Newt Gingrich takes two of the last three, Cain in third

Getting_Back_to_Basics

All this bunching up will evaporate in early January. It’s practically a done deal that Romney will win NH. And I predict Ron Paul wins Iowa (he’s now consistently second and has a good ground game there — unlike Cain or Gingrich). With a Romney and Paul win, what happens going into SC? It’s anyone’s guess but these two wins will take the wind out of the sails of Cain and Gingrich, leading to Romney dominance. Of course maybe this is a “new way” to campaign by keeping things national, but it still seems like Romney’s to lose.

haumea

Ron Paul, Ron Paul.

He isn’t winning anything. “Let’s be buddies with Iran” pretty much disqualifies his from serving a CiC (expect maybe of Mars), and future debates will clarify the issue sufficiently.

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

…based on the desire to defeat BHO and attempting to isolate personal bias.

Each advocate would want others to fall by the wayside and then absorb the attendant support; this explains the movement from Perry to Cain to Gingrich, for example.

But there will come a time when the music will stop, and there will be [increasingly] fewer seats upon which to alight. Therefore, the key-concern is staying-power [which is ideally manifest by the raison d'?tre of Santorum's swing through all 99 Iowan counties].

Most have validated the semi-finals [search for the anti-Romney] model [upon which Dick Morris keeps harping, in-between his pro-Cain proclamations]. Thus, whom will the 65% of TPM-leaning GOP’ers choose [subtracting Mitt's 25%-ceiling and Paul's 10%- tithe]?

The difference between Perry’s fall and Cain’s plummet is that only the latter is refueled virtually daily; amazingly, for example, Politico didn’t cover Rick’s anti-DC rollout yesterday, instead, today noting his debate-challenge to Pelosi. Rick can be depended-upon to issue quality-statements, provide superb-interviews, and generate becalmed-debates.

*

Meanwhile, The Newt is already being confronted on his reticence to come-clean on Fannie/Freddie, central to the 2008-crash; NO ONE can believe that he was paid $1.3M for an exclusive “history” lesson…particularly when it will take minimal effort to demonstrate the nexus between his input and pressures exerted on GOP-legislators to turn-down-the-heat on F/F scrutiny.

All the great debating techniques won’t obscure this glitch, let alone his embrace of the Individual Mandate, as a manifest of his statism/elitism.

THIS is from “Winning the Future”[2005, signed-copy dedicated to my son Michael] on page 126:

“4. You have the right to be part of the lowest-cost insurance pool and YOU HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO BUY INSURANCE. We need some significant changes to ensure that every American is insured, but we should make clear that a 21st Century Intelligent Health System requires everyone to participate in the insurance system.”

Lest this quotation stand-alone [along with his longitudinal support for the Individual Mandate, manifest for-example when he endorsed the stance of the Heritage Foundation, per a hot debate-exchange with Mitt], consider this quote from “Real Change” [2008] on page 227:

“Everyone should be required to have coverage.”

There you have it; The Newt supports community-ratiing rather than open-competition; he would choose SCOTUS-justices who would be RINO’s. And no rhetorical legerdemain will neutralize THIS glitch [let alone others related to global-warming, flip-flops on Libya, etc.].

*

It can be assumed that the bit-players [as good as they are on myriad issues] will not emerge, noting their flat-lines throughout this period of flux.

It also must [sigh!] be assumed that no one else will enter the race ["DeMint, we hardly knew ye!"] when so much vetting/debating has already transpired.

Therefore, the anti-Mitt will be either The Newt or Rick Perry. Now, which has been the True Conservative?

bzip

I am not sure how Newt can continue to hang on and rise in the polls with the onset of the media’s vetting. From all of Newt’s past baggage to more recent baggage which is now gaining traction such as;

Gingrich Said to Be Paid at Least $1.6 Million by Freddie Mac
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/print/2011-11-16/gingrich-said-to-be-paid-at-least-1-6-million-by-freddie-mac.html

Gingrich made big bucks pushing corporate welfare
http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/article/gingrich-made-big-bucks-pushing-corporate-welfare

Report: Gingrich took money from drug lobby while pushing Bush?s prescription drug bill
http://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2011/11/16/report-gingrich-took-money-from-drug-companies-while-pushing-bushs-prescription-drug-bill/

Gingrich Said to Be Paid at Least $1.6 Million by Freddie Mac
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/print/2011-11-16/gingrich-said-to-be-paid-at-least-1-6-million-by-freddie-mac.html

Newt Gingrich is no conservative
http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/2011/11/newt-gingrich-no-conservative

I also don’t see how Cain can come back or continue to rise i n polls after all the enormous gaffes he has encountered, from the like the Libya gaffe, the support of unions to the more recent Cuba foreign policy remarks from yesterday regarding the wet-foot, dry-foot policy:

http://videos.kansascity.com/vmix_hosted_apps/p/media?id=120856111&item_index=&genre_id=00000840

Herman Cain brings embattled campaign to South Florida
Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/11/16/2504634/what-herman-cains-south-florida.html#ixzz1dyHbq3WQ

http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/11/16/2504634/what-herman-cains-south-florida.html

I just don’t see how either cain or Newt stay upfront.

bzip

It seems all too funny – well Bachmann is hitting Newt for his dealings with Freddie, Bachmann was also receiving money from Freedie…

From HotAir;

Bachmann ?fought? Freddie Mac ? while taking its money
http://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2011/11/17/if-this-is-what-it-looks-like-to-fight-freddie-mac-more-candidates-should-try-it/

..”?While [Gingrich] was taking that money, I was fighting against Fannie and Freddie,? Bachmann said on Wednesday.

It turns out that while she was ?fighting? them, she was also taking their money.”

Freddie Mac gave Bachmann money ? while she was ?fighting? them
http://dailycaller.com/2011/11/16/bachmann-took-campaign-money-from-freddie-while-she-was-fighting-them/#ixzz1dwDrErMY

curtmilr

The question is to whether said action moves to Gov. Perry or Gov. Romney. Perry has done damage to his brans. In his speeches and interviews, he has been solid, but the MSM keeps running the “Oops!” moment, thus his policies are not gaining attention and support. We’ll see!
Romney is a good man, but his flip-flopping historically are just so off-putting he can only be the candidate by default if no other candidate can consolidate the field to defeat him.
This leads to the question of who would be selected in a brokered convention???

kellyinthetexaspanhandle

gov. perry is good for america. listen to him!

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

.nt.

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

If the field is closed and if none of the 1%-players can rise, then the demise of Cain would yield only The Newt to challenge Rick Perry as the anti-Romney.

As I concluded, will not the 65% of GOP’s float-vote settle upon the True Conservative?

If one performs an Electoral-College analysis and allows for the GOP to win fly-over America [over objections of DC/NYC aloof-analysts], then it would appear that Rick Perry could become the landslide favorite.

He must continue to distinguish himself from the pack, invoke “Fed Up!” for rhetoric [as a resource for distilled-quotes, upon demand], and lead all answers to jobs/jobs/jobs.

As the voters “get serious” and the tiresome PMSNBC rhetoric is supplanted by substantive analysis among GOP rank-and-file, can anyone else prevail?

bzip

I tend to backup my statements and my positions through video’s, links and whatever else I can provide as evidence. If you or anyone here thinks that is spamming, then you better look up the definition of spamming.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

No, seriously, you do this for every candidate except your preferred. You aren’t adding anything to the conversation. You’re just a drippy faucet. It’s really gotten old.

http://wadingacross.wordpress.com logus

Will you be doing any comparative polling analyses at the beginning of January in relation to previous primaries?

If Newt continues to do well, do you think that bodes well or badly for him?

The article at NRO is a few days old and Mr. Geraghty has Cain in second, but by the end of the article he lays out his prediction. He also looks at prior primary races.

Mr. Geraghty’s prediction is that Florida will provide the true predictor of the primary. His prediction is Romney, IA; Huntsman, NH; Gingrich, SC.

His reasoning for Huntsman’s win is two-fold, the first being the amount of time that Mr. Huntsman has invested in the state at the expense of pretty much all else.

Neil, I realize that your posts on the polls try to focus on the current polling data, but as I don’t recall whether you did so in ’08, I’m wondering if you’re inclined to do a detailed data comparison and prognostication come New Year.

bzip

If you don’t like what I post – don’t read it. You are the dripping one going around bashing everyone you disagree with.

Death_of_the_Donkey

and according to the latest Iowa polls, he is right around 7% there too. Please explain how he makes this comeback in 6 weeks, I just don’t see it. He had his opportunity and has likely blown it.

http://wadingacross.wordpress.com logus

From NRO. In case he’s posted a new article, look at the Nov. 14th posting.

bzip

That is would be easy. Where was Cain or Newt 6 weeks ago. It is amazing what happens in just a couple of weeks.

Polls in Iowa are a little tricky in predicting the actual outcome of the caucuses so I don’t know how much I would trust that.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

or retract your statement.

Show me where I’ve been bashing everyone or retract your statement.

bzip

I don’t need to tract my statements. I think you need to retract your bashing.

texasroots

thanks for the informative links. Helps a lot.

Tbone

post the results from 2008 and then apply your two digit intellect to a fine analysis of them.

Tbone

you post something, it’s wrong.

acat

Will someone please yank the plug?

Mew

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

But that’s not what I was accused of. Let’s please all keep our accusations straight, ok?

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

I don’t intend to try to dig up polls from last time. We already know who won last time.

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

Polls only measure where we currently are in the race.

acat

is the one Huckabee won. (Iowa has not been a reliable predictor since everyone realized it was a reliable predictor and started pouring money into it…)

Note that Wikipedia has a nice graph showing polling going into the caucuses.

Mew

acat

Let’s try that again.

Mew

supergirl2911

Was responsible for the anti-newt flyers about his personal foibles. He had a nice press conference gave his contrition and when it come back up he’ll say I have already discussed this and been attacked personally. Let’s talk about issues. Ladidada more and more think its Romney behind all attacks but this was so small (flyers? Really?) no one would no if not connected to he response . The attacks

naraht

Gack. The idea that Mr Geraghty’s predictions can be extended *quite* easily to have 5 different winners in the first 5 caucus is pretty bizarre.

Also, if the winner in Iowa ends up on the low side of 20% (and within a point or two of second place and even third) will the media play it as “X won Iowa” or will it be played as “Republican primary *still* confused? (And will it matter there whether X is Ron Paul or not?) And four years ago, McCain was *fourth* in Iowa.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

.no–text.

supergirl2911

Was responsible for the anti-newt flyers about his personal foibles. He had a nice press conference gave his contrition and when it come back up he’ll say I have already discussed this and been attacked personally. Let’s talk about issues. Ladidada more and more think its Romney behind all attacks but this was so small (flyers? Really?) no one would no if not connected to he response . The attacks Of Bachman, perry and campaign have been more messy. IMO,

CincoSolas_del_Bronx

.

sethellis

Paul is giving Iowa a lot of attention. I do not believe his numbers there reflect what will happen on election day. Those supporters will ditch him at the last second.

So far the majority Redstate narrative has been correct. Newt has risen to the top at Cain’s expense. However, Newt is already bleeding from the scrutiny.

Which means it goes back to Perry just like what you guys have been saying all along. I think he has a great strategy right now with the anti-washington angle. It positions him as the perfect alternative to Newt. Unfortunately, I think Perry’s brand has been damaged beyond repair. Even if he overcomes that he will have trouble defending his reform plan. It will be like 999 all over again. Bold, but not something the entire party can get behind. I think term limits on court justices will be particularly troublesome.

uncmike

is the perception by some in the base that he’s a slick debater, and that seems to be more important to many Republicans, especially establishment types, than stands on issues or real records of achievement. The “slick debater” standard is also why Romney continues to hold onto his magical 25% which, I strongly suspect, consists of establishment Republicans who are more worried about being embarrassed by a candidate in a debate than worried about the actual positions the candidate holds or will take if elected. Dr. Skarloff, you have done a very good job in your post of reminding people here why Newt should be anathma to their dreams of putting a real conservative in the White House–he’s not one. He’s an establishment type, through and through. Newt can’t hang around DC as long as he has–taking money from the K-St crowd, Freddie Mac, Beltway think-tanks &c., and not sell your soul so his now-wife, Callista, can have another string of diamonds from Tiffany’s.

By this time next week, the Freddie Mac story alone will begin to erode the rose colored glass view of Newt by many in the base as they begin to recall why he lingered in low single digits not so long ago–examples from Dr. Sklaroff’s post above are but the tip of the iceberg. Put simply, reality will once agan set in and, like Cain before him, Newt will sink in the polls.

As I have written in these pages before, it will ultimately come down to two candidates–Romney and Perry. The short, romantic flings with Michelle, Herman, Newt and, yes, even Ron will be over as reality finally sinks in. Only two candidates will remain and, of those two, only Perry is a real conservative with a demonstrated record of achievement. Like everyone, he has warts, but his are not of the type that keep on giving and he has owned up to them already. That is why I, like many others, will remain Perry supporters until he decides to take his name off the ballot or wins. For the sake of the country, I hope it is the latter.

pennsylvaniafarmer

Perry might be the only “true conservative” left after Cain’s fall, but that doesn’t mean the 65% will coalesce around him. First, some of the 65% will trade purity for fluency and intelligence, and go to Romney or stay with Newt. Second, Cain and the lower tier candidates won’t just disappear. They will still garner a good part of the 65%.

Perry’s resurgence depends not on slipping ahead of Cain and Newt, but on their total collapse. That’s not likely to happen until after Florida.

westcoastpatriette

even Perry’s warts are small and disappear quickly.

http://wadingacross.wordpress.com logus

Thanks.

I’ll stop pestering you then.

http://wadingacross.wordpress.com logus

I do think it’s kind of fun to guess though.

What irks me – though really doesn’t surprise me – is how the media (and conservatives to some degree) are fretting or pointing out how there is a “lack of consolidation” so far.

Has there EVER been consolidation on either side going into the primaries? And what exactly is the mark of consolidation? A single candidate, two, three, four?

All of that said, following this election and even going into it, one would think that you could look at thirty plus years of presidential elections and have some fairly solid predictions going into the primaries and then the general. And yet there still seems to be a divergence of opinions…

Ah well.

uncmike

Other than signing the legislation regarding allowing children of illegals to pay in-state tuition at colleges, something Texans and its legislative supported overwhelmingly, most of Perry’s supposed “warts” relate to attacks on him by Cain and others over the (still never seen) “N-word” on a rock somewhere in Texas, and on Bachmann’s shrill attacks on him over the Gardisil issue. Perry said he didn’t handle the last one correctly. Yea, I admit, he hasn’t been exactly a Romney-caliber “slick debater,” but I’m one more impressed with the man and his overall record than whether he stutters, stammers, or has a senior moment in front of a crowd in a debate run by liberal networks who are more interested in protecting Obama and dumping on Republicans than addressing the growing list of dire issues facing this country.

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

That few of the 65% will move to Romney is illustrated by how few of them have done so, thus far, despite multiple prods [such as Christie's endorsement].

That the lower-tier candidates will not survive into February is predicated on $-concerns [as reflected by T-Paw].

That Rick will have staying-power into February [due to his $, if nothing else] has been a consistent assertion in myriad postings.

Therefore, I believe my prognostication is reality-based.

red_oakster

Iowa chose the eventual GOP nominee in 96 and 2000. As for Perry, there’s no sign yet he can get up off the floor. However six weeks is enough time if both Gingrich and Cain fade. It isn’t impossible, but it’s a tall order.

Death_of_the_Donkey

Cain and Newt were low to begin with. Perry went from the top down to 7%. I think it is much more likely given the precedent of this primary campaign that one of the other single digit pollers rise than Perry get a resurgence.

westcoastpatriette

the one I had the most difficulty coming to terms with–is relatively minor in the bigger scheme of things. For one thing, the legislation was drafted ten years ago when most people were not paying attention to this problem like they are now. It is also so limited in scope that one cannot conclude that it puts Perry in the pro-amnesty category and for that reason, it is understandable and forgivable going forward.

tdawg89

a polling question–what limits CNN/WSJ etc from getting larger sample sizes? I know at a certain amount you are no longer getting a m ore accurate sample, but when I see polls with only 200 or 300 it seems silly. Why not find 300 more respondents and get a more accurate sample?

Death_of_the_Donkey

And recent polls show Perry in single digits in NH, SC, and FL too. I am not saying it is impossible, only that he would have to make an epic comeback in the next 6 weeks or so and he cannot afford for anyone else to rise in the polls between now and then.

bzip

It is possible, I would like to think that it isn’t. I tend to think more people will give Perry a second look because it is Perry – Perry has lots of money to get his name and proposals out there and that speaks volumes, he has a very highly regarded record with lots of accomplishments. But It is hard to say just what will happen and what the next flavor is.

My money is: Perry gets a good second look and assuming he doesn’t blow it big time it will become a Perry Romney race.

Though it would be interesting to see a Perry Newt race.

Tbone

Romney can’t win the general, he is John McCain 2.0. Gingrich can’t win the general and about the only thing Cain hasn’t done yet is declare himself not a witch but it wouldn’t surprise me if he added that to his resume of stupidity..

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

.

tdawg89

nt

uncmike

it’s more than just the number of people you poll. For one thing, you have no way of knowing what the percentage of R/D/I will actually turn out in a given election so if your guess (as a pollster) is wrong about that and you oversample one group, that can skew results. You also have no way of knowing where a given respondent is actually telling you the truth. So, for example, if I got a call, I might say I’m for Obama when I would never vote for that jerk–just wanting to play games with the pollster. Also, you have to know whether the prediction model you are using is correct and you don’t know. You’ve heard about this pollster or that sprinkling his magic “sauce” into the mix–many of these are simply based on the bias of the pollster himself. Not only that, you really have no way of knowing whether a “likely voter” is really a likely voter yadayadayada. If this was a science, all the polls would agree. Take a look at the differences they reflect.

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

..

omegamale

I’d like to see the polls on Gingrich a few weeks out as this story digests. I gave a serious look at Newt, but its actions like this that make me turn away in disgust.

I started out as a Newt Fan when he came to prominence in the mid-nineties, but I’m convinced he approaches politics as more of a con to ingratiate himself than anything.

Newt’s overarching political ideology seems to be about one thing, Himself. And that’s before we even get near his messy and weird personal life.

No serious Presidential candidate takes a Mediterranean Cruise in the middle of a campaign. I don’t see Newt staying anywhere near the top, this was vanity candidacy without any real campaign infrastructure that was meant to do one thing, promote himself in televised debates with millions in free PR. Conservatives shouldn’t be so easy to con.

gracie

Perry has been doing everything right before and since the last debate…jobs plan, tax plan and now chew the government in half plan. Great speeches and ads. I cannot figure out why Iowans are not liking him considering his conservative core!!

The biggest problem I see is our so called media is not covering all of this so it is not getting out. I agree with all of you that as Newt’s warts are discovered to be serious Perry would be the go to candidate. BUT will he have enough money to stay in until that time??

I figure all of us have personally helped with donations. But his big donors need to hang in! What else can we Perry supporters do to help him stay in the race?

naraht

What some of the media is using somewhat as a theme is the dislike that some primary voters have for various candidates. I’m not sure that your average John Edwards supporter disliked Hillary quite as much as your average Cain supporter dislikes Romney. And the longer that it goes until the race gets a true frontrunner (or at least down to 2 or 3), the more work is going to be required to truly bring the party together.

uncmike

I used to have several mathematical statisticians work for me and I have a pretty good sense of this whole business. As I said, if this was a science, the polls would agree. And they would predict the actual results. Even so called exit polls are notorious for being wrong as Bush v. Gore nicely illustrated.

uncmike

I used to have several mathematical statisticians work for me and I have a pretty good sense of this whole business. As I said, if this was a science, the polls would agree. And they would predict the actual results. Even so called exit polls are notorious for being wrong as Bush v. Gore nicely illustrated.

tjms

since Ted Nugent is backing him-he refers to him as the “Great White Buffalo”, he will do a big concert fundraiser to help out!! He has an excellent writing on Perry at his website, I have asked him for permission to post and hope to hear back soon. Maybe he will send to several papers,etc to help as well. I did ask when he is going to do a fundraiser for Gov. Perry as well. Figure it never hurts to ask.

bobguzzardi

There are no saints in DC and Rick Perry will not be the first.

Rick Perry’s ideas are bold and radical (at the root) change in direction.

Let us not look at what is wrong with Rick Perry, let us look at what is right and there is no other offering Uproot and Overhaul, no one else talking about restraining Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, and JOBS and ENERGY.

Rick Perry’s ideas are politically feasible, maybe not in four years, but over time. Unlike Ron Paul who offers unworkable ideas that are politically dead.

The Texas Model works; the DC Model is driving us to European Bankruptcy. Rick Perry personifies the Texas Model.

So he is not slick. Is that a bad thing?

Rick Perry is The Guy.

septembergurl

predictions on the early races as a starting point, I’d like to point out the reality we are facing today, six weeks before the Iowa caucuses.

The Republican primary has been presented to us, by the LSM, the candidates, and our own conservative media, as a contest between the frontrunner, Romney, a liberal/moderate/moderate conservative and a series of conservative challengers, all of whom have fallen short, due largely to the inability of conservatives to coalesce around a single conservative candidate.

This narrative, however, is not an accurate picture of the campaign. There is not Romney and Not Romneys. Rather, there are two groups of candidates: four conservatives and four Not Conservatives.

By Conservative I mean candidates whose governing record (be it legislative or executive) , their campaign issue positions, and their plans for the next administration adhere generally to understood conservative policies. They can be expected to govern conservatively (SC appointments, eg) and promote our reform agenda.

They are: Bachmann, Huntsman, Perry and Santorum. (Please accept my premise here, which is easily verified by checking records).

Not Conservatives are candidates who are generally following a conservative line in the current race, but who have records that demonstrate a lack of adherence to conservative principles, expediency, etc. They are candidates, in short, who cannot be depended upon to enact as much as possible of our reform agenda if nominated and elected.

Romney, Paul, Gingrich and Cain are the Not Conservatives. Cain lacks a record entirely and often expresses views that are not conservative (eg abortion). Romney and Gingrich are opportunists. Paul, of course, is ideologically very conservative on some issues and the opposite of an opportunist. His foreign policy makes him not acceptably conservative.

Now, take another look at the Fox poll. The four highest are also the four Not Conservatives. Likewise, the four Conservatives are all at the bottom. So this is not so much a contest between Romney and Conservative not Romneys, but among four Not Conservatives.

How can this be? Isn’t the Republican primary dominated by conservatives, Tea Party activists, etc? isn’t the entire party animated by a desire to reverse the corrupt liberal social Obama regime?

I welcome explanations, but that is not the point of my discourse. Let me say there is a lot of confusion and a lack of clear thinking on what our goal should be in this election (nominate and elect a conservative who will advance our agenda and govern conservatively). I urge you to think about not so much individual tactics, decisions, mistakes, etc in the campaigns and more in a big picture way.

As a practical person, let me offer the following steps that are productive, lest we simply keep circling the drain and rearranging the deck chairs:

1. Stop saying that there are too many candidates and the bottom four should drop out! That would remove every real conservative and leave us with a battle among the non-conservatives before the voting even starts.

2. This is where Geraghty comes in. For various reasons, there is no one candidate we can cohere around. Yet the primary schedule is closing in on us. My suggestion is to support the conservative candidate (one of the four) who is best positioned to win in each of the three early contests. Yes, support three different candidates. By support I mean money, rhetorically, writing, arguing, informing, volunteering, organizing, everything.

In Iowa, support Rick Santorum. He is a fairly good fit, has campaigned more than any other candidate, and is reliably conservative. Better play down the hawkishness, Iowa being rather pacifist/isolationist (why Paul does well).

In New Hampshire, support Jon Huntsman. He is the only conservative with a chance, has campaigned extensively, moderate affect plays well there, has money for ads, which can be effective in a small state.

In South Carolina, support Rick Perry. Southern, military background, attractive, charming, very conservative on the issues that matter. Romney does poorly here, Paul not strong, so it would be winning over Gingrich/cain.

Assuming some wins/places for Conservatives in these contests, consolidation could then begin without risk of going into big primaries with all conservatives gone. After the next round (Florida/Nev/Mich) we would probably be down to four: Romney, Paul, Huntsman and Perry.

At that point we have a realistic chance of nominating a true conservative.

bobguzzardi

Newt Gingrich is a Phony and I like to think the Republican Voter will see that. I hope and pray, too.

Herman Cain is a super guy but a lightweight and I think the Republican Voter will see that. I hope and pray.

Michelle Bachmann is dynamite but no governing experience at all and we have seen what happens when we elect someone without that experience.

Mitt Romney is Obama lite and this is a Bold Colors Election where we need a candidate who is exactly opposite to Barack Obama’s Statist Model.

Rick Perry is imbued with the Texas Model, of separation and balancing of powers, of 10th Amendment Federalism.

The Texan v. the Leviathan State… my money is on Texas

bobguzzardi

The “ooops” moment was about downsizing government.

CATO has down excellent work on how Commerce, Education and Energy are essentially engines of wealth redistribution.

Obviously, each has functions that need to be done but the Corporatist Subsidies are, seriously, misallocating resources and bankrupting the country.

irishgirl

this is one of the most interesting comments I have read. and I mean that in a sincere way–not sarcastic.

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

…and it seems that, by the pace of recent events, he will invariably attract attention from the MSM/LSM/ELM.

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

…Guzzardi says it all!

irishgirl

“let us not look at what is wrong with Rick Perry, let us look at what is right”. Excellent way to put it. Also, the other comments made about how the Repub establishment is not wanting to be embarrassed with an inept debater are also right on the money.

Scope

in an article up on The Hill currently, it is claimed that some of the big Perry donors pulled back after his debate flub. It doesn’t mean that they have gone to another candidate yet. I’ve also read articles which stated that there is still a lot of Republican money sitting on the side lines waiting to see how the campaign season shakes out. Not much of that money went with Cain when he went up in the polls, and I doubt many will run out and start backing Newt, knowing that he probably won’t survive his vetting. Perry can still get those donors back.

If Perry keeps doing the great job that he has, keeps doing great interviews, does fine in the next debate or two, the money will come back to him. I am still firmly of the belief that it will come down to a Perry Romney race. I have to believe that that money would have already gone to Romney by now, but it hasn’t, and probably won’t.

conservativeparrothead

That I can see, oh sure, all of them have appearances here and there on Fox and other conservative radio shows around the country but in terms of policy substance its just not there. You might see stump speeches and such on CSPAN, but generally the people watching that, are the ones who are already supporting him.

Unfortunately for Rick Perry, the coverage comes in the debates.

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

…because you forgot to factor-in the chronology…and anticipated interim-reactions.

First, you cannot realistically include Huntsman in the “conservative” category; not only has he spoofed the others ["Mr. Science" remember?], but he has also adopted postures that are anathema [global warming, Foreign Policy, TARP].

Second, you should not split support for true-conservatives by, for example, allowing Santorum to survive Iowa; he is lying in wait for others to falter, and he was a big-spender while PA-Senator [and his strong pro-family quotes...dating back to his book...would repel Indies].

Third, you cannot allow yourself the luxury of helping others learn your paradigm because a split-race benefits Mitt [and destroys the TEA Party Movement in the process].

Fourth, were your scenario to play-out, Rick would be hard-pressed to win S.C. after having lost immediately-prior competitions.

Let Mitt win N.H., and let’s win the rest for Perry!

[Sorry to disagree with you, gurl and girl.]

gracie

Doc, I didn’t think he needed funds either but have been worrying and then I see it on Drudge. We have got to heep him going until the inevitable next meltdown.

The people around me have gone from Cain to Newt. Not even giving Perry a second look. EVen when I send the video of the last debate…won’t take time to look at it.

Hey, isn’t Toby Keith a recent convert?

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

Because, if we’re not careful, the MSM/LSM/ELM will do what it did in ’08; remember how Rush constantly rails against the risk that the libs will choose the GOP candidate…prior to destroying him/her.

I might add that there are two omissions from your presentation, a state [Nevada] and a candidate [Bachmann]. The former consideration would also go to Romney until/unless we congeal with Rick [and those who voted in the senatorial primary in '10 are mobilized accordingly]. The latter consideration would also illustrate the problem with relying solely upon conservative credentials [domestic, social and foreign-policy]; we must ensure we emphasize the DELIVERABLE of JOBS/JOBS/JOBS.

My phys. ed. prof @ Penn State in 1970 advised “over-analysis breeds paralysis.” Your insights are enlightening, but not dispositive.

lucasblack

I don’t like the idea of term limits on justices at all. I don’t know what he was thinking there, but he also has to know that the chance of making that change is effectively zero anyway, so it’s just pandering.

tjms

sent the Nuge a msg about an hour ago, waiting to hear back. There are several country stars that are friends with the Gov. I agree with the dr about his money but never hurts to get more. The articles I read locally in TX pretty much say it is ONE of the bundlers that are backing off so hopefully there are still plenty more.

lucasblack

Perry’s fundraising has dried up.
http://blog.chron.com/rickperry/2011/11/perry-funds-dry-up-after-gaffes-and-dip-in-polls/

gracie

Great news! Dont’ cha know DC is rolling with his threats to cut them in half! SCope do you thik he went too far?

The lack of coverage of the new substantive speeches, interviews as con-parrot just mentioned is about to drive me c r a z y.

lucasblack

Actually, as a current Newt supporter, I have to say he was doing well in some of the VERY early polls – like from a year ago. His launch of the campaign was as bad as I had ever seen and he quickly cratered. Perry could come back but it’s much harder for him than Gingrich. Lots of people remember Newt and had good feelings about him at one time – they just had to remember what they liked. Perry was unknown on the national stage and has run up very high negatives within the GOP base. He’ll have to spend lots of $ to erase those negatives and he doesn’t have much money coming it to replace what he spends.
Newt needs to staff up and rebuild an organization – he’ll have grassroots money coming in, but he also needs to get on the phone and start dialing for $ if he’s serious about this.

gekster

Please put more in the title box than single words.
You could have put the sentence up to the comma, and it would be better
than just putting the ‘I’.
It will give a clue as to what the comment is about, and would get more posters to look at your comments.
Others actually use whole sentences, and no one complains.
This is just a suggestion, and I am not telling you how to post.

texas214

Isn’t his stand on issues, or even his likeability, it is he hasn’t been able to convince those within the GOP voting block and the overall electorate he is up to Commmander and Chief.

Challengeing Pelosi isn’t presidential; Presidents don’t offer to debate House Minority leaders – they ignore them or use them as campaign fodder.

Perry, if he is going to get a second look, needs to show that he is a plausible President, not just a very good governor with good ideas.

lucasblack

Here’s how Perry does it.
3rd in Iowa (or better). Either way, it’s likely that he loses to Ron Paul, but Paul’s standing won’t matter. Bonus points if he beats Romney.

Ignore NH. They’ll hate him up there. Go right from Iowa down to SC.

Win SC. Only a win in SC will give him the kick he needs to win this race. If he’s viable, he should be able to win there. If he can’t win there, he might as well drop out. But if he wins SC…

Win FL. Again, I think he has to win. Romney is better positioned for a long run. Perry needs to win because a loss to either Romney, Gingrich or if someone else (if there is a surprise in the early states – say Huntsman wins NH or something freaky like that) wins the state, he doesn’t have the momentum he needs and will be seen as only being able to win in the deep south.

If he does all that, I think he’s got a real shot at the nomination. It’s a tough needle to thread, but McCain did it. It can happen, it’s just not likely.

lucasblack

Actually, Cain would be a warlock. I tend to think Romney is probably the most electable, but as a Newt supporter, I think he’s worth the risk. Hunstman is electable in the general, but has no shot at the nomination (same with Johnson). One of my big problems with Perry is that I think he’s even less electable than Newt, though more so than Bachmann, Santorum, Cain and Paul.

texas214

he has to pass the commander and chief test. My support for his policies aside he has to show the GOP voter and the general voting public he has a vision and can lead on that vision. Unfortunately he hasn’t done a very good job.

changeforrickperry

and didn’t think it was nearly as discouraging as the headline would have us believe. There are still people who are sticking to Perry through thick and thin–and in California, no less. The article (http://blog.chron.com/rickperry/2011/11/perry-funds-dry-up-after-gaffes-and-dip-in-polls/) quotes from Dan Logue and Jeff Miller. Logue says, “Don?t count him out. He?s got his feet under him now and is headed in the right direction, based on the fact that his record is the best record of any candidate who?s running for president.? Miller says that after the “oops” moment, “I got a call from someone who said, ?I?m still in for the max. I believe in the governor. I believe in what he can do for jobs.???
____________________________________________________________
“Success is not final, failure is not fatal; it is the courage to continue that counts.”–Winston Churchill

www.changeforrickperry.org

lucasblack

Not as much as you think. Perry deferred a lot of payments until after the fundraising period to artificially inflate his bank account. Clever trick, but he’s now being called on it.

changeforrickperry

Scratch out that question mark at the end–I’m sorry–no offense intended.
______________________________________________________________
“Success is not final, failure is not fatal; it is the courage to continue that counts.”–Winston Churchill

www.changeforrickperry.org

tjms

and I will try and remember to do so.

gracie

to see how many regular people are still in it to win it.

lucasblack

No question Newt has a big ego (as do most politicians, actually) but one thing I am happy about is he doesn’t claim God told him to run. Then again, Newt’s head is so big he might think he’s God Almighty himself, but as a Christian, that always bugs me when people suggest that God chooses political leaders. I thought Jesus made clear that God didn’t much care who was running the government.

I don’t expect this Freddie Mac stuff to hurt Newt much, but I’ve been wrong about plenty of other things in this race. In the spring, I was telling everyone who would listen that Pawlenty would be the next president.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.

Romans 13:1 (ESV)

mrmises

Obama?

CincoSolas_del_Bronx

Oh, and yes, the same could be said for a very, very long list of Pharaohs, Caesars, Emperors, Governors, Khans, Kings, Presidents and the like–including some that would have been a mite harder to get along with than our own.

(‘I wonder what they do teach them at these schools.”)

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

And Mao, and Stalin, and Hitler, and…..shall I continue?

Joshua Persons

And he still wrote the above.

Scope

Perry’s new Government Reform plan is very very timely. Look at all of the news headlines, other than the campaign articles ha, Solyndra, Fast and Furious, Freddie and Fannie multi-million dollar bonuses, activist judges ruling the individual mandate constitutional, Wall St. shennigans, EU bankruptcy, Supercommittee failures, Insider trading by Congressional members and etc. Don’t you think that the electorate is so sick and tired of the garbage pit that is Washington. The only ones surely shaking in their boots at a Perry presidency are those that have firmly imprinted their butt impressions in their congressional chairs.

The Washington establishment was never on Perry’s side anyway. Remember the article that EE put up here early in the race saying that Perry was going to have a big hill to climb, because many of those insiders know their gravy days will be over with him as the president. Rove and the Bushies are still very much a part of that establishment, and their tentacles are far and wide.

I give the Newt until about a week or two after Thanksgiving for him to have his day in the sun. There are many grandmas and grandpas that will be talking around the Thanksgiving table, about Newt days as the Speaker, and the fact that he was facing an ouster as the Speaker, on a vote of no confidence. There were about 30-40 reps that were prepared to vote against Newt as Speaker in the next congressional term, because he lacked discipline and a coherent direction for the party. He lacked leadership. He was also facing ethics charges. So, he failed as the Speaker, but now wants to be the leader of the country. He won’t last at the top.

Where will those “speed daters” go next? Many went from Pawlenty, to Bachmann, to Perry, to Cain, and now they are going for Newt. Man they must be getting dizzy.

Perry’s biggest problem has been with his debating skills. He has consistently improved, even in the debate where he had his opps moment, the rest of his answers were great. Some of his best answers were after the opps flub, so he was not so shaken personally that he fell apart. He held himself together, and that deserves some credit. I would have been so mortified at myself that I wouldn’t have remembered my name after that, but Perry managed the crisis beautifully. He went right into the spin room and said “I stepped in it big time” and with a smile on his face. Compare that to Cain’s Libya moment, where the physical stress was was apparent that he was looking for a hole under the table to crawl into. His tongue was working so hard he looked like a lizard after a knat.

Hey gracie, Perry is doing Ok, and he will prevail in the end. Even the good Dr. S is back in his camp, and that is going some after he wanted to tie him to the RR tracks after the opps moment.

acat

Before someone incorrectly asserts Godwin’s Law…

Mew

pennsylvaniafarmer

Perry’s problem isn’t the media, it’s that he lacks heft. All the candidates put out policies, and Perry’s are better than some, but they feel campaign driven. His “tear down Washington” speech the other day especially strains credibility. I think a lot of Republicans, including myself, are sick of propaganda.

Newt and Romney (and also the irrelevant Santorum and Huntsman) have command of issues. All four can drive policy debates in their camps, not just give speeches about them.

At the end, I’m looking for talent and electability. Romney and Newt have the former in spades, but the latter is still unclear.

determinedconservative

Why haven’t we heard calls to draft him into the race, like we have for Chris Christie and Mitch Daniels? That would be a candidate I could unambiguously and with no hesitation get behind. “Sigh” indeed.

Agree with all the problems you raise WRT Newt–and you didn’t even note the cuddle on the loveseat with Pelosi, where they affirmed their mutual allegiance to the cult of AGW.

I was really excited when Perry came in the race, but it seems like he has really plummeted in popularity. I never thought he was so bad in the debates, personally (except of course for the infamous “oops” moment, but he had already been tagged as a terrible debater by then); but it’s disconcerting that he has fallen so far in the polls.

Goes without saying that I don’t want Mittens to be the nominee. Nor Huntsman or Paul. And Cain has not worn well. But why are Bachmann and even Santorum so easily dismissed? I don’t get that.

Bottom line is that I hope conservatives can unite around a single credible conservative alternative to Romney and stick with him or her. If we spread our votes around to our personal favorites and divide the conservative vote, I’m afraid that gives Mittens the clear path he needs, just like McCain in South Carolina last time. So how do we prevent that from happening?

gekster

Looking for another McCain, are we.

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

…the follow-through of your analysis.

If the field is closed and The Newt will go the way of Cain, then who is your anti-Romney?

The need for a constitutional amendment yields the intent to scrutinize the activist courts, a concept that certainly resonates among people in the TPM.

The rest is true regarding other governmental reforms; why do you think Nancy doesn’t want to debate a guy who is presumably a bad debater, regarding the D.C. she loves?

Nothing is irreparable, not even the nascent “narrative” that Rick’s not “smart” [which now is ambient, regularly on Morning-Joke]..

CincoSolas_del_Bronx

OK. No m?s.

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

Spread the Word!

mrmises

In our political system, the people are the legitimate governing authority. All authority is from God, and it is through the people that His will is expressed. The political leaders we elect are merely figureheads and temporary representatives of the will of the governing authorities (the people).

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

…and she echoed what has emerged from Ed Rollins; she’s “toast” [inside and outside]. Remember, she has no “deliverables”…except for a spate of quotable-quotes [remember Gardisil?].

Santorum’s ego is disconcerting; attention-seeking behavior [after having failed in PA so miserably...after having been a big-spender and after having achieved only one goal, welfare reform...in 12 years] is unappealing, even when he has visited all 99 Iowan counties.

We prevent Mittens by supporting Rick…AGGRESSIVELY.

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

He has succinctly characterized the field; a key-goal will be to differentiate Rick from Bush-’43 [realistically and perceptually] without disparaging either.

theone3434

those of you on the Perry train will never leave…the problem is that he has made so many gaffes in the last several months that he is no longer being taken seriously. The GOP presidential nominees all have issues (nobody, NOBODY is a “pure” conservative) and the one that may be deemed closest to that (Perry) has so many issues regarding his intellect/debating skills that positioning him as the nominee against Obama would be foolish. Someone has to step up as the anti-Romney and if that is going to eventually be Perry, he has to completely revamp his personality/intellectual capacity. He looks/sounds like the dumb cowboy during the debates and in his commercials. Outside of his ardent supports (majority of RedState included) he is looked at as more of a joke than a viable option.

Just an independent’s perspective…I know I will get all of the pro-Perry posters in a frenzy but keep in mind that my thoughts more than likely reflect a large portion of the voting population (as evident by Perry’s poll numbers).

buckedup

Has Perry at 6 percent in a tie with Bachmann.

determinedconservative

In particular, the idea that having different conservatives win each of the early primaries helps us lead to consolidation behind a single conservative standard just doesn’t make sense. My obsession right now (whole reason I stopped lurking here and registered to comment) is to brainstorm with other conservatives about how we can settle on one conservative alternative to Romney as early as possible. McCain won South Carolina in 2008 with only 33% of the vote because conservative opposition to his candidacy was split. We need to figure out a way to prevent Romney from navigating a similar course.

Scope

Just looking at RCP, there are two polls listed on the right for Iowa. One poll (Rassmussen) has him leading with 32%, and only two days before, another poll has him tied for second to last place with 5, with Huntsman at the bottom with 0. That has got to be the biggest joke I’ve seen in polling to date.

Joshua Persons

Even in your formulation, the Bible still commands us to be subject to Obama, since he’s been put into authority by the people using the valid governmental mechanisms. This is a republic, not a democracy — Obama and Congress are not mere “figureheads”.

determinedconservative

She is “toast” inside and out? No “deliverables”? Can you clarify?

thisisme7

Rick Perry is not the nominee. Period. I’m not throwing my vote away with a POS candidate just because they will have an R next to there name (don’t even try to say that I’m just gonna vote for Obama, that scare/coercive tactic won’t fly).

tailfins1959

“Tbone (Diary) Thursday, November 17th at 10:10AM EST (link)

post the results from 2008 and then apply your two digit intellect to a fine analysis of them.”

”

“Be respectful, or be banned. No Profanity. ”

Could someone explain to me how telling someone they have a two digit intellect is respectful? This reminds me of Limbaugh’s portrayal of liberals who exempt themselves from their own rules.

I am learning a great lesson here: How Balkanization of conservatives will re-elect Obama. I don’t care who wins, Obama should be punished at the ballot box for making so many people suffer. If Romney is elected, he will get that message loud and clear. This isn’t a football game. Our nation has been impoverished long enough.

kipling

Christians are called to be submissive to government unless that submission would lead to sin or contradict the will of God.

A good example is Acts 4:18-20. Peter and John are arrested by the Sanhedrin and charged not “to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus.” Peter and John responded: “Whether is is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, you must judge, for we cannot but speak of what we have seen and heard.”

Peter and John were in direct defiance of the governing authority. Submission to God trumps submission to the state.

Scope

has something like $55 million to spend on ads for Perry, according to a fairly recent article I read. Also, didn’t a Texas college recently set up a PAC for him?

tailfins1959

B-HO is turning the US into a third world country. ANY of the participants on that debate stage can stop the slide.

conservativeparrothead

Party Unity My A..

Aaron Gardner

I am a huge Perry fan, that said, I will support the GOP Nominee in the end.

Instead of threatening to take your ball and go home, just work harder to ensure that Perry is the nominee.

I won’t lecture you in the ways you can help Perry, but I will say that these sort of threats do no good and in the long run hurt you more than they hurt the party you are protesting.

Buck up, there is plenty of time for Perry to make a comeback.

Repair_Man_Jack

nt.

tailfins1959

A repressive government is the wage of a corrupt society.

Repair_Man_Jack

Bad leaders have occurred for reasons of God’s will. (At least that’s one well-respected interpretation of that section of the OT).

Tbone

I’m sorry I inflated your intellect, I won’t do it again. Honest.

Joshua Persons

nt

clintonformccain

Bachmann to Perry to Cain to Gingrich might as well be labeled “UNDECIDED” because that’s what they are. They are simply jumping to whatever non-Romney candidate is getting the best buzz on TV that week, or even that day.

theone3434

and work with survey results quite often. When a survey is being conducted, the surveyor will use a formula to determine the sample size of each party that is required to give an accurate result. They then take a relied upon data source (say the party voter registration phone number database) to get their samples from. They ask you which party you affiliate yourself with during the call but they already know the answer based upon you registration (you can still answer independent, though). Once they have reached their required sample size for each party, they no longer accept results from “overage” survey responders (so not to skew the results). The “prediction” model does not “predict” anything. It is a Margin of Error (+ or – a certain percentage) and Confidence Level (95 or 99, usually) formula that will give you an idea of how reliable the results are…this is dependent on sample size. Everything you talk about in your post is already accounted for when extrapolating the results of the survey.

Realize however, as was stated previously, that these polls are only snapshots of a particular window and can still be skewed based on other variables (how many landlines called versus cell numbers, geographical location, day/time the survey was given…etc.).

kaheo

The Rasmussen is more reliable as they used more republicans. The Iowa State Univ/Gazette/KCRG had more general voters thus the huge discrepancy.

Checkout the other polls for November and they’ll show Newt consistently in the 17% average for Iowa:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statewide_opinion_polling_for_the_Republican_Party_%28United_States%29_presidential_primaries,_2012#Iowa_.2831_Delegates.29

So my guess is that all other pollsters are right and ISU are wrong!

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

How do you square your support for him, noting he endorsed the Individual Mandate, as a manifestation of his elitism/statism?

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

…because I hear he’s geared-up to handle the CiC role.

Michael_Handley

I try to check out Red State several times a week and I have come to the conclusion that most of you are following the media conversation too closely. Step back and look at the oveall picture. What I see is that Romney is standing firm where he is in the polls. he hasn’t made any big mistakes but he hasn’t convinced enough Republican voters so he hangs around 25%. Perry has “stepped in it” several times and the media is all too happy to call him on it, which is depressing his numbers. His record is good but he really needs to boost his debate style and substance. Gingrich is the smartest man running but he needs to get out front on the baggage issues. Cain is brilliant at running a business, but his knowledge of foreign affairs is dismal. Paul has a rock solid following that is small but has a very loud voice. Paul is his own worst enemy and the voters won’t give him the nod. The public doesn’t seem to be giving much support to the other candidates even if some of them have had their moment in the sun.
So where are we?
Romney appears to have the lead on the ground. He has the structure in each State and that is a big plus. The others move up, shine for a bit, and then fall away. They either have little structure, make too many gaffs in the ongoing debates, or something comes to light that adds negative baggage. After all is said and done, Romney is still there. He sounds reasonable enough, and even though he isn’t everyone’s cup of tea, they would vote for him over Obama.

So after months of infighting we are right back where we started from. All of them have taken their turn in the batters box and made a few hits but we still are waiting for the home run hitter to step up to the plate and knock one out of the park…

tnguy

Every poll can’t be wrong. His $$ is drying up, and he’s running out of time. I’ll vote for him in the primaries, even if he announces that his campaign is no longer active.

Regardless, there is no chance for him to come back now. I hate that fact, and wish it weren’t true, but it is. #$%^^&head rock and his horrible in-state tuition responses put him behind the 8 ball, and then every time he started to get traction for a comeback, he’d muck up a debate.

Sad reality is, 11.5 months from election day, we already know we will not have a conservative candidate for president. The tea party was a mirage, for the most part. Frankly, when the left and the media questioned their intelligence, they’re proving those questions were legit, in spades.

Why would I say that? Many of them are supporting Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich…even though both of them have often been in opposition to conservatism. They forget Newt was lecturing them a year ago that they need to forget Reagan, while sitting on a park bench with Nancy Pelosi, and Mitt Romney has been openly opposed to their beliefs his entire life. Sad that “conservatives” are so pliable with a few sweet words from a candidate. That they’d ignore Gingrich’s repeated abandonment of conservatism, his personal shortcomings, his failure as Speaker.

Conservatives can’t blame the media for choosing their candidate as they did in 2008. They willfully chose democrat-lite.

pttx333

He is so unappealing in that there is a snarky, smug, condescending posture about him that is very off-putting. There are a few other adjectives that would apply, but you get my drift. He attempts to be a macho sort of guy, and it just falls flat and ends up sounding like a female screeching in a man’s voice.

But that is just me …

conservativeparrothead

I made this argument in another diary response. But remember Reagan, many saw him as too extreme and unelectible and even two weeks before the election the guy was trailing Carter and in the high 30′s. Then came the debate and subsequent landslide.

Conservatism to the independent and moderate is not an easy sell, its actually very easy to demonize and say “you are only about the rich” or “you dont care about this or that” or “you are gonna kill Social Security or Medicare”. So the skill of articulation and persuasion I think are essential to this election. While I love Governor Perry as a Governor and wish he were my Governor, IMO this job of selling conservatism is one that from what I have seen he is not qualified to handle.

To me in the general, I think Newt’s personal baggage may actually help him. The Democrats arent going to want to have a discussion about family values and with three time married Newt isnt going to either, so the discussion turns onto:

Spending: You want Obama or do you want the guy who balanced the budget 4 straight years, only time that has been done in most voters lifetimes.

Jobs: You want Obama and overregulation or you want someone who controlled legisltative agenda when UR was 4.2%?

Newt has the historical chops to show why Conservatism works and Obama’s ideas dont. Im affraid Perry would get caught up in gotcha games and minutia in a debate, have a bad performance and that would be that.

lucasblack

At the time he endorsed it, it was a mainstream Republican idea.

clintonformccain

Romney has always been the most likely nominee and nothing has changed. However, he has not yet sealed the deal against a very weak field. The polling changes daily suggesting that the race hasn’t even begun to gel.

Do I think Perry is going to win the nomination? Probably not. But, it’s certainly not “over” for him at this point. He could make a run, especially if he comes out in favor of electrocuting the children of illegal immigrants to fire up the base.

pennsylvaniafarmer

Yes, actually. But I don’t see any around.

Michael_Handley

Sure it can. What we are seeing now is the run up to the Big Show. If you have Obama up against Gingrich in the National Debates it will make a hugh difference because one on one Obama is a lightweight and the public will see him for what he is. Remember that most folks don’t pay much attention to all the political stuff going on right now. They haven’t really made any decisions yet. I think that around next September they will start tuning in. Until then it’s our fight for our Party. May the winner walk with God…

lucasblack

I can’t agree with this. I don’t like Rick Perry either, but if he’s the nominee, I’ll suck it up and support him. The only one I am not sure I could vote for would be Bachmann, but I’d probably still vote for her because she’d have no chance to win and I’d want to do what I could to limit the size of Obama’s victory.

pennsylvaniafarmer

I agree. A conservative can win in the general, but only if he or she can explain and defend conservatism. Record alone doesn’t get you there.

Say all the nice things you will about Perry’s record or the man, he’s not a good communicator. That’s why he’s at 8%.

Romney and Newt are not as conservative, but they can and will defend the main tenets of the Party in a way that Perry and Cain can’t. The ability to do that is a prerequisite for the office, for me.

Aaron Gardner

Perry isn’t hated up here. I don’t think he will win, but he isn’t hated. In fact, he has been received rather well just this week.

Here is just one example from his stop in Nashua via the Union Leader:

Nadia Glauber supports Perry based on his impressive resume of achievements in Texas, she said. While governing the second largest state, Perry has gained valuable experience that can be used to solve this country?s problems, she said. The economy is doing well there, Glauber said, as is the job market. Perry has also dealt with some complex issues such as securing the Mexican border, she said.

?He?s doing a fabulous job in Texas,? Glauber said. ?Texas gets it.?

Carol Goss is still researching candidates, but said she was impressed with Perry?s performance. He put a lot of thought into his positions and it showed, she said. Goss is looking for a candidate that can look at the big picture to find solutions that the country needs, she said. Goss said that she remains undecided.

Al Baldasaro, state-federal relations and veterans? affairs chairman, said he came out to show his support for Perry. Perry has a good track record for taking care of the elderly and veterans, Baldasaro said. He called Perry a go-getter who makes things happen.

?Perry tells it like it is and he has a record backing him up,? Baldasaro said.

I wouldn’t write him off just yet.

I live in Vermont and I have been going door to door to get signatures to get him on the ballot here. Many don’t know much about him but when they hear what he is proposing they are more than willing to sign up and help him get on the ballot.

acat

Last time I checked, voting hasn’t started.

Mew

kaheo

Especially when the candidates periodically mess up on their own:

Perry: Told conservatives – “They have no heart”, that wasn’t the media and it was primarily why he initially dropped in the polls. He apologized the next day, but the damage was done.

Cain: Failed to handle the sexual allegations 10 days prior to when it broke to the media. He shouldn’t answer foreign policy questions if he has no clue on the subject matter.

Newt: Has been contradicting himself every other day/debate. He should’ve know better that the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac lobbying (or consulting if you like) would pop up at sometime but instead he doubled down on attacking politicians and ex-politicians who cozy up with them!

If a conservative is watching liberal media and using that to form their opinion on whom they’ll vote for, then we are really doomed. I doubt that that is the case but its easy for a candidate who is down to believe so! The candidates just need to get their act together.

Perry has the best chance to recover from his missteps as he has a good record to run with but he needs to win 2 states out IA, SC and FL.

My predictions: Newt will be consumed by the Fannie Mae saga but may end up winning Iowa. Herman Cain will continue to slowly implode due to sexually harassment allegations and lack of foreign policy and do well in IA, SC but only come in 2nd or 3rd. Romney will continue to keep his mouth relatively shut hoping that Perry and Newt do not get their act together.

Romney will win NH and Perry will go on to win SC. The next battle will be FL. The winner there will be the nominee as they’ll have won 1 more state than anyone else at that point.

sunshinek67

there has not been enough time yet to reflect the impact of the negative press that he is getting right now. It has just started and fairly sure will continue through the Thanksgiving holidays. Not sure who said it, think Acat, but the voting populous will end up beleaguered and resigned after the negative press gets done with this fresh round of vetting of Gingrich (a lengthy career Washington politician!), his past, his present and most likely what to expect in his future as a potential CIC, thus giving Governor Perry another chance to rise above the smolders of the ABR crowd. I hope.

Looks like Cain is done, sex sticks. Compounded with a very limited knowledge of foreign policy (so likable though!), tough mountain to climb.

Governor Perry’s flaws: heartless comment (apologized), no border fence (strategic fencing & other resources more effective), Gardasil (said it was a mistake) and a 53 second brain freeze (human moment with a very effective subsequent self-deprecating humorous media blitz orchestrated by a lightning fast competent campaign staff indicative of what would be seen in a Perry administration). Is this enough to invalidate his three term tenure as Governor over the 2nd most populous US state, 13th largest world economy, CIC over 20,000 Texas National Guard troops, and a solid record of conservative values of fiscal prudence & social values?

This election has turned into the political version of American Idol for the highest office in the land; country experiencing precarious times and uncertainty, the world financial system on the brink of total meltdown, the always impending threat of another terroristic attack. Iran wants a bomb. Pakistan and China have a bomb. Huh.

I have three children that I raise as a single mom. Important for me to see a President that is not only competent and consistent, but one who inspiring. Our future generations are counting on us to be responsible voters. Perry’s radical plan to change the status quo is necessary. Gingrich, while he has an R next to his name, is inspiring only so far as his abilities to debate, and his internal think tank. Some of his actions, however, personal and professional, leave a large window of desire. Not the best the GOP has to offer.

wth America~

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

As Michael Handley noted, we’re all tending to focus on the “micro” while the “macro” is evolving.

Let’s see how Rick does on Tuesday; if he is as forthright as he was @ the UN, he’ll distinguish himself…and won’t be susceptible to any flip-flop accusation.

*

Here is a compilation – as of FOUR YEARS AGO – of Mitt’s flip-flops…some of which have flipped in the interim:

http://www.redstate.com/erick/files/2011/10/FLIPFLOPS.pdf

Here are a few websites which include a lot of pro-Perry information on RedState.com:

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2011/10/27/the-horserace-for-october-27-2011/#comment-137986

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2011/10/28/mitt-romney-leads-george-will-to-write-in-all-caps/

http://www.redstate.com/aarongardner/2011/10/28/perrys-positive-outlook-for-america/

*

a contemporaneous CNN Video documents hypocrisy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLVL_8wKjdY

Listen @ the 2:00 mark, when he endorses amnesty.

*

Recall the unprecedented gumption that yielded?in September?the press-conference in NYC regarding the UN vote on ?Palestinian Statehood? that has been captured [compiled after much Internet-searching]. Experience the uniqueness of his standing astride Congressman Turner [who hired Rush, decades ago] and Deputy Knesset Speaker Danon [of the wing of the Likud that assuredly cannot stomach the mega-release of terrorists]. Then project the type of forthrightness that he will project when dealing with America?s enemies; his history of shooting a coyote that threatened his dog should serve as ample warning to political/military adversaries of the risk entailed when confronting his forthrightness.

Perry distills the issue
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Q0Sqlj_I9o

turner
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Q0Sqlj_I9o

danon
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxgWSPMLu44&feature=related

perry answers questions
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgsumGJswWk&feature=related

*

gekster

He would be much better this time.
And thank God we don’t have a McCain this time around.

kaheo

children of illegal immigrants comment was a joke, right? Even as joke, it didn’t work too well for Herman Cain!

federalfarmer1

Wrong with regard to romney. Romney is campaign driven, not idea driven. He’s just better at remembering his lines than Perry. If Perry was idea driven, he would not forget central aspects of his reform plan and be able to discuss them with some nuance. He can’t. He is just repeating talking points somebody gave to him, like Romney.

The reason you want an idea driven candidate has been on display in the republican congress since Newt left. It’s agenda has been motivated by desires to stay in power, not fix things.

Newts money from fanny and freddy is a bad mark, but every politician does it. His plan to dissolve the companies is a good one though. He knows how Washington works, and clearly used that knowledge to make a lot of money. I would do the same. But hes shown again and again he us ruthless and won’t have any problem eliminating the same companies he took money from. Thatswhatmakes Newt attractive. He knows the system, he has no scruples about crossing anybody in Washington, and has big plans to fix things. If he has 4 years to run loose in Washington, a lot of entrenched republicans and dems will get trampled. That’s why he will be smeared beyond anything seen since last time he had power. Conservatives need to be smart enough not to play the driveby game against their own.

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

…because the GOP must function optimally AND the MSM/LSM/ELM will forever emphasize the negatives, regardless.

The GOP STARTS with most of fly-over USA, so persistence of BHO’s negatives and emphasis on jobs/jobs/jobs should allow us to prevail.

The prediction game is fraught with uncertainty, although I generally agree with the sentiments that are expressed in this narrative; nevertheless, if Rick does well in the debates AND gets his position-papers out-there, he can rise again.

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

Really cuts to the chase.

The “reality show” imagery captures eyeballs because the punditry is engaging.

But the focus remains on Rick!

uncmike

Therein lies the problem. Sample size is one thing, but it’s the constituent parts of the sample that are largely guesswork, because they have no idea what the mix of Republicans vs. Democrats vs. Independents vs. Libertariants vs. etc. etc. will actually turn out to be on election day. So the mix in their sample is guesswork (your “formula” thing). The pollster might think his mix will be 52% D vs. 46%R, but that’s just a guess. That’s how push polls manipulate voters by oversampling one bunch so they know they can generate the result the want. Statistics is a legitimate branch of the mathematical sciences and there are certainly methods which can be used with, er, confidence. But the application of mathematical statistics to political polling leaves much to be desired because it involves guesswork about human behavior. Polls have become little more than ways for the 24/7 liberal media to generate something for talking heads to talk about. If the record of pollsters was so good, we wouldn’t have to laugh at how badly some of their predictions compare to actual election results. Yes, I admit they reflect transient trends, but that’s about it. Which is not to say I don’t look forward to Neil’s regular Thursday morning recap of the latest polls, But I do so not because I put much weight in their typically mixed results, but because of the discussion they can generate.

theone3434

but I think you also illustrate why polls are merely a scientific “guess” at what the current state of a particular question or subject is. Most polls are reflective (within a certain percentage) of the actual consensus. However, people must actually SHOW UP and vote. It’s one thing to answer a question conveniently from your home and another to actually travel to a polling center and cast your vote. Which is why most polls now site the “strongly” (both negative and positive) feelings among voters because they are much more likely to be proactive in voting. There has been attempts and formulating the percentage of people that actually vote based upon their feelings towards politics in general and voting history (whether they did or not in previous elections) but the data is hard to come by and costly. As with all surveys, the results must be taken with a grain of salt but I wouldn’t entirely dismiss their findings.

changeforrickperry

One question: could you elaborate on your comment about the “macro” and the “micro?” What is it that you see evolving?

buckedup

Pew has Perry at 8 percent tied with Paul for 4th place.

avagreen

Read all of Richard Dunham’s post………..they sound like an echo chamber of anti-Perry articles (with exception of one, I think). ~next

What else would a liberal newspaper have to say and twist? It was Houston’s whining/screams over Perry’s wanting to do away with sanctuary cities that killed the bill.

~next

DMOnline

So Herman Cain stood up New Hampshire Union Leader this morning. He was to give an hour+ interview to them but bailed unexpectedly.

With everything going to crap for Cain, how much longer before he decides to announce his departure from the race?

As for Newt, he seems to be experiencing his “15 minutes” as frontrunner as did Bachmann, Perry, and Cain before him. After the press and establishment GOP tear Newt apart, that leaves just one more conservative in the race to experience frontrunner status: Rick Santorum. Something tells me the man currently polling at 1% in most polls won’t reach the top tier, however.

We shall see.

DCuz

avagreen

that he’s been raised in Philly, one of the most liberal places in the U.S.
High School: Central High School, Philadelphia, PA
University: BA History, University of Pennsylvania (1978)
University: MA History, University of Pennsylvania
Bio: http://www.nndb.com/people/399/000131006/

NOT SOMEONE WHOSE VIEWS I WOULD TRUST.

constitutional

The Herman Cain dropout is a good point. I remember after Pawlenty lost the straw poll he bailed on a Huckabee interview unexpectedly.

As for front runner status, I think it’s rather likely that after Newt fades, we’re going to see Perry come back up and that’ll bring us to Iowa.

After that, who knows. Hopefully Perry will win Iowa and finish Romney off with a win in SC.

Spartan4Life

Trust me on this. By the time a story makes it through even the beginning of a news cycle it is already over. The press can’t see what is happening on the ground from their DC or NYC cocoon. So don’t believe anything these people tell you.

Just as Gingrich gets headlines for being on top I guarantee you he is already falling, maybe precipitously. I had a fling with Newt for about 20 minutes the other day but by today I am so over it.

Sure a lot of voters are just like me. Watching from the sidelines hoping a great candidate emerges but not settled yet. If you can change your mind at the drop of a hat, how can the polls tell you anything?

avagreen

……I don’t have to remember “what I liked about him”………..all I can remember are the things “that I didn’t like about him” back then.
He’s pleasant to listen to, but……..he’s not all that. He has way too much baggage. Don’t have to mention them because anyone reading this can fill in the blanks.

Scope

Not a thing I would change in your post.

avagreen

??
http://www.wnyc.org/blogs/its-free-blog/2011/aug/12/opinion-iowa-straw-poll/

AND,
A summary of winners from 1979 to today. Keep in mind each year was the year before the presidential election. So the ?79 poll was for the ?80 election.

1979 ? Winner: George H.W. Bush ? Nominee: Ronald Reagan
1987 ? Winner: Pat Robertson ? Nominee: George H.W. Bush
1995 ? Winner: Tied between Phil Gramm and Bob Dole ? Nominee: Bob Dole
1999 ? Winner: George W. Bush ? Nominee: George W. Bush
2007 ? Winner: Mitt Romney ? Nominee: John McCain
http://amerpundit.com/2011/08/11/how-reliable-is-the-ames-straw-poll-in-predicting-winners/

avagreen

which I answered some place else.
He’s from the Houston Chronicle, a liberal rag, and was educated in Philadelphia, PA, one of the most LIBERAL places in the U.S. Houston was the main mouthpiece that killed the sanctuary city bill Perry tried to get passed.
Not a good place to get positive info about Perry.

One article on DRUDGE from one article by Richard Dunham does not truth or facts make.
Have more faith than the word of this liberal trying to kill Perry’s campaign.

sunshinek67

Team Perry 2012~

Scope

over a period of years. As late as 2008, in a book he wrote that year, he was still in favor of the individual mandate. Newt flirted with a presidential run in the 08 season. I remember listening to him on Hannity’s radio show saying that he would decide if he would get in the race in the next month, and it would depend on how much support he thought he would get. Not two weeks later he told Hannity that he would not be getting in the race. Now miraculously he is leading in some polls. Man are the Republicans forgetful, but they are about to be reminded of all they forgot, or never knew.

sunshinek67

A team is there through the thick and the thin, right now might be thin but you either believe in Perry or you don’t is my philosophy. Perry supporters, like yourself, here on RS write so eloquently on his behalf~

profnickd67

to your argument but can only think of two at the moment.

Scope

of Newt’s decision to not run again as the Speaker, as he would have had no support from many Republicans. They were about to hold a vote of no confidence in him as the Republican leader in the House. Newt has always been undisciplined, as you saw in his earlier campaign. His campaign since it’s implosion after the staff exodus, and his comment’s in an interview with David Gregory, calling Ryan’s Medicare plan “right wing socialism”, and once again supporting the individual mandate. There are very good reasons that Gingrich has been in this race for as long as he has, and until only recently got any attention. The only reason people are looking at him now is totally and strictly because of his good debating skills. That’s where Gingrich’s positives end.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

where Christians have to make this decision every day. The United States of America, even with Obama as President, isn’t one of those places.

Scope

Ha, that’s to funny. Newt was leading the charge against Clinton for his Lweinski debacle, all while he was secretly cheating on his wife with a Congressional staffer. Oh, I think the Democrats will have a field day with his rank and putrid hypocritical family values. Combine that with the ethics charges he was facing in 98, which led him to resign from the House, and the Obama ads write themselves.

conservativeparrothead

I also think many saw him in a debate for the first time, so while many remember him and may like or dislike him from “guest” appearances, seeing him on stage in a debate head to head against other contenders has really flipped the favorables switch. Even when he got into the race, I think his favorables werent very good but many have come around.

conservativeparrothead

Without his leadership, they were able to blow a hole through the budget, pass No Child Left Behind, McCain-Feingold, and a prescription drug benefit that wasnt paid for plus those wonderful $300 checks to all Americans. Boy good thing they got rid of Newt so they can show how Conservative they are!!!!

septembergurl

conservative victories in the early contests(however defined) in order to stave off the likelihood of a campaign in which Romney is opposed only by (say) Gingrich and Paul and perhaps one or two mortally wounded conservative challengers.

And, it doesn’t matter so much which conservative it is, in my opinion.

As to Bachmann, I pick Santorum to win Iowa because he has worked the state more than any other candidate, campaigning in all 99 counties. He has a good organization and his social conservtism plays well. Huntsman is not competing there, and while it’s possible both bachmann and Perry can rise again before the caucuses, it strikes me as less likely in her case. And Iowa is the only early state where she has a chance. I certainly think it’s possible for Perry or Bachmann to come in second or third, ahead of Romney, which would be nice. But I think Paul might win, or Gingrich.

As to Nevada, I included it with Florida and Michigan as the second round of early primaries which will determine whether we have any hope of nominating a conservative.

kipling

I agree that we are not there yet. But the public funding of abortion moves the line a lot closer.

Gun registration and confiscation also crosses the line and people need not comply. I have family in CA who were legally forced to register their guns and then had those guns confiscated by the state. A lot of CA residents now store their guns in Arizona.

lucasblack

Newt had his problems as a leader, but he wanted to change things. Instead he was replaced with Tom Delay (effectively) and he did more damage to the GOP brand than any single person. Reformers like Newt and Kasich were out and it was all pork barrel stuff trying to buy a permanent GOP majority. When I look at Perry all I see it another Tom Delay.

septembergurl

real conservative in the race and therefore we should all support him. Anyone here could, and some have, argued that Perry is not a real conservative and their guy or gal is.

That argument does not get us very far, and the time for voting is getting closer. The Rasmussen Iowa poll today shows Mitt and the other non conservatives with 74% of the vote, and the conservative four with less than 20%.. What I’m saying is, we are not in a strong position. If we did coalesce, we would have what, 15-20% of the vote. That’s not going to stop Romney.

As for Perry, I expect him to do well in Iowa but not win. Late entry, various issues, etc. It’s said there are two tickets out of Iowa. The winner, and the second place. I think there may be more this year. Romney has been downplaying his chances, and there is considerable criticism of his avoidance of Iowa events, Ames, etc. Say that our guy, Santorum, and Paul come in one/two, then Perry and Gingrich come in 3/4, then Romney comes fifth (maybe sixth, if Bachmann gets her act together). That would ding Romney in NH, and tee up South Carolina for Perry.

kipling

One way God punishes a society is by letting them have what they want. You want to live in a society without God, then He will let you live in a society without God. See Romans 1 where God gives them over to what they desire. If you want to live under a president who rejects Christianity and calls himself the Messiah, then you get what you want.

Unfortunately, the judgment often hits the innocent as well as the guilty.

septembergurl

And thank Erick & Red State for allowing people to express their ideas at length.

westcoastpatriette

are current examples of civil disobedience taking place every day all over America depending on where you live. Christians are having to take these stances more and more as our government “legalizes” immorality.

westcoastpatriette

Allowing Obama into the White House was like God’s last warning to Americans that if they don’t do an about face with respect to their respect for Him, our Republic will not survive.

kamiller42

… more to come if he does well. I thought about hanging donations as a carrot in front of him to do well in debates. If many of us did this…

“Dear Gov Perry, you will receive $100 for every debate you do well in.”

Money can be a good motivator to do better. $-)

Scope

According to an article up at the Hill, the Cain campaign requested Secret Service protection oh Herm. No other R candidate to date has asked for the taxpayers to foot that bill. McCain did not want Secret Service protection in 08 because of the restrictions it places on a candidate, and because he said it was a waste of taxpayer dollars. It would seem that Cain is passing that expense off on the taxpayers so as to not have to expend those monies from his own campaign coffers. Methinks Herm has a very inflated sense of self, which the article states sometimes gives the aura of power to a candidate.

gracie

because it supported what I had already been reading in numerous places since the oops debate.

I know very well what the Houston Chronicle is, that is why I have not touched it for twenty five years although it was enlightening to read what you wrote about it’s editor.

I am one of Perry’s most faithful followers. Aaron once described me as a trench worker…I am. I spend many hours a day trying toget folks to give Perry the second look. I was at opening day of the Texas legislature, fought against Straus, called and met with our Rep Lois Kolkhorst, who wrote the Healthcare Compact that passed in special session. I know which bills Perry, on his own authority, put in the special session, one being the sanctuary city bill. I met Perry at RedState/Austin, I made PC’s for him for the Governors race at which time I learned exactly what we are up against!

I think Governor Perry is our very best hope for a conservative President. Unfortunately I am a worrier…I worry about Newt’s stating only this week that he is not sure of his opinion on global warming, about his arrogance and ego, going off on tangents, unchecked.

I really worry about Cain becoming the second look candidate because for some unknown reason people are NOT seeing his gaffes for what they are…huge areas of ignorance on many a subject.

And I do worry about Perry holding fast with these low numbers, not getting decent publicity, credit for his positives, the possibility that his red meat was a bit raw. Scope however wrote a throrough and helpful post above also mentioning the extra 55 million he has. I admit I do ask questions, not to convince myself but to prepare the most cogent arguments to use in my community. If only the electorate were following the facts like we are! But they are not. I won’t be giving up on Perry. I am as faithful as anyone here.

davep

..has been wrong for several decades. Congressional approval is at the lowest in history. Still many back the same old repackaged politicians.
Frankly a few are catching on. It will take a candidate like Ron Paul or Gary Johnson to turn this conventional wisdom around.
I was pleased to hear that Johnson will quit the Republican Party and run as a Libertarian candidate. Good for him and good for us.
What’s that? He’ll split the vote. There you go again with convention. Clearly explain to me the difference between Obama and Romney.. (long pause) Right, there isn’t any difference.
daveP

Tbone

don’t ask him inconvenient questions that further expose how clueless he is.

Either that or he’s afraid he might kill himself by repeated shots to his own foot.

1bunny

that the taxpayers are footing this expense. It should only go to the actual nominee not to a candidate no matter who they are – R or D. It should be part of their campaign expense not the taxpayers expense.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

Yet Jesus still told us to render to him what is his.

I don’t see how gun registration has anything to do with Christianity.

Scope

and all of the other campaigns are paying for their own security. I personally see it as hubris on Cain’s part. His campaign is sinking, yet he asks all of us to foot the bill for his “protection.”

carolynr

Do you see him giving up. Look at what happened to him in that debate and LOOK AT WHAT HE DID AFTER. He got up, faced his media and is giving it his all. That is one of the messages that has to get out there….the man has perseverance…and we don’t need a prez that gives up…like the idiot we have.

Romney is a big spender, an no different than Obama in policies. You will see that healthcare bill get revamped if it is overruled by SCOTUS back into the Federal Government…only he (Romney) will say it is different because we have private insurance companies running it. Still…we’ll have some bla bla health insurance department to tell the insurance companies what they can do.

Gingrich has a lot of facts up there in his head. People want to see Obama embarrassed. Not me…I want to see him defeated. Debates don’t make the country…policies do. Get the word out there to your friends. Freddie Mac is not the only skeleton in Gingrich’s closet…too much of the stuff the TPM doesn’t want. Know why he is ahead in Iowa…ETHANOL SUBSIDIES. Perry doesn’t support subsidies. I blog on the DesMoines Register…and quite frankly…I wish they would go back to growing corn for food because ethanol is ruining our engines. I guess that Gingrich is also playing the conversation to the hilt up there also.

I’m with Doc….let’s get Perry going in SC…get rid of Gingrich and Cain and get a head start in FL.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

Nor is anyone (yet) being forced to perform gay marriage.

Taking a stand is quite different from choosing to obey God or go to jail (or worse lose your life). That’s happening in places in this world today, but it’s not happening here.

tjms

a great governor. At least that is how I try to look at it. Only problem is that the only other big supporter of states rights that is running I would have trouble voting for. And as dangerous as it is getting here in central TX with the cartels starting to set up shop in SA things are going to get bad before long. Just yesterday an article in the SA newspaper of some members being arrested. There is a reason arrests are down at the border, they ignore them. The border states are going to need to take care of themselves.

Scope

When some reporters in Fla. were asking him questions on the Cuban policy. It was another deer in the headlights moment, until he ran into a building, and then came back out saying that the questions were just “gotcha” questions. This man has no earthly, or cosmic for that matter, reason to stay in this race. I am embarrassed that R’s would put this guy at the top. Have so many gotten on the Jim Jones kool aide drinking spree?

carolynr

Job…Jobs…Jobs. That is all I put on the Politico today. I’ll have to go into the Hill and WaPo tomorrow. thanks for your input.

Rick Perry is the only candidate that can bring this country back from this mess we are in.

carolynr

and the Conservatives should bail. It is my belief that polls have about a two week lag time.

So folks…it will be down to the wire on this one. Let’s give some help to Perry…either $$$ or blogs…but let’s say…at least we tried…instead of complaining about our un-conservative candidates. BTW…Gingrich is coming off smug.

nathanalbright

…is himself.

avagreen

Gawd!
How full of yourself can one get?
or, just a really good marketer? This is the man that wants to be president? LOL!
http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/Cain-SecretService/2011/11/17/id/418455

westcoastpatriette

I’m not talking about the person who wants the abortion–it’s the abortion providers who have to fight for the right to refuse to perform an abortion. Same with same sex marriage.

Don’t know where you’ve been if you are not aware of these things taking place frequently in America.

Scope

those very same people he counted on getting his name out there. Cain never missed the chance of going on TV with any liberal he could find, and Fox. Now that they are starting to ask the hard questions, he needs protection from them. This is quickly becoming the Cain Circus train very quickly.

conservativeparrothead

Oh really? He doesnt support them for farmers and didnt take them as a farmer?

In the mid 1990′s he was for ethanol, which is fine, that was the conservative position at that time, that maybe Ethanol would be good for Texas, that maybe there would be a refinery built. Now he is against them and thats fine. But some Perry supporters would have you believe that anything you once supported be it Farm Subsidies, Ethanol Subsidies, or Al Gore would pretty much eliminate you from their mind.

I understand people are going to choose who they want because they believe they are the candidate that aligns most with their values and beliefs, but just try and be consistent, if its ok for your candidate to change positions or for that matter change parties over a 25 year run, then its ok for others to as well.

Tbone

and he answered the wet one is the one in my mouth, the dry on is the one I am hopping around on? That question?

changeforrickperry

until much closer to the actual election. I just saw this on Twitter and didn’t really believe it until I checked RS.

I cannot believe this. Cain is going to be really unpopular with Americans around Thanksgiving tables, I’ll tell ya. This is almost as bad as Joe Biden and his Secret Service.
____________________________________________________________
“Success is not final, failure is not fatal; it is the courage to continue that counts.”–Winston Churchill

www.changeforrickperry.org

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

t

nice subject line!

gracie

SA is so far south you must be deluged with problems.
You DO have fantastic Mexican food however!

nathanalbright

….but let’s not forget what our best friend as far as post-primary consolidation is: the soon-to-be-evicted tenant of the White House.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

No one is forcing anyone to perform gay marriages in the US.

I don’t know where you’ve been if you think this is happening.

center77

when I went to meet him, they checked me over first.

greyeagle

He does just fine with one to one. That would also mean that Obama can’t use his teleprompter. Should not be a problem, especially since he did great during the last debate.

greyeagle

They do not mean much at this particular time. It also depends on what entity is actually do the polls. If it is done by a liberal entity, they tend to sample more Democrats than Republicans. I expect in these polls they are not just sampling Republicans. This particular point in time, polls should be for the Republican base, and they are not.

Common_Cents

hehe

greyeagle

Not hardly! Perry has been talking about this stuff for quite awhile. Romney supporters should realize that the conservatives in the GOP, and that includes Evangelicals, conservative Jews, maybe Catholics are not inclined to vote for Romney. The conservatives want a true conservative this time and not a flip flopper.

gracie

Really. How can anyone still support this er man?

Thank the Lord we found out now.

goformitt

Remarkable: Cain still leading in this latest Iowa poll. Ron Paul is demonstrating an amazing popularity in a number of Iowa polls, this one included.

Perry’s commercials are on TV all the time – has made no impact.

Candidate %
Herman Cain 24.5
Ron Paul 20.4
Mitt Romney 16.3
Can?t Decide 8.1
Rick Perry 7.9
Michele Bachmann 7.6
Newt Gingrich 4.8
Rick Santorum 4.7
Jon Huntsman 0.0
Other 5.8

http://caucuses.desmoinesregister.com/2011/11/17/new-poll-iowa-republicans-favor-herman-cain-and-ron-paul/

septembergurl

Let’s just combine all the conservative vote, that’s about 15-20% of the republican primary vote. That will surely cause Mittens to stop in his tracks.

Get back to me when you have the conservative alternative to Romney.

tngal

on the Herman Cain/Homeland Security/Secret Service story..

__________________________________

UPDATE: ?We are protecting Herman Cain,? Secret Service spokesman Ed Donovan said Thursday night. He said the decision was made by Homeland Security ?Secretary Napolitano, at the request of the Cain campaign and in consultation with the Congressional advisory committee.?

?The authority was given to the Service to protect Herman Cain [beginning] today,? Donovan said.

Asked about the decision to protect Cain about a year before the general election, Donovan said: ?Historically, it?s not that unusual.?

http://www.politico.com/2012-election/

________________

Its from Burns and Haberman at Politico. Not my favorite outlet, but meh…

Note the “its not that unusual part. The blurb also goes on to mention other people who sought secret service protection early on in their campaigns . PAt Robertson and Jessie Jackson were a couple. There are others.

And then there’s this…
__________________

“Donovan declined to say whether any threats prompted the decision to protect Cain, who at this point is the only candidate under protection other than President Barack Obama.”

______________________

Alright. What can you deduce? Maybe A) Secret Service has a standard policy not to announce if there is a credible threat against a candidate/lawmaker/etc; Or maybe B) Herman doesn’t want it out that he has been threatened; Or you can pick C) the automatic go into full-anti-Cain mode. The-man’s-such-a-jerk-nobody’s-ever-done-this-before-who does he think he is-garnering attention -brain-blast.

Obviously as the Secret Service spokesman pointed out it has been done. And their SOP of not mentioning a credible threat would make sense as it would put a spotlight on an individual and they really don’t want to put more of a light on one candidate as opposed to another.

Hey, if I was being threatened and I found out by Janet N’s team that they decided TODAY I would get secret service, that would explain why I didn’t talk to some silly paper in NH today. I was busy being briefed by homeland security. And it might it explain where my mind has been the last week.

It is plausable to believe Mr. Cain has come under threats. He can offend. But he doesn’t care. He’s not really an “eat your peas” kind of guy or a “you don’t have a heart” kind of person… More likean , “I will fix this friggin economy, get these jobs back here where they belong, and we will work together. If you can’t handle it, you know where the door is, but we can do this if you work with me” – kind of person.

Common_Cents

We are the stupid party allowing the lame stream media to shape debates, opinion, and wage war on R’s and Conservatives.

romansdaughter

Goodness, I haven’t seen anything smart about Obama, Even when he gives speeches without his teleprompter he seems pretty brainless to me. As far as I can see Rick Perry has more wisdom in one pinky finger than Obama has in his whole body. Just Saying.

theone3434

I can’t remember the exact number of debates he has been in (too many to count) but I have watched every single one and if we were handing out grades, he would have a C – average…there is a joke about his real grades at A&M somewhere in there. Whether you believe Obama is a smart guy or just a teleprompter hack, he can at least hold his own against the best of them (you can say you completely disagree with every single point he makes but he can at least put together a complete thought/sentence). I think Newt would do pretty good against him, Romney could hold his own, and (this may be surprising) I think Santorum would do the best. Even though he is completely unelectable in the general, he has good ideas, experience, and doesn’t just spout talking points.

theone3434

Exactly! If Perry were to win the nomination, wouldn’t everyone in America just be watching the debates and holding their breath waiting for another “you are heartless” or “I can’t remember the third one” or “Oops” or completely unrelated answer to a question. Every build up to the debate would be a nightmare. PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE just let him make it through this one without saying something stupid…PLEASE. Perry is likable because he isn’t the slick politician but it also makes him an easy target for not be very intelligent (or at least appearing that way). In my opinion, continually serving up self defecating one liners (going on Letterman, referencing his “oops” moment in the last debate several times) may make people laugh but the laughter is directed AT him not WITH him.

The only thing that will change this perspective is answering intelligently and succinctly in SEVERAL debates. One other piece of advice from someone not qualified to give it, don’t look at the other candidates for approval when giving an answer…always look straight ahead at the moderators or the camera and be CONFIDENT in your answer.

theone3434

if Romney or Gingrich are the nominee, then neither will be able to push as hard against Obamacare as some of the others. Romney, obviously, implemented Romneycare in Mass and Gingrich was one of the founders of the individual mandate at the Heritage Foundation (as noted by Romney in the 847th debate). Romney can try to say that it was a state issue or that his plan was different but it really isn’t THAT much different and the same advisers that helped him construct Romneycare did the same with Obama for Obamacare.

Now, the caveat, both are good enough orators that they may be able to slip through that argument without too much collateral damage. It’s going to be an interesting election regardless of who gets the nomination

theone3434

regardless of if they are on the ballot or not, you can write in your preference. Go out and vote no matter what the situation.

That being said, you will absolutely be “throwing” away your vote in terms of it’s impact on the general election by voting for Perry (if he isn’t the nominee) but don’t let others tell you what you MUST do.

Know the consequences and vote in good conscious for who you think will be the best president.

determinedconservative

n/t

septembergurl

OK.

As I said above, the conservative vote is the vote given to four real conservatives in the race: Santorum, Bachmann, Huntsman and Perry.

In this instance I was referencing the Iowa poll (Rasmussen) where the total percentages of these four =19%.

That would be between 15 and 20. Correct me if I’m wrong here. In general, this holds for all recent state and national polls. If it’s over 20 it’s not by much.

You might argue with my designation of who is a conservative and who is not, but that is a different argument.

Common_Cents

unabashedly takes on the media
takes on obama head on
wins SC
discusses solutions and conservatism

Much of Limbaugh’s program was defending/praising Gingrich.

changeforrickperry

in order to win the nomination? Only Perry, Cain, and Gingrich have really taken on the media and Obama as well as discussing real workable solutions. (We can quibble on their different solutions, but at least they all have pretty specific plans, right?)
______________________________________________________________
“Success is not final, failure is not fatal; it is the courage to continue that counts.”–Winston Churchill

www.changeforrickperry.org

sticktotheconstitution

true

but you won’t be hearing about it from any of the know-it-all bigshot “conservative intellectuals” on redstate.com

Common_Cents

Pretty impressive move. We’ll see how he navigates the media smear assault over the next couple weeks and as other polls are refreshed, if they corroborate.

conservativeparrothead

I mean I guess most primary voters are a more informed lot that the general. Therefore some of this “news” could have an impact.

In comparison to some of the others:

Cain, had two issues: First, there was potential crimes there being alleged, and that had “scandal” written all over it. Then to follow that up, he had a pretty weak debate performance and the Libya gaffe, its creating a narrative that he just isnt going to be President.

Perry – there hasnt been anything that singularly brought him down, I think voters are looking for someone who can articulate that message of conservatism and he performances and subsequent commentary on those performances has really hurt his campaign.

As for the Newt thing, I just dont see much here with regards to the Freddie issue, to me its a non-issue. From what we know, he didnt lobby. What we do know, is that he, like many ex politicians gets way too much money to do things like consult or give speeches.

But as far as the skillset that got him to where he is now in the polls or the belief that he can challenge and take on Obama in a debate and articulate the conservative message…that hasnt changed.

westcoastpatriette

with being fired as we speak in states that have legalized same sex marriage if they refuse to participate.

The same is true in the medical field. Ever heard of political correctness? You must have your head buried someplace if you are unaware of this kind of forced coercion occurring every day in America.

conservativeparrothead

McCain’s rise was somewhat surprising, I think the overall feeling in 2008 was the “R” brand was so damaged that our only shot is to run McCain because maybe his personal brand with indpendents will help, but it didnt.

But McCain was not very good at public speeches and debates, thus Im not sure that he had “talent”.

conservativeparrothead

Newt was on Levin’s show Wednesday and I heard him give an answer that I think would work in Obamacare.

He said at the time, Conservatives were looking at two things:
1. Offer a health care alternative to Hillarycare that was with private options

2. Which was bigger at the time, curbing the cost of those with money, not having insurance, getting sick or injured and having the taxpayer stuck holding the bill.

After examining the workability of such a proposal, it just wasnt going to work and at the federal level, he believed it to be Unconstitutional.

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

regime, which is on more reason I wish Cain had been a competent candidate, because the attacks on him actually helped him because it crystalized a PC issue that most Americans hate… more later

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

That was the original claim; your attempt to move the goalposts notwithstanding. If I were a Christian living in China (or many other countries) I would be extremely offended by your view of persecution.

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

We believe that life begins at conception. If the law allowed convenience killings of 3 year olds, surely a war to stop same would be justified as a just war.

I often get a chill down my spine for not advocating same yesterday for the millions of really small lives being slaughtered in the womb.

jakeofalltrades

I felt the thrill up my leg over Cain. What a let down.

westcoastpatriette

The discussion was not anywhere limited to the definition of government persecution occurring only by arrest. There are many ways to discriminate and coerce other than placing a person in jail.

Why are you so quick to snap? Makes me get snappy back.

westcoastpatriette

…

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

Do you see where I’m going with this? Semantics gets in the way of truth so often. The desire to boil substantive arguments down to one word, and then make that word the issue.

My liberal Christian part-time girlfriend and best friend throws up the Chinese (never Egypt Coptics since Obama blessed the Aranb Spring) Christians to end arguments about the slippery slope in this country.

more later

westcoastpatriette

nt

jakeofalltrades

The authority in this nation is God. It is His name that is on our currency, not Ceasar’s.

The government derives its authority from our consent alone. The government of this nation is subservient to us. It is government that must obey us.

The American Revolution turned the authority structure of Emmanuel’s day on its head. It is the government that must render to us, and our leaders will be judged for failing to render to us the government we demanded in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, signed in our names.

We owe the government nothing. It is a tool that exists only so long as it serves our interests.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

for revolution against one’s own government for any reason. Yes, that also means I believe our own revolution was not justified. Yes, I realize how this statement will be viewed by people at this site.

jakeofalltrades

n/tyrants

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

.nothing.

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

running for me.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

but the United States of America is not God’s Chosen Nation, regardless of what phrase is printed on the currency (which was not originally there, but added much later). And on all my money, I still see dead Presidents.

westcoastpatriette

nt.

jakeofalltrades

the proof of that being that it happened.

He claims the credit for seating and unseating rulers. And He has seated us, under His authority, upon the throne of North America.

It was NEVER God’s desire to subject us to government!

Our revolution was founded in the most ancient and true of all governmental concepts in the bible. Read 1 Samuel 8

And the LORD said to Samuel, ?Heed the voice of the people in all that they say to you; for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected Me, that I should not reign over them. 8 According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt, even to this day?with which they have forsaken Me and served other gods?so they are doing to you also. 9 Now therefore, heed their voice. However, you shall solemnly forewarn them, and show them the behavior of the king who will reign over them.?

10 So Samuel told all the words of the LORD to the people who asked him for a king. 11 And he said, ?This will be the behavior of the king who will reign over you: He will take your sons and appoint them for his own chariots and to be his horsemen, and some will run before his chariots. 12 He will appoint captains over his thousands and captains over his fifties, will set some to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and some to make his weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. 13 He will take your daughters to be perfumers, cooks, and bakers. 14 And he will take the best of your fields, your vineyards, and your olive groves, and give them to his servants.

15 He will take a tenth of your grain and your vintage, and give it to his officers and servants. 16 And he will take your male servants, your female servants, your finest young men,[a] and your donkeys, and put them to his work. 17 He will take a tenth of your sheep. And you will be his servants. 18 And you will cry out in that day because of your king whom you have chosen for yourselves, and the LORD will not hear you in that day.?

19 Nevertheless the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel; and they said, ?No, but we will have a king over us, 20 that we also may be like all the nations, and that our king may judge us and go out before us and fight our battles.?

21 And Samuel heard all the words of the people, and he repeated them in the hearing of the LORD. 22 So the LORD said to Samuel, ?Heed their voice, and make them a king.?

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

God’s Divine Will, that is. So, what’s your point?

Btw, The United States of American ain’t Israel. Not now, not ever.

jakeofalltrades

I never said we were God’s chosen nation. Dead presidents cannot be rendered to, but the Constitution says “We the People”, and the name on the currency is God’s, and the declared authority of the nation on the currency is God.

Your entire point regarding the currency is therefore false. You’ll need a better argument.

Also, arguing against the Revolution is defying the authority, just as you do when you deny the authority of this land’s rightful ruler, the people themselves.

jakeofalltrades

You ignored the entire passage I quoted, you are a dishonest debater, and I am through talking with you.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

We aren’t a democracy (mob rule), but a Republic. That means there are specific government leaders (Caesar). There are 548 of them in our federal government to be exact.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

I agree that they are. That doesn’t negate the fact that the revolution was unjust.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

I clearly addressed it.

lovethemiddle

I live in Iowa.

And apparently, many here have have fallen for the bull so often called out. That which is constantly referred to as the MSM and polls that are usually ‘pooh-pooh”‘d until they support an individual belief have manipulated many to believe Rick Perry is some kind of hero here in Iowa.

Trust me: Nothing could be further from the truth.

Remember: Bachmann won the Straw Poll here. I honestly don’t think Iowa knows what it wants anymore. There’s a lot of frustration with the current crop (pun intended) of candidates and the national tendency to love every candidate for two weeks before moving on to the next.

As far as I can tell, we’re getting pretty fatigued with much of the process already. But as for a candidate, it’s anybody’s guess…but it sure doesn’t seem to be Perry once you actually start taling with actual Conservative voters.

Just my 2 cents, of course.

CincoSolas_del_Bronx

-no more now-

jakeofalltrades

“Instead of threatening to take your ball and go home, just work harder to ensure that Perry is the nominee. ”

And if you fail to get your candy-date elected, blame it on yourself and just pull the freaking lever against Obama.

LibertyWins

Cain, Perry, and Bachmann to a rapid decline after riding high for a month. That means Newt will be going down just before Christmas. That means Iowa voters will have two choices return to Perry or go out on a limb and go for Ron Paul. If Ron Paul wins Iowa, he can beat Romney in NH and with that momentum, he can win SC. By that point the Anti-Romney crowd will fall in line behind him or accept Romney.

If you are afraid of Paul’s Foreign Policy, vote for Perry.

jakeofalltrades

I’d think you of all people would have a more nuanced view of this. Scripture interpreting scripture is one of the five solas, after all, and Jesus’s words must be interpreted against the rest of scripture, not our own eisegesis.

The fact is that God seats and unseats all authorities by His own caprice, according to His goodness, for His own glory and the benefit of the elect.

I know – because God wills them and brings them about – that all successful revolutions are justified. They are justified merely by the fact that God willed the government to change. They would not have succeeded otherwise, and in revolting, the rebels have carried out His will.

That is all that matters. All other questions about the justification of successful revolutions and changes of government are irrelevant to everything.

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

I pray to God that Perry can make a comeback. This country probably needs a reliable tea partier conservative to save some semblance of the Shining City on the Hill, and given Cain’s laziness and Bachmann’s shallowness, Perry is the only one left, eh?

jakeofalltrades

He sees government as a vehicle of terrible oppression. He does not value particular governments very highly. No wonder He has caused governments beyond counting to fall throughout history.

Because God told the Israelis to leave Egypt – thereby failing to render the service they owed to Pharaoh and basically revolting – Jesus’s statements about rendering to Caesar cannot possibly speak to the issue of revolt, lest He have contracted Himself.

And what was God’s stated justification for rebellion against Egypt?

“I have surely seen the oppression of My people who are in Egypt.”

This was the very justification of our revolution, which we also, as Moses to Pharaoh, presented to the King before we rebelled.

redneck_hippie

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

We aren’t Israel, that’s my point.

aesthete

the question of what, indeed, is rightfully Ceaser’s is one that the Bible does not dwell on. Arguably, Ceaser had much to do with Jewish prosperity and with much of the goings-on in Israel when Jesus was on this Earth: as a newly-integrated province, Roman improvements were everywhere. New systems of irrigation, connection to new trade networks, sanitation systems, better coinage and minting, etc: Ceaser, or at least his empire, could account for many material improvements in the region. What similar improvements can I credit Bill Clinton, George Bush, or Barack Obama with, such that they are rightfully owed anything?

jakeofalltrades

The exact content of what is owed to Ceasar is not explicated, but if we are to reason about it, it must be according to scripture. If the Israelis owed it to Pharaoh not to revolt against his oppression, then God was wrong to lead them in revolt.

Therefore Christ’s statement cannot cover national rebellion against oppression in all cases, because He would be contradicting His own words to Moses, which He said to Him in the form of a burning bush. This would of course make Him a liar and a rebel and therefore incapable of serving as a sacrifice for sin, in which case Christianity is falsified.

jakeofalltrades

“because He would be contradicting His own words to Moses, which He said to Him in the form of a burning bush.”

The last Him should not have been capitalized because Moses is not divine.

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

what’s the use…

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

amen?

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

Not to mention the entertainment of the day.

GWB had some pretty big accomplishments in his day. That I would have to list them on this site is unfortunate.

And it’s not about what’s owed (due), but rather defining its spiritual value.

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

of a government for reasons less than, equal to or greater than:

a) taxation without representation;
b) to end slavery
c) to end genocide
d) to end abortion?

I don’t think so. Hence, the just war doctrine.

I know this. I feel guilt for not doing more to stop abortion.

CincoSolas_del_Bronx

since everything they actually did … actually ended up occurring.

Equivocation is great for setting up punch lines, less so for advancing understanding. To this point your desideratum rests upon a conflation of the decretive and permissive wills of God, a multi-faceted insistence that localized divine pronouncements within the Mosaic economy trump the universal commands of Christ and the apostles, and curiously, the application of a purely negative term–caprice–to what more cautious authors have called “by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will”. Since I have just done so, I am quite certain that you will acknowledge me completely justified in breaking off this fruitless branch.

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

endorses or prohibit’s force to stop unjust Caesarean actions.

The fall of man plus God’s endorsement of nation states to limit man’s evil, plus God’s endorsement of Israeli war and even wars against the Hebrews incl exile certainly doesn’t add up to a prohibition against war per se.

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

later…thinking

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

This seems like a good time for Gamecock’s famous…

Its all been damage control since Eve bit the apple and will be until Jesus returns

and

The US is the worst nation in history except for all the others, by far.

and

Protecting the weak, the children is surely doing unto others as we would have done unto us.

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

This cries out for a diary by NT or Cinco…or a grandson of one that suffered under Stalin or Mao that weren’t overthrown?

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

Theresa…

jakeofalltrades

Freedom from the law is freedom to do good, regardless of the law. Christianity is not rules and regulations, but an aspiration.

We are free to “break” rules – which do not apply to sons of God in the first place – in order to do good. It is good that people should not be oppressed under the yoke of tyranny, and we are free to use righteous judgment in determining how much is too much and at what point stopping it with bloody revolution is justified.

It is good that infants should not be slaughtered, and if killing one man would stop the genocide, I might do it myself with a clear conscience under God.

The sons of God are bound by no law. We are free to do good.

williamjameson

should focus on fiscal qualities and push back but not ignore Socon values because the economy is far more important than Newt’s past. We should examine Newt based solely on his fiscal strengths because growth matters more than your personal issues!!!!!!!! Seriously!

Newt or Perry are far fiscally smarter choices than Romney who has a lousy track record and only 2 years of actual governance.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

I could say much more on this topic but have restrained myself. This simply isn’t the right forum. I have had these discussions elsewhere, and it is best that they remain there.

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

pweese…understanding that this matter deserves a full diary/book treatment! We won’t be harsh. We understand that a diary reply answer will be inherently incomplete. My brother in Christ. seriously

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

some sort of action, including revolutions, hence the revolution must be God’s will?

I think the term “God’s will” is often general in nature, in that it was God’s will that man have free will to reject God (see The garden_ and that the Fall was God’s will as inevitable in the plan to create sons of God that can inherit eternal life, the main part of said plan being that God would become man…

And that much of the rest is damage control…

clintonformccain

It’s not a duck. It’s a lobbyist, whether hiding behind the dodge of not being officially declared or not.

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

thinking…

Because one thing this Great Recession has concentrated the mind upon is that as important as is the USA, the main reason for this whole thing called life and history is about the converting of lowly human animals into sons of God that can live forever with God.

jakeofalltrades

I never insisted that Mosaic law trump Christ’s words – quite the opposite. If Christ – as you say – prohibited all rebellion, and this is universal, then He sinned when He lead the Jews out of Egypt. As a sinner, He cannot save, and Christianity is false.

This is exegesis – scripture interpreting scripture. And unless you have a counter-argument for you how you can believe rebellion universally unjustified AND that Jesus led the Jews out of Egypt against their ruler’s wishes, then you should answer this or change your name to Cuatro Solas, deleting sola scriptura.

As to “caprice”, it was a poor choice of words, but your zeal is heartening. I intended by that word to emphasize His right to do as He pleases with what He made, with no need to justify it to us.

aesthete

an ambiguous subject, but I draw the line at saying that the Bible gives a clear yes/no answer when it comes to what we should render to the prevailing government. Aside from the OT examples of Israel’s revolt from foreign powers, we have several examples in the NT of civil disobedience: Peter and John, for example, *did* break the law in place at the time, and defy the authorities, afterwhich they were imprisoned by the prevailing authorities without complaint. How is this different in principle from either 1) not paying your taxes and allowing yourself to be imprisoned, or 2) revolting against an unjust empire and being at peace with the idea of getting tried and hung for your crime?

Is it not submission to the law to accept the legal penalty, if it comes your way? After all, the law cannot ban or abolish, but merely penalize: thus, accepting a penalty is still in keeping with the law. And is it not true that God is above laws of men, and that this allowed Peter to escape prison with conscience cleared after the angel unlocked the door, despite his sentence not being reduced to time served by a magistrate or an authority? How is this different from a Godly Christian who has miraculously survived bloody revolution, and who believes that this is on account of divine protection?

Finally, a word on revolution: many of the conflicts called “revolutions” are hardly that at all. A revolt implies a breaking off from an established authority. In contrast, wars of independence — such as the Hungarian wars for independence, the Polish struggles for same, and others — are more an attempt to re-establish proper lines of authority which were in place before an usurper took them: in this sense, they are restorative rather than disruptive. The US revolution seems to fall in line with the “restorative” model: attempts were made to reconciliate with Great Britain, the causes of the revolt were the King’s disruption of lines of authority with a pedigree predating the Hanoverian monarchy, and the revolution never once disputed the King’s authority in the English home islands. Likewise for Hungarian and Polish revolutions, the nationalist, non-violent breaking off from the USSR of many Eastern European nations, and many other similar “revolutions”. In many ways, these “revolutions” resemble a client state casting off its fetters more than any radical deposition; none of the examples that I gave really cared much about regime change at all, merely independence and secession.

jakeofalltrades

What I meant by the word “caprice” rather than flipping out.

mom2oneson

nt

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

We’ve already completely threadjacked this diary, and I’ve gone much further than I intended. If one of the moderators believes writing a diary on this is important, they can contact me and I will consider it.

sunshinek67

is that he is on defense right now, and I suspect for a while, there’s a lot out there to go over. That trashcan Politico is all over it too, Gingrich has had to set up a website to counteract all of his missteps and scandals. There exists a litany of reasons why conservatives should not be fooled into thinking that his superfluous oratory skills and internal think tank knowledge has expended itself into solid leadership, both professionally and personally to carry the conservative torch against Obama.

He is not the best. He, like Romney, and now Cain, has scandals or significant controversies that dilute the message, being able to entrench a very deep line in the sand against Obama next year.

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

nt

jakeofalltrades

even when they get together and call themselves a government.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

And I’ve given my reasons for not answering. You should also follow your own advice about being charitable.

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

t

kipling

The entire command is:

“Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s.” (Matthew 22:21)

The contest of the command is as follows. In an attempt to trap Jesus the Herodians – supporters of Herod and the Roman government – asked Jesus, “Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?” Jesus responded by calling for a denarius and asking whose image was on the denarius and whose inscription was on the denarius. The coin of the time would have borne the image of Tiberius. The inscription would have read “Tiberus Caesar Augustus, the son of the Divine Augustus.” The denarius claimed divinity for Tiberus just as Augustus had claimed it for himself and Julius Caesar.

The command given by Jesus splits the issue of the coin and actually limits what must be rendered to Caesar. We are to render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s – in this case the coin. However, we are to render to God the things that are God’s – i.e. worship as divinity. Caesar may not claim that which belongs to God, in this case worship as divinity.

Scripture does not elaborate on what belongs to Caesar but we do know that certain things do not belong to Caesar. I believe that the power to wantonly take innocent life is not a right that belongs to Caesar – whether Julius or Mr. Obama.

nathanalbright

NightTwister. Acts 5:29 clearly states that we are to obey God rather than men. If, therefore, there is a conflict between obedience to the heavenly law as given in scripture, and between our earthly realms, we are commanded by God in Acts to obey God. That means we will be in some form of rebellion against our earthly government. No man can serve two masters, after all.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

It completely disagrees with your interpretation of Acts 5:29.

nathanalbright

…if you read Romans 13:1-7 (the whole context) it states that rulers are to be a terror to evil works and not good ones, and that rulers are to be servants of God. Paul did not say what would happen to those leaders who failed to serve God correctly, but he stated their responsibility to serve God and enforce His law in Romans 13:1-7. You just read it wrong because of your own statist biases. Your problem, not mine. Read 1 Kings 12 for a better understanding of the divine right of revolution against tyrannical leaders. It is the whole biblical context, rather than your own eisegisis, that determines what a biblical verse means.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

This interpretation follows the creeds and confessions of the Church for centuries, your eisegisis notwithstanding.

We aren’t going to agree on this, and I have no plans to take it any further.

kipling

Romans 13:1 must be read in the context of Romans 13:1-7.

If Romans 13:1 means absolute unconditional obedience to all governing authorities, then Jesus Christ was a poor example of a Christian. He did not subordinate himself to the Sanhedrin or the Jewish elites. He challenged their authority, told them they were wrong, urged the people to reject their example, and ultimately said that God would destroy them and give the vineyard to another.

Acts 5:29 and Acts 4:19 qualify Romans 13:1. Obedience to civil authority is commanded by God unless that obedience requires disobedience to God.

Romans 13:2-7 also qualify Romans 13:1. Civil authority should restrain evil, not good. (13:3-4) Civil authority should “execute wrath on those who practices evil.” (13:4) Civil authority should not restrain those who do good or execute wrath on those who do good.

The problem with the government of the United States under Mr. Obama and others is that it is a terror to those who do good. It promotes evil, encourages it, and even helps to pay for it. We live in a time when evil is called good and good is called evil. Our government under Mr. Obama and the cowardly Republican leadership is not the government that God calls for in Scripture.

Along with Acts 5:29 and 4:19, other Scriptures demonstrated that a believer must not obey a government when obedience to that government will mean disobedience to God. Please see Exodus 1:17, Daniel 3:16-18; 6:7,10). Please see the Old Testament prophets who rebelled against the Kings of Israel and John the Baptist in the New Testament. Samuel and Elijah even anointed men to challenged the established government.

nathanalbright

…which fleshes out what I have been telling you. Your biblical understanding is weak. You are trying to pit the scripture against each other, which is poor practice, speaking as someone trained in scriptural exegesis (which you appear unable to recognize when it differs with our own pet conclusions).

The Roman Emperor at the time was Nero. At the time Paul wrote Romans, it should be noted, Nero was seen (falsely as it would turn out) as a young king devoted to virtue, advised by the philosopher Seneca, who was himself a wise and relatively principled pagan, so far as it goes. The Bible makes it abundantly clear, if you are willing to hear examples (which appears to not be the case) that the obedience due to rulers was conditional and limited, but that the obligation for obedience due to God was without limit.

For that reason, in light of our limited and conditional obedience to authority, we therefore reject the sort of statist tyranny that behavior as our current president portends for the future. You appear to have no such moral scruples against being a good German soldier for totalitarian dictators. We will each have to stand before God accountable for what we have said and done, and “I was just following orders” will not be a good enough excuse to avoid judgment.

jakeofalltrades

I’m tired of posting sample size charts – it’s your turn now .

jakeofalltrades

Thanks, kipling, I’ve always respected you.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

Neither do the creeds and confessions. But it’s apparent these have no value for you. And with that, I’ve already said way too much on this topic. There are many other forums online for religious discussions. If you must, the last word is yours.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

Revolution or blind obedience are not the only options in the case of a totalitarian government. Scripture supports neither of those options, and I would choose neither of those.

nathanalbright

…as you are not an authority on the scripture given your own previously exposed weak knowledge. The creeds and confessions do not count for anything with me, being the mere words of men (although, I should note for the record that the Westminister Confession, since this seems to be your own chosen evidence, directly endorsed interposition and the right of revolution).

nathanalbright

If you believe that there is a line beyond which government cannot legitimately cross, you are not a believer in blind obedience. However, if that is so then there is also the question of how one resists. The very act and attitude of resistance suggests a revolutionary attitude, even if you believe only in nonviolent protest. The only way to avoid either blind obedience or the acceptance of a right of revolution (however you define it–such as the doctrine of interposition wherein lower levels of government can step up to resist corrupt higher authorities, or something less formal) is to have a fallacious worldview error by which you conflate the “is” and the “ought” and deny any sort of moral standard or ideal beyond the actual, in which case you are in all practicality at the “blind obedience” level only without the moral clarity to admit it. Either way, you leave yourself unable to resist tyranny by rejecting any means of redress from outside the government itself. And furthermore, you cannot be a patriotic American citizen while rejecting the legitimacy of the right of revolution, because it was on that ground that America’s constitutional heritage stands, both in the Declaration of Independence and the American Constitution, both of which were revolutionary acts against a corrupt and ineffective order.

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

He is a research professor of theology and biblical studies at Phoenix Seminary…

http://www.amazon.com/Politics-According-Comprehensive-Understanding-Political/dp/0310330297

kipling

I have read and used his Systematic Theology. Found it very insightful and useful. How is his “Politics According to the Bible”? I have seen it but have not had a chance to pick it up.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

just war with revolting against your own government.

I’m not going to get into a proof scripture battle with you or anyone else. The creeds and confessions are just fine for me. That they aren’t for you is your business.

And just because I disagree with your interpretation of scripture doesn’t mean I have weak knowledge. Is that the best you can come up with?

kipling

Your kind words are appreciated. It has been an interesting thread.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

There are other options. That you cannot see them isn’t my problem, but such is happening in the world today.

You’re going to judge my patriotism? I’m an honorably discharged veteran. Are you? Have you taken a pledge to die for your country defending the Constitution against all enemies, foreign or domestic?

This has gotten ridiculous, and I’m through with you.

kipling

I have always taught that the Protestant Reformation had a lot to do with the development of American political ideology.

Enjoyed your comments.

Common_Cents

This is how you smack down the slime smear dem media machine. The GOP should hold seminars for all members on how to handle the hostile media.

http://youtu.be/hKQw8EjMh_U

kipling

Correct me if I am wrong but you pledge to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Would not the domestic enemy also include a government bent on the destruction of the Constitution? Since your oath is to the U.S. Constitution and not to a particular government, your oath is one that prohibits blind obedience. The whole concept of unlawful orders also prohibits blind obedience to authority.

If the government came for you and your family, would you resist or blindly obey? If you would resist then you agree that there is a line that demands an armed revolutionary response.

The difference may be in where one would draw the line.

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

way.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

That you keep trying to say that I do is dishonest.

kipling

The point in my comment is that Scripture commands obedience to government unless that obedience causes disobedience to God. That was the whole point of the verses I cited in Acts 4 & 5.

Rebellion does not always entail taking up arms against a government.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

Obeying God is always right. If obeying God causes us to break a law of the state, then better to suffer the consequences of the state than disobey God. That isn’t revolution nor is it blind obedience.

kipling

“If obeying God causes us to break a law of the state, then better to suffer the consequences of the state than disobey God.”

Yet, Peter did not stay to suffer the consequences of the state in Acts 12. He fled to carry on the revolution.

Is rebellion always wrong when they come for your family? Would it be wrong when they come for the Jews?

Your commitment to non-rebellion ultimately gives evil a free hand in the world. It sounds noble but a lot of innocent people will die as you sit back and admire your own nobility.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

Peter….revolution? Ok, I’m done here. You haven’t a clue. You certainly continue to misrepresent me. I have to believe you are doing it intentionally now.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

….no.text….

kipling

You seem to limit your definition of rebellion to armed conflict. Yet, rebellion has many facets. Jesus rebelled against the Jewish system of his day and therefore led a rebellion. The revolt was not a military one but the direct defiance of authority was there. His Jewish enemies – Sadducees, Pharisees, Herodians, etc. – all saw the danger in Jesus and what He preached. That is why they had Him killed.

I think you are done here. Have a good night.

nathanalbright

…what are the other options. I don’t see them. I have commented that “revolutionary” attitudes need not be limited to armed uprising against your own government, but might be a strong and fervent desire to vote out the bums in office. That would still be “rebellion” against the existing government. It’s not my job to figure out what you believe. It’s your job to tell me. So show me that you don’t believe in blind rebellion. You can’t tell me I’m making a fallacy of false dilemma without showing me the other options. Got that?

nathanalbright

….only the most obvious. I showed you a creed that believes in interposition, which is part of the right of revolution. You ignored the reference, because your own knowledge of “the creeds and confessions” appears to be as nonexistent as your knowledge of scripture. You cite one verse out of context and use that to contradict over a dozen verses that show the limited nature of our obligations to obey human government. Because God is sovereign over all the universe, human governments are only the viceroys and servants of Him. Therefore because our ultimate loyalty is to the kingdom of heaven, any loyalty to earth is therefore contingent and limited. This concept seems to big for you to understand, since you can’t show me any examples where you would stand against a corrupt government that would demonstrate an acceptance of the legitimacy of opposition to corrupt government, a truth expressed numerous times in the Bible (as discussed elsewhere) and also a prominent theme of American history.

nathanalbright

I enjoyed your comments as well. I wholeheartedly believe that religious beliefs have political consequences. I have read (though the exact source escapes me at present) that George III or his advisors once complained about the American Revolution being a Presbyterian rebellion. The link between Calvinism and the political philosophy of the American Revolution is hard to ignore, as it is a defense of federalism in general, allowing for states to interpose for a corrupt national political order.

nathanalbright

…of my own position.

CincoSolas_del_Bronx

When at last old Jewel, blind and shaky and almost weeping, rose to his feet, his voice was hardly audible. Men turned round to gaze at, and some to admire, the clear-cut, half-childish face and the white hair which had become more conspicuous as the long room grew darker. But only those close to him could hear what he said. At this moment Lord Feverstone sprang to his feet, folded his arms, and looking straight at the old man said in a very loud, clear voice:

“If Canon Jewel wishes us not to hear his views, I suggest that his end could be better attained by silence.”

Jewel had already been an old man in the days before the first war when old men were treated with kindness, and he had never succeeded in getting used to the modern world. For a moment as he stood with his head thrust forward, people thought he was going to reply. Then quite suddenly he spread out his hands with a gesture of helplessness, shrunk back, and began laboriously to resume his chair.

C.S. Lewis, That Hideous Strength (1945)

This long room as well has palpably darkened …

nathanalbright

….that’s a very appropriate quote for his behavior on this thread.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

I certainly won’t waste mine here anymore trying to explain it to you.

Common_Cents

He’s getting out in front of the baggage and addresses each point.

http://www.newt.org/answers

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

aren’t actively taking up arms against our government for the slaughter of millions of children. I’m serious. What’s more immoral than taking innocent life?

There are six things the LORD hates, seven that are detestable to him, haughty eyes, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood…

Proverbs 6:16-17 (NIV)

If you really believe there’s a biblical mandate to revolt against an immoral government then what are you waiting for? Ours is certainly more immoral now than was King George’s just before the revolution.

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

obtaining freedom from an existing government (pgs. 88-91):

1) The Bible nowhere says it is wrong to change an existing government
2) God works thru human actions to appoint different leaders at different times
3) Biblical examples of raising up new leaders to deliver people from the rule of tyrants; and
4) Founders justification also included that it was justified to rebel against the Monarchy because it is morally right for a lower govt official to protect the citizens in his care from a higher official who is committing crimes against these citizens – refers to Calvin on this.

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

criminals

nathanalbright

…I’m surprised as well. So far my hostility to abortion is in the vocal public advocacy state. Like some others here (like Mr. Gamecock) I often wonder if I should do more.

nathanalbright

…because you accept the minor and major but can’t accept the conclusion of simple syllogistic reasoning? Because you don’t know how you would resist an evil government but don’t want to accept the label of being a believer in blind obedience? Or simply because you like to insult others for their beliefs but can’t bear to be open about your own. You’ve done enough insulting on this thread, without being open and honest yourself about your own political philosophy. Put up or shut up.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

because you can’t read.

nathanalbright

….and there’s not much I can do about it. It would be far easier just to admit that you’re a believer in blind obedience and end the discussion gratefully. Instead you’re like the man who claimed he didn’t like digging holes but couldn’t put down the shovel.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

So you have either be illiterate or a liar. I was being gracious.

nathanalbright

It is you who are illiterate to the Bible, to the Creeds, or to whatever contradicts your deeply held beliefs that you appear inarticulate about and unable to express in the Queen’s English or any other kind of language. Instead you insult me for not being a mindreader enough to divine the difference between a steadfast refusal to countenance the right to revolution in either political or military terms and blind obedience to authority, given your totally mistaken eisegetical views on Romans 13:1 and your inability to cite any creeds that actually agree with you. I suppose you might be able to find some kind of Anabaptist creed that agreed with you, but they are pietists anyway opposed to political involvement on moral grounds, so I imagine that wouldn’t help your grounds either. I am not illiterate–rather I am not a mind reader and you are disingenuous about your political worldview.

jakeofalltrades

Before I cut them off until such indeterminate date that they repent. You might want to evaluate that policy for yourself. It’s a real time-saver.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

When I say to you, “no, that’s not what I’m saying”, and you continue to say that it is, that’s lying. I have neither the time nor the desire to clarify my position to liars. If you’d even been a little bit charitable to your fellow Christian and asked, “then what is your position?” instead of continuing to posit a false dichotomy, I might have been interested in clarifying. As it is, you’re content to boast that you’ve beaten your strawman. Far be it from me to get in the way of that.

nathanalbright

….I shall have to consider it.

CincoSolas_del_Bronx

Hinz.

red_oakster

nt

jakeofalltrades

Pretty much nothing is “always wrong”. Christian liberty is about not being bound by rules, but instead being free to do good, because Christians are not under the law, it having being fulfilled by Christ.

Even if we were to accept the existence of a rule that says “never disobey government”, it would never apply to the sons of God where the same would interfere in any way with doing good.

jakeofalltrades

n/t

thisisme7

just because you really, really want any of the candidates to be better than Obama isn’t going to make it so.

thisisme7

on my governor’s campaign for governor for two years… I know how to work for him.
I’m NOT supporting anyone but Perry. I won’t throw my vote away.

thisisme7

Saying “either” when you say you don’t like Perry. You sure as hell aren’t speaking, or talking to me. I don’t give a ___ if you don’t like him.
What kind of hypocrite are you anyway? You whine how “I can’t agree with this, I don’t like Perry… wahhhh” Yet you say “oh but I don’t think I’d support Bachmann” You contradicted yourself in a matter of three sentences

thisisme7

voting for whomever I want. My decision. My vote. My choice.

Basically everyone crying that I feel the way I do, why support anyone but Perry if you think my vote will cause the Republican to lose? So basically you know any other lesser candidate cannot win against Obama. If you didn’t feel this way, people wouldn’t be whining about how everyone should bend over and take any R on the ballot.

Bill S

This site is for support of conservatives AND Republicans. We support the most conservative candidate (that is electable within reason) in the primary, but in the general, we support the Republican candidate. If you’re not willing to do that, well, maybe you should look elsewhere for sympathy, because you ain’t getting it here.

thisisme7

where I can and can’t go. How liberal of you.
You’ll never be in a position to tell me what to do, how to think, and how you want the election process to go doesn’t mean that I have to follow you.

Not doing a good job btw of having me change my mind. In fact, I think I’ll come back if Perry is not the nominee and campaign against the nominee when all is said and done just to see you throw a hissy fit. See, I can do those things because I still have my civil liberties… or do conservatives no longer believe in that?

Bill S

…tell you where you can and can’t go around here. If you continue to be a horse’s ass, I’ll tell you to go to another web site…and you will have no choice about it. Now start playing nice, because I don’t throw hissy fits. I just disable your account. Nice, neat and clean.

thisisme7

lookie there, I’m still commenting.
Even if you did, I can still come back on here as much as I want. No amount of bullying, hissy fits, etc. can stop me from doing that either.
And it’d be wise not to order someone like a Nazi to ‘play nice’ when you are a bigger horse’s ___
hmm thought it said ‘no profanity’ just before the Post Comment button…

Bill S

but since you insist.

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Newt Gingrich takes two of the last three, Cain in third

COMMENTS

ALL

COMMENTS

POPULAR

#RSRH

PICK YOUR STATE & GET LOCAL