depends on the approach Newt is considering, and how tight he plans to try to set long-term control parameters.

    You and I will just have to be on opposite ends of this, I guess. We have to start somewhere and soon. I’d just as soon we use L6S as fly by the seat of our pants any day of the week. Which is how it has been for over a decade.

  • jakeofalltrades

    The only respectable candidate to run.

  • lineholder

    I’d have to agree with that. But when it comes to processes, I disagree. Every task our government performs involves a process, lapert.

    All of those processes are “fat” and heavy with costs that aren’t necessary, including labor costs.

  • gracie

    And you found it that lacking?
    If so then I guess I owe you an apology.
    Apologies.

  • lineholder

    Where did you hear the details? If you have a link, please post it because I haven’t found one as of yet.

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

    .

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

    Your boy isn’t winning enough to matter.

  • aesthete

    Sorry gracie and lineholder, but there is no silver bullet when it comes to government scope and spending short of taking the d*mn thing to the back and shooting it.

    Limited gains in efficiency through emulation of business practices are possible, but by and large have already been implemented and don’t resolve the underlying problems. Newt is smart, but he has a demonstrated tendency of hopping on bandwagons and overstating his case.

  • goodgovernance

    If you’re familiar with the notion of the “wisdom of crowds,” which is in fact a legitimate scientific concept, and demonstrated by how massive groups of people can collectively do as well predicting the stock market as the best Wall Street analyst, then maybe not all is lost when the uninformed vote.

    At least, maybe the results aren’t as terrible as you might think from some of the individuals who are voting.

  • lineholder

    we do need something that has proven to be effective to work with and from. Do you know of any other such tools that can be used?

    I’ve never claimed that it would be end-all to our problems. And in all honesty, I’ve yet to hear enough about what Newt has in mind to say that it would even suffice.

    I’m drawing from what my experiences with it have been. And that’s about it.

    I know that the healthcare industry is just now getting around to make use of it. Believe it or not, our healthcare system has areas where the tasks and processes involved are either “fat” or redundant as the dickens.

  • goodgovernance

    I’d protest vote for him, myself.

  • lapert

    It is being applied to financial processes (Corning is a good example).

    But if you mean my reference to it not being around when Romney was in the private sector – that is true. Lean Six Sigma was invented by Michael George in 2002 – the book that launched it is Lean Six Sigma: Combining Six Sigma with Lean Speed. The fundamental concepts of Lean and Six Sigma, and the even more fundamental techniques that underlie them certainly predate that, but Lean Six Sigma is a very specific framework that was ‘invented’ in 2002.

    If Gingrich were simply saying they need to focusing on reducing waste in processes that would be one thing, the fact that he is pushing a specific framework that isn’t the best choice for most government inefficiency tells me he has been wowed by a sales job.

  • lineholder

    tools such as this have been implemented in a way that is effective. Not when we have 81 different agencies designated for “teacher quality” and a ratio of administrative to front-line personnel in government is so high.

    Somebody might have talked about implementing it. Following through with it? Obviously not.

  • lapert

    He held at least one conference call on it last summer/fall

  • lineholder

    We’re doing the same thing here, lapert. I’m drawing from the realm of my experiences, past and current, and you’re drawing from yours. Neither one of us knows for certain what the specifics are that Newt has in mind.

    Seriously, the context I know is front-line. Not administrative. Not applications. It does involve process analysis, eliminating redundancy, etc.

    How has it been used in your realm of experience?

  • aesthete

    are there incentives in place to allow government to implement this program? In the private sector, there’s an obvious incentive: money and efficiency! Government tends not to have these incentives, or perverts them in ways that make it hard for reform and anti-corruption programs to take hold. Perhaps LS6 will be of limited effectiveness, but the same results that you see in the private sector don’t really apply to government. If LS6 cuts some government, great. I’m pessimistic about the savings: so long as we have the programs we have and run them the way we run them, we can only save so much money. Nike running shoes might truly help with aerodynamics when it comes to long-distance running — but if a big fat guy is buying them with the idea that he will go as fast as a marathon runner wearing the same shoes? That might not work out so well.

  • lapert

    No, I was on a conference call he held (I think it was August) with some LSS gurus.I heard what he had to say, it was the equivalent of a first meeting consultants pitch.

    I’ve seen it in different contexts, it is obviously most natural in manufacturing processes – particularly one with low tolerance for defects (like chemicals). When it comes to people-heavy processes (like accounting operations/close process) there are some adjustments that need to be made. And for the most part, the rigor of six sigma gets dropped after implementation if used at all (it really asks for more precision than appropriate for decision processes like accounting approvals). I think Corning would even call their process Lean rather than Lean Six Sigma even though they originally had that in mind.

    At the end of the day, I think its success is heavily dependent on the culture of the organization. In some cases, the structure,statistical rigor and precision are exactly what the organization needs and wants, but in many cases (like most software companies I have engaged with) it doesn’t work. Something that is more experimentally oriented and free flowing (something that will mesh with Agile Development for example) works better. Unless I was a specialist shop with only on tool to sell, I would never go to a client presuming that any given framework is the right answer.

  • lapert

    In Government it is all about defining the mission. Tolerance for waste that doesn’t negatively impact the mission is high because the incentive isn’t ever going to be there to focus on it. When the waste does impact the mission (take expeditionary contracting in the military as an example) its process and impact is so dispersed that it usually takes something big to see it and years to redesign the process after which you have typically solved a narrowly scoped version of the initial proximate issue seen but left the root cause in tack only to show itself somewhere else.

  • runner12

    NT

  • lineholder

    My first contact with it was manufacturing. If you’re familiar with that at all, then you know what it entails. But in the business I was working in, when I went there to set up a quality system and try to get them ready for ISO certification, lapert, they had nothing, and I mean nothing.

    They had a major selective assembly problem. They weren’t producing from drawings. No specs on parts. Their entire process was badly out of control. No procedures for any processes at all. And in order to try to deal with the selective assembly problems, the process had gotten fatter and fatter.

    Sort of like adding regulatory measures onto regulatory measures with no communication in the form of procedures, scope of responsibilities, etc. between agencies would be in how our government operates. All the regs requires labor support, and the labor support requires admin. Too much admin in the government’s case. So that’s been my perspective on it.

    At the present time, I’m getting exposed to how it used in healthcare. And it’s being used as a process control mechanism there, too. I hope that explains where I’ve been coming from and why.

  • lineholder

    That’s the current projection, aesthete.

    I know something along the lines of L6S seems so insignificant that it would be a waste of time, but…we really do need to get something moving forward to stop the direction our nation is heading in and it needs to be done quickly! And with job dependency on government being as high as it is with private sector growth and development being relatively flat…okay, shoot me or something, but every dollar we can save is a dollar we don’t have to pay interest on.

    It’s not a catch-all solution, but I’ve never claimed that it would be. All I’ve said is that it is a good place to start.

    BTW, my family says that I squeeze Lincoln until he screams, if that is pertinent factor to this conversation, LOL.

  • aesthete

    Sample sentence: “Crap Shoot IX? You mean, the one starring Mitt Michigan and Trixie Texas? Yeah, that one was alright, but he was way hotter in Massachusetts Mandate III.”

  • aesthete

    but so long as the bad economy is happening to other people, instead of those in government, the incentive for reform is minimal. Even then, there’s a decent chance that we just have Greek-style riots from those in government, instead.

    I’m not against LS6, persay — just doubtful. IMO, we need to be talking about reform and cuts to the main drivers of government spending — we can talk about LS6 too, but it shouldn’t be a centerpiece.

  • lapert

    The incentive has to be at the level of the individual actors in the bureaucracy – that is who needs to have incentive to find waste. The budget is a blunt tool for that, and that is what has driven some efforts recently, but it is too blunt for Lean Six Sigma and tends to be transitory as soon as the focus on specific budget targets subsides and is as likely to cut bone as fat. Otherwise, without some sort of profit measure that lets you compare the value of the cost with the outcome of the mission the incentives are hard to come by.

  • lineholder

    Process control mechanisms mean nothing if solid outcome parameters don’t exist.

    I still believe that if it was approached a certain way, it could succeed, and quite possibly far beyond anyone’s expectations at that.

    Still, lapert, I’m sorry…but I honestly and sincerely believe that we need something BOLD at this point to turn things around. That may not be Newt. But it definitely isn’t Romney either.

    Ah, well, this is depressing. I’ve got some reports to turn in before midnight. Talk to y’all later.

  • missourirancher

    You done the honorable thing. And contrary to what many think, Rick Perry was Heads & Shoulders a better candidate than any Republican candidate we have had for many years. I personally beleive he was even better than Ronald Reagan.

  • acat

    that give tipsters a part of the money recovered… Give the folks who save money a share of what they save “We The People”.

    Trouble is (I’ve watched this happen in the private sector, although not specifically on a six sigma project) there’s a tendency to build in extra fat, knowing it’ll just be cut later on to increase the apparent benefit of the ‘lean’ process. How much easier will this be in government?

    Mew

  • texastory63

    Sounds like what my dad says when he told me he voted for Ashbrook against Nixon in ’72. I too was for Governor Perry. After he dropped out I had to sign on with Santorum. At least if we go down in November with him you know which side he is on. Romney is a continuation of the establishment keeping the proles out of power. As I watch Ohio go I feel like I am watching the slow death of my country. Bush, Dole, McCain & Romney. Winning?

  • acat

    way too close to a santorum…

    Mew

  • lapert

    You can get ‘finders fees’ for uncovering all sorts of fraud against the government. There is a mint to be made focusing on finding medicare fraud (a lawyer friend of mind who used to work in justice used to say that was his retirement job).

    And you are absolutely right, even in the private sector it fails more often than it works (at least in large organizations) because the agency problem is hard to overcome with any incentive structure. A framework alone is nowhere near enough, the culture has to exist around the effort.

    I used to say that public and private sector aren’t as different as people think, it isn’t that the public sector is really as efficient as the private sector is assumed to be but the private sector is closer in inefficiency to the public sector than most like to admit.

  • acat

    You’re right that big private sector outfits are less efficient .. in fact, inefficiency seems to increase with organization size.

    This is also exactly why I reject the “too big to fail” argument. The British East India company epitomized “too big to fail” and yet, when they finally audited the books .. it was flat broke and had been for years.

    Mew

  • greyeagle

    No, there is no way Perry would accept a VP for Romney. Perry is a staunch conservative and Romney is a flip flopping liberal. Besides, Perry is the Governor of the second largest state in the US. Why would he want to be a second fiddle to Romney.

  • lapert

    Smaller government is the only answer.

    And inefficiency certainly increases with size – geometrically not linearly. But the problem with too big to fail is a different one – size isn’t the right indicator of the impact or importance of failure, something like interconnectedness is more accurate. You can be very small but still systemically critical, and there is little chance of seeing that ahead of time from some central oversight body.

  • redmymind

    One could buy one in ANY “choice” of colors as long as it was black!

  • greyeagle

    I think Rick Perry was prematurely pushed away. This eliminated the very best candidate for President and the ones we have left generate no excitement especially Romney.

  • lineholder

    It all depends on what you want to succeed in doing and holding to a course of action that makes success possible.

    I’ve worked for private sector companies who have been faced with going under, and oddly enough, a lot of them don’t consider striving for efficiency or utilizing tools that allow them to become efficient until they are driven to it by that threat. Then they want to focus on waste, scrap, process control…you name it, all of the sudden, it’s important. So I know what you’re referring to when you say that private sector can be inefficient.

    But I’ve also been directly involved in situations where they do reach that point, and they start utilizing tools in a way that does let them turn things around. I’ve seen cases where not only has it let them succeed, but they’ve succeeded far beyond what they might have hoped for.

    That’s what I know of. That’s also part of the reason I believe there’s more potential in utilizing tools like L6S than people tend to see on the surface.

  • acat

    and Bill Deming.

    Plan, Execute, Analyze, Refine – as taught to post-WWII Japan by an American nobody in Detroit wanted to hear.

    Mew

  • demsaresatanic

    You can do it joey!

  • penhall99

    You voted for Perry, the guy I was behind all the way. So why in the world did you call for him to get out? You have gone out of your way to bash the remaining candidates and have told us all they cannot win. And then you vote for the guy you refused to endorse AND pushed to get out. Makes a lot of sense!

  • aesthete

    Markets don’t work if there’s no opportunity for failure.

    Governments don’t fail unless things are so bad, that even standing armies aren’t enough to keep them in grift. This is part of why government is so inefficient.

  • lineholder

    But look at what has happened in Greece. They established regulatory measure upon regulatory measure. And of course, they have to have people working in agencies to provide implementation and enforcement of those regulatory measures. We’re doing exactly the same thing. O-care alone set up 159 new agencies!

    Greece is in a position where so many people are dependent on the government for jobs that they can’t make many cuts to agencies or departments without triggering a massive demand-side crisis in their economy. And we’re heading in the exact same direction!

    Anything that keeps us from following the path of Greece…I can support.

  • lineholder

    Those companies have had tremendous success utilizing statistical analysis tools.

    Want to hear something ironic? I’ve been working about 30hours/week while going to school. The company I work for is in the restaurant industry. When O-care came along, they knew that their back was to the wall. So they evaluated their demand, looked at their processes, and decided to make some processes changes to increase their business flow. By making a few changes, they increased their capacity of service by over 20%. So far.

    Even restaurants can utilize process analysis tools effectively to succeed! But our government won’t. It isn’t that they can’t…they won’t.

  • SoFiMil

    Thanks, Erick. You helped make lemonade out of lemons.

  • Aaron Gardner

    He has been more open and honest than most other online pundits.

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

    Plus it would raise suspicion of Perry trading his support for a VP slot. Perry as Romney’s VP would echo too strongly of 2008. Probably not a good match for Santorum, but then I don’t know who would be a VP for Santorum.

  • texastaxpayer

    I can understand your vote Erick and do not fault you for voting principle. I have to call your attention to a simple reality though. If we all “protest vote” Mitt Romney will be the nominee. In fact in any state turn out is low the weasel wins. Rick Perry asked me to support Newt Gingrich. That in itself is good enough for me. However if Newt should leave the race before I vote I will then support Santorums campaign. If Mitt Romney locks up the nomination the world may get a shock come November. Gary Johnson is growing in popularity in my neck of the woods. For many many people I speak with he is already the goto if Newt falters. Romney has spent a great deal of time and money insulting Texas, Texan’s and our good governor. I would be very very surprised if he carries this state in November. The point I am trying to get across here is this. Romney will fracture the most powerful red state in the union. He will take what should be an easy victory and turn it into a contest where the only possible benefactors are the democrats. I hope you hear what I am telling you here. The time to protest is over, its time to stop Obomney or suffer the consequences.

  • sulmak

    and not moderates, left-leaners and quos. Republican insiders love the current system, that is why it is the way it is.

  • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

    A state he was supposed to win. Wasn’t it 3%? And the GOP had to change the rules to make sure he won the delegates by 1.

  • hisgirlfriday

    As of a little after midnight Ohio time, and 95 percent of the vote is in.

    The difference between Romney and Santorum: 7,264

    The total protest votes for Huntsman and Perry: 13,424

  • krish

    I have been harping about the same issue in many of my posts! Unfortunatley, I did not get much traction …thank you for bringing this up! we need to identify these gutless wonders who make gazillions of $$ spouting conservative principles & especially Rush boasting about himself as the de facto conservative leader!!

    In fact, I wrote an email to Rush saying that he need not endorse anybody but at least identify who we should not vote for a moderate like Romney! It is all about $$ & ratings rather than the future of conservatives in Republican party or the country.

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

    I see the value of remaining essentially neutral and I listen to his radio show regularly and the boy’s a natural. But Aaron, you have no excuse, not being a public figure, but heck, its only a primary…as long as y’all don’t go third party in the general! smile

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

    so

  • Don T.

    Erick, Your protest vote was voting present. Not a profile in courage. I agree with other comments here. It amounted to a vote for Mitt Romney. Thanks a lot.

    But at least you feel all good and principled about it.

  • Aaron Gardner

    Also, VT was going for Romney no matter who I voted for. I voted for the man I thought was best fit for the job, I will never consider myself wrong for doing that in a primary.

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

    t

  • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

    The vote of conscience is the very lifeblood of liberty.

    There are three converging views that are forcing the ebb and tide of our candidate field.

    1. Many conservatives feel that this may be one of the last elections we have to stand our ground in the tide of socialism in the context of Keynesian spending under the guise of “Crisis” using Alinsky tactics… as such many believe this is the genisis of total integration of socialism into societal norms. So Conservatives are looking for traditionalists, and purity in the message to drive a mighty wedge and to force the public to acknowledge the failures of leftist feelings. (Newt Gingrich is the current candidate that speaks for these conservatives)

    2. There is a literal war being waged on Religion. We all know it. With phrases like “Woman’s Health” being a euphemism for free condoms paid for by mandated health insurance, waiving the conscience of Religious organizations that run private institutions for the benefit of the community. So conservatives are looking for a Social Conservative fighter. (Rick Santorum is the current conservative candidate that speaks for these conservatives)

    3. Finally there are those that consider themselves pragmatic, and are either looking for an Obama defeat, and a public manager that will better handle government. Everything else is the usual platitudes to conservatives. There are some that believe a businessman is more qualified to fix Government Business, than a government professional. (Romney is the best fit for this, but there are some that want to recognize Newt, or would support him if he didn’t go all Newt from time to time, and leave us with a blank expression on our faces).

    The Paul factor is really libertarians finding an acceptable Republican.

    In the beginning of this election cycle one by one, the best conservatism had to offer in a conservative candidate failed to jump in for one reason or another.

    For me Rick Perry was as close to the real deal. As far as “conscience votes” go… A primary is the time to do have a conscience vote, we owe no allegiance to someone that doesn’t represent us in a primary.

    In my estimation we currently have 3 camps…

    1. Not Romney
    2. Not Santorum
    3. Why couldn’t Newt be a little less Newt?

    I am totally empathetic to Erick on this, but I can also see the logic in his conscience vote, midget analogy and all. :D

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

    votes for a former nominee, but all must answer to their own conscience. I would say that I think EE’s vote was born of the best way to maintain plausible deniability while a public figure, masked as “conscience”.

    I agree with your bottom line, but aren’t we allowed to inquire as to what motivates the votes of others? Yes. That too is essential to Liberty.

    God bless

  • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

    I’m not sure I drove the point home after re-reading… I’ve been out of sorts…

    So all that was said before… and to drive the point home…

    If more conservatives would just vote their conscience rather than being duped into narratives, and “primary strategy”…. then maybe we’d have a chance at seeing the “cream rise to the top” rather than having to vote in the “NOT candidate” column…

    I’ve always been a big advocate of people voting their conscience.

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

    but that the seemingly most conservative choices early on, failed to perform well in the nomination process and it does no good to whine about the process because even the suggestions for change would not have kept my first choice Perry from putting his foot in his mouth, my second choice Cain from boasting of his ignorance, and my third choice Bachmann from…well you get the drift.

    Now, if a conservative considers the remaining choices to be tweedle-dum, -dee and -the next tweedle, then I can understand a vote for a non-candidate at this stage, but I don’t think its “conscience” alone that results in a vote for Perry at this stage…imho

    I have wanted and still want the most conservative available nominee with other factors like character, baggage and intangibles factored in and my analysis leads me to rank them Santorum, Newt and Mitt in that order, with the delegate totals becoming more important each day as it becomes increasingly harder for Newt to win.

    more later and good discussion

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

    beleive….therefore, I’m in it for the long haul….the tea colored glasses are off. we have to persuade and fight against the liberal culture just as much as in the political process and until we fix We the People, we will have to “settle” as all humans have since Eve bit the apple.

  • jaykali

    Bc they are all already damaged. Santorum blew his chance with the contraception deal where now somehow we are on the f-ing LOSING side of an issue (the contraception mandate) that we should be winning.

    Santorum has a slight chance bc he has delegates that he could cede to Romney but I don’t think even that will be enough leverage. Romney would do much better to get Marco Rubio. If not Marco Rubio then Allen West would also be a great choice and either pick lets exposes the left for what racists they are bc they will have to attack Rubio on being a fake latino or West being a fake black. There are maybe a few other choices but I don’t see why Romney would get a moderate type he HAS to get a strong Tea-party conservative on the ticket and he absolutely will do that.

  • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

    I kowalski’d below… to further the point…

    I agree, questioning the motive is essential to maintaining liberty.

    I for one take Erick Erickson at face value… when he said “I have been left uninspired for various reasons by each.”

    It’s not hard to see the motive. Although he may have protested “none of the above”… and not voted at all, or chosen some other “not Romney…” He still chose Perry. Not Herman, Not Paul (for a laugh), not Bachmann. So I trust his motives… but maybe he knows that there’s a lot of us diehard Perry supporters here on Redstate, and we’d hope to see the same from him.

    I think Erick has throughout this cycle been an honest broker, going after all of the candidate’s weaknesses, and facing blowback from the candi-bots.

    He’s said things about Rick Perry that’s made me upset, he’s even said things about Mormonism that have irked me… but I don’t see malcontent in anything he’s said… if anything he’s made tough observations that some of us would like to have ignored, or would hope others wouldn’t see.

    but by all means, I see nothing wrong with inquiry… ;)

  • independentconservative

    I got news for you, there is more of a chance that John C. Breckenridge II, aka Newt Gingrich loses than either of those two. As a Romney supporter, stubborn Newt is the best thing to happen to Mitt. Without him, Santorum would have won FL, OH, and MI! God bless that stubborn old mule.

    He’s the reason the Republican brand and Romney’s name are tarnished. No one has done more harm to the Republican brand than Gingrich’s nasty ads and bad attitude at beating Romney at all costs like a bitter little child who can’t get over the fact he sucks and very few people want him to win. Outside of GA where he wasn’t even born by the way, he didnt even get as high as SECOND in the other 9 contests yesterday.

    What a fool Newt is. He’s so 1995 as it is.

  • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

    We don’t have to “setlle” so much as we have to be more diligent in persuasion in long suffering, meekness, and love unfeigned. We don’t need to win this battle with labels and epithets. We need to persuade. We can’t “FIX” the people, that’s what socialists do.

    We shouldn’t all be focusing on some heirarchical enumeration of priorities… We should all be focusing on influencing what we can where we are, within our spheres of influence. (We can’t all be the fortunetelling rooster perched upon the stone mountain ;) )

    We need to “lift where we stand”. This is what I mean by this…

    Battling the “liberal culture” is like battling “good and evil”… and the best way to battle evil is to live by good. I am a social conservative, there are somethings that should and ought to be legislated to protect life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but for every jot or tittle that is signed into law arises new arguments spun by new legal kung fu…. if you get my drift… it’s a never ending battle, and we must be ever vigilant. We’ll never be rid of evil until Christ does the banishing. So it is up to us to recognize that for all of our stated goals, they’re more a direction than they are an achievement.

    As for winning hearts and minds to the cause, I will address social legislative issues with those that are easily persuaded and deceived by saying what they need to hear, not what I need to say. (Herein lies the difference between Santorum and myself… I don’t always answer someone, even if I have a good answer, because I know that I can’t win pissing contests with skunks… and nobody likes a know-it-all) If Santorum could understand this, he wouldn’t be walking off the reservation to make well the abused bodies and souls that leftist counter-cultural lifestyles have damaged in the wake of their libertine instincts. It’s not that what he says is incorrect, it just doesn’t square with the price of T.E.A. in the U.S. right now… the point being Santorum has for better or worse signed off/voted for things he shouldn’t have. I can’t view him any more than maybe a 1 and 1/2 column conservative… and that’s because I’m not so convinced based on his debate performances that he understands how to deal with the threat of Iran’s nuclear ambitions (supposed or stated)…

    As for Newt, I think he’d be the best VP since Cheney… which granted that’s the difference of a Biden as VP… but still you get my drift… we need a guy that can sabre rattle the hell out of the Senate, and work behind the scenes on real ideas… but his genius is misunderstood by people that don’t care to study and at best have a drive by attention span… and as such… Newt will be Newt, and he’ll unintentionally turn people off… see “Moon Base”… (which I like as an idea, but its a hardsell)

    Romney is Romney… and as a Mormon, I trust him as “brother Romney”…sometimes it irks me when people try to paint him as some dishonest cretin… I do think he’s honest in all his flip-flopping… but that’s the point… it means he’s indecisive, and hasn’t really put a lot of thought into the root cause analysis of what is needed in this country, with exception to the economy and job creation… and I think he’s hoping to fix a lot of ills by providing economic opportunities… as a President… I see him as a G -H.W. Bush, an awkward moderate-hawkish country club Republican that doesn’t mind spending as long as there is some sort of political ROI… but maybe I’m off the mark in that comparison.

    None of the 3 (or 4) really represent me… I think they’re all great men (even the fourth–sans newsletters bearing his name–and earmarking championship title holder), I think all of them will be better Presidents than Barack Obama… but I’ve given up hope on any of them rising to the mantle of Reagan… They all have their niche… and I don’t see a single one of them really seeking to protect the constitution and the values of limited government (not extreme Laissez Fair… we don’t need to invite the gold investors to this discussion) but real “is this truly necessary? is it constitutional?” type of questioning before we go down paths that require massive repeal efforts.

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

    candle

  • stroker97

    and I apologize for my off-handed remarks. Just got caught-up in the moment I guess. My point was this: the results in OK show that if you add up the votes for Perry, Bauchman, and Huntsman, and provided those votes went to Newt, Newt would have beat Romney for second. Additionally, Newt would have come closer to beating Romney in TN. I just question the logic behind a protest vote. To me it?s like voting for a 3rd party that has no possible chance of winning. But, as we all know, it?s our right as citizens to vote for whomever they please. Just not sold on the value of the ?protest vote.? This is just my opinion, which given the results from last night?s primaries/caucuses doesn?t really mean a thing.

  • CarolT

    My vote here in Massachusetts does not count because Mitt was going to win this one too. I thought about voting for Rick Pery for two minutes, but then voted for Newt. It does not count here, I wish I could move to TX & have a job and my family too. It’s not meant to be, sadly.

  • dpmaine

    I wonder what Gov. Perry’s future will be. It almost seems as if he’s tired of being Governor of Texas. A third term in the cards?

  • dpmaine

    I just figured that Gingrich would never, ever, ever take a VP slot from Romney in return for anything.

    Although, it could end up that Gov. Romney doesn’t have the delegates for a first round victory, and has to secure the nomination by straight out delegate trading.

    In that case, I can’t imagine who he would trade delegates with.