« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Perry loses the debate; Romney wins but remains unacceptable for conservatives.

Promoted from the diaries

Last night’s debate was not the best debate.  Stylistically, the google & youtube questions were annoying and largely shallow.  Substantively, Perry looked as bad as he ever has with Romney coming out the winner.  This is a huge problem for conservatives.

Rick Perry is on the cusp of becoming the consensus candidate that Romney isn’t.  He is tea-party and establishment.  He is the jobs governor and potentially the best hope we have of being Obama in 2012.  But last night, he was terrible.  He got beat up by Rick Santorum, Bachmann and Romney.  He could not articulate a single position.  He tried to return the favor to Romney on healthcare, immigration, jobs, flip-flopping, etc. and yet Mitt Romney, the largest flip-flopper of modern times, made Perry out to be the flip-flopper.  Perry stumbled, slurred, repeated, tangled, and forgot his lines all night long.  He is (was) the frontrunner, he is going to get attacked.  Every single candidate on stage has to knock him out in order to get anywhere.  The path to victory goes through him.  He is going to have to learn how to deal with it and last night he failed miserably.

Something else Perry must work on, he is wrong on immigration.  He may be “compassionate” but he is also stupid.  I have no problem with amnesty for illegal immigrants coupled with a wall or boots on the ground.  Perry has a great argument against a wall and for troops.  This was the only point in the night where he sounded intelligent.  But there is no responsibility to help educate illegals through in-state tuition.  Texas chose to give breaks to children of illegals and I have no problem with that.  However, it isn’t right and it isn’t smart.  Additionally, it is not as if the son or daughter of an illegal immigrant has two choices, “fall through the cracks” and live off of the government or get in-state tuition from Rick Perry.  There are many other ways to make this work.  Perry needs to alter this message.

Mitt Romney was the beneficiary of Perry’s stumbles last night.  Romney was articulate even when he wasn’t being honest about his record.  He is a good debater, but he is not a conservative.  His attacks on Perry are shameless.  There are appropriate times to attack Governor Perry, there are also appropriate times to allow the moderators to attack the Governor.  This is the second debate where Romney’s attitude has not seemed presidential.  He often seems as whiny and petty as Rick Santorum.

Aside from all of this, Perry is right.  Romney is unfit.  He was for Roe v. Wade before he was against it.  He was against charter schools before he was for it.  He was for gay marriage before he was against it.  He was for Romneycare before he was against Obamacare.  And let’s not forget that technically, Obamacare doesn’t affect those with insurance like Romneycare.  Technically, Obamacare is also a “market-based” plan.  Obama didn’t pass “socialized medicine,” he set up a healthcare exchange with a “public option” or one government plan out of many private plans.  That is as market based as Romneycare.  The Obama administration has admitted that it used Romneycare as a basis for their bill.  Romney signed gay marriage into law in the first U.S. state.  Romney came out in support of Obama’s race to the top education plan.  At the end of the day, it is glaringly clear that Romney is not one of us and he isn’t the best candidate for this position.  As Rick Perry said the night before, he is “Obama-lite” but we need someone that can articulate the case against Romney and so far the only person doing that is Perry and he is failing.

Romney fired more people than he hired in the private sector.

Romney was nothing more than an average RINO governor in Massachusetts.  There is nothing so great about this guy that we need to put him up against as our candidate.  I don’t care if Perry is soft on immigration and tried to mandate a vaccination through executive order.  Romney is the father of socialized medicine in America!  (Follow the Jump for more)

Michele Bachmann had an excellent point when she said that we didn’t need to settle for moderates.  We could elect anyone on that stage so why not get the most out of our mileage.  To do anything else would be stupid.

Besides, evangelicals will not be flocking to vote for Romney.  Anyone who thinks that he is a lock is kidding themselves.  What good are “independents” if you lose evangelicals?  And independents vote for the most exciting candidate (Reagan, Clinton, Bush II, Obama) that amps up their base, not the safest candidate that the base doesn’t even want.  Just because Chris Matthews wouldn’t vote for someone doesn’t mean that candidate is unelectable.  Just because someone isn’t moderate doesn’t mean they are unelectable.  Independent voters want someone who believes in something.  At the end of the day, the media and the left will paint whoever is the candidate out to be way to tea-party or right wing.  So we should accept that and move on.

One more point on Romney.  He is using a scorched Earth policy by attempting to sink Perry on social security.  It is clear that if Perry wins this thing, he will be badly bruised by Romney’s withering lies about how Perry doesn’t want social security and making him answer questions about its constitutionality.  Of course its unconstitutional and Romney knows that, but he is a liar and a snake and he will be anyone if it means he becomes president.  His aspiration knows no bounds.  He has completed transformed himself into someone that is unrecognizable from the Romney that ran for Governor just ten years ago.  The only conservative consensus we should have at this point is — No Romney.

With Perry faltering, Bachmann has a long shot comeback in this race and I welcome it.  Next debate I would like to see more substance.  I would also like to see her go on the offensive against Romney.  She is wrongly ganging up on Perry while benefiting Romney.  She needs to damage him personally and a lot of people would me more willing to support her as the anti-Romney candidate.

Huntsman did well.  There is a lot of economic principles that he has right.  I hope that someone else can make use of his plan.  But as a conservative and a pro-life Christian, I could never vote for him.  He isn’t one of us.  He is an elite and we can do better.

Rick Santorum did surprisingly well and gained exposure at Perry’s expense.  His foreign policy ideas are stupid and we need to get out of the middle east yesterday.  Santorum speaks in talking points and is a neo-con war hawk stuck in a 2003 mentality.  But he was strong in other areas.  He may become a middle-tiered candidate before its all over but he is only hurting our eventual candidate long term.

Finally, Santorum was excellent on the question of homosexuals embracing their sexual identity in the military.  He is right, the military isn’t a place for sexuality to be policy.  The fight isn’t against homosexuals or heterosexuals, but merely against defining oneself by their sexuality.  I thought he answered that question tremendously well.  He just has a irksome debate personality and that may be contributing to his low poll numbers.  Mike Huckabee took the same talking points and won Iowa with them.  Santorum just isn’t that skilled of a television debater.

Gary Johnson performed nervously, but well.  I didn’t know he was a governor and he really sold me that he is the real deal.  Good for him.  But he won’t be the nominee.  This does go to show that Ron Paul’s libertarian ideals are catching on.  Paul used to not even be allowed on the stage, now he is polling third with a new libertarian joining the stage.  I welcome the fight against the neo-cons for control of the party.

All in all, conservatives need either Perry or Bachmann to step it up big time.  It is not just their careers on the line, it is our future and if we truly want conservative ideals, we can’t put another moderated republican in the White House, we can’t have Romney, we must have a conservative.

COMMENTS

  • Common_Cents

    Wayyy overdone. They are being manipulated by the media to get some reality TV jerry Springer drama. An occasional zinger is great but they looked like two immature kids on the playground saying “oh yeah? Well MY Dad can do…….Blah blah blah.”

    They need to call out the media/moderators like Gingrich does when an unfair stupid attempt comes up to pit them against each other beyond policy discussion.

  • runner12

    ” he is the one we should be going after.” Darn Ipad!

  • elayman

    “Huntsman gets the economic principles right, but is too elite for evangelicals, I could never vote for him. He isn

  • toothpick

    Just asking…

  • victrola

    My thought on the candidates before was: Romney is our most electable, but Perry can also win, and he’s also a better conservative. I can’t say the same thing anymore, I honestly think candidates like Herman Cain or Newt Gingrich would be more electable.

    Watching Perry up there was not only painful, his answers were downright insulting to most conservatives. Being opposed to subsidized in state college tuition for illegals does not mean I don’t have a heart. And what’s his answer for being against a fence on the border?

    Here’s the thing, I’m not convinced Perry really is the uber-conservative everyone makes him out to be, at least on the issues I care about. All he has shown is some over the top rhetoric on Social Security that he’s now backtracking on. Now he’s saying we should protect all current SS beneficiaries and those close to retirement (he said NOTHING would change) So that means another 30 years of Social Security payments, please tell me how he’s going to fund that and take the “Ponzi” element out of it? And what happened to his idea about turning SS over to the states? Now he’s saying that’s just for government workers?

    I agree that this was the time to run a “Reagan”, but unfortunately none of our Reagans stepped up to the plate. So now we have to figure out who can actually knock Obama off. To me, the only one left is Romney. I’ll take a center-right moderate over a second term for Obama.

    • justluthien

      Perry’s spoken about the fence before: his point is that it is not feasible for the entire length of the border. Why? Because the border between Texas and Mexico is a river; a fence would have to be rebuilt everytime the Rio Grande flooded.

      • streiff

        A fence outside the urban areas like Brownsville, El Paso, etc is just stupid and wasteful. Drones, tethered blimps, sensors are all better solutions.

    • Michael Dugas

      Look. They have to have lived in Texas for three + yrs and they have to be signed up for the path to citizenship and all that gets them is…..the opportunity to PAY in state tuition rates. That’s all they get, they don’t get a free ride & they don’t get moved to the front of the line.
      Can we now get passed the subsidized tuition for illegals in Texas please!

      • Doc Holliday

        the reason we can not is it is just not true. We still care about truth right?

        Perry said he supports in state tuition because he does not want illegal kids on the “dole”. Well, first of all, do all non college graduates end up on the dole? Secondly, it is ILLEGAL for ILLEGALS to be on the dole! So what Perry said was a lie, illegal immigrants can not get medicaid or unemployment by law. Secondly, you say the illegals are on a “path to citizenship”. The problem there is there is no “path to citizenship” for illegals, that is also against the law, against Texas law and against federal law.

        ok, well, there it is.

        • aesthete

          I wouldn’t mind fast-tracking citizenship of children of illegals, but going to college is no guarantee of a good job, and vice versa.

          • Doc Holliday

            in the late 90′s and 200s. The Brits are right to tell many to learn a trade, they are not hurting those people, they are helping them. I know “landscapers” with more take home cash than most with degrees.

            btw, I completely destroyed every single point Michael made, I did not want to do it, but I had to. I understand the desire to get behind a candidate, we are certainly in a whirlwind here. We want someone to break out, but they have not.

      • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

        Instead, he played some cheap lefty ploy accusing us of not having a heart, or not liking someone whose name sounds different from ours.

        Which is a symptom of a bigger ideological flaw…

  • septembergurl

    him last night. You make the case against him well. I would support any of the others. Maybe not Gary Johnson, a libertarian but lacking the entertainment value and occasional ray of inspiration that Ron Paul has.

    Huntsman:
    ” But as a conservative and a pro-life Christian, I could never vote for him. He isn

  • Pingback: Homepage

  • gregorysstewart

    Sad to say, but after three tries in three weeks, Perry has shown that he cannot debate. The pattern is self-repeating. By the end of every debate, he is tongue-tied and inarticulate.

    May I respectfully suggest a cocktail of ginseng and Vivarin for the next time.

    Every time Perry stumbles over his own nouns and verbs, all of us Republicans blanche at the thought of this happening on stage with Obama.

    Perry is also seriously afraid of defending some of his decisions on the basis of expediency. Why? I do not know. All of us understand that a governor for over a decade has to make expedient decisions.

    Why did Perry make Guardasil an opt out rather than an opt in? Because with opt outs, health insurance companies will pay for the vaccine, making it more widely available for all socio-economic levels.

    Why does Perry support in-state tuition for illegal aliens? Because he had a large Hispanic community as part of his constituency, that would not help him get reelected if he did not support it. That is reality. In addition, I understand that it is not available unless the student has taken steps to become a citizen. Why didn’t Perry remind us of that? It would have saved him among conservatives and preserved him among Hispanics.

    Perry did damage control in the second debate by coming across as a straight shooter. That sub-text made a difference for all of us who were otherwise perplexed at the pregnant pauses in the middle of his sentences. He forgot to employ that tactic yesterday.

    Perry seems to be the only candidate that has not committed himself to written answers for some of the main issues in this campaign. I do not think he needs to have a 59 point plan, because he is not running as a technocrat, but “I’ll get around to it” sounds a lot like “I forgot to do my homework” after three debates.

    I like Perry. Look at my other posts. This guy has a great story. Now he needs to learn how to tell it.

    Mr. Perry, if you are reading this, here is my 6 step plan to reassure voters that you will not be killed in a debate with Obama:

    1) Read the opposition papers on you, and know the answers by rote.

    2) Spend two days off the campaign trail with a debate coach, and a director. You will only start to improve when you are totally sick of it.

    3) Only 10% of your message is informed by words. Practice debate in a ballet studio, (for the mirrors) and work on your body language. Even when you are on offense you look like you are on defense. Animate your answers. Soften up! We don’t hang someone for a wrong answer.

    4) Humor is an absolute requirement. Inject some into your answers. It makes you look confident, and a whole lot less scary. It humanizes you. It relaxes you.

    5) If the debate last two hours, so should you. Do whatever it takes to be engaged and engaging for as long as the debate lasts. Mangling your syntax as the last question rolls around is toxic.

    6) Ok, you made your point, you can throw dirt. Now its time for you to adopt the 11th commandment. Look like a uniter, become the leader of this party.

    I say this with complete sincerity. Last night has to be the very last “beginner” debate you do.

  • LiveStronger

    other great Republican presidents had their conservative credentials questioned by other Republicans. Reagan raised taxes as governor of California. W picked a fight with congressional Republicans early in his campaign (1999 to be precise) for allegedly “trying to balance the budget on the backs of working Americans”.

    Regardless of your desire to punish Mitt Romney for statements that he made while campaigning to unseat Ted Kennedy in 1994 or campaigning for Massachusetts governor in 2002, the guy is a conservative. He will be a great conservative president.

    He may not be acceptable to Republicans who can’t stomach the idea of a Latter-day Saint holding up the Republican standard but he is more conservative than Rick Perry and he is my #1 choice at this point.

  • streiff

    like a Kuwaiti oil field fire is energy efficient.

    He’s a cynical opportunist who isn’t a career politician because he can’t get anyone to vote for him.

  • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

    Romney has spent a lot of time and money trying to convince people of his “conservative bonafides”…. but rhetoric over action is always empty.

    Perry may have made some judgement mistakes that may not be considered the “conservative” approach on some issues, but there’s no denying he’s taken action and has implemented conservative policies.

  • profnickd67

    “Republicans who can

  • Whacker77

    I admit, I fell for Perry at the start, but no more. His performance was terrible, if not disqualifying. Having said that, how can anyone still view Bachmann as credible?

    Bachmann is considered by most R’s in the House to be out for herself and herself only. She can’t keep a staff because they can’t put up with her. She makes misstatement after misstatement. Worst of all, she says some “got retarded” with no proof.

    All she has to offer is HPV and the same attack on Obamacare. She’s not nor has she ever been a real contender for the nomination. She just filled the void for time because the field has been so terrifyingly weak.

  • Kyle-MI

    but, at least, he is our cynical opportunist. His opportunism for the current campaign is in the conservative direction. As long as he has conservative majorities in the House and Senate, they should be able to keep him in check. Although far from the safest situation for this country, Romney is still infinitely better than Obama.

  • jcmooreusnret

    The Republican Party will once again be duped into accepting a [big government nominee] for the presidential race. Another Republican Neo-Con in the White House will mean more of the same Un-Constitutional government and the public will wonder why nothing ever seems to change for the betterment of the country. Afraid of “old man” Paul? He is a healthy SOB who could certainly make it through a 4 year term and would definitely be a true Constitutional Conservative.

  • streiff

    Paul is a fraud and an idiot. His saving grace is that some of the things he says, like the fence with Mexico could be used to keep Americans in, are so funny that it is good to have him around.

  • mikeymike143

    and not wanting to vote for somebody because they are a certifiable nutcase is not the same thing as being ”afraid” of them. LOL

  • silentcal2012

    Some of you have an implaccable hatred for the man that is distrurbing.

    Romney was never for gay marriage. Never. That is an out and out lie. A bogus lie.

    His “flip flops” are over seven years old. Rick Perry was an Al Gore Democrat. People change. A lot of good pro-life people were pro-choice once. Growing, maturing and becoming conservative is not a flip-flop.

    And thanks for admitting that evangelicals have a problem with him because he is a Mormon. When supporters say it, people atttack it. But his adversaries can publicly say it, and threaten the GOP with it.

    Dont vote for Romney because the bigots and the unconstitutional theocrats will stay home! That’s like Hillary voters saying dont vote for Obama because racist white working class wont vote will stay home.

    If they stay home, good. I hope they stay there and rot their way to hell.

  • tailfins1959

    The central question is: Will inability to debate sink Perry? If he will wither under the heat of the left’s attack machine in the general election, he should NOT be the nominee. Perry has dug him self a hole, he still has a good shot at digging himself out. If we miss the Perry train, it’s Romney by default. I’m beginning to be concerned that Perry may be a Presidential level Sharron Angle.

  • Aaron Gardner

    And for the record, Mormonism wasn’t mentioned in this post once.

  • freedomscribe

    Gay marriage cannot be encapsulated in a sound bite. Romney’s position has evolved as he had to deal in the real world.
    http://www.massresistance.org/docs/marriage/romney/timeline.html
    I’m not concerned with that issue, but Romneycare is a real problem. I wish Herman Caine could break out (soon) but it seems we are stuck with 3 or 4 viable candidates. Perry with a good debate coach would be my 2nd choice but Romney really worries me.

  • Repair_Man_Jack

    Now let’s all learn one more. None of these people, and nobody on the sidelines that could still credibly win the GOP nod will do what is necessary w/o our pressure. We will get a sub-optimal candidate in 2012. We have to hijack this individual and make them do Conservative things.

    There’s an old joke about walking to school every day, uphill both ways. That’s what being conservative is like. It is cheaper, freer, feels better and is less frequently santioned if you just ditch the standards and act like a hedonistic lefttard. That’s what every potential GOP candidate out there will do under societal and media pressure….if we let them do it.

  • silentcal2012

    Mitt is pro-life, for traditional marriage, pro-Israel, and despite all attempts to paint him as something he is not, has a pltform that is nearly identical to Perry, Cain, Gingrich.

    They all advocate the same things with minor tweaks.

    Why then would some evangelicals let Obama have a second term if Romney is nominated if they are not sick individuals and bigots?

  • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

    Seems to be going both ways lately.

    Romney “gray baiting” Perry on Social Security. Perry accusing those who opposed his in-state tuiton for the children of illegals “not liking the sound of their names.”

    I hope this only gets better.

  • Aaron Gardner

    If they are the same as you suggest and you still don’t support Perry then aren’t you also just an anti-evangelical bigot?

    See how that works?

    See why making assumptions as you did is wrong and counter productive?

    Get a clue.

  • streiff

    on which time Romney is speaking. For instance, this is “pro life” Mitt

  • streiff

    to cast their vote for whomever they wish for whatever reason. Personally, I wouldn’t vote for an atheist because they don’t share my values. I can understand why some people wouldn’t vote for a Mormon.

    Casting opposition to Romney, who is typical northeast establishment Republican, as religious bigotry is just going to get you banned the next time it happens.

  • silentcal2012

    Your analogies are really weak

    Find once sentence that I ever wrote that implied that I would sit home if Perry were nominated, or how much I hate him. I barely ever talk about him other than the fact he is a terrible debater and will be a drag on the ticket.

    I will question someone who purports to be a patriot and constitutional conservative, and will let Obama have a second rather than vote Romney. They are either liars, trolss, idiots or bigots.

    My biggest bone with Perry since the beginning is that he is an unprepared, less talented George W. Bush. He’ barely electable. He might slip in, but it will be a dogfight, and Perry will destroy GOP momentum outside the South.

    Romney can bring the GOP surge to all four corner of the map.

  • Doc Holliday

    we are not friends, and likely will never be. If we met in person and had a beer, I am guess we would be friends. Anyway, I ripped you a bit in a recent post, but I want to call a truce. I really don’t care about you and have no ill feelings towards you or anyone else. This is the net, and we all take our sides I guess.

    You can come back with attacks if you want, you can say I knew you could not leave etc. I deserve that one. I really don’t want to fight anymore. I think I was wronged, and probably you do too. But this in the freaking ‘net, who cares. The reality is I have left. I left for a month, and I will likely never be a regular poster here again. I could be wrong, I could be dragged back in lol, but I don’t think so. I do want to be able to say a thing or two when it matters to me, if that is ok with you and the uppers.

    Look, you have your role that you play, it is not for me to critique it. But I have friends here, people that were here a long time and left for their own reasons. I feel like the guy who stayed to long, like I am new because the best of them have left. Oh well.

    You can say what you want to about me, but I will not respond. I don’t think you are a bad person, I know how Algore’s internet works. We have to have our little battles from time to time, one guy with the white hat, and of course me with the black :)

  • Aaron Gardner

    You didn’t feel like addressing the real points in the post and called them lies and then implied that anyone who doesn’t like Romney is a bigot.

    That is what is pathetic. Don’t get pissy because I called you out for it.

  • gregorysstewart

    Let’s say we adopt a Mitt.

    1) How does he attract a bigger slice of the VERY important Hispanic vote?

    2) We should not consider his religion, but people will anyway. There is no public demand that we show our tolerence for a Mormon. How does he keep the whisper campaign from making in- roads.

    3) How does he get the Evangelical base to man phone banks, post signs, knock on doors and do all the things that a Republican army needs to so that we win this thing on the ground.

    These are not a rhetorical questions. Elections are about turning out the base as well as grabbing the independents.

    Assume that Perry’s inability to debate makes him a GOP after thought, we would need these questions answered for real.

  • Xasteius

    Romney goes up 1.3 to 43.5; Perry drops by 5.3 to 27.1 (as of 11:48 MST)

  • Aaron Gardner

    I have no ill will towards you personally, I just disagree with some of your politics.

    Thanks for seeing that I am not a bigot. ;)

  • acat

    Even if you’re just going to be one of those great characters who shows up every couple episodes, welcome back.

    Mew

  • streiff

    is in our direction until he’s elected.

    I think his obvious need to be liked is going to make him about as conservative as Richard Nixon.

  • elainemorris

    Before you make up your mind one way or the other, please Google Perry and NWO; Perry and how he has danced around the Illegals issue. He has really let Texas down (and I have been here all my life). Please research Agenda 21 as well as the super highway from Mexico to Canada.

    This man is a politician — a Bilderberg Politician.

  • acat

    Because, if personnel is policy, Mitt’s decision to keep Kjellander as his Illinois campaign chair in 2008 after it was quite clear that Bob K is as corrupt as they come means we’ll just be trading a group of Dem kleptocrats for a group of GOP kleptocrats .. and that’s not acceptable to me.

    Mew

  • silentcal2012

    Your reciting 17 year old facts to make your case?

  • runner12

    I would not be suprised if they took some of them. This is not their first rodeo.

  • florajo

    Bachmann is the only one who won’t screw us over. The others are cleverly disguised RINOs.

  • streiff

    but I see you object to that as unfair

  • silentcal2012

    This diary spreads the insidious lie that Romney signed a gay marriage law. Never happened. Gay marriage came from the court. He fought gay marriage but acquiesced to the sjc ruling.

    Just like Reagan and Bush enforced abortion laws as chief executives. Romney did not start a constitutional crisis by usurping the role of the judiary. Like Reagan he respected seperation of powers, rule of law, and the role of the supreme judiciary.

    From this some fools try to spread the l lie that he signed gay marriage into law..

  • Doc Holliday

    ’nuff said.

  • Doc Holliday

    thanks Acat. I will likely be just a bit player, but I can’t predict the future. An hour ago I never thought I would type here again. I guess I just go with the way the winds tell me. Good to see you, nice to get a pic with the words :)

  • Michael M. Keohane

    but I have been asking since the Nixon/Kennedy debates just what do these debates prove about the candidates and their ability to function as our countries chief executive. We might as well have dance contests as debates and the dance contests might draw an audience that stays awake.

  • streiff

    constitutional amendment which would have overturned the court ruling.

  • Massachusetts_Transplant

    Romney is a “liar and a snake”? Whatever happened to Reagan’s 11th commandment? That’s a little over the top and discredits this entire rant . . . er post.

    What Romney is, is a pragmatic conservative that can actually lead and get things done. More importantly, he actually has some depth on all of these issues and can articulate his stances on the issues. This is clearly unlike Rick Perry – who frankly embarrassed himself with that performance last night. If the question doesn’t give Perry the opportunity to say that “in Texas” he kept taxes low, has predictable regulations and passed tort reform, then Perry seems lost and out of his depth.

    What we absolutely don’t need this election is for our nominee to be stymied when some interviewer asks them those old “gotcha” questions such as “what newspapers do you read” and “what Supreme Court cases do you disagree with besides Roe v Wade”. At this point, I am afraid Perry’s answer to the first would be “none” and to the second “I don’t know”.

    My favorite part of last night’s debate was “hey Rich have you ever been to the southern border?”

    “Yes I have”. Umm Governor Perry, when you ask a question like that – you are supposed to know in advance that the answer was no. At this point, Obama’s glib tongue would demolish Perry and we’ll be looking at “4 more years”.

  • freedomscribe

    http://www.massresistance.org/docs/marriage/romney/timeline.html

  • silentcal2012

    Look it up on youtube. He repeatedly pushed for a con amendment.There was one he opposed that did more than protect marriage and stripped gays of basic civil rights.

    So much misinformation comes from a group of wackjobs who spin his record to destroy him like massresistance.

    Romney fought hard for a con amendment.

  • runner12

    I think that the reaction to the debate has been very knee-jerk, which is understandable when you consider who is in the WH. Conservatives and other freedom-loving Americans are terrified of an Obama second term. This real and natural fear causes us at times to go into full panic mode when one or more of our candidates slips up.

    The reality is that Cain won the debate and that Perry and Romney had EQUAL ups and downs. Perry actually did have some high points. He clarified his position on SS and even though I may not like his answer on immigration, he had a solid answer ( minus the have a heart comment). He believes in securing the border and is not pro-amnesty. His positions are more to the right of both McCain and Bush.

    But Perry badly mishandled the last exchange with Romney and given that it was towards the end of the debate it was what stuck in the minds of most people. He needs to work with a debate coach.

    Romney also has some solid points and replies. But in one exchange with Baier, he became defensive and shrill. He needs to slow his speech down and defend himself without looking angry.

    I think that the bickering between the two was non-productive and brought out the worst in both. This needs to stop because the only winner in this is Obama. We must strike a balance between honestly critiquing our candidates without providing a roadmap for the Left on how to attack the GOP. Gingrich was right to say that this should be all about Obama. Good grief people, we have a neo-socialist in the WH, he is whonwe should be going after.

    The top-tier candidates will improve and grow. Let’s give them time before we line them up in front of the firing squad.

  • silentcal2012

    If decades old info is a reason to call Romney a flip flopper then Perry is the ultimate flip flopper. The former Al Gore Democrat.

    Whats good for the goose…

  • Doc Holliday

    we would pick Gingrich. He is a conservative, and he can out debate Obama. Now we can’t just pick a guy, but if we could, it should be Gingrich. Romney and Perry have flaws that could lead to an Obama second term. Sure Gingrich could lose, but at least we would have put our best man forward, and rolled the dice.

    I agree Cain is good, he could be the Veep.

  • earlgrey

    I have been so wound up this morning, I have been looking to find anything to get me to relax enough to peel myself awa for a much needed mid-day run (recovering from sinus infection –my times are sucking !!!).

    Anyway, you get the earlgrey prozac award today. Thanks for calming me down enoough to get away from my screen.

  • kcdude

    a reference to Cain. I agree that he did take this so-called debate, while I think Gingrich did well once again.

    The back and forth between Romney and Perry caused my wife to tune out and I’ll say that inplementation of the debate coach idea is overdue. I had difficulty listening to some of Perry’s comments because he appeared to be very uncomfortable just being where he was and doing what he was doing.

  • pdawk

    were even in the same stratosphere last night in debate performance. I know Romney is a 4 letter word to many on this site, but the guy is by far the best chance we have of re-taking the White House.

    I think everyone got swept up in this “idea” of Rick Perry as if he embodied the Camelot of conservative ideals. The problem is that just like Camelot, the idea of Perry as a strong conservative and general election candidate is a fairy tale. Hell, he makes W. look like John F. Kennedy when it comes to debating. As they say in Texas, Perry is all hat and no cattle.

  • Aaron Gardner

    nt

  • streiff

    a good number of Southern conservatives were democrats because of a cultural affinity they held for that party. In 1988 Gore was a pretty good guy. He was as conservative as GHW Bush.

    For someone who whines incessantly about using Romney’s old, and by old I mean more than 24-hour old, positions against him you are certainly harping on who Rick Perry supported for president in 1988 despite the fact that he was recruited into the GOP by Karl Rove.

  • runner12

    Gingrich is great in debates, but he has baggage to. Could he overcome the past? Maybe. It is too early to tell.

  • runner12

    I think everyone needs to take a deep breath around here. It is only September and we are not helping ourselves by hitting the panic button.

    Sorry about your times, getting back on track after being sick is rough. Especially after an upper-respiratory infection. I am ramping up training this week for my first half-marathon of the season. Glad the weather is cooperating!

  • Doc Holliday

    good to see you again! I agree about Gingrich, he has always had baggage. I think the debate last night actually helped those who we questioned. The reason being that Romney and Perry showed so many failings. Hell, I am surprised the Palinistas are not out in force. I mean, at this rate, I am looking for the dog with the fewest fleas. I just want Obama gone.

  • jmcmd

    Come next November this economy will likely be in no better shape than it is now. At that point I don’t think people will be as interested in someone’s baggage as much as their ability to fix problems. If the new Contract is well crafted Newt will be able to make a strong case for himself and make Obama’s failure the focal point of the election. Let’s also remember that BHO is not without baggage himself, we just need a candidate who isn’t shy about bringing it up.

  • rightwingmom52

    Hope your parents are doing okay.

  • streiff

    constitutional amendment that would have protected marriage. That is what we are talking about. That amendment did not “strip gays of their rights” that is just balderdash. It prevented gay marriage Lite.

    Romney hasn’t fought hard for anything other than moving jobs overseas.

  • rightwingmom52

    rush our choice, but who would you like to see leave the pack? I’d like Huntsman, Johnson, Paul and Bachmann gone. Maybe Santorum because I don’t think he has a chance, but I agree with many of his answers.

    Enjoy your runs!

  • streiff

    is what I read in the papers

    Romney Called 2002 Amendment Banning Gay Marriage And Benefits In Massachusetts Too Extreme And Did Not Support It.

  • Doc Holliday

    you are certainly one of the good ones I missed. My parents are doing as well as can be expected I guess, my mom is doing much better than last year. My father has been surrounded by the evil that is Alzheimer’s and he can’t help that. He has already lived over ten years with it, that is the Marine in him. I tell him every day how much I love and respect him, that is all I know to do. He doesn’t seem to feel pain, and he gets a lot of attention. He walks more than I do and meets a lot of new friends every day, people and dogs. I wish I could do more, and I will try to do just that until they pull me away.

    I hope all is well with you and yours. We all have challenges, I realize that from time to time and it wakes me from my myopia.

  • silentcal2012

    Its freakung Massachusetts. Romney backed an amendment supporyed by most conservatoved in the state and had a shot of passing.

    That other amendment was overe reaching garbage that had no widespread support.

    And yes he is a successful capitalist.

  • gracie

    but I will not lift a finger to campaign for him. I am just not capable of the lying it would require.

  • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

    Rhetorical or not… the Mormon whispers (primary or general) are less than what we need to actually worry about as conservatives in this primary…

    The “evangelical base” isn’t a bloc vote, and the people that put up signs, call phone banks, and knock on doors will be the same precinct chairs that have always done it when it comes promoting the GOP (regardless of the nominee).

    I don’t think the “Hispanic vote” is as much of a unified voting bloc as some may think…

    if we adopt Mitt, here’s my rhetorical question…

    How many phone calls, how many emails, how many letters, how many signatures, and how long will it take for you to listen to conservatives, when they will inevitably find themselves in disagreement with you and the establishment GOP congressional leadership on some form of legislation or executive issue, before you actually LISTEN, and ACT accordingly?

    Romney speaks well… but too often… he knows his audience, but his message is geared to his audience… and this is why I’m fearful he gets the nomination…

    There is no doubt he is a squish… I won’t call him a RINO, he’s done a lot for the Republican party with his PAC… and in the end I believe he will unify the conservative base… (around the anti-Romney candidate) so we’ve got that to be thankful for…

    As a conservative, I hope that our nominee understands how to LISTEN to their base… this is my biggest issue with Romney… just when I think he’s listened, he comes up with some technocratic drivel to remain in the grey space… which is why he and his supporters can CONSTANTLY point out ‘THAT’S NOT WHAT ROMNEY SAID, WHAT HE SAID WAS’… and that’s why he faces the “flip flop” stigma…

    I support Rick Perry because he’s got all the tools Romney has for a general election win against Obama… he may not debate well, but at least I know where he stands on the issues, and oddly enough with the Gardasil thing, I’m quite convinced that Perry knows how to LISTEN to his base… he read the writing on the wall early, and dropped the issue when it fell DOA.

  • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

    What are his political views worth right now?

  • streiff

    called the amendment extreme and he did this because it is Massachusetts.

    You see, the unfortunate thing about a representative form of government is you can’t always get what you want. So he could get half of what he wanted but decided to work against it. I feel a lot better now.

    If he’d worked at all in building the Mass GOP, rather than overseeing its effective demise, he might not have had that problem.

  • justluthien

    I’ve read a lot of statement in this thread about “I won’t vote for ___ under any conditions,” and I can understand that: it’s how I felt about McCain in 2008. Not this time. If the GOP nominates Howdy Doody, then he will get my vote because I’m not sure the country can survive four more years of Obama.

  • clarioncaller

    Michele Bachmann said it correctly. Obama is going to loose. The Republican nominee will be the next president(especially with 14-15 more months of this economic agony).Michelle is where I’m leaning right now. WE DON’T NEED TO SETTLE.GO BOLD.

    Romney is a Progressive just as McCain is.(He will continue the progressive march to transform America) He needs to be defeated early and often at the polls.

  • earlgrey

    I was worried she would still any momentum that might have gone to TPaw. I still wonder if TPaw would still be there if she had gotten in the race. I wasn’t really aware that she had enough experience to run, especially since everyone kept saying Ryan didn’t have the experience. To me, she looked like an opportunist, and she has embarassed herself and the tea party.

    Santorum has no chance and I think he is more weight dragging on Perry.

    I like having Newt in the debates.

    Huntsman, Johnson are distractions and they just give MSM fuel to use against the tea party.

    My run sucked. I can’t seem to kick this bug, either that or am really just a wimp. There’s got to be some rich guy I can blame for this. . .

  • runner12

    Huntsman, Santorum, and Johnson to go. As much as I hate to say it I would like to see Bachman bow out. She needs to train her sites on Obama, not other conservatives.

  • streiff

    It is THEM. THEY are coming for you.

  • Glaucon

    >Gary Johnson performed nervously, but well. I didn

  • wonkish1

    Newt is an expert and what is called framing.

    An example is when Reagan was asked about his age and said, “I won’t use my opponents youth and inexperience against him.” That’s framing.

    If someone goes after Newt about particular baggage he will just fire back with the most eloquent yet forceful argument of the pettiness of his detractors in serious economic times. And instead of him losing ground because of the attack he will actually gain ground because of it.

    I wouldn’t be so worried about Newt’s baggage being the issue. An expert framer can nullify just about any baggage out there.

  • Common_Cents

    with no explanation.

    Does anyone think Newt learned anything From his mistakes? Looks like Perry did after being a Dem in his past. To dismiss Newt with a simpleton label such as “baggage” is like doing drive by hits on Perry and to say they believe Gingrich would do the exact same thing all over again. It is disingenuous to ignore his accomplishments as well.

  • acat

    is that Newt’s “baggage” makes it difficult for him to win the support of specific groups who are more active in the primary than in the general.

    Specifically his capitulation to Bubba Clinton calls into question how good he really is at hard negotiations, and make the fiscal types wonder… he loses them to Romney.

    Sharing a couch with Nancy Pelosi in one of those stupid “save the planet” commercials turns off the group who reject man-made climate change.

    Divorcing a wife while she was dying and having an affair with a staffer are both hard to swallow for the religious-minded.

    I do not see a way for Newt to overcome this *in the primary*, although I think it all becomes background noise in the general.

    Mew

  • streiff

    you say he and Romney agree on school choice

    Romney Came Out Against School Vouchers In 2002 After Favoring Them In 1994.

  • Common_Cents

    Then isn’t it similarly fair to say Rick Perry has baggage for being a Democrat? or judge any of the other candidates for baggage over the same time period? I am just pointing out that there seems to be some bias towards Gingrich’s screw ups and not others “baggage”.

    Everyone has baggage. I look for the ones who learn from their mistakes and get the feeling that they aren’t going to repeat them. Such is life.

    I want all candidates vetted equally with the same standards. May the best one win.

  • perry4prez

    how come he keeps getting reelected there?

  • runner12

    I simply stated my viewpoint of the debate. Romney did come across as shrill at times and Perry did zing him with his omissions in the reprint of his book. But that does not take away the fact that Romney also made some very good points and had some great moments.

    As for Perry, my assessment is based on watching both the debate and the live covering of the event on this site. There were several comments on the live feed that complimented some of Perry’s answers, so it could not have been all bad. The problem was that he royally flubbed ( and I mean flubbed) the second to last question. Not the impression you want to leave people with.

  • runner12

    My larger point was that we need to stop with the knee jerk reactions and the shooting of our own.

    The perfect allegory that comes to mind for me is a football game. Let’s say it is the beginning of the second quarter. Your team is up 20-7. All of the sudden your team’s quarterback throws a pick-six and/or the runningback fumbles and the other team scores. Would it be rational for the coach to be pulling his hair our, bemoaning to his team that all is lost? Or better yet screaming to throw out the first team offense because they stink? Of course not. But that is how some on here have reacted to last night’s debate.

    I am not saying that we should not have honest critique and discussions about candidates on here. But let’s not trash them so much that we make them unelectable. All we do is help the Left when we do that, and they know it.
    Keep the debates on the merits, and vote your conscience. Remember, anyone on that stage last night would make a better President than Obama. Heck, any of the moderators would make a better President.

  • Michael M. Keohane

    but I have been asking since the Nixon/Kennedy debates just what do these debates prove about the candidates and their ability to function as our countries chief executive. We might as well have dance contests as debates and the dance contests might draw an audience that stays awake.