1

Good post.

I'll give him the benefit of the doubt though cause he is not Mitt and I'll only crap on him when he actually does skip debates. I'm sure our Romney supporting betters agree?

2 These debates are media-created bullshit.

3 Perry should take advantage of the Internet and do video debates.....like that guy Lee Doren does.

4 Ya think Mittens would ever agree to a one-on-one with Newt? Think about it.

5 good....these debates are stupid

6 if he cant handle republicans....

7 these aren't debates anyway...that thing newt and cain are going to do.....that is a debate.....these other things are a waste of time

8 Barack Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure.

9

These debates are media-created bullshit.

Yeah, they are.  And if you can't even handle them then you're not qualified to be President.

10 Perry dissappoints me. A warrior doesn't quit the fight, he takes a loss, steps back anylizes the loss, makes adjustments and goes back into battle. A warrior doesn't quit the field and hope the enemy falls on his weapon and dies.

11 It seems to me that the debates are kinda skipping him!

12 Perry can't wish this away. He lost his lead because of his performances in these debates, avoiding them isn't going to get it back.

Yep.  If Perry is serious about winning, he needs to perform well in the debates.

And anybody who is going to tackle entitlements needs to be able to survive an hour-long question and answer session.  Yes these debates are stupid, but it's hardly a crucible, definitely not compared to what will happen when you start fiddling with knobs and levers for social security.

13

I'd like to see Perry in some televised town hall meetings. I'm guessing he would shine with more than 30 seconds to elucidate his platform.

 

Who would cover it?

14

I'm mixed on this.

I think the debates have been pretty awful, especially the ones where democrats moderated(see what I did there).

 

However, it may seem like he's running away from a weakness.

I think he should pick the debates that suit him and go to those. The sooner there are less candidates in the debates, the better it will be for him.

I would much prefer to hear him speak for a few minutes than try to get something packed in 20 second sound bites.

15

10 Perry dissappoints me. A warrior doesn't quit the fight, he takes a loss, steps back anylizes the loss, makes adjustments and goes back into battle. A warrior doesn't quit the field and hope the enemy falls on his weapon and dies.

A warrior doesn't turn his sword on his fellow warriors that are on his own side.

That is the problem. ....Perry doesn't see his fellow Republicans as 'the enemy'.

16 I don't think this is nearly as big a deal as you're making out, Drew.

My read on this is that they'll do Michigan, and see where they are.  With the first Primaries coming up so fast, they need to really start slamming those states with retail politics.  It's not his fault that the debate schedule is set so that the only way to attend the debates is to screw up the actual campaigning.

We've had too many already, IMO.

If I were advising Perry, this is exactly what I'd suggest: Do Michigan (because you're already committed), then only do the others if it won't impact your retail politics too much.  I don't know where the next few are but, for instance, I wouldn't do a debate in CA right now.  You functionally lose two days of campaigning in a state that matters if you do that.

17 These debates have been debacles.  Pissy slapfights orchestrated by effete media liberals with all the dignity and illumination of professional wrestling.  Deliberate attempts to embarrass or demean whatever eventual challenger to His Excellency that manages to squeak out a primary win.

Debates might be a good thing, but not with the media turning them into gang events with no more agenda than ruining the GOP field.

And Perry made a mistake jumping into the race immediately into these debates, his weak ground.  He should have established himself with speeches and appearances before going into the orchestrated slapfights.

18 Basically agree 100% with DrewM.'s post.

By the way, Drew, I owe you an overdue apology: in that other thread where you wrote about not voting for Romney in the general election, I leaped to accusing you of saying you would vote Obama over Romney (as opposed to casting a protest vote or somesuch).  It was out of line, and I'm sorry.

19

Why is anyone still talking about this loser?

 

He isnÂ’t smart enough to realize that he was ahead in the polls when he was attacking Obama, then fell like a rock when he went on the attack against other candidates.  We donÂ’t need anyone this stupid in office.

20 If it ain't working for him, do what will work for him. Shit - these TEEVEE debates are worthless. My advice is to hit the hustings and give interviews only to local TEEVEE and radio. Focus on the meaningful States from a nomination point of view and tell the metro boy talking heads to get fucked.

21

Agreed: GOP debates are just gotcha set-ups for liberal media to ask gotcha questions in attemps to gain gotcha sound-bites for their king. Note the lack of economic questions from fawning pro-Obozo media.

Still - you gotta show up. Or get the whole thing cancelled by all: stating -unfair media bais - no thanks.

Perry is not good in the debate. We need someone to debate Obama. Not only debate Obama - but wipe the floor with him.

 

22 I thought someone (semi-official) suggested a dedicated Perry/Romney debate.  Did I imagine that?  If not, has there been any word from the respective camps on whether that will happen or not?

23 if Perry starts skipping debates he's essentially quitting the race.

I don't think so. Also, it isn't a done deal on skipping them either. Of course the media is already treating this just like the racist rock.

The thing about these debates is they are good for two groups in the current crop; Romney who never gets hit with the gotcha questions and who answers stuff with no answers/platitudes and the candidates who are broke.

Skipping these debates when the Iowa caucuses, NH, and SC start in two months may just well be a sound strategy. I also think if he quits and starts hitting the States Romney will too.

24 What Perry needs is a cool costume and a comic-relief sidekick.

A good catchphrase would help too.

25 9  These debates are media-created bullshit.

Yeah, they are. And if you can't even handle them then you're not qualified to be President.

--------

Which primary debates did Barack Obama win?

26 If I were advising Perry, this is exactly what I'd suggest: Do Michigan (because you're already committed), then only do the others if it won't impact your retail politics too much.

If I were advising him, I'd say >win< Michigan.  Go there, don't stammer, be smart, land body blows.  He should be training for these things like a prize fight.

Maybe then you can start skipping them, but not until you prove you can do good in them.

27

Perry is not good in the debate. We need someone to debate Obama. Not only debate Obama - but wipe the floor with him.

I would love to see Newt do that.  ::: sigh :::

Sadly, he picked the wrong decade to stop sniffing glue.

28

A warrior doesn't turn his sword on his fellow warriors that are on his own side.

That is the problem. ....Perry doesn't see his fellow Republicans as 'the enemy'.

Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at October 27, 2011 10:40 AM (esyI3)

Well when your friends are chopping you off at the knees, you might need to reconsider your outlook. They are in serious competition, and he doesn't need to chop his opponents, Reagan didn't, but he needs to pull his head out of his ass and make the changes needed to do well in debates, or get the fuck out.

29 Posted by: Jeff B., making sure the sedatives work before commenting at October 27, 2011 10:41 AM (bbxN5)

Thank you.

And to be clear...I wrote that in anger and deleted it before I was going to post it. Ace just posted it for me first and the software picked up the unedited version.

It was like a letter never meant to be mailed that accidentally was.

30

Perry dissappoints me. A warrior doesn't quit the fight, he takes a loss, steps back anylizes the loss, makes adjustments and goes back into battle. A warrior doesn't quit the field and hope the enemy falls on his weapon and dies.

 

Regrouping and forming a new strategy aren't the same as quitting. Yet, if it appears to be, well...perception and all that.

The key to making these debates more than the joke they've been thus far is narrowing it down to three or four candidates. Get Santorum, Paul, Crist, and Johnson off the friggin stage. Hell, get Bachmann out of there as well. Get it down to Romney, Perry, Cain, and Newt and see where it goes from there. Even a Southerner such as Perry should be able to get a message across in a minute to a minute and a half.

31 Rick will not skip debates - he says stuff like that to throw off the MSM. They will all report that he won't show up and when he does he can say they are all full of shit.

32

Which primary debates did Barack Obama win?

Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at October 27, 2011 10:42 AM (esyI3)

More importantly, he didn't lose any.  And Obama had a media swooning over his pant creases.  Rick Perry doesn't have that.

33

>>We've had too many already, IMO.

There have been more debates in the past two months than all of last year I think

34 Which primary debates did Barack Obama win? Unfortunately the Dems are not stupid enough to put seven Candidates on a stage and allow them to tear each other apart for the amusement of the masses.

35 damned if ya do, damned if ya don't ... hell of a process we have.

36 if i can find the polling station he's got my vote

37 I keep seeing people say that they like Perry's record in Texas (with caveats); they like him in interviews; they like him in campaign appearances; they like his plan for x, y and z but he's bad in faux-debates so he can't be President.  Like there is ever a need for debating as President.  Ever.

Some of you who are complaining about Perry are pro-Romney...the others are just helping the pro-Romney crowd.  Cain isn't likely to get elected no matter what his polls say right now and if he does what do you get?  No one knows because he's never had to take an actual stand on anything in the past.

38 Skip the debates!  Why, that would be desthpicable!!!

39
22

I think a Romney/Perry debate could only happen if Perry were #2 or better, and Romney would do it out of desperation.

Do you think right now he'd even agree to a 1:1 with Cain? I doubt it.

40

Which primary debates did Barack Obama win?

It doesn't matter.  You have to show up.  He showed up.

41 If I were advising him, I'd say >win< Michigan.  Go there, don't stammer, be smart, land body blows.  He should be training for these things like a prize fight.

Fair.

But the point remains. The debates are of marginal use for Perry.  Until and unless Romney is actually confronted by the moderator (because he can just ignore the other Candidates, more or less) on some of his past record, no one is going to touch Romney in the debates.

I also agree that he needs to get back to "Barack Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure, and I promise to work every day to undo the clusterf*ckery that he has inflicted on the American people."  But that only gets so much play- as much as Obama is the ultimate "enemy," he still has to win the Primary, and that means pointing out where other candidates are deficient.

42 Rick Perry could skip all the debates, and conservative blogs would still pump him up as the great conservative hope.

43

@Joffen, Mitt tore Newt to pieces the last time Newt went after him directly on Romneycare. It was a humiliating ass-kicking too, as Newt was forced to admit that he had previously endorsed the individual mandate. It was an epic slapdown of Newt by Romney, and I'm saying that as someone who really, really dislikes Romney.

Mitt is a slimy liar, but he's also a very artful dodger and agile debater. Newt tends to swing for the fences in the debates, but as with that exchange with Romney shows, Newt can get caught flat-footed and forced to eat his words..

 

44 It seems to me that Perry's campaign has been run by folks who don't know what the hell they are doing.  If Perry is calling the shots, then the blame's on him.

But the word "incompetent" comes to mind on how his campaign has been run.

45 26 If I were advising Perry, this is exactly what I'd suggest: Do Michigan (because you're already committed), then only do the others if it won't impact your retail politics too much. Go to Michigan and tell the rest of the US, if you vote for Romney you will end up like Michigan."

46 >>>Which primary debates did Barack Obama win?

I don't know if you're being sarcastic or you're just not familiar with what happened in the 2008 race, but Obama basically WON the nomination over Hillary Clinton by defeating her during the debates.  Actually, she lost HERSELF the nomination in much the same way that Rick Perry frittered away his shot, by horribly fumbling a relatively easy question about...driver's licenses for illegal immigrants.

Seriously though, it was the key moment of the Clinton-Obama primary after which she suddenly began to hemorrhage support to Obama.  So it's really quite funny and ironic that you wrote your post in the tone you did, because...yes, Obama's victories over Clinton in the debates (or, tellingly, her own LOSSES in them) are what made his "dark horse" long-shot bid suddenly a very real prospect and set him on the path to eventual victory.

47 We need someone to debate Obama. Not only debate Obama - but wipe the floor with him.   Posted by: Lemon Kitten at October 27, 2011 10:42 AM

And that would be Newt.  God help us.

48

Perry can't wish this away. He lost his lead because of his performances in these debates, avoiding them isn't going to get it back.

+1, Perry is busting his ass to get this comeback going and more recent polls have him below Newt now, I can't see how he turns things around guys

49

Like there is ever a need for debating as President.  Ever.

Debates are about being persuasive.

Are you saying that the ability to persuade is not needed as a President?  That Presidents just issue order from on high and people scurry about to make it so?

How's that working out for Obama right now?

50 His fall from front runner status is almost entirely due to his awful debate performances.

Is it? The declining trend in Perry support started a week before he appeared in any debate—and with a single exception, there are no clearly debate-related downward sub-trends within that down-trend. It's surprisingly constant.

You can look this stuff up, if you like. There are charts and shit.

But I figure no one cares, because there's some repeatable conventional wisdom out there, and people like it.

(I think he sucks at debates. I don't think that's what his polling problem is.)

51 What Perry needs is a cool costume and a comic-relief sidekick.

A good catchphrase would help too.

Posted by: Clutch Cargo at October 27, 2011 10:42 AM (Qxdfp)

I keed, I keed

52
Sadly, a cool costume wouldn't work for Newt.
He's more like Artemis Gordon, only he's been experimenting on himself.

53 These debates are media-created bullshit.

Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at October 27, 2011 10:33 AM (esyI3)

So?

Regardless of their origin, the debates exist, they aren't going away, and Perry sucks at them. If he can fix that he has a shot; if he can't he will be a flash-in-the-pan.

54

Actually, she lost HERSELF the nomination in much the same way that Rick Perry frittered away his shot, by horribly fumbling a relatively easy question about...driver's licenses for illegal immigrants.

oh God I remember that, that was as hard to watch as Perry's "heartless" comment

55 Rick Perry could skip all the debates, and conservative blogs would still pump him up as the great conservative hope.

That's because real conservatives bank on record not rhetoric. And no he is not the "great conservative hope". He has his ugly spots, but nowhere near as many as the others, especially that Democrat with an R after his name.

56 Rick Perry could skip all the debates, and conservative blogs would still pump him up as the great conservative hope.

Even if that were true (and it isn't), that would be because he's the best of the lot.  I won't say "best of a bad lot" because they're so much better- as a rule- than what we had in 2008.

57

Regardless of their origin, the debates exist, they aren't going away, and Perry sucks at them. If he can fix that he has a shot; if he can't he will be a flash-in-the-pan.

+1

58 I would agree with this, if I thought anyone reachable was actually still watching these dog and pony shows.  I don't, so I'm not convinced it's a thing.  Yes the media will slam him for it, but they'll find a way to do that regardless.

59

Yes the media will slam him for it, but they'll find a way to do that regardless.

That's true, so why give them something easy to use?  Why not make it a little harder on them?

60 Skipping debates is a brilliant strategy!

61

(I think he sucks at debates. I don't think that's what his polling problem is.)

Posted by: oblig. at October 27, 2011 10:48 AM (cePv

He collapsed after the 'heartless' comment.  Considering there isn't much else he did, I think that's the culprit.

62

32 If memory serves....Hillary, Edwards and Biden did much better in the Dem-primary debates than Obama.

But you are right...Obama had the media on his side and he used the Internet to reach people. Obama also did a lot of retail politicing in stump speechs and meet & greets.

Right now, Perry is getting better press on CNN and on CNBC, than he is on Fox. He is doing a lot of retail politicing, shaking hands and doing speeches. He needs to add the Internet to his strategy as well.

63 Perry should kidnap his opponent's kids and threaten to give them the "Perry treatment" if their parents debate well.

64 Sadly, a cool costume wouldn't work for Newt. He's more like Artemis Gordon, only he's been experimenting on himself. Well, that train Artie and Jim rode all over the West did look a bit like Tiffany's designed it.

65 I don't know if you're being sarcastic or you're just not familiar with what happened in the 2008 race, but Obama basically WON the nomination over Hillary Clinton by defeating her during the debates.  Actually, she lost HERSELF the nomination in much the same way that Rick Perry frittered away his shot, by horribly fumbling a relatively easy question about...driver's licenses for illegal immigrants.
Posted by: Jeff B., making sure the sedatives work before commenting at October 27, 2011 10:47 AM

Bullshit.  No one remembers that minor gaffe.  Clinton lost the nomination when she went up against a younger, more attractive, more eloquent, more minority candidate.

66

What is the name of Obama's tailor?

I'll get those pants creased !

67 Debates are overrated.

68 DrewM. I agree with the sentiments but not the conclusions. Yes, in a rational world, it would be political suicide to skip GOP debates. In the world we inhabit, our stupid fucking party let's RINO dipshits in Iowa, New Hampshire, and to a lesser extent, South Carolina, pick who our candidate will be. And it will be Romney. Because we are the Stupid Party.

69 But the point remains. The debates are of marginal use for Perry.  Until and unless Romney is actually confronted by the moderator (because he can just ignore the other Candidates, more or less) on some of his past record, no one is going to touch Romney in the debates.
Posted by: AllenG
................
They brought up RomneyCare just the last debate and he skewered Newt on the mandate being his idea.  Perry tried to bring up his immigration problem and failed miserably.

What is it you think hasn't been brought up about his record?  AGW?  Big freakin deal.. he's changed his mind.. or "re-evaluated" his former position and now thinks cap and trade is a bad idea..

These are not big issues with most voters right now.. his stance on assault weapons?  Who, but the very hard core base gives a flying f*ck when the economy is in the crapper?

70 Yes absolutely the debates are run by Democrat operatives disguised as journalists. I just wish a candidate would behave as if they knew this and use it to their advantage by challenging the premise of the questions and using the moderators own political bias as contrast to the conservative position.

71 Posted by: Jeff B., making sure the sedatives work before commenting at October 27, 2011 10:47 AM (bbxN5)

They're not working.

72 >>>oh God I remember that, that was as hard to watch as Perry's "heartless" comment

Yeah, it was epic, major wall-to-wall political news at the time, and it basically cost Hillary the nomination against a guy who right up until that point had been viewed much the way we look at Cain: "nice guy, needs experience, not really a serious candidate, just running to raise his name recognition."  So again it's deeply ironic that CMAJH asked the question she did, because it proves my (and DrewM's) point and totally undercuts hers: debates DO matter, and modern day elections are frequently won or lost on the strength of them. 

73 Perry's picked up a new debate adviser since the last debate.  Will be interesting to see if he makes a difference.

74 Clinton lost the nomination because Obama is black (sorta/kinda) and democrats orgasmed.

75 Perry lost me when he called Romney "heartless" for refusing to share his hair styling secrets.

76

And it will be Romney. Because we are the Stupid Party. Posted by: Empire of Jeff at October 27, 2011 10:52 AM (XE2Oo)

Yes it will.  And that will well and truly suck.

And you will pull the lever for him anyway.

77 But you are right...Obama had the media on his side and he used the Internet to reach people. Obama also did a lot of retail politicing in stump speechs and meet & greets.

That wasn't really what I was getting at.  At no point did the media ever say that Barry lost a debate during the primary.  If he made a gaffe, it went down the memory hole.  That is a tremendous advantage over your competitors.

Perry, on the other hand, ain't getting that treatment.

78 If Perry does not not show up at the debates and make a stand on who he is, what he is about and why we should elct him, he is done. They will hit him with the Palin your a quitter meme. I think Perry, out of all of the candidates would make the best POTUS. My fear is in a debate, Barack would kick his ass.

79 Perry was displaying an extraordinary amount of arrogance that was hurting him in addition to the debates. In NH, its been a huge liability. People just think he is too cocky. Too bad conservatives push the "its his turn" meme. It works. Perry and Cain will be fine candidates... in 2020.

80

*If* this is true, Perry is either much dumber or much more desperate than even I thought.  We'll see.

This may be a trial balloon run up by the campaign to gauge reaction and generate some buzz for Perry.

81

The GOP base is all fired up. Romney is the perfect fire hose to cool that enthusiasm right down.

Did I mention that Mitt sux?

82 Bullshit.  No one remembers that minor gaffe.  Clinton lost the nomination when she went up against a younger, more attractive, more eloquent, more minority candidate.
Posted by: huerfano
.........
and.. Oprah.  Actually, I am only kidding a little here.

But you are right.. he was destined to win the minute he put his hat in the ring.

Luckily, the Oprah factor will not be present in this election.  White, moderate suburbanites who thought it "was time" for an articulate black man to become president have had a good slap of reality the last 3 years..  Most now realize his is a SCOAMF.

83 Perry is dead. Really doesn't matter to much what he does now.

84

Hmm.

If he'd complained loudly and bitterly from the beginning about the debate format, the number of candidates, the stupid-ass liberal question asking moderators, etc., then he could walk away and blame the debates.

Doing badly and walking away from them saying "there are too many" isn't the same.

We need a president who can deflect blame better than that!! Oh, wait, we're trying that and it's not working out so well...

85 Agreed:  these debates have been an abject failure for the GOP.  I like the thinking out of the box.. stay out of them and campaign.  Force the media to follow him.  Deny the media their bs set-ups and the large field to pick him to pieces.  It will be an all or nothing idea, and i think, if he did no more debates until after March, he'd be good to go.  Presidential candidates having to do well in debates is a false floor the media has created.... it would be nice... but conservative values and leadership are more important.

86 our stupid fucking party let's RINO dipshits in Iowa, New Hampshire, and to a lesser extent, South Carolina, pick who our candidate will be.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at October 27, 2011 10:52 AM (XE2Oo)

Exactly. Who decided that Kansas and Utah shouldn't decide?

87

I'm going to go on and sound like a broken record here....

We should have round-robin Lincoln-Douglas debates and scrap this format with 37 different candidates crammed on the stage being forced into giving truncated responses.

Anyone who doesn't want to show up for an L-D style debate should carry his or her ass back home.

 

88
64
Bwahaha.

89 And it will be Romney. Because we are the Stupid Party. I don't know what you mean.

90 >>>The GOP base is all fired up. Romney is the perfect fire hose to cool that enthusiasm right down. Did I mention that Mitt sux? Posted by: Do I know you? at October 27, 2011 10:55 AM (OlN4e) Once again I'm compelled to ask: if Romney wins the nomination, what the hell kind of sense does it make to claim that a candidate who got fewer votes would actually generate more broad enthusiasm?

91 Perry was displaying an extraordinary amount of arrogance that was hurting him in addition to the debates. In NH, its been a huge liability. People just think he is too cocky.

That's not arrogance, it's swagger. I can see you aren't employed in the marketing field.

92

If I remember the Hillary/Obama debates, I seem to recall the moderators going all in for Obama and asking Hillary hard gotcha questions first, like name the leading of East Scabumfuck and stuff like that.

SNL even did a couple of bits on it.

http://tinyurl.com/3mwxlrm

 

Hillary was put through the ringer and Obama was given kid gloves treatment.

 

 

93 These are not big issues with most voters right now.. his stance on assault weapons?  Who, but the very hard core base gives a flying f*ck when the economy is in the crapper?

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at October 27, 2011 10:53 AM (f9c2L)

If you hand-wave away all of Mitt's problems, pretty much all that is left is a guy whose favorite novel is Battlefield Earth.

By the way, Mitt is on record saying he thinks that a stimulus can work during economic downturns.  He just didn't like that last stimulus.  What a rock-ribbed fiscal conservative.

94 >>>Bullshit.  No one remembers that minor gaffe.  Clinton lost the nomination when she went up against a younger, more attractive, more eloquent, more minority candidate.

I think you are making the mistake of projection: YOU don't remember that gaffe, because you didn't pay much (if any) attention to the Democratic primary at the time.  But it was literally THE key inflection point in the 2008 Democratic primary, the moment when Hillary damaged herself crucially with a number of primary voters who were at that point more or less settled on her as the "inevitable" candidate.

You are also forgetting the fact that Obama didn't really win handily against Clinton.  In fact, in terms of actual votes cast, he didn't win at all: Clinton had more votes in the primaries, all told, than Obama did by the end of the season.  So your claim that she lost because Obama was 'destined' to win as the young black attractive candidate is simply ahistorical: you are viewing the race through retrospective eyes, where now that we know the outcome it's too easy to presume it was foreordained.  It wasn't foreordained at all, and I remember it extremely well: long into the season, into March and April the CW was STILL that Clinton would pull out the nomination -- it was only Axelrod's brilliant understanding and gaming of the unique Democratic primary rules involving superdelegates and proportional reps, and his media strategy of turning Obama into a rock star with "fierce moral urgency" blah blah blah, that won Obama the nomination by a HAIRSBREADTH.

95 Complaining about the debates is pathetic. Perry sucks at immigration, so immigration isn't an important issue anymore. Perry sucks at debates, so lets stop having them. People complain about candidates being picked or chosen by the elite - that's what happened to Perry. Perry was hyped by the bloggers to the point they created a myth. Debates expose the truth. Its a great format to pierce the hype, spin and bias. Thank God for the debates.

96

That's not arrogance, it's swagger. I can see you aren't employed in the marketing field.

Well, when the electorate sees "swagger" and thinks "arrogance" then that's a distinction without a difference.

97

Perry's picked up a new debate adviser since the last debate.  Will be interesting to see if he makes a difference.

I hadn't heard that. Who did he get?

98 A prudent warrior chooses his battles. Or, failing all else, the lecture circuit.

99

I'm not exactly a Perry fan and I still think this is the right decision. Perry is who he is. We realize he won't be able to debate with Obama and anybody who thinks he can is thinking wishfully--and Obama is a lousy debater, thin-skinned and inarticulate.

Perry needs to show us what he can do.

Also, it is suggested above that Ron Paul needs to get off the stage with the other also-rans. By that logic, Perry is done since Paul is running better than double Perry's numbers.

100

>>Exactly. Who decided that Kansas and Utah shouldn't decide?

 

Personally, I think the populous states should get first crack. California, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Texas, New York, Florida, Illinois, Michigan and Georgia. (some 48% of the country)

 

Then let the race be for the other half.

101 That's not arrogance, it's swagger. I can see you aren't employed in the marketing field. Posted by: Stephen Douglas at October 27, 2011 10:58 AM (LyOUH) ---- Doesnt matter. Obama has the young black hip hop vote locked up.

102

72.... it's deeply ironic that CMAJH asked the question she did, because it proves my (and DrewM's) point and totally undercuts hers: debates DO matter, and modern day elections are frequently won or lost on the strength of them.

No. My point was.....that only a small segment of the population [political junkies, media watchers, lawyers] even pay attention to these debates. Most people could not name a debate that Obama actually 'won'.

It basically boils down to......the media. They create these debates. And then they declare who the 'winner' of the debate is, based on whose soundbites were the best.

 

103 Jon Huntsman ought to be gratified that if he cannot win the nomination in person, he will win it in spirit, vicariously.

104

He collapsed after the 'heartless' comment.  Considering there isn't much else he did, I think that's the culprit.

+1 even after subpar debate performances he was still in the lead and was even tied w/ Romney in CA! His polling imploded opnce he uttered "heartless" and from what I'm seeing a lot of folks are going to hold that grudge against him for a long time to come

Exactly. Who decided that Kansas and Utah shouldn't decide?

I've always found the way primaries are held silly, it should be 1 big national primary, fuck these early states that feel entitled to determine the race. my state of FL is rebeling against that bs and the RNC is threatning to punish us.

And you will pull the lever for him anyway.

damn right I will if it's him or Obama and I'll feel proud to do so

 

105 exactly....    oh, and Obama is a SCOAMF

106 We're going to wind up with socialized medicine.

107 VOTE 4 BASIL

108

Yes the media will slam him for it, but they'll find a way to do that regardless.

That's true, so why give them something easy to use?  Why not make it a little harder on them?

That works in both directions.  The debates so far have, well, given them stuff that was easy to use...if you're hosed either way, choose the option that gives you more flexibility to work to your strengths.

Not that it's likely to save Perry.  I just don't think it's the factor one might think it was at this point.

109 And you will pull the lever for him anyway Yes I will. Because I'm mature. Quit sniggering, jerks.

110

By the way, Mitt is on record saying he thinks that a stimulus can work during economic downturns.  He just didn't like that last stimulus.  What a rock-ribbed fiscal conservative.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk
............
And W tried his own versions of stimulus... they didn't work either.

I didn't hear any of the purity clowns calling Bush a RINO when he pushed through stimulus measures.

111 >>>Personally, I think the populous states should get first crack. California, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Texas, New York, Florida, Illinois, Michigan and Georgia. (some 48% of the country) Then let the race be for the other half. Posted by: Ben at October 27, 2011 11:01 AM (wuv1c) Why does ANY state get first crack? What is so wrong with having the primaries on the same day? I mean, nobody even seems to talk about this, ever. I can only assume I'm the one missing something.

112

These debates are not perfect, almost exclusively organized by liberals or FOX News, which seems to play by liberal rules on these special occasions.

But these are not Perrys problems and Perrys problems are not limited to the debates, even if the debates put them on display. He may be more conservative then Bush, but he is as inarticulate as his former Boss. Even if Perry becomes our nominee and ends up becoming potus, it will be a gruesome muddling through and we will end up with a guy at the helm, who wont be able to defend himself, his administration or the conservative cause (just like Bush). He cant even handle appearances on friendly shows like O'Reilly, where he was only "good" if you measure it by the low expectations resulting from his horrible debate performances.

He has to confront and to overcome these problems or he is simply not ready for prime time. To run away would pussify his a-man's-man-rough-texan-alpha image to a fatal extent. 

113 Personally, I think the populous states should get first crack. California, We're the state that gave you The Governator. Just sayin.'

114

I think me may have that rare creature - Horde Consensus.  Quick, don't scare it!  From what I see, we pretty much agree on the following:

1.  The current debate format sucks all possible ass.

B.  The above doesn't matter since given Perry's prior performances this appears to be ducking away from an area where he's weak.

Purple.  Doing one on one debates instead would be a great way for Perry to come back, presuming his performance dramatically improves.

IV.  Obama is a SCOAMF.

115 Once again I'm compelled to ask: if Romney wins the nomination, what the hell kind of sense does it make to claim that a candidate who got fewer votes would actually generate more broad enthusiasm?

Posted by: Paul at October 27, 2011 10:58 AM (DsHk0)

Mitt's current strategy is "I'm the only one who will be left when the conservative vote splits."  That's not exactly Henry V before Agincourt energizing the troops.

116 Once again I'm compelled to ask: if Romney wins the nomination, what the hell kind of sense does it make to claim that a candidate who got fewer votes would actually generate more broad enthusiasm?

Because, after 8 years of campaigning (he basically started in '04, after all), if someone can only get 25% of the vote- even if that's the biggest single piece of the pie- then every other vote cast is a vote against that person.

It may be cast against multiple candidates, but it is definitely against the person who has been running for so long.

117 Somebody should send Perry a copy of Sun Tzu. BTW, if you have not read Sun Tzu, you have missed a treat. He was an extremely wise man, and never defeated in battle, IIRC. His key tenet was INFORMATION.

118

You are also forgetting the fact that Obama didn't really win handily against Clinton

Obama wouldn't have even been the nominee if the DNC didn't do what it did to Michigan and Florida

119 Stick me in!

120 We're going to wind up with socialized medicine. It hurts less if you think of it as a thousand points of Romneycare. Well, 50. Maybe 57.

121 I didn't hear any of the purity clowns calling Bush a RINO when he pushed through stimulus measures.

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at October 27, 2011 11:03 AM (f9c2L)

Let me correct that for you. A "compassionate conservative" = RINO.

122

Why does ANY state get first crack? What is so wrong with having the primaries on the same day? I mean, nobody even seems to talk about this, ever. I can only assume I'm the one missing something.

You're missing the arrogance, power plays and general stupidity of those who run the GOP in the various states.  Simultaneous primary voting will require the giving up of various fiefdoms and there is a greater chance of my giving up chocolate before that happening. 

123

I hadn't heard that. Who did he get?

Posted by: Stephen Douglas at October 27, 2011 11:00 AM (LyOUH)

Here's the announcement:

http://tinyurl.com/42kptfx

124 In retrospect, how ridiculous does Perry look kicking off his campaign: - Blowing Romney kisses and sending him love - Threatening the Fed Chair with violence - Pissing all over Bachmann's IA straw poll parade. All that shit seemed so *cool* to Perry cheerleaders early on, but the residual effect of all that "swagger" wears on people, especially after they saw he couldn't debate and is rather incompetent.

125 Mitt's current strategy is "I'm the only one who will be left when the conservative vote splits." That's not exactly Henry V before Agincourt energizing the troops. More like something out of Richard III.

126 Actually Perry collapsed and Cain rose after my appearance in the MSM. via 4 unnamed sources!

127

- Blowing Romney kisses and sending him love

well to be fair Bachmann seems to be doing that as well

128 In order of preference, best to worst: 1) Cain 2) Perry 3) Gingrich 4) Recent escapee from the Phantom Zone who becomes surprise dark-horse candidate 5) Romney Anyone But Obamney!

129 And W tried his own versions of stimulus... they didn't work either.

I didn't hear any of the purity clowns calling Bush a RINO when he pushed through stimulus measures.

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at October 27, 2011 11:03 AM (f9c2L)

You never heard people complaining about Bush's stimuli?  Where you born in 2009?

130
I agree with the fact Perry needs to
1) stop trying to go after Romney, he can hang himself with his own rope/product
2) start concentrating on the fact that Obama is a SOAMF - over and over and over.
3) any attacks coming his way he deflects, gives ONE answer, and gets back to Obama is a SCOAMF

This will work in the pathetic Q&A format masquerading as a "debate", use quick, easy to understand sound-bites and no big words.

131 More like something out of Richard III.

If Mitt Romney had a hump, I'd write in "Hump" in the general. 

132

He may be more conservative then Bush, but he is as inarticulate as his former Boss. Even if Perry becomes our nominee and ends up becoming potus, it will be a gruesome muddling through and we will end up with a guy at the helm, who wont be able to defend himself, his administration or the conservative cause (just like Bush).

At least he'll try!

Romney will not defend the conservative cause any better than Perry or Cain would. Romney will defend technocratic statism and call it conservatism.

133

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at October 27, 2011 11:03 AM (f9c2L)

I like you Ch-Town but where you think that approval in the 20s come from? Even going into the 04 election folks we're getting concerned w/ Bush's fiscal record (though i'd take his over Obama any day)

134 Throw a vaccine and some brown people at these John Birch Society rejects and even a three-term governor from one of the most conservative states in the union can't get traction. It's like stealing candy from a trust fund baby. Now that we've preempted Perry's candidacy -- and brother let me tell you, we were worried about facing him in the general -- we need to turn our attention to Romney. Listen up: It'll be all about the Mormon, baby. That and Romneycare. I figure we can dupe around 4 million of these folks into staying home and not voting. Of course if we can luck out with Cain as the nominee then we can sit around binging on pizza, beer and smokes and still win easily. I don't think these rubes are that dumb to nominate Cain, but you never know. After all they gave us Sharron Angle and Christine O'Donnell, didn't they? Stay classy, rubes. See you at Barack's 2nd inaugural ball. Heh.

135 and from what I'm seeing a lot of folks are going to hold that grudge against him for a long time to come

Which seems really stupid to me: One bad (really, really bad) comment, Vs RINO Romney.

And- for clarification: I truly believe Romney is a RINO.  I believe the only reason he is a Republican at all was that he knew he wasn't quite liberal enough to get the nomination in MA as a Democrat.

I didn't hear any of the purity clowns calling Bush a RINO when he pushed through stimulus measures.

No, no one called him a RINO, but if you're trying to suggest conservatives were happy with the 2008 stimulus measures, you're either misguided or lying. 

Conservatives didn't even like the rebate checks in February that year, and we absolutely hated TARP.  We never claimed those measures were conservative- but neither did Bush.  He admitted that he "abandoned free market principles to save the free market system."

136 We are toast anyway. The commies are manipulating the press and the market to give Obama the big boost.

137 >>>Why does ANY state get first crack? What is so wrong with having the primaries on the same day? I mean, nobody even seems to talk about this, ever. I can only assume I'm the one missing something.

Because it would be a disastrous idea.  The staggered primary system is, if nothing else, a safety valve.  Campaigns evolve, candidates evolve over the race, scandals come to the surface and huge gaffes are made, etc. etc.  You don't want a situation where everyone votes, the decision is made, and then BAM you find out the winning candidate has a juicy sex or corruption scandal in his closet.  Too late, he's the nominee!

Also -- and this is undervalued and underappreciated around here -- it's critical that primaries take place over a period of months because it gives a lot of time for the party to unite around the winner.  If they were all held on one day, what would happen more often than not is that the winner would only win with a plurality of the vote: 20-25% would be enough to secure the nomination in a multi-candidate field.  That would be apocalyptically bad for GOP unity.  What the staggered system allows GOP voters to do is make their peace with the "serious options" remaining on the table, and allow the winning candidate to secure far larger victory margins in the later primaries.  This matters because it's been proven (by a lot of interesting studies) that the act of voting for a candidate once (in a primary) has the effect of psychologically 'bonding' a voter to him, cementing loyalty or at the very least acceptance, for the later general election.  In a system where everyone voted together on one day and the winner won with only 20% of the vote, there would be immense hard feelings and disaffection that might well be impossible to overcome by election day.

Trust me, the system we've got might suck in a lot of ways, but it's extremely effective in a lot of other ways that are less easy to see, but equally as important.

138 Haven't we done the Seven Dwarves thing long enough? I mean, I LIKE Dopey and Grumpy and Doc--but none of them is qualified to be Prince. Why can't we send the comic characters off (heigh-ho) to the mine and let the comely candidates carry on? And, no, sorry Michelle B., of course you are comely in almost every other way, but in terms of Presidential electability you are 2.5 feet tall, wear a floppy hat, and carry a pickaxe.

139
123

Ok, a bunch of marketing, PR and pollster types are supposed to help Perry in the debates how?

140

I didn't hear any of the purity clowns calling Bush a RINO when he pushed through stimulus measures.

Did you forget to turn your hearing aid on?

141 I hope Romney uses some mustard as hair pomade in the general, so we can pretend he is the more appealing ham sandwich when we pull the lever.

142

>>>Why does ANY state get first crack? What is so wrong with having the primaries on the same day? I mean, nobody even seems to talk about this, ever. I can only assume I'm the one missing something.

 

Because the point is the elimate the weak canidates. Let's say we all voted tomorrow and we got Herman Cain and then after a few months we found out all sorts of crap about him and lost.

By dragging it out over a period a time we get to learn their weaknesses and their baggage.  If a bombshell is going to come out about the candidates, it will come out during the primary process.

 

The only downside in my mind is that states that aren't representative of the national Republican party get first crack.

143 Bad idea unless Perry is going with a lot of paid tv air time.  At least the debates are covered by the media.  Campaigning and speeches by MFM disfavored candidates are trees falling the forest.  If they don't cover it, and they don't, it didn't happen.

144 I'm sure Ace remembers. He supported it too, so the whole blog chewed his ass out several times over.

145

>>>Why does ANY state get first crack? What is so wrong with having the primaries on the same day? I mean, nobody even seems to talk about this, ever. I can only assume I'm the one missing something.

Because these regular people would get to vote! What's wrong with you? Anything could happen if we did that. How would rig the primaries for whoever was 2nd place last time?

146

Romney will not defend the conservative cause any better than Perry or Cain would. Romney will defend technocratic statism and call it conservatism.

Posted by: Entropy at October 27, 2011 11:10 AM (XxXUI)

No disagreement about Romney and by now Im not so sure that Cain actually knows what conservatism is...

147

Perry is finally on to something.

Too bad he hadn't thought of skipping all the previous debates.  _{Shades of Palin skipping all non-FNC TV interviews?}

Now he should consider skipping all future magazine interviews, and he'll be good to go.

148

I didn't hear any of the purity clowns calling Bush a RINO when he pushed through stimulus measures.

>>>Did you forget to turn your hearing aid on?

Indeed, the last few years of the Bush admin, aside from the Surge were extremely painful.

I seem to recall most of the conservatives going into revolt over TARP and Bush's, "I had to abandon capitalism to save it" crap.

He didn't have 20-30% approval rating because the democrats abandoned him,

149

No disagreement about Romney and by now Im not so sure that Cain actually knows what conservatism is...

you folks should remember that Cain loves him some Romney

150

He didn't have 20-30% approval rating because the democrats abandoned him

+1

151 These debates are the only place you can't believe your own lying eyes. The press made Obama's debate performances as easy as they could possibly be. The media is making it as easy as possible for Romney. Crowd boos Perry while he's trying to land a punch on Romney. Carville says Perry should just pack up and go, because Romney's the guy they fear. What do you hear there? Do you hear that Romney's the guy who can get elected, or do you hear that Carville prefers that Perry pack it in? Carville's just an extension of Shieffer, who's an extension of Beckel, who's an extension of Williams. Advice to Perry: tell Obama that after golfing and campaigning for 3 years, his time's up. What's Obama's answer to that in a debate?

152 I don't remember any huge Bush spending stimulus programs. He did a tax cut, that isn't the same thing.

As for Hillary losing, she lost because the Dem Party decided she was going to lose. Obama won off of the Caucuses and the super delegates from the Party.

As for "biggest States going first" no, the States that vote Republican by the widest margin should go first.

153

I will say one thing about the debates: WAY too many of them.  Who was the Einstein that thought having the candidates savage each other debate after endless round of debates was a good set up for the eventual nominee next year?

3 debates TOTAL would have sufficed - one every 6 months or so.

154

 didn't hear any of the purity clowns calling Bush a RINO when he pushed through stimulus measures.

No, no one called him a RINO

Yes, yes I did.

155 I don't remember any huge Bush spending stimulus programs. He did a tax cut, that isn't the same thing.

The "rebates" in early 2008 (direct checks to everybody- even "taxpayers" who never paid taxes.)  TARP.  These were both big spending stimulus programs.  It's just hard to remember them because they seem so small in comparison to Porkulus.

156 Romney/Huntsman 2012! Because a weathervane and a wardrobe are better than Obama. Seriously.

157 Class, for lack of a better comparison, is like bladder control: You either have it or you don't. When it comes to forcing Obamacare upon America with dishonest gimmicks, the Democrats have no class.

158 >>>I don't remember any huge Bush spending stimulus programs. He did a tax cut, that isn't the same thing.

No, he passed a couple of smaller stimulus bills in the last year of his term.  And then of course there was TARP.

>>>As for "biggest States going first" no, the States that vote Republican by the widest margin should go first.

Except for the problem that, by law, both parties have to hold their primary elections/caucuses on the same day in each state.  So much for that idea.

As obnoxious as NH and IA's position at the front of the race is, at least it can be said on their behalf that both are swing states, and that therefore the opinions of their voters actually holds a certain amount of relevance.

159

>>>Carville says Perry should just pack up and go, because Romney's the guy they fear.

I don't agree with Rush Limbaugh often(he self promotes a bit too muh for me), but he's dead on when he says if Romney is our candidate then Obamacare is off the table as a political issue.

Think about that. The two biggest problems Obama has are the economy and Obamacare. By picking Romney, we take one of those two off the table.

160 153

I will say one thing about the debates: WAY too many of them.  Who was the Einstein that thought having the candidates savage each other debate after endless round of debates was a good set up for the eventual nominee next year?

3 debates TOTAL would have sufficed - one every 6 months or so.

Posted by: CoolCzech at October 27, 2011 11:16 AM (Iaxlk)

What is the deal here? 3 debates? Yougottabekiddin. Peing POTUS is all about being persuasive, the bully pulpit is the real power of the office. Look how Obama has pissed that away with endless blathering speeches about nothing in particular. A great debater weilds great power when he has that. Why would you want a candidate who is incapable of weilding that weapon?

161

111....Why does ANY state get first crack? What is so wrong with having the primaries on the same day?

They shouldn't. Its wrong to let these smaller states decide who our nominee is.

But the Northeastern establishment Rinos have the most control over the party. ....That's why they are pushing Romney on us.

Perry will sweep the South and the Midwest....if he will just stay in the race till the end. I don't consider Florida a part of the South anymore, because of all the Northeastern retirees there.

If Perry will stay in this thing till the end....we may very will end up with a floor debate at the Convention. ...And in that case, Perry wins.

162 The "rebates" in early 2008 (direct checks to everybody- even "taxpayers" who never paid taxes.)  TARP.  These were both big spending stimulus programs.  It's just hard to remember them because they seem so small in comparison to Porkulus.

Those rebates in early 2008 were virtually negligible. As for TARP I am not sure I would lay all of that at Bush's feet.

Compare those to the first Stimulus with the Dem $1T, the second 300B, the third I think was $400B and they want another damn one.

163 >>>Indeed, the last few years of the Bush admin, aside from the Surge were extremely painful.

Oh who are we kidding?  I knew it was going to be a gigantic shit sandwich when Harriet Miers landed in our laps in Fall '05.  That was The Moment for me...I completely lost confidence in his judgment when he tried to pull that stunt on us.  Thank god we ended up with Alito, but man...

164 GOP debates are just gotcha set-ups for liberal media to ask gotcha questions in attemps to gain gotcha sound-bites for their king.

Yeah, that would never happen to him if he were the actual president.

165

As obnoxious as NH and IA's position at the front of the race is, at least it can be said on their behalf that both are swing states, and that therefore the opinions of their voters actually holds a certain amount of relevance.

i'd agree with you but i'm not sure i'd call them swing states that can lean GOp all that much. since 92 the GOP has won both states only twice, NH in 00 & IA in 04. To be fair, NH is looking more GOP favorable next year and IA is winnable

166 Clinto list to Obama because the Dem nomination process is worse than ours. Clinton won NY,CA, FL, NJ, OH, PA and TX . How do you not secure the nomination winning the top seven electoral states. She also won Michigan that was not counted.

167 I'm trying to understand why the Perry camp wouldn't keep this to themselves.  They are going to the next debate after all.  Why announce so far in advance that you may or may not attend subsequent debates?  How does it benefit them right now?

168

>>>I don't remember any huge Bush spending stimulus programs. He did a tax cut, that isn't the same thing.

no that was a tax cut + stimulus

I remember the price tag was 30-40 billion which was a big number back then.

Also, everyone got a gov't check, not just those of us that paid in

169 Except for the problem that, by law, both parties have to hold their primary elections/caucuses on the same day in each state.  So much for that idea.

What law? Link please

170 To this day it still astonishes how easily Compassionate Conservatism ushered in Medicare Part D. Almost as if Bush loved big government and big public entitlements. Is the last mannequin standing more or less conservative than Bush? Nevertheless, anybody but Obama.

171 >>It's not his fault that the debate schedule is set so that the only way to attend the debates is to screw up the actual campaigning.<<

I think Perry and his team should be given credit for recognizing that this schedule isn't accidental and it isn't intended to develop insights into who the candidates are.

The whole purpose of this debate charade is to keep the GOP at odds, ineffective, and unfocused.

Perry is doing the correct thing by not playing by "their" rules. Kobiyashi Maru anyone?

Now he'll get to get his message out, unencumbered by media spin to the people who matter the most. The voters.

Bravo Gov. Perry for having the guts to do this.

<Mr. Sulu, fire for effect!>

172

Compare those to the first Stimulus with the Dem $1T, the second 300B, the third I think was $400B and they want another damn one.

Well what do you expect, following Bush?

You gonna let the Republicans be the party of big government welfarism and special interest handouts?

After W's triangulations the Dems had to go big. Democrats are suppose to be the spending party and we needed Obama if we were gonna actually top Bush somehow.

173 >>>Perry will sweep the South and the Midwest....if he will just stay in the race till the end. I don't consider Florida a part of the South anymore, because of all the Northeastern retirees there.

Perry is currently at 11% in South Carolina.  He's in single digits everywhere else in the South and Midwest, including the very Midwestern state of Iowa.  I don't really see where you're getting this from, other than your own 'gut feeling' or whatever.

174 Maybe this is like Wrestlemania, the fight has been going on for too long and no one can win or will admit defeat. Then suddenly out of the dressing room, in street clothes carrying a folding chair, the killa from wasilla beats them down and takes the belt. Oh well, a guy can dream.

175

Alas, the way I see things shaping up is...

 

1. Romney wins the nomination,

2. Romney loses the election, because too many of the base don't like him,

3. Huntsman wins the nomination in 2016 because, of course, "It's His Turn."

Somebody, please prove me wrong.  Because I truly don't want to be 100 percent right on this one.

 

176

>>NH is looking more GOP favorable next year and IA is winnable

I always have high hopes for NH but the so-called Republican party there always seems to vote for social liberalism over fiscal conservatism in general elections.

 

177

Perry will sweep the South and the Midwest....if he will just stay in the race till the end. I don't consider Florida a part of the South anymore, because of all the Northeastern retirees there.

FL still has a southern tradition in some parts, as for who's seeping the South and Midwest, right now it's not Perry. it's the Cain.

178 Compare those to the first Stimulus with the Dem $1T, the second 300B, the third I think was $400B and they want another damn one.

Absolutely true, but not the point.  We're referring to Chi-Town Jerry's comment regarding Conservatives not calling Bush a RINO for his stimulus- which we did- and then remembering what his stimulus programs were.

RINO Romney  was on board with all of those stimulus measures, including the Bail-Outs (which, yes, I lay at Bush's door: He requested them).

179

Not so dissappointing. Next.

If Romney should try to follow this lame example, then I'd be upset.

180

Posted by: Ben at October 27, 2011 11:23 AM (wuv1c)

yeah I still don't understand how they went for Bush in 00 but not 04, did the war bother them that much? was Kerry's regional citenship that big a factor? idk

181 <Mr. Sulu, fire for effect!>

Posted by: Honda at October 27, 2011 11:22 AM (ladck)

 

Oh MY!

182

Think about that. The two biggest problems Obama has are the economy and Obamacare. By picking Romney, we take one of those two off the table.

 

I think Rush is wrong for the simple reason that Romneycare is a state program, and Obamacare is a federal one.  The tenth amendment is the difference.

183

>>>>To this day it still astonishes how easily Compassionate Conservatism ushered in Medicare Part D. Almost as if Bush loved big government and big public entitlements. Is the last mannequin standing more or less conservative than Bush?

 

Thank Rick Santorum the most conservative man to ever walk the earth for voting for that.

 

184

3. Huntsman wins the nomination in 2016 because, of course, "It's His Turn."

Posted by: CoolCzech at October 27, 2011 11:23 AM (Iaxlk)

Probably not.  Huntsman isn't going to finish the race as a front-runner.  Based on right now, it'll be Cain, or Sarah!

185 >>>Think about that. The two biggest problems Obama has are the economy and Obamacare. By picking Romney, we take one of those two off the table. Why do people keep claiming this crap? He's already promised to sign a bill repealing Obamacare. How does that take it off the table?

186 Skipping the debates will lead to some of his strongest performances.

187

The famous sisters are reportedly angry after Michelle Obama last week revealed that the President had tried to stop his daughter watching ‘Keeping up with the Kardashians’.

They have allegedly responded by insulting the First Lady’s dress sense with one of the sisters reportedly calling her wardrobe ‘pretend poor’ while another said her outfits are ‘cheap suburban tack’.

188

FL still has a southern tradition in some parts, as for who's seeping the South and Midwest, right now it's not Perry. it's the Cain.

Amazing isn't it. After all, ask the Democrats, the South is populated by nothing but racists and rubes, and their victims.

189

Perry would have to win the next debate by a very wide margin to have any juice to skip a debate between then and Iowa.  Aren't there like 2 or 3 debates in Iowa around Christmas time? He can't skip those as Iowa will shake some of the no money also rans out of the race.

Out of that $15 to $19 million he has to spend, he needs to dump about half in Iowa, S Carolina, and Florida now. He's spending in Iowa on that new jobs commercial that came out Tuesday. He needs to get his economic plan out in front of those states voters asap and keep it there and NOT f up the next debate.

However, if for some reason Cain and ROmney are not 1-2 in either order in Iowa and Perry sneaks in, whole new race regardless.

And yes, regardless of the GOP nominee, if you don't for them in the general, you support Barak Obama.

190 >>>Clinto list to Obama because the Dem nomination process is worse than ours. Clinton won NY,CA, FL, NJ, OH, PA and TX . How do you not secure the nomination winning the top seven electoral states. She also won Michigan that was not counted.

Exactly.  The idea that Obama was "inevitable" is quite simply false, a piece of retrospective reasoning.  He was anything but inevitable; the man actually lost to Clinton in the popular vote, which is immensely telling! What won him the nomination was the fact that he had a brilliant campaign team that understood the weird quirks of the Democratic primary nominating system (which, incidentally, is completely different from the GOP one -- it's a historical legacy of the party's reaction to the seizure of the party by the suicidal McGovernites in 1972) far better than Mark Penn and Hillary's team did. 

191 My biggest grip with Bush was crossing the aisle to work with Ted the swimmer and failing to veto the congress pork run wild.

192

She also won Michigan that was not counted.

Florida wasn't counted either

193 Skipping the debates will lead to some of his strongest performances. Posted by: Truman North still kinda likes Rick Perry, but... at October 27, 2011 11:26 AM Maybe, but if a man gives a great performance and nobody sees it or reports on it, did he still give a great performance?

194

Probably not.  Huntsman isn't going to finish the race as a front-runner.  Based on right now, it'll be Cain, or Sarah!

It'll be Tim Pawlenty.

195 22 I thought someone (semi-official) suggested a dedicated Perry/Romney debate.  Did I imagine that?  If not, has there been any word from the respective camps on whether that will happen or not?
    It is my understanding that the same Tea party group that set-up the Cain/Gingrich Lincoln-Douglas style debate invited Mitt Romney & Rick Perry to participate together in such a debate as well.   I think it would be a hella interesting thing to watch.  I don't know how they've responded.

196

>>>yeah I still don't understand how they went for Bush in 00 but not 04, did the war bother them that much? was Kerry's regional citenship that big a factor? idk

 

That's easy. The Marriage Amendment.

 

Karl Rove's plan on marshalling the evangelicals was a major social wedge issue. In this case gay marriage.

Bush never had any plan of implementing it, but he and Rove knew it would get social conservatives to the polls in large numbers.

This turned off Libertarian leaning republicans who were already stretched thin by the wars.

197

And yes, regardless of the GOP nominee, if you don't for them in the general, you support Barak Obama.

+1

198 Thank Rick Santorum the most conservative man to ever walk the earth for voting for that. Is he the one on stage radiating a blinding nimbus of sanctimony? Because I can never make him out through the glare.

199 186 Skipping the debates will lead to some of his strongest performances.

Posted by: Truman North still kinda likes Rick Perry, but... at October 27, 2011 11:26 AM (I2LwF)

Yeah, but where, dancing in his undies like Tom Cruise in his living room?

200
And, once again, it is Groundhog Day at the ol' HQ.

201

173.... I don't really see where you're getting this from, other than your own 'gut feeling' or whatever.

I getting this from history. ....So far, this election cycle reminds me the most of the one in 1980.

In 1980, all the 'conventional wisdom' said that Bush would be the nominee, because that is who the Republican establishment wanted. ...They laughed at Reagan, and used his monkey movies to make him look stupid. Even the media was playing along with that narrative.

202 He's already promised to sign a bill repealing Obamacare. How does that take it off the table?

Posted by: 1/1027th of a Janitor at October 27, 2011 11:26 AM (tazG1)

Some people don't believe a RINO sack of shit that changes his position to suit whoever he is speaking to. Personally, I do not think Mitt would repeal Zerocare. He's lying about that.

203

Sarah in 2016?

She'll be a "Whatever happened to?" segment on Entertainment Tonight by then.

_{(Is ET even on anymore?)}

 

204

Why do people keep claiming this crap?

>>>He's already promised to sign a bill repealing Obamacare. How does that take it off the table?

 

Easily, because once he wins, what the fuck will anyone do about it?

He'll get at least four years and then he'll hope that come time for re-election the party hates the democrats more than his decision not to repeal it.

It's what Republicans always do. They screw most of the base knowing there is jack shit we can do about it.

205 (my friend was working the thread up above so we are going to have the same hash-oy.) Anways- Ihave to call out- Jeff B. when he says this- Oh who are we kidding? I knew it was going to be a gigantic shit sandwich when Harriet Miers landed in our laps in Fall '05. That was The Moment for me...I completely lost confidence in his judgment when he tried to pull that stunt on us. Thank god we ended up with Alito, but man... Posted by: Jeff B., making sure the sedatives work before commenting Are you aware of Mitt Romney's record on appointing judges in Massachusetts? Try this on for size- The Boston Globe in 2005 said the following: Governor Mitt Romney, who touts his conservative credentials to out-of-state Republicans, has passed over GOP lawyers for three-quarters (75%) of the 36 judicial vacancies he has faced, instead tapping registered Democrats or independents – including two gay lawyers who have supported expanded same-sex rights. Of the 36 people Romney named to be judges or clerk magistrates, 23 are either registered Democrats or unenrolled voters who have made multiple contributions to Democratic politicians or who voted in Democratic primaries, state and local records show. In all, he has nominated nine registered Republicans, 13 unenrolled voters, and 14 registered Democrats. (via poorrichardnews.com)

206 I think you are making the mistake of projection: YOU don't remember that gaffe, because you didn't pay much (if any) attention to the Democratic primary at the time.  But it was literally THE key inflection point in the 2008 Democratic primary, the moment when Hillary damaged herself crucially with a number of primary voters who were at that point more or less settled on her as the "inevitable" candidate.
Posted by: Jeff B., making sure the sedatives work before commenting at October 27, 2011 10:59 AM

You are wrong.  I remember it well.  I lived in a state that had been giving illegals DLs since 2002 thanks to that other candidate at the time, Bill Richardson.  But, without the media carrying Barry's water because of who and what he is, he would never have won the nomination. 

207

I really like the idea of a Perry/Gingrich debate. All Perry needs to do is hold his own against Newt! and it validates his decision to skip some or most of the general debates. However, if Perry doesn't hold his own in a one-on-one format and Newt! reduces Perry to a pile of smoking rubble, Perry will show he doesn't have the stuff to take on President Obama. Newt! wins either way.

Next up: US Congressman Ron Paul versus actor and liberal political analyst John Cusack.

208 Bush was an unmitigated disaster for conservatism. The only thing that has saved it from a generation in the political wilderness is the even greater unmitigated disaster that is SCOAMF.

209 So Mitt Romney had the chance to appoint- 36 judges in Massachusetts-and- 23 of them were Democrats.

210 Maybe, but if a man gives a great performance and nobody sees it or reports on it, did he still give a great performance? Perhaps Perry will hold a debate in a closed room with no audience and no opponents. And no moderator, because you can't be too careful.

211

>>>>In 1980, all the 'conventional wisdom' said that Bush would be the nominee, because that is who the Republican establishment wanted. ...They laughed at Reagan, and used his monkey movies to make him look stupid. Even the media was playing along with that narrative.

Yeah, but Reagan and Romney would have more in common in that comparison. Not on policy, but in terms of being also-rans in previous elections.

Reagan had run in the 1968 primary and lost to Nixon, and he almost unseated Ford in the 1976 election.

Romney has been running for this position since 2006-2007. 

212 I think Rush is wrong for the simple reason that Romneycare is a state program, and Obamacare is a federal one.  The tenth amendment is the difference.

Nope.  The issue to most people is the mandate.  Most people don't understand or care about the 10th amendment.  If they did, we'd already have repealed the 17th amendment, and there wouldn't be any question about whether SCOAMFCare was Constitutional in the first place.

Mitt Romney supported (and still supports) a mandate in MA.  Since most people don't know or care about the 10th Amendment (most of them couldn't tell you what the 9th or 10th amendments are: and those ARE the Federalism Amendments), they'll see any complaining he does about ObamaCare as either: pure partisanism ("he only doesn't like it because he's a Republican and Obama is a Democrat!") or an esoteric technicality.

Which means SCOAMFCare is, more or less, off the table.  Even if Romney wanted to fight it on 10th Amendment grounds- he has no history of that, and so has no foundation to do so.  Where would this sudden love of the 10th Amendment come from?

213
Bush's stimulus = tax cuts

Obama's stimulus = raiding the Treasury and funneling billions to his base

214

Some people don't believe a RINO sack of shit that changes his position to suit whoever he is speaking to. Personally, I do not think Mitt would repeal Zerocare. He's lying about that.

Posted by: Do I know you? at October 27, 2011 11:29 AM (OlN4e)

Precisely because he's so sensitive to the way the wind is blowing, I would expect him to sign a repeal of Obamacare if a conservative Congress passes the repeal bill.  People forget it's not up to the President to repeal a law... it's up to Congress.

215

The only thing that has saved it from a generation in the political wilderness is the even greater unmitigated disaster that is SCOAMF.

Yup.

So I guess if at first you don't succeed...

216 Harriet Miers JeffB? She's as accomplished and probably smarter in terms of IQ than anyone on the Bench now. I say that in support of Amishdude since her undergraduate degree was Mathematics.She definitely had more experience in contract law than anyone. Of the complaints against Bush I think this is the most overblown.

217

It does get very tiresome listening to people complain that NH shouldn't have the first primary because we're small and inconsequential.

I don't care.

I do not want MY primary dictated to me by a "big" state like CA or TX, as if they are somehow more important because they have a larger population and land mass.  They also have San Francisco, Los Angeles and Dallas.  No thank you.  If you don't like how NH's primary goes, then vote in your own primary or caucus to fix it.  NH's constitution dictates that our primary be held at least seven days before the next similarly contested primary (as opposed to caucus), and that's that. 

*breathing deeply*

I don't generally get into this argument because it gets my blood pressure up and never does any good anyway.  But sometimes I just have to get the aggravation off my chest. 

218 I also like how the last debate was in Nevada -a good state for Mitt, and the next one is in Michigan-a good state for Mitt. His father was the governor of Michigan.

219 He'll skip strategically. If he has a zinger and "wins" then he's free to skip one. He can also skip if he wants to make a point about a liberal moderator.

220

Precisely because he's so sensitive to the way the wind is blowing, I would expect him to sign a repeal of Obamacare if a conservative Congress passes the repeal bill.  People forget it's not up to the President to repeal a law... it's up to Congress.

Morons, wake up. Our republican leadership in Congress wanted to repeal the mandate but keep pre-existing coverage.

Just the unpopular parts. We can fix it.

221

NH's constitution dictates that our primary be held at least seven days before the next similarly contested primary (as opposed to caucus), and that's that. 

basically you feel entitled to have the 1st primary

222 >>>In 1980, all the 'conventional wisdom' said that Bush would be the nominee, because that is who the Republican establishment wanted. ...They laughed at Reagan, and used his monkey movies to make him look stupid. Even the media was playing along with that narrative.

Again, this is just not correct.  All the conventional wisdom said the exact opposite: Reagan was the frontrunner from beginning to end, and he was "next in line" as well given his remarkably close finish in the 1976 primaries (he nearly upended a sitting President, which is amazing when you think about it).  He was so far ahead in the race that he ran a Romneyesque "above the fray" strategy until George H.W. Bush surprised him by winning (irony!) the Ames Straw Poll in IA, at which point Reagan swooped down and promptly put Bush in his place.  Reagan ended up winning every single important primary -- Bush only took IA, MI, ME, PA, MA and CT -- and totaling up 60% of the primary vote nationally. 

It's weird how you confidentally assert claims which are, in fact, the exact opposite of the truth. 

223 It's time to nut up or shut up!

224 Also the meme that MassCare and ObamaCare are the same and it takes the issue away if Romney is the nominee. MassCare law about 80 pages. Obamacare about 1000 pages. You think there's some differences?

225 Just sayin' ...

226 Did any of you know about Mitt Romney's judicial appointment record? See Rick Perry might have called you heartless but Mitt Romney thinks you are stupid. And part of that is because he knows the media won't keep you informed of his "liberal" tendencies.

227

If you don't like how NH's primary goes, then vote in your own primary or caucus to fix it.  NH's constitution dictates that our primary be held at least seven days before the next similarly contested primary (as opposed to caucus), and that's that. 

Yeah, well, the primaries are always over before it gets here. We don't get to vote.

My state's constitution says New Hampshire doesn't get to vote at all, so there. n'yah n'yah prima donnas. Fuck your special privledge constitution.

228 Romney has been running for this position since 2006-2007. You know, running a presidential campaign is such a large, complex undertaking, it counts as presidential experience itself, so cut the governor some slack. Look at my career. Solid B+. I've made all the right decisions.

229

Seriously, their 'constitution says so'. The New Hampshire constitution wasn't ratified by the whole country.

How bout we all just pass state constitutional ammendments that say, by law, our primary electors have to count 3x more than any other states and that's that.

230 Kudos to Romney for actually finding 13 republican judges in MA.

231 I'm not on board with Mitt the squishy flipper at all, and had high hopes for Rick Perry when he first appeared as a candidate.  He proved himself a weak and dumb weenie in his first debate, someone who has no real message, was not ready at all for prime time, could not handle the national stage, and fell flat on his face from the withering fire of libtard journolisters.

He is now toast, and this decision to skip debates relegates him to something somewhere below the soles of Ms Bachmann's boots.

I'm totally with Drew on this one.  But I just cannot get by my disgust with Romney.  He is not the candidate we need.  Why, in this country of over 300 million souls, can we not find the candidate?

232

 >>>also like how the last debate was in Nevada -a good state for Mitt, and the next one is in Michigan-a good state for Mitt.

On that note, they need to tell the audience to STFU. Half of the stories the MSM have done about the debates pertain to the audience reactions to certain questions.

what is so hard about telling the audience to keep quiet. That's how it used to be.

233
I promise to do to college tuition what I did to health care costs.

234 HOLD  FAST

235

Perry is too weak minded to compete in the debates. That's why he's talking about chickening out of them now. The debates exposed Perry as nowhere close to ready for prime time. Consider that he had a commanding lead in the polls - UNTIL he delivered not one, not two, but THREE piss-poor debate 'performances'. Obama would tear Perry up in the Presidential debates.

Who says the debates don't make a difference in the minds of voters?

236

basically you feel entitled to have the 1st primary

Posted by: RINO Vice President For Life AuthorLMendez, Formerly YRM, Who Supports The Ban Of Curious at October 27, 2011 11:34 AM (yAor6)

Yes.  And I'm not sorry.  NH ratified the Constitution.  NH had the first actual constitution of any of the original 13 colonies, ratified in 1776.  So pardon me if I'm a little proud of my state and feel justified in fighting tooth and nail to keep the primary.

237 I think skipping the debates seals Perry's voluntary or involuntary exit from the race. He would be portrayed as a loser, quitter, etc. and there would be an element of truth to such charges. He needs to show up and do better. Period. And yet I still am not convinced that his debate performances are the primary reason for his fall as opposed to his initial la raza defense of the Texas dream act.

238

239

>>>Also the meme that MassCare and ObamaCare are the same and it takes the issue away if Romney is the nominee. MassCare law about 80 pages. Obamacare about 1000 pages. You think there's some differences?

Yeah, the informed american public will totally know the the minor differences.

240

Mitt is the man the MSM wants to follow Zero, if Zero is to be voted out, they see Mitt as the least objectionable leftard replacement.

Did I forget to mention that Mitt sux?

241

Yeah, but Reagan and Romney would have more in common in that comparison. Not on policy, but in terms of being also-rans in previous elections.

Reagan had run in the 1968 primary and lost to Nixon, and he almost unseated Ford in the 1976 election.

Romney has been running for this position since 2006-2007.

The 'also-ran' similarity is the only similarity to Romney. And one that makes Perry an even stronger candidate today.

Reagan was pulled into the 1980 cycle by a groundswell draft-Reagan movement withing the party. Reagan didn't get in the race until mid-November of '79....and he hit the ground running. Whereas Bush had been running for a long time.

That groundswell of Reagan supporters were the seeds of the Tea Party sentiments today. ....Less spending, smaller government, less taxes. ....Those sentiments are not new.

242 tasker do you know how judicial appointments are made in MA? Also do you know that Judge Bork has been advising Romney since 2008 and believes he will appoint the kind of judges you are looking for?

243
Hello,

I just came down to Earth with the last drop of rain.

Tell me more about these Romney and Perry fellows.

244 Yesterday we got a preview of how Mitt Romney is going to fight for Republican causes. DId Mitt Romney try to persuade voters and give them reasons to support Kasich's efforts in Ohio? No, he waffled, then he walked it back-he did very little to help. Is that leadership?

245 Of the 36 people Romney named to be judges or clerk magistrates, 23 are either registered Democrats or unenrolled voters who have made multiple contributions to Democratic politicians or who voted in Democratic primaries, state and local records show. In all, he has nominated nine registered Republicans, 13 unenrolled voters, and 14 registered Democrats.

These judicial appointments are for the MA equivalent of traffic court judges, dude -- district court judges and clerk magistrates, are you serious?  Those are non-partisan positions, with no ability to make or shape substantive law and no real capacity for promotion to higher levels.  Romney is on the record as saying that when it came to those lower courts appointments (again: these are literally the podunk guys who rule on your speeding ticket, not the MA Supremes or something like that), he wasn't concerned about ideology, except in the sense that he wouldn't appoint anyone who was pro-criminal.  I don't see where any real objection can be raised to that.

When it came to higher court appointments -- Circuit Court, Ct of Appeals, or Supreme Court (whatever, I don't really know MA's exact layout) -- the governor cannot make judicial appointments directly, he has to submit it to a Democratic 3-person panel for approval to be sent on to the legislature.

This sort of thing goes to what JackStraw and I were talking about in last night's thread.  The sorts of factoids that a lot of people float out there on right-wing blogs to "discredit" Romney actually do no such thing when you understand the legal constraints he operated under as governor.   But of course people are generally suspicious of ANYTHING that has to be explained or contextualized, which is something that the people who spread this sort of anti-Romney stuff are well aware of when they send it out there shorn of its proper context.  That's why it's so frustratingly effective.

246
Blog blog blog!

What is blog?

247

My state's constitution says New Hampshire doesn't get to vote at all, so there. n'yah n'yah prima donnas. Fuck your special privledge constitution.

Posted by: Entropy at October 27, 2011 11:37 AM (XxXUI)

My personal constitution says Entropy is a dumbass.  Sucks to be you, huh?

248 polynikes- Well we can have Judge Bork's "beliefs" or we can have Mitt Romney's record. Or even better we can have some other candidates record.

249

"Judge Bork has been advising Romney since 2008 and believes he will appoint the kind of judges you are looking for?"

Thankfully Romney has never changed his mind on anything in the past.

/snicker

250 >>So don't think I'm defending them when I say this....if Perry starts skipping debates he's essentially quitting the race.<<

Eh, no. Sorry. He's already turned himself into a long shot with those damn liberal-infested things, why do more damage? His strength is supposed to be interacting with voters up close and personal, why not spend his time doing that? (along with spending some of that pile of cash on TV and radio ads)

What, exactly, does participating in these ridiculous things - doing well or not - prove exactly? Other than the GOP is the stupid party for letting the people who end up running them to run them in first place. Go campaign, Governor...it'll either work or it won't but doing more of these dumbass debates surely won't.

251 #240 No Ben I'm saying it won't be a moot issue if Romney's the nominee. There are plenty of big differences that Romney will be able to use against Obama and make him look stupid.

252 Correction to #246: The MAJORITY of those judicial appointments are for the MA equivalent of traffic court judges, is what I meant to say.

253
So, what are you people saying, Mitt Romney is not a good choice?

Stop beating around the bush, my dear fellows.

254 No, he waffled, then he walked it back-he did very little to help.

Is that leadership?

Posted by: tasker at October 27, 2011 11:42 AM (rJVPU)

We stand ready to pass the golden waffle of POTUS to a man who can appreciate it.

255 what is so hard about telling the audience to keep quiet. That's how it used to be.

RON PAUL!!!11!! That's why.

256 People forget it's not up to the President to repeal a law... it's up to Congress. The waiver gimmick is a gimmick and won't work. Recall Truman's seizure of the steel industries by executive order. Overturned in court. A President cannot arbitrarily expunge the entirety of a massive bill and get away with it. Not with lawyers being a heavily Democrat constituency. Democrat Dick Soetero can get away with limited waivers for Democrat buddies, but no Republican President will be able to wipe out acts of Congress wholesale, and no President should be able to do so. That President would be up in front of the SCOTUS faster than you get a parking ticket on an expired meter in Manhattan.

257

NH had the first actual constitution of any of the original 13 colonies, ratified in 1776.  So pardon me if I'm a little proud of my state and feel justified in fighting tooth and nail to keep the primary.

You can keep it, as soon as you pay reparations for slaves.

I mean if you're going to take credit for what happened in 1776....

258

How bout we all just pass state constitutional ammendments that say, by law, our primary electors have to count 3x more than any other states and that's that.

Posted by: Entropy at October 27, 2011 11:38 AM

^^^^ THIS ^^^^

I was in New Hampshuh last week. It's a pretty place, except for a few "Romney" signs destroying the environment.

But what the hell does a state constitution saying "we wanna have our primary first" have to do with anything on a national level? At this rate, NH might as well combine its '12 and '16 primaries into one just to stay "first."

Unless I slept through my primary-school Civics classes, I didn't see anything that said individual states' rights trump anything any other state decides to do.

259 I just came down to Earth with the last drop of rain. Tell me more about these Romney and Perry fellows. Less impressive than a ham sandwich, but they will do in a pinch.

260 Why do I feel like I am a character in the Truman show?

261 @258 Reparations have already been paid. Between 1860 and 1865.

262

I find it amazing that this thread is at close to 300 comments in just a little over an hour, compared to other threads this week that have been dead men walking, when the gist of the comments is essentially the same as every other candidate-based thread:

"Romney sucks, but he's going to be the candidate, even though he seriously sucks, and nobody likes him, but he's going to win, and he sucks."

I think that about sums it up, ne?

263 So what?  I say skip the damn debates.  Too many candidates, the moderators suck and there is no time to give a well thought out answer.  Newt is the only one who shines in this type of setting.  I say take to the people locally.  That's what counts.  The old ways need to die off like the RINOSAURS.

264 >>So don't think I'm defending them when I say this....if Perry starts skipping debates he's essentially quitting the race.<<

What did it mean when Romney (and Huntsman) skipped the Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition candidate forum? 

265 Ron Paul will be at the next debate. Rick Perry fears people like Ron Paul.

266

Why do I feel like I am a character in the Truman show?

 

Because you are. Well, except that it's called the Obama show.

267 Any of the cobloggers know if Ace is going to rolling out of the rack today?  Who has the keys to the blog?  All that?

268
Hello?

269 This sort of thing goes to what JackStraw and I were talking about in last night's thread.  The sorts of factoids that a lot of people float out there on right-wing blogs to "discredit" Romney actually do no such thing when you understand the legal constraints he operated under as governor.

No, but they aren't bullet points in his favor, either.

Mitt decided he wanted to be governor in a corrupt state where the governor was impotent.  He also ran around that state promising a lot of shit that he didn't deliver on.  Then he tried to tout a non-conservative shit sandwich as a reason he should be president in 2008.  Nobody made him do any of these things.  He did them.

Nothing in his tenure in MA is evidence he is a superb administrator, brilliant politician, or principled conservative.  It's a murky mess you have to make excuses for if you start with the tautology that Mitt is a great candidate.

270
Hello?

Anyone out there?

271 Hey, does anyone think rdbrewer will be in a hurry to post THIS article in the "Headlines" section of the blog today?:  http://tinyurl.com/42s465e

From Politico, the headline says it all: "Barack Obama's New Ally: Rick Perry."

272
I'm lost.

Hello?

273 37 I keep seeing people say that they like Perry's record in Texas (with caveats); they like him in interviews; they like him in campaign appearances; they like his plan for x, y and z but he's bad in faux-debates so he can't be President.  Like there is ever a need for debating as President.  Ever.

Some of you who are complaining about Perry are pro-Romney...the others are just helping the pro-Romney crowd.  Cain isn't likely to get elected no matter what his polls say right now and if he does what do you get?  No one knows because he's never had to take an actual stand on anything in the past.

Posted by: Laughing in Texas at October 27, 2011 10:45 AM (dL9LY)

Exactly. How many debates has Obama had since President? Oh, none? Huh. I see, this is how we pick our guy for the job: You must be good at the one thing that you will never, ever have to do if you do get the job. Every other thing that you will have to do as President--and which you may be really good at--is not near as important. Wow. Sound strategy there. With that kind to ignorance of reality and mental gymnastics that goes into the "logic" I can see why Romney holds steady and Cain is still in.

274
I'm in a maze and I'm lost.

All I see is corn all around me.

Hello?

275 "Romney sucks, but he's going to be the candidate, even though he seriously sucks, and nobody likes him, but he's going to win, and he sucks." The beauty of the English language is the multiplicity of ways to say the same thing.

276 I'll vote for Mitt or Perry, no problem. Romney is a bit more squishy than I prefer, but he's better than giving Obama another four years.
The rest of these jokers, I'll hold my nose and vote for them, but I won't be happy about it.
But, among the reasons we lost in 2008, is party disunity.  When the hardcore types around here started saying crap like, "McCain's whole family works for the government! He's never held a real job in his life!" I knew we were lost.
This is what we want to do in 2012: GET OBAMA OUT OF OFFICE! Tattoo that backwards on your forehead so you see it in the mirror every morning.
Yes, Mitt is a bit of a squish and yes, Perry doesn't actually seem to realize that he's running.  None of that will fucking matter if Obama gets another four years.
I do NOT want to be here on November 7, 2012 watching you fucks pout and blame each other because the idea of putting political power ahead of ideological purity is too fucking complicated for you to understand.
We've got a real good chance this time, let's not fuck it up.

277

>>>Any of the cobloggers know if Ace is going to rolling out of the rack today? Who has the keys to the blog? All that?

 

what do you mean rolling out the rack?

278 >>>Mitt decided he wanted to be governor in a corrupt state where the governor was impotent.

What a weird comment.  What should Romney have done?  Not get involved in politics at all?  Do the easy thing and switch parties to run as a Democrat instead of actually running as a Republican?  Leave his home state and carpetbag somewhere else? 

279 Depressing. I saw Ann Coulter on fox last night talking about a poll that shows 48% of the country is "distraught" at the prospect of Obama being reelected. Ann asked, essentially, what he hell is wrong with the other 52%? I am beginning to think Obama may actually be reelected.

280 New thread

281 275
I'm in a maze and I'm lost.

All I see is corn all around me.

Hello?

Posted by: Soothsayer in a cornfield at October 27, 2011 11:51 AM (sqkOB)

Should have brought a Zippo lighter with you. Retard.

282 New thread Posted by: Tami-Cardinals! at October 27, 2011 11:52 AM Thank God

283

will ace be around?  I wrote an article and put it in draft.   I want to know who to lobby to get it published.

284 All I see is corn all around me. Hello? If you're Cary Grant and you're waiting for "George Kaplan," duck.

285 Leave his home state and carpetbag somewhere else?

Umm, he went to college there.

I went to college in Vermont.  I don't live there any longer.

The guy is a millionaire with multiple homes across the country.  Executives at that level live away from business operations all the time.  Let's not pretend he didn't have other options. 

286 I won't vote for Romney. Ever. That is all.

287 I'm in a maze and I'm lost.

All I see is corn all around me.

Just hold still, and Mitt Romney will subsidize you out.

288

275
I'm in a maze and I'm lost.

All I see is corn all around me.

Hello?

Cornfused? .....Take two kernels, wash them down with some 100-proof and call us in the morning.

289

"Rick Perry fears people like Ron Paul."

Most sane people fear Ron Paul as well.

290 Never mind.  Moot.  He's up and rolling.  Not hard, but then again, it's not even the crack of noon.

291
All I see is corn all around me.

Be happy you're still seeing it.
It's when you don't see it any more you should start to worry.

Watch your ass.

292 >>>Umm, he went to college there.

Umm, no.  He went to college there, business school and law school, founded a major business there, and lived and worked in the state for thirty years, and raised his family there.  It's not as if he only had a tenuous connection to the state.  Why on earth would you try to argue otherwise?

293 Ed Anger do you get paid every time you post that? Do you get paid with shiny objects?

294 Damn I missed this thread.

I'll just say this....

I've been one of his biggest supporters here but I'm done if he goes this route. I can defend his bad debate performances. The deer-caught-in-the headlight- silence. The stuttering. Even the comments  I despise most (i,e "heartless") that he doubled down on after the debate. The It's not the be-all-end-of of the nomination process. But skipping them outright? Inexcusable. What happens in the general election process -- is he going to skip those too? Obama is mangina. Any one of the candidate should be able to take him out.

Of all his missteps this one is unforgivable should he take this approach.

295
What a weird comment.  What should Romney have done?  Not get involved in politics at all?  Do the easy thing and switch parties to run as a Democrat instead of actually running as a Republican?  Leave his home state and carpetbag somewhere else? 

Posted by: Jeff B., making sure the sedatives work before commenting at October 27, 2011 11:51 AM (bbxN5)

This comment is hilarious.  Romney *must* run for governor of MA.  He couldn't have done anything differently if he wanted to enter politics.

1) Mitt has three home states - Michigan, Massachusetts, and Utah.  He could run in any of them credibly.  Are you arguing he cared about Massachusetts?  It is to laugh.  If so, he'd be broken up about what Mittcare has done and he would have fought tooth and nail to prevent Deval Patrick from being the next governor.  Instead, he left Muffy Healey behind to lose while he put on a flannel shirt and headed to Iowa. 

Mitt's lasting legacy is Deval Patrick.

2) Mitt probably would have been a Democrat, but pater was a GOP governor in Michigan and a Dem primary in MA is going to be tough to win with that baggage.  He sure as hell wasn't gonna beat Teddy in 1996 in a Dem primary.  Plus I'm sure Mitt feels the GOP is 'his' party, much like a T. Coddington Van Vorhees.

296
All I see is corn all around me.

Speaking of corn, Tito's Vodka (the best) is made in Texas from corn.

Perry should just stand at the podium in the next debate with a 750ml bottle of Tito's taking the occasional shot from an 8oz tumbler.

When asked a question, he should just look at the MSM clown and say "fuck you", with an additional "cocksucker" or "asswipe" or something to that effect. And then take another swig.

His numbers will soar.

297 Poll over at NRO shows 73% of those responding think Romney is inevitable. sigh

298 Poll over at NRO shows 73% of those responding think Romney is inevitable. There's a Ford in your future! Unfortunately it's the Edsel.

299 Lacey,

I disagree.

I suggested that he quit the debates weeks ago and focus on what he's good at: stump speeches and connecting with his supporters.

The debates aren't mandatory and they're essentially the MFM's main tool in selecting our candidate for us.

So, if you're doing something you're bad at, that is in fact hurting you, and it's not mandatory, why would you continue to do it?

300 134 Throw a vaccine and some brown people at these John Birch Society rejects and even a three-term governor from one of the most conservative states in the union can't get traction. It's like stealing candy from a trust fund baby.

Now that we've preempted Perry's candidacy -- and brother let me tell you, we were worried about facing him in the general -- we need to turn our attention to Romney. Listen up: It'll be all about the Mormon, baby. That and Romneycare. I figure we can dupe around 4 million of these folks into staying home and not voting.

Of course if we can luck out with Cain as the nominee then we can sit around binging on pizza, beer and smokes and still win easily. I don't think these rubes are that dumb to nominate Cain, but you never know. After all they gave us Sharron Angle and Christine O'Donnell, didn't they?

Stay classy, rubes. See you at Barack's 2nd inaugural ball. Heh.

Posted by: David Axelrod at October 27, 2011 11:11 AM (rJVPU)

Yup. How do you think Obama won the last time? We want to lie to ourselves and call it a historic election, unstoppable, etc., but the numbers are: Had the GOP shown up in the same numbers as previous elections, it'd be President McCain. Hmm. Wonder what was the problem that the GOP just couldn't rouse itself to turn out for a moderate, finger-in-the-wind Republican? I know!! He wasn't a good debater!! We need a master debater!!

301 Soothsayer,
Take my hand.  G-Damn it!  That's NOT my hand you perv!!!!!

302 The media has chosen our candidate. Didn't we swear that wasn't going to happen again?

303 >>>The debates aren't mandatory and they're essentially the MFM's main tool in selecting our candidate for us.

>>>So, if you're doing something you're bad at, that is in fact hurting you, and it's not mandatory, why would you continue to do it?

A number of reasons, most pertinent of all being perceptions.  You support Perry, and are therefore naturally inclined to excuse or justify stuff he does.  But that puts you alongside 4% of the GOP primary voters at this point.  The other 96% (and some of the 4% as well) are going to look at Perry suddenly deciding to skip debates after a series of universally panned performances that sent his poll numbers plummeting and made him look stumbling and inarticulate and THEY will think "huh -- he's a pussy on top of everything else."  And your argument about how the debates aren't "mandatory" will be laughed away as the eyewash they are: if you're at 4-6% in the polls and suffering from a narrative wherein you've put yourself in that hole due to your inability to sell yourself in debates, suddenly ditching them will only make you look weak and unprepared.

As DrewM. said, if he does this, it's the equivalent of conceding the race completely.  In fact, I wonder whether he hasn't damaged himself more already just by letting this trial balloon float out there. 

304 So, if you're doing something you're bad at, that is in fact hurting you, and it's not mandatory, why would you continue to do it?

I get the whole "well our poll numbers are so low, what do we have to lose approach", but....

How does this help him prepare for Obama in the general? What's he going to do - skip those?

Perception is everything - unfortunately more than substance it seems. But that's the hard reality. He'd look like an inept pussy if he backs out. Skipping one debate could (and I'd go as far to say "would") be as damaging as anything stupid he may say in any other debate. The media is already not kind to him - why give them any more ammunition?

I expect him to buck up and do what is expected of every other nominee. 

305 One of a million facts ignored by Romney Derangement Syndrome suffers: Romney beat the Rockefeller Republican machine incumbent govenor in a primary, and then beat the Dem. Romney ran to the right of Weld-Cellucci-Swift. He kicked Swift out and then beat O'Brien. Romney ran against Kennedy, gave him the only formidable race in his career. A tough task. Beat the incumbent liberal Republican governor in a primary. Tough task. Romney won the governor's race as a Republican in MA against a popular Treasurer. Tough task. Romney's not about taking the easy way out, as others have insinuated. He's a tough cat.

306 Oh, and Cain spending a bunch of money on a national ad campaign on Rush Limbaugh?
That's for one thing and one thing only: To keep the fickle, scared-of-our-own-shadow, "Please don't say anything bad about us," poll driven GOP base on the Cain boom facade. The media will keep pumping out polls showing him viable; Cain will keep doing things that make him look good.
But it is not real and it is not a long-term winning strategy. It's like spending your entire marketing budget on bringing in an elephant for your grand opening--lots of buzz, lots of crowds, no repeat customers.
If you know marketing, you know Cain has no damn idea what he is doing.
But some of you are excited as shit 'cause "Didja hear? Cain's Market is going to have a real, live elephant on Saturday!!"

I'm revising my prediction: Cain will--WILL--endorse Romney buy by March 30, 2012.

307

"Romney's not about taking the easy way out, "

He was awesome when he ran for re election. Wasn't he?

308 Umm, no.  He went to college there, business school and law school, founded a major business there, and lived and worked in the state for thirty years, and raised his family there.  It's not as if he only had a tenuous connection to the state.  Why on earth would you try to argue otherwise?

I did not say he had a tenuous connection.  I said he chose to live there.   It is not his home state in terms of the place of his birth or where he grew up or where his parents lived.  

His undergrad was at BYU, by the way.  He went to grad school and worked in Massachusetts.  As I said, he was an executive millionaire with multiple residences.  It's not at all infrequent for them to live somewhere other than where their company is headquartered.  I'm surprised you don't know that. 

Lots of us wind up living places for reasons of work.  I endured Boston for two and a half years myself.  But most of us do not have the resources or connections to readily change those circumstances.  Romney certainly does (and did). 

Why is it hard for you to accept that he chose to live in one of the bluest states in the union? 

309 You realize that you listed a bunch of personal victories for Mitt Romney. What's his legacy in Massachusetts? RomneyCare, and 23 out of 36 democrat judges.

310 287 I won't vote for Romney. Ever. That is all. Posted by: Ed Anger at October 27, 2011 11:54 AM (7+pP9) Then fuck you. Send us a postcard letting us know how SCOAMF's ass tastes.

311 308

"Romney's not about taking the easy way out, "

He was awesome when he ran for re election. Wasn't he?

Posted by: Dick Nixon at October 27, 2011 12:21 PM (kaOJx)

_

True. He governed too conservatively for MA. He was starting to lose the Dems and Indies he needed to win.

312

 1/1027th of a Janitor at October 27, 2011 12:22 PM

THREADWINNER

313 I'm still trying to figure out why Romney, who has the nomination sewn up, is not spending time trying to court conservative voters.  It seems odd to me that he would skip the Iowa forum last week.  It's no skin off his nose to make nice to a bunch of social conservatives for a couple of hours.  Why didn't he do it? 

314 I get the whole "well our poll numbers are so low, what do we have to lose approach", but....

How does this help him prepare for Obama in the general? What's he going to do - skip those?

Perception is everything - unfortunately more than substance it seems. But that's the hard reality. He'd look like an inept pussy if he backs out. Skipping one debate could (and I'd go as far to say "would") be as damaging as anything stupid he may say in any other debate. The media is already not kind to him - why give them any more ammunition?

I expect him to buck up and do what is expected of every other nominee. 


The debates are optional, and too much weight is placed on them.

And Obama isn't going to debate - unless it's Romney. Because Romney will be paid to go down in the third round.

Perry's been doing better in the debates and probably should stick them out, because you're right - he will catch a lot of grief over it if he drops out. (Remember the first appearance he skipped because of the firestorm in Texas? Even the worst wildfires in Texas history wasn't a good enough excuse.)

Ideally, ALL of the candidates need to tell the DNC debate team to FOAD. I'm still scratching my head on why the debates are supposed to be so important these days, not when you can swing a dead cat and hit a talk show to appear on and the wild frontier of You Tube awaits.

315 oops-repost. Winning You realize that you listed a bunch of personal victories for Mitt Romney. What's his legacy in Massachusetts? RomneyCare, and 23 out of 36 judges he appointed were Democrats.

316 Winning, you're really at that the wrong blog.

317

His name is WINNING!, what do you expect?

318 >>Mitt decided he wanted to be governor in a corrupt state where the governor was impotent. Actually, the truth of the matter is after turning around a bankrupt and failing Olympics, the Republican Party of MA begged Romney to run for governor. He didn't actively seek it, he was recruited. Here's a fun sort of O/T fact. Since big spending seems to be enough to get someone branded a RINO these days, which president oversaw a higher percentage of spending to GDP, Carter or Reagan? Answer, Reagan. he vastly grew the size of government spending including doubling the DOE, new farm subsidy programs, enormous growth in military spending, entitlements and foreign aid to name a few. In fact, spending under Reagan peaked a 28.7% of GDP, high even by Obama standards. I doubt many here would consider Reagan a RINO>

319 >>>And Obama isn't going to debate - unless it's Romney. Because Romney will be paid to go down in the third round.

That's right, Mitt Romney is going to take a payoff from Obama to throw the election to the Democrats.  Because he's just corrupt like that. 

Seriously, you don't actually believe this sort of thing, do you?

320 Y-not I'm still trying to figure out why Romney, who has the nomination sewn up, is not spending time trying to court conservative voters. Simple math. Romney has the liberal Republican vote sewn up-and they do exist particularly in N.H. and he has no serious competition for their vote-maybe Huntsman. If there are seven other candidates competing for different varieties of Conservative voters-some of them being the rarer kind that go for Ron Paul-he doesn't need to do much of anything.

321

It seems odd to me that he would skip the Iowa forum last week.  It's no skin off his nose to make nice to a bunch of social conservatives for a couple of hours.  Why didn't he do it? 

He has rejected any ties to the Tea Party. He wasnt to be free up for the general. Mark my words, he's going to go heavy after mythical 'independants' and depress the living fuck out of the grassroots.

322 *If* he has the nomination sewn up-he's running for the general and already courting the middle muddle vote.

323 >>>Actually, the truth of the matter is after turning around a bankrupt and failing Olympics, the Republican Party of MA begged Romney to run for governor. He didn't actively seek it, he was recruited.

Exactly.  The Massachusetts GOP hated Jane Swift, who was too incompetent and liberal even for these supposed closet-liberal squishes, and so they sought out Romney to run after his Olympic triumph.  The MA Democratic party even tried to get him taken off the ballot by arguing that his work on the Olympics in Salt Lake City disqualified him on residency grounds, until the court unanimously ruled that he was eligible given that MA was his permanent residence and he had lived and worked there for three decades.

324 Posted by: tasker at October 27, 2011 12:28 PM

But since he's the presumptive nominee, shouldn't he be thinking about preparing for the general? 

We know he's not worried about money.  His only competition in that area is Perry, whom we know is a completely meaningless candidate not worthy of attack ads or attack web sites.  So I would think nominee-elect Romney would be willing to at least make a passing nod at conservatives.  What was he afraid of, another scary preacher? 

325 >>>So Mitt Romney had the chance to appoint-

>>>36 judges in Massachusetts-and-

>>>23 of them were Democrats.

I see that you have completely ignored my response to this allegation.  I can't force you to acknowledge something you're invested in ignoring, but it completely refutes this spurious charge.

326

JackStraw at October 27, 2011 12:27 PM

Funny how people forget that Cold War thingy. Plus, thanks to Carter, the military was sort of fucked up pretty badly and needed to be rebuilt and built up.

327 Jeff B. All I saw in response was they are the equivalent of traffic court judges. Do you have any supporting evidence?

328 A legacy in politics supposes an activist role in politics. Romney's greatest achievement was doing nothing, which more politicians should do.

He vetoed thousands of bills, thousands.

Since he has left, without Romney holding down the fort, Dems have done everything from raise the tolls, raise the sales tax, protected convicted criminals, stacked the courts with radicals and more.

I'd rather have a Coolidge than a rock star with a "legacy".

329 Entropy, tasker -
Implied sarc tag, btw. 

This is as conservative as Romney will ever be.

330 Y-not His only competition in that area is Perry, whom we know is a completely meaningless candidate not worthy of attack ads or attack web sites. Oh ah ha! Gotcha. Ya that is interesting...

331 Cripes it took me two shots to get it. gawd...

332 >>>Funny how people forget that Cold War thingy. Plus, thanks to Carter, the military was sort of fucked up pretty badly and needed to be rebuilt and built up.

That only addresses Reagan's military spending.  What about all the rest? You going to defend his massive farm subsidies? 

Also, it's interesting how quickly we're allowed to introduce things like "context" and "mitigating circumstances" into a defense of Reagan's record, but any such attempt w/r/t Romney is just "RINO spin." 

333 Ya but Winning RomneyCare is a douzzy of a legacy..

334 We need to end all debate and rally around Romney - the only one who can win.

335 Jeff B. Do it, do it now- who is your second?

336
1/1027th of a Janitor at October 27, 2011 12:22 PM

THREADWINNER

Posted by: Dick Nixon at October 27, 2011 12:23 PM (kaOJx)

Fuck the both of you and the GOP, too. You don't housbreak a puppy by rewarding it for pissing on the carpet.

337 Jeff B. Those are non-partisan positions, with no ability to make or shape substantive law and no real capacity for promotion to higher levels. Holy crap-dude that's awful trusting of human nature right there..

338

we're allowed to introduce things like "context" and "mitigating circumstances" into a defense of Reagan's record

Well it was 30 years ago. How's that for context.

Abraham Lincoln is a squish! He supported subsidizing manifest destiny!

339 >>>All I saw in response was they are the equivalent of traffic court judges.

Not just that, but the fact that all higher court appointees in Massachusetts cannot be selected by the governor and sent to the legislature for an up or down vote: they first have to pass through an ultra-liberal all-Democratic "Board of Governors" for approval before they can be submitted to the legislature. 

Guess why this board exists?  The Dem legislature put it in place precisely to prevent MA's long string of Republican governors from appointing conservative judges to the courts.  The MA legislature has a long, long history of exactly this sort of naked partisanship: remember how they passed a law revoking the Governor's right to appoint a Senate replacement when Kerry looked like he would beat Bush and leave an open seat for Romney to fill?  And how they UN-passed the law when Kennedy died and Deval Patrick was in the seat to appoint a Democrat?  Big shocker there.

340 >>>Holy crap-dude that's awful trusting of human nature right there..

It's not about "trusting human nature," it's about being a lawyer who understands how state court systems work.  Lower court judges don't write published opinions and therefore cannot set any sort of written precedent. 

341 Plus if a judge initially retires or dies midterm the governor makes the appointment and then the judge is up for the next election as an incumbent. It's pretty damn rare for an incumbent judge to get voted out.

342 >>Funny how people forget that Cold War thingy. Plus, thanks to Carter, the military was sort of fucked up pretty badly and needed to be rebuilt and built up. I'm not ignoring it. But every politician can always make an excuse for increasing spending. Even though it's not popular here, TARP was a response to an imminent fiscal collapse. It's not like Bush was just waiting to dole out hundreds of millions of dollars (almost every penny of which has been repaid with interest). He faced a crisis as real as an military attack and took action, just as Reagan did. But to ignore the massive spending under Reagan is to ignore facts. It doesn't mean I consider Reagan a RINO, far from it. Point is its easy to paint with a broad brush if you don't consider the context of why action was taken.

343 Actually, the truth of the matter is after turning around a bankrupt and failing Olympics, the Republican Party of MA begged Romney to run for governor. He didn't actively seek it, he was recruited.

So Mitt was forced, kicking and screaming, to run for governor?  Come on, Jack.  Was he forced to run in 1996?

And would you stop with the Olympics?  No one cares.

Since big spending seems to be enough to get someone branded a RINO these days, which president oversaw a higher percentage of spending to GDP, Carter or Reagan? Answer, Reagan. he vastly grew the size of government spending including doubling the DOE, new farm subsidy programs, enormous growth in military spending, entitlements and foreign aid to name a few. In fact, spending under Reagan peaked a 28.7% of GDP, high even by Obama standards.

I doubt many here would consider Reagan a RINO>

Posted by: JackStraw at October 27, 2011 12:27 PM (TMB3S)

A funny thing happened though.  There was thirty years of spending increases and now we're broke.  I don't think people would be fired up about Reagan nowadays if he were promising to increase spending.  We need to cut spending.

344 Seriously, you don't actually believe this sort of thing, do you?

I was speaking metaphorically.

345 Ya but they still bring their personal views to bear in the decision making process and Romney passed over Republican judges to make those appointments.

346 >>>Do it, do it now-

>>>who is your second?

My second choice?  There really isn't a good one -- one who I think can beat Obama, that is -- but I'll support ANYONE who wins the nomination.  Any-fucking-one.  I suppose Perry is my "second" choice by default, even though I think he would be a terrible candidate and I'm surprised to discover that his record to be, once context is taken into account, is worse than Romney's.  He's second simply because Cain cannot be considered a serious candidate. 

But whatever: we nominate a dead dog, and I'm voting Dead Dog/Rubio in 2012.

347 "once context is taken out"... You mean reality-as in the state of being-er Texas?

348

Ed Anger at October 27, 2011 12:37 PM

Blow me redneck. Take your desire for a third party to the LaRouche fanatics. You'll fit right in.

349 Posted by: Winning at October 27, 2011 12:14 PM (I+xVl)

Have you ever even been to Massachusetts?

-Jane Swift was massively unpopular.  She had a little scandal involving a helicopter.  She'd never won an election in the state and wasn't going to.

-Romney got shellacked by Kennedy, losing 58-41. Yeah, what a competitor.

-Romney won in an awesome year for Republicans following 9/11 after having been the 'hero' of the Olympics, in a state which had elected a Republican governor every time since Dukakis.

This is like the scientology version of L.Ron Hubbard versus the real thing.

350 >>So Mitt was forced, kicking and screaming, to run for governor? Come on, Jack. Was he forced to run in 1996? >>And would you stop with the Olympics? No one cares. Well, actually the Republican Party of MA cared quite deeply. It was the biggest reason they wanted Romney who had achieved some level of national notoriety for the Olympics fix. I didn't say that to impress you who wouldn't be impressed if Romney spent all day ripping the heads of liberals with his bare hands, I said it to give historical context as to why he was recruited to the job. He had no intention of running. That's just how it happened. >>A funny thing happened though. There was thirty years of spending increases and now we're broke. I don't think people would be fired up about Reagan nowadays if he were promising to increase spending. We need to cut spending. Exactly. Times change. Believe it or not, individual mandates used to be a very important conservative virtue. Personal responsibility and all that. Now they are about the most hated thing by conservatives. This change happened in less than a decade. So if you aren't going to hold Reagan's massive spending against him because at the time it was considered ok by the majority of conservatives, why does Romney constantly get hammered for a policy he crafted with the ultra-conservative Heritage Org on an idea that Newt Gingrich used to be a huge fan of? Never mind, I know, Romney is a dirty RINO.

351 You know, I just looked at the debate schedule.

There is a total of 24 debates scheduled. (It's almost as if someone wanted the candidates to spend all of their time preparing for debates rather than campaigning.)

There are FOURTEEN debates between now and March.

I don't think it would hurt any of the candidates to skip a few of those.

352

I remember the Palinista's comparing St Sarah to Reagan to give her relevance. Why are the Romney fans doing the same thing?

Reagan enjoyed a lot of success economically, growing GDP and getting unemployment down on his watch. Reagan also reigned in regulation from the Feds.

Romney enacted a major socialized medical plan with individual mandates and required purchasing that destroyed 18,000 jobs and cost $4.5 billion dollars.

Sounds identical to Reagan, if you are a Romney fan.

 

353 Since we will probably continue to let MSNBC and CNN run our debates with their deliberate gotcha, agitation, and division tactics.  (feels they have definitely succeeded so far)  Lets just forget that Obama refused to attend a fox news debate and keep redoing that.

So if Rick Perry skips these unhidden bear traps and still wins the debates will forever be marginalized.   Not that I think this is ideal but the one fox news debate we had Wallace was being a turkey. soooo......I guess the fork in the road is.

-He skips but still wins and future leftists ambushes debates are marginalized

-He doesn't skip and he drops even his last few points and the field is narrowed down further as a choice to between Gingrich or Cain vs Romney.

While normally I would hate the idea of politicians refusing to debate given the circumstances....  there is not real downside for us.

354 Make NO Mistake!  14 debates is meant to destroy non-obama horse before it even gets our of the gate.

355 >>>So if you aren't going to hold Reagan's massive spending against him because at the time it was considered ok by the majority of conservatives, why does Romney constantly get hammered for a policy he crafted with the ultra-conservative Heritage Org on an idea that Newt Gingrich used to be a huge fan of?

I would really like to see an answer to this by some of the people around here that doesn't simply beg the question or ignore it.  Even Ace has acknowledged this -- times change, and hammering politicians for positions that were totally kosher and conservative back when they were held but have since fallen out of favor seems disingenuous.

More than anything else, though, I'm intensely amused by people who denounce Romney as an unacceptable crypto-liberal because of the state-level individual mandate with one breath, and then go on with their next breath to declare that Newt Gingrich -- who supported a NATIONAL MANDATE like Obamacare, not a statewide one, and did so fervently right up until 2008 -- is looking like a pretty good conservative choice these days.  Are these folks just immune to irony, or are they going out of their way to remain ignorant about the contradictions here?

356

"So if you aren't going to hold Reagan's massive spending against him "

Reagan isn't running for POTUS. Hasn't ran in 27 years. He's also dead and buried.

How is what Reagan did almost 30 years ago have squat to do with Mitt Romney?

357 I don't care if he skips the other debates.  As far as I'm concerned, the debates only help those who say, "Oh, look at that Romney, he's really good at television, I'm a-gonna vote for him."

(R)omney (I)s (N)ext (O)bama.

358

How is what Reagan did almost 30 years ago have squat to do with Mitt Romney?

Because we need something to distract us from the fact that it's his turn so the GOP is giving it to the squish.

359

A minute ago it was Bush is a RINO too, so vote for Romney.

But people don't like Bush anymore.

So now Reagan is an imperfect RINO, therefor, vote for Romney.

360 >>>Blow me redneck. Take your desire for a third party to the LaRouche fanatics. You'll fit right in.

I've always felt that "Ed Anger" is a liberal moby.  Even the name -- a stereotypical one that liberals often use to parody "angry white Rethuglican rednecks" -- suggests that he's a lefty's idea of what a Tea Party fanatic would sound like.  Pretty sure he's just a Kos Kid who moonlights here to stir up the shit.

361 These debates have been debacles.  Pissy slapfights orchestrated by effete media liberals with all the dignity and illumination of professional wrestling.  Deliberate attempts to embarrass or demean whatever eventual challenger to His Excellency that manages to squeak out a primary win.

Debates might be a good thing, but not with the media turning them into gang events with no more agenda than ruining the GOP field.

And Perry made a mistake jumping into the race immediately into these debates, his weak ground.  He should have established himself with speeches and appearances before going into the orchestrated slapfights.

Posted by: nickless at October 27, 2011 10:41 AM (MMC8r)

===

^ This.

362

a vote for Romeny is a vote for Obama and Perry is G.W. Bush but not as smart or polished.

with Perry's numbers i'm not even sure why we are talking about him anymore.

363 >>>As far as I'm concerned, the debates only help those who say, "Oh, look at that Romney, he's really good at television, I'm a-gonna vote for him."

Surprisingly enough, that includes a substantial plurality of the American voting populace, both in the primaries and the general election.  Which, as I've said over and over, is why debates matter.  If Romney wins the nomination it will have been on the strength of his consistently sharp debate performances.

364

a vote for Romeny is a vote for Obama and Perry is G.W. Bush but not as smart or polished.

with Perry's numbers i'm not even sure why we are talking about him anymore.

So do I take this to mean you're a Cain supporter?  Or do you back Newt "I supported NATIONAL healthcare mandates right up until the moment the GOP base decided they hated it" Gingrich as your true conservative champion?

365

Well I'm dizzy from the circular slap fight. How about everyone vote for their candidate in the primary and go GOP nominee in the General Election?

Off to lunch.

366 >>How is what Reagan did almost 30 years ago have squat to do with Mitt Romney? I think you know. People seem to be pretty flexible with what are and what aren't conservative values. Reagan spent like the wind but he is universally regarded as the best conservative president in decades. Perry has a position on illegals that puts him to the left of Lindsay Graham and used to be a deal breaker here but now he is the conservative hope. But Romney never gets any slack for the health care plan he helped enact which represented conservative values of the time. Why?

367 He had no intention of running.

And yet he ran.  And he ran again in 2008.  And before that in 1996.  Mitt the reluctant statesman is a hard sell.  Mitt ran in MA to pad the resume for a presidential run.  Without his four-year stint, nobody would have taken him seriously.

So if you aren't going to hold Reagan's massive spending against him because at the time it was considered ok by the majority of conservatives,

If people in the 80s had objected to increases in spending, we wouldn't be in the mess we are in now.  And that is weighed against the good which Reagan did.  But Mitt has done no good, only bads which must be 'explained'.  Why should this guy be our standard bearer?  Prove to me he's Reagan and he'll get Reagan's respect. 

Reagan could rally conservatives.  Mitt infuriates them.  Reagan won an upset over the establishment candidate.  Mitt's strategy is to split the conservative vote and be the only guy left.

why does Romney constantly get hammered for a policy he crafted with the ultra-conservative Heritage Org on an idea that Newt Gingrich used to be a huge fan of?

He didn't craft it with the Heritage Org.  He crafted it with the Democrat legislature of Massachusetts.  Mitt is standing by his bill, even though it's been a disaster, saying the bad legislature did all the things you don't like about it. 

And before you go there, it's unconvincing to say that Mitt refuses to recognize reality so he won't be seen as a flip-flopper.  It hasn't stopped him in any other case.

Never mind, I know, Romney is a dirty RINO.

Jack, do you really not see that only people married to the idea of Mitt as a great candidate can do all these pretzel twists? The Planned Parenthood connections, the assault rifle ban, Romney care, support for stimulus spending (just not Barry's).  Do you notice how often you are presented with statements and actions by Mitt Romney and have to say, "Yes, but...?"

368 Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at October 27, 2011 12:41 PM (FkKjr)

Nice spin. I quit reading after the part about 2002 being a great year for Republicans in Massachusetts. Just too funny.

While Perry and Cain were carrying water  for the Democratic Party of Carter, Mondale, Dukakis, and Clinton, at least Romney was fighting the Kennedys. More than can be said about Al Gore's waterboy.

And if you spent any time in MA, you know Romney put a scare in TK. And you know how the liberal press savaged Romney, but he still competed.

369 361 >>>Blow me redneck. Take your desire for a third party to the LaRouche fanatics. You'll fit right in.

I've always felt that "Ed Anger" is a liberal moby.  Even the name -- a stereotypical one that liberals often use to parody "angry white Rethuglican rednecks" -- suggests that he's a lefty's idea of what a Tea Party fanatic would sound like.  Pretty sure he's just a Kos Kid who moonlights here to stir up the shit.
Posted by: Jeff B

I am always dumbfounded at how often conservatives are tricked by this sort of stuff.  But then conservatives cant imagine why a person would behave as such a sociopath troublemaker...

370 >>Jack, do you really not see that only people married to the idea of Mitt as a great candidate can do all these pretzel twists? Nah, what I see is you misstating lots of what took place in MA and Romney's actual record. I see you cutting him no slack but more than willing to cut slack for Perry who's illegal position has never, ever been considered conservative. I see you cutting him slack on the Texas Enterprise Fund which is very much the same as Obama green company giveaways to supporters. I see you ignoring the massive green energy, largest in the nation, mandates that Perry has put on Texas and is costing his constituents billions. In short, I see you more than willing to overlook the failings of other candidates but not willing to give the same consideration to Romney while also being last then factually accurate about his record. You don't like him, I get it. You know what else I see? Romney slowly but surely pulling away from the pack and yes, getting the endorsements of conservatives and moderates alike. Picked up the endorsement of a Tea Party Rep. in Ohio the other day and Arron Schock is getting ready to follow suit. Are all of these people twisting themselves into pretzels or is it possible that maybe people see things differently than you?

371
I've always felt that "Ed Anger" is a liberal moby.  Even the name -- a stereotypical one that liberals often use to parody "angry white Rethuglican rednecks" -- suggests that he's a lefty's idea of what a Tea Party fanatic would sound like.  Pretty sure he's just a Kos Kid who moonlights here to stir up the shit.

Posted by: Jeff B., making sure the sedatives work before commenting at October 27, 2011 01:03 PM (bbxN5)

You'd be a totally incorrect dumbass to believe that.

372 Nice spin. I quit reading after the part about 2002 being a great year for Republicans in Massachusetts. Just too funny.

So you read to the end.  I said it was a good year for Republicans.  And it was.

at least Romney was fighting the Kennedys. More than can be said about Al Gore's waterboy.

Oh yes the way he had Ted stand behind him when he signed Romneycare...way to take the fight to the man.  Plus his stumping at Planned Parenthood shindigs during that race.

And if you spent any time in MA, you know Romney put a scare in TK.

So Romney's major accomplishment to head the Republic is that he scared Ted Kennedy, before he worked with him on numerous projects.

373 Posted by: JackStraw at October 27, 2011 01:22 PM (TMB3S)

So again, you attack another candidate.  No evidence of conservatism, just attacking other candidates for flaws which Romney has in addition to others.  And as usual, claims I'm 'misrepresenting' Romney.

And just like in 2007, Mitt is inevitable.  Sorry Jack, it ain't happening.  I did like the appeal to authority.  Do you really think Ohio was a net win for Mitt this week, Jack?

374 Probably a good idea for Perry - he's not the brightest bulb in the floor lamp, and being forced to think on his feet has clearly been a detriment to him so far.

375 >>So again, you attack another candidate. No evidence of conservatism, just attacking other candidates for flaws which Romney has in addition to others. And as usual, claims I'm 'misrepresenting' Romney. So let's see if I get this straight because this seems to be a recurring theme. This is a thread about Rick Perry but you and others took the opportunity to hammer Romney again and again but if I point out that 1) Romney actually cut spending and balanced the budget in MA 2) raised the credit rating in MA from AA- to AA 3) produced a job friendly environment that stopped company and job loss and helped reduce the unemployment rate 4) point out that while I personally don't like the MA health care plan because I knew liberals would distort the shit out of it as soon as they could but it was considered very conservative at the time and also 5) point out some of Rick Perry's, the subject of this thread, non-conservative positions, all I do is attack poor Rick while you are busy doing what, attacking Romney in a Perry thread and this is somehow on me? I and others try to correct your misrepresentation Romney's record all the time but you keep pretending things that didn't happen did happen and vica versa. And you seem incapable of defending any of Perry's flaws. Seriously, if you attack Romney in a Perry thread I think it's fine for me to not only support Romney but also point out Perry's flaws. And I think I will continue to do so. And yes, I think on balance Romney's visit to Ohio will work out just fine for him.

376

"...took the opportunity to hammer Romney again and again..."

 

Romney deserves it, he's not idealogically fit to be our nominee and, apparently, that needs to be pointed out over and over and over. 

377

Ed Anger at October 27, 2011 01:23 PM

You still here redneck? Shouldn't you be back over fellating Ko$?

378

"Romney actually cut spending and balanced the budget in MA"

Nothing like a major tax increase being enacted right before you take office, plus across the board increases in property taxes and other fees, to give you a pile of money to balance your budget.

379 Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure.

380 I was very happy to search out this web-site.I needed to thanks to your time for this excellent read!! I definitely enjoying each little little bit of it and I have you bookmarked to check out new stuff you weblog post.

381 Took me time to read all the comments, but I really enjoyed the article. It proved to be Very helpful to me and I am sure to all the commenters here! ItÂ’s always nice when you can not only be informed, but also entertained!

382 This web site is my breathing in, really fantastic pattern and perfect subject matter.

383 Wow this is soo helpful I have been trying to figure this out on my own for a long time now. Hopefully making this change will help encourage discussion on my blog.

384 Thanks for sharing, please keep an update about this info. love to read it more. i like this site too much.

385

Perry can't hack it.  Pure and simple. No excuses, the man has to earn his support like everyone else.

I keep asking myself what would everyone be saying if Mitt Romney had said he didn't want to take hard questions in a high presurre atmosphere.

I think Romney's campaign would be done if he did this.

If Perry isn't an invention of the right wing media he needs to prove it!!!

In the same kind of  contest that has traditionally picked the leader of this country.  No special rules for Rick Perry, because he isn't up to the job!!!  No affirmative action for dummies!

Was it a surprise to Perry and his acolytes that debating issues in front of voters is a large part of the process?  Did he not notice that all these years?  Perry has no business being in this contest of he can't do the job of a canididate!

This is NOT a game.  This is a Presidential campaign, it has rules, and it has traditions and it has a time tested structure.

This isn't a coronation for Perry or Romney or Cain.   There is no birthright!!!!!  Not even if you are the most conservative person on the planet!  Half of America has the right politics!  He isn't running for common citizen!!!

You have to prove you can do more that say the right words in a speech.  And you have to prove you can work under pressure. The American people have a right to see how you behave under pressure! How you react when you are challenged, or dont' know an answer!!!

It is not enough that your politics is good.  Not nearly enough.  In fact it is only the price of entry. 

It's like a bus driver who can't press hard enough on the brake to stop the bus or doesn't know what a red light means. A debate is a basic skill that is required of a President.

If Rick Perry does not have what it takes to do the job of campaigning he should pack up and go home!!!

386 This info is a terrific read. Thanks for the info.I am looking forward for more updates. ipad 3 converter  hulu converter  convert mts files

387 Sure looks like Romney is working with the Media, to bait Perry attacks... While Perry could easily take advantage of this position, because the people want UNITY; are deeply against Obama policy; and crave a strong positive leader...

He needs to spend more time absorbing quotes of the founders; and answer questions in context of: "States Rights, Freedom of the States, Will of the people; etc."