I find it hard to believe that Romney is gaining from Bachmann’s fall in the polls. It seemed that many of the Paul supporters, who were not married to him, were choosing Bachmann as an alternate candidate, as Bachmann seems to have spent time pandering to the libertarian wing of the Tea Party, especially with those that think any federal involvement with vaccinations is evil, which is Ron Paul’s position. I believe that many Paul supporters have realized that he is not going to win the nomination because of his wackiness or because he is too old.

It is hard to believe that many of the Bachmann supporters would go to a known moderate, who stands by Romneycare, when Bachmann’s constant mantra has been that she will get rid of Obamacare. That doesn’t seem to make sense.

There is also the perception now that Bachmann has chosen the wrong hill to die on with her at times fraudulent attacks against Perry, and Merck with the charges of the drug causing mental retardation. I would think that her support is falling mainly for those over the top charges. How would that benefit Romney? Santorum, in some polls has now dropped from a pretty steady 2 to a one, most likely for the same reason with his pile on at the last debate.

Palin is being removed by many pollsters, as is Guiliani as there is no indication that they will enter the race. I would also find it more than a little interesting if Palin’s supporters went for Romney, as Palin has been considered by some, as the only true conservative in the race, whatever true conservative means. No one has accused Romney of being a conservative. On the contrary, he has proudly taken up the mantle as the party moderate.

Something doesn’t make sense.

on Thursday. It seems that Perry has been trying to play it carefully at the debates, and to just maintain his lead. So many have warned that the real Perry is too crass or bold with comments like treason and ponzi. Others have been clamoring for him to bring his strong Texas take no prisoners style. I’d actually prefer that he fight it out, in a manner that proves that he can’t be boxed in or bossed around by the moderators or other candidates. I personally believe that that is what many are waiting for. Time for him to take of the gloves and go for it.

Those that have a problem with his immigration positions are going to have their heads exploding as he is doing a fundraiser in NY tonight, as is Obama. Perry is being hosted by the head of the Taxi Assoc. or something like that, who happens to be hispanic, and is expected to take in 50 to 100 thousand from the event. The guy said he is squarely behind Perry, and I’m sure he can bring much of the NY hispanic vote with him. Perry got 38% of the hispanic vote in his last election. The hispanics are dropping away from Obama big time. Perry can conceiveably gain much of the large hispanic population in votes. The immigration issue is very low on the priorities list, and the economy and job creating take up all that oxygen. I don’t think that Perry will fall from the skies in a thunderous bolt of dislike. Don’t know the numbers of Palin or Bachmann supporters, but if Perry picks up a good portion of the hispanic vote, the ladies supporters will not make much difference.

Sorry for going on.

conservative candidates is that the vote gets split between so many that the moderate wins.

In the 2010 5th district House race against Perriello there were 7 R candidates running. 6 of them were conservative to varrying degrees, including one Paul type candidate. They had varying degrees of experience and resumes. Not one of them would drop out, and hung to the bitter end. The most moderate Robert Hurt, recruited by Cantor with his Young Guns program won the race. No one would get behind the most, or best conservative and the vote was very split.

I consider all of the candidates running to be conservatives other than Romney and Huntsman. They mostly just don’t have the experience that many want and need after the president on training wheels.

and either will Obama come the general. Yesterdays headline at Drudge was “Liberals vow to primary Obama.” I’ve been saying since last year when Obama’s numbers started dropping, and even Carville started making some negative noise about Obama, that if he kept going downhill, Hillary would jump in and primary him, if he doesn’t just back down before that. Look at all the recent stories about how popular and beloved Hillary is. They are trial balloons to see what kind of chance Hillary has. The Clintons always test stuff before they jump in. Soros and the Clintons are close friends, but for Soros’s money, he put it on a bright fresh articulate black guy that would be the real “first black president.” Soros wants a refund. He will now back who he probably thinks he should have backed last time, Hillary. Hillary will say she changed her mind, that she needs to do it to save her party, her country, and for the women who want the first women president. She won’t be easy to beat, as most won’t realize she is Obama II, but a lot smarter and even more devious.

n/t

I read the article, and it seems that the people being quoted, as the Texas Tea Party leaders are from the Texas Tea Party Patriots. Most of the Tea Party Patriot groups support Ron Paul, or at least they used to.

One of the leaders quoted, JoAnn Fleming want Perry to call the legislature back into session to pass the Sanctuary City ban bill, that the legislature had already rejected. Does she think that the very same legislators will change their minds and pass the bill because she wants them to?

Another Tea Party coordinator, Ken Emanuelson said that Perry has the option of signing an EO to address some of the immigration related problems.

So if I have this right, they were probably some of those screaming because Perry bypassed the legislature and signed the EO for Gardasil, but now they want him to bypass the legislature and sign an EO to deal with the immigration problem. Am I missing something here.

I also would love to know how they feel about their hero Ron Paul now calling for open borders so no one can be held in when they want to escape to Mexico.

No wonder some of the Tea Party groups are losing popularity, and in essence are ruining it for those that aren’t so loony.

He is counting on his record at Bain Capital, where he claims to have created thousands of private sector jobs, but his record when he was governing Mass. was awful. As Perry stated, Romney’s state was 47th in job creation when he was governor, and that wasn’t in an economic environment that Perry still managed to create jobs in.

Then of course Perry also created the means for the job growth in Texas with Tort Reform, no state tax, and the least amount of Regulations that he had control over. They are all winning issues with the population, not necessarily the special interest groups though. Perry can highlight the fact that a major power company in Texas now is having to close coal fired power plants, and they must layoff people because of the new increased EPA regs.

when given a list of priorities, immigration comes way down on the list. Jobs and the economy are the high priorities, and I don’t see that changing between now and Jan. 2011. Granted the polling reports were from 2010, but according to a morerecent poll most want the borders closed, agree with the AZ law, and want police to be able to ask for proof of citizenship, however, many including 75% of D’s and surprisingly 47% of R’s are perplexed as to what to do with the illegals already here.

I am not saying that I am an amnesty supporter, I am not. I do see the benefit of guest worker visas for the jobs that most Americans won’t do. I would agree that the 99ers should be forced to do some of those jobs, but current unemployment laws do not allow that. How many are willing to stand in a baking hot field, for 8 hours or more, and pick veges or fruit. How many are willing to muck horse stalls, and handle horses? Not many.

Perry has a great shot at picking up a good portion of the hispanic voting block, and because the immigration issue isn’t high on the priority list, it’s possible that many won’t hold his immigration past policies against him. His record of job growth, and an economy in Texas to be envied can be the winning ticket. Of course that isn’t how Tom shott them all Tancredo won’t see it that way. What do you think?

as you have stated, is that when someone inherits a bad economy, or two ongoing wars, or whatever, the knee jerk reaction is to blame the predecessor. Jeeez it’s all still Bush’s fault according to Obama and Freddy Kruegerman. I think people are tired and worn out with hearing those claims. Reagan inherited a terrible economy from Carter, but I don’t believe he ever resorted to blaming Carter. He worked at it, and did a great job in the time he had to turn it around. I know some will say, but he raised taxes, and yes he did temporarily. He also increased the military/defense budget and rebuilt a decimated military force which provided his peace through strength policy. If I’m not mistaken the military is still using some of the same military equipment that was authorized by Reagan and the Congress. That’s pathetic.

As to Romney’s unemployment rate, didn’t I just read that because of Romneycare, the state lost 18,000 jobs? That has to be a crushing report against Romney and something Perry can put to good use.

few bad apples ruining a good thing with the Tea Parties, it is proof yet once again that when there is a leadership vaccum, someone will always come forward to fill that vaccum. No one wanted Tea Party leaders, it ruins the grassroots citizens in their local towns and communities who came out spontaneously to protest the Obama destruction after the stimulus. When you saw who was starting to combine the Tea Parties into one big group, all posting the same platforms or goals on their websites, it was already starting to stink. I found it amusing that they claimed to be non-partisan, despite the fact that theliberals/Democrats hate the Tea Parties. I really do believe that there are two very distinct Tea Parties. One group leans to the Ron Paul faux (OK acat) libertarian groups, and those in lesser number that are closer to Reagan conservatives. I hope in the end the Reagan people win out. You will know them by who supports Perry, and it won’t be the faux libertarian faction, as evidenced by the Texas Tea Party.

libertarian route back in the 80′s, as I’m sure you know. He found out that it really is a two party system, and that third parties have little chance. After Paul’s 08 flame out, he took his campaign moneybomb money and started the Campaign for Liberty, which had a statement on the web, I’m sure not for everyone’s eyes, but I found it. They said that third parties didn’t work so they had to take over one of the main parties, and the Republican party was the one to take over, because Republicans were lazy, and didn’t want to get their hands dirty. They determined that they could change the Republican into what they wanted it to be. That has caused a tremendous split between the traditional conservatives, and the one issue fiscal conservatives. That is what we are seeing the results of today. Heck Paul left the Republican party saying he was done with them, and that Reagan was a failure. He had to come crawling back when he knew he would go no where as a libertarian candidate. He couldn’t have even won his House seat as a libertarian. His cult members hate the Republicans, and to a lesser degree the liberals, but they know they can’t get a third party off the ground any time soon. So they stick with all us horrible neocons, to our detriment. As Rush said a few months ago, someone has to get rid of this guy (Paul) before he destroys the entire Republican party. I seriously doubt the original libertarian party would even take these homeless, hopeless loonies in.

we want their vote or not. How many of the die hard supporters came out and said they didn’t vote for McCain because they were standing on their principles. Look at the names of the people Paul himself endorsed in the general and refused to endorse McCain. I doubt Paul himself voted for McCain. How many of them wrote Ron Paul’s name in? This time to the rodeo they have dug their heels in even more, and I doubt they will vote for the R nom. if it isn’t Paul, which it won’t be. It will be much easier to chase the larger block of hispanic voters than to try to convince the Paul supporters to support the nominee. I do believe that the die hard Paul supporters are those that Reagan was referring to when he said “some just need to go their way.”

but as we found out from the eloquent speechifer Obama, it should never be the first criteria as to how we choose a candidate. Obama eloquently told all how he was going to socialize (or worse) the country, and he was elected largely for that ability. I’ll take record over speaking ability, or debate performance any day. Romney would without doubt give us a speech that would make Harvard people proud, but, Perry will make it clear, without 50cent words, so to speak, what he has in mind.

people decide for themselves. If wonkish wanted a history of usdebateboard’s comments, he could surely look them up. The last time he was here, in a campaign season, it took him a good while to catch up, and get up to speed with the site. He will find out, but it takes him a little while. He will get there though, eventually. He’s like this happy energizer bunny, which I think I called him his last time around.

has a different meaning than more educated? Who would have thunk it. I believe I said that I have been watching the Obama admin. with respect to what the Obama admin. has been doing behind the scenes on immigration. I posted links that proved that what the feds have been doing all but obliterates any real actions that Gov’s can do with respect to immigration, Your reply to me was to dismiss much of what I posted about the feds. actions, and you most certainly dismissed anything I said, as you are so much more knowledgable than I, Yyou think Gov’s have more ability to control than they do. You have had a problem with Perry on immigration, and you’re comments have borne that out. You just want to refuse to believe that Governors don’t have much control over a federal responsibility.

I’ll go toe to toe with you on how the Obama admin. has usurped any ability of any states to do much of anything about immigration. Let me know if you are up to it. I’m ready.

but the partiette has come out strong against Perry immigration policies. She indicated for her it can be a dealbreaker. She has posted that Gov. have more power than they actually do. If you look into what the Obama admin. has done to strip any immigration laws on the books, you would understand how Obama has made it impossible for any Governors, or even the police in the states to accomplish anything. acat asked her what she was doing in her state to fight the problem, and her comment was that 287(g) was accomplish whatever. She isn’t even up to snuff on the stripping of the 287(g) program by this admin. But she’s sure quick to disparage Perry because of his positions.

I have no problem going head to head with the facts, but to be dismissed as though I know nothing, and that the patritte has been much more on top of the issue is frankly disingenious and more than a little decieving. I don’t post much of anything without having the details at hand.

tell me you honestly don’t fuss when someone tells you they have much more knowledge than you do with respect to an issue. Hmmmm.