August 11, 2011

"Texas Gov. Rick Perry will announce that he is running for president..."

"... on Saturday in South Carolina, a Republican familiar with the plans told CNN."

How do you feel about Perry entering the race?
Great! He's my favorite.
Excellent. Best person to enter the race so far.
Fine. Another worthy contender.
Okay. Not my favorite, but a decent option.
Eh. Not one I wanted to enter.
Bad. He's crowding somebody I like better.
Terrible. I can't stand him.
  
pollcode.com free polls

117 comments:

Andy R. said...

I guess he's just going to further divide the vote among the joke unserious candidates, which I imagine benefits Romney.

Original Mike said...

I've only heard him once or twice, but what I've heard so far did not impress me.

Triangle Man said...

The more the merrier, but if the economic news continues to improve and the stock market rally holds I expect it's going to be a tougher run for the whole Republican field.

Andy R. said...

Actually, maybe some of the commenters here can help with a question I have. Which of the joke Republican candidates know they are a joke and which are serious about their joke campaigns?

I mean, clearly Gingrich knows he's a joke, and Bachman seems to be serious about her joke campaign, but some of the rest have me confused.

Is Perry in the serious camp?

Original Mike said...

"if the economic news continues to improve and the stock market rally holds ..."

Huh?

lyssalovelyredhead said...

I'm very happy that Gov. Perry is entering the race, although I still feel like I need to know more about him. I know he's a former Dem (although Blue Dog, from what I understand. I'd like to know more about his conversion. But he seems to have done well by TX.) Basically everyone who's in right now has some glaring problem in my eyes (not when compared to Obama, of course, but in a lesser of the two evils and I couldn't get excited about it sort of way), so I'm really hoping that Perry will continue to be strong in my eyes.

I'm interested to see what the other commenters have to say about him. Wish he were participating in the debate tonight.

- Lyssa

Scott M said...

Mixed feeling after the big prayer rally. Not that I mind a spiritual compass in the White House, but it's going to put a big target on him. Plus, I acknowledge that this is not the time for the social conservatives to rule the roost.

lyssalovelyredhead said...

Original Mike, Triangle's got a huh out of me at first, too, then I realized that my sarcasm detector had fizzled.

********************************

Andy R., Perry's doing great in the polls, despite not actually even being in the race, and he's certainly got the appropriate experience as a multi-term governor of a major state. Why would you consider him a joke candidate?

- Lyssa

lyssalovelyredhead said...

Scott M.:Mixed feeling after the big prayer rally. Not that I mind a spiritual compass in the White House, but it's going to put a big target on him. Plus, I acknowledge that this is not the time for the social conservatives to rule the roost.

I generally agree (though I find the prayer rally a bit of a turn-off, being not crazy about that sort of thing), but as a southerner, I really expect that he's going to win more than he loses by appealing (pandering?) to religious conservatives. It's silly to me, as I tend to think that sort of thing should be more private and personal, but I'm a minority in that.

- Lyssa

Original Mike said...

"Triangle's got a huh out of me at first, too, then I realized that my sarcasm detector had fizzled."

What say you, Triangle Man?

Scott M said...

It's silly to me, as I tend to think that sort of thing should be more private and personal, but I'm a minority in that.

I tend to agree with that sentiment except for people that want to be running the country.

traditionalguy said...

Perry is the ultimate changeling always for sale to the highest bidder.

In his case the charge that Rich Corporations actually run the government will be 100% true.

He loves cheap illegal Mexican labor.

He hates personal injury recoveries for near criminal negligence and intentionally bad product designs causing ghastly injuries.

That will eliminate many lawyers, but it will also eliminate the rights of all victimized American citizens.

Other than that he will be fine with me.

But he has only learned a rural Texan white man persona and he must somehow use that to beat the first Black President in areas outside of the Bible belt south. Hmm.

DJ Drummond said...

Rick Perry is a serious candidate. First, he has signficiant experience as governor and has enjoyed great success in running the economy. Second, his religion is not going to be the problem some think - Perry chose his words carefully in describing his faith, not hiding it nor making himself seem a fanatic, he basically made sure Obama's people could not target him on that issue. And third, Perry has a track record in politics which shows he knows how to fight democrats and win.

I know enough about Perry to wonder if he's everything he advertises, but he's been smart enough to stand up to Obama in public and come out the winner, so if you want a republican in the White House your best odds lie with backing Perry. Perry might be be the best choice as a conservative candidate too.

Scott M said...

people that want to be running the country.

Sorry...blew a writing fuse...

Carol_Herman said...

SOON Sarah Palin enters Iowa on her bus!

"ONE NATION." It looks like a bus. But it's the name of a future new party in America.

Yay, Sarah.

Go Trump!

Oh, if Perry doesn't make it UP? I expect Karl Rove to push Jeb Bush. Will you be able to stop laughing?

chickenlittle said...

If the right people hate him, he's OK by me.

Anybody check Sullivan's blog lately?

Revenant said...

Of the declared candidates, he's the most likely to beat Obama.

Paul said...

Let's just say Ann, I've offered my IT skills to his campaign.

And I'm quite serious about it. He is the best of the bunch. I have a good job and there is no chance of me being laid off right now (but who knows in a few years with this idiot as president!)

No he isn't a Reagan, or even a Bush (W that is) but he is so far ahead of the rest of them and I feel we just can't afford four more years of Obama/Biden/Reid/Pelosi....


Ok?

phx said...

Is Perry in the serious camp?

He had a call from God to run so you bet he's serious.

Cedarford said...

After Bush, DeLay, LBJ, Dick Armey, Phil Gram the architect of Wall Street dereg, Alberto Gonzalez...is the mood of the country really there for another Open Borders Compassionate Conservative from Texas?

Or do we need a little hiatus...like hoping the next SCOTUS Justice does not come from NYC?

Peter Hoh said...

Trad guy: Perry is the ultimate changeling always for sale to the highest bidder.

I thought Romney was pretty flexible with his positions. They might not be for sale, but they are certainly subject to change.

madawaskan said...

And Obama is a yogi.

pm317 said...

Lyssa, you may want to read this.

It is an impressive biography considering where he started. It is also quintessentially American and never ceases to amaze me that how pedigree and class don't matter much to compete for the highest office in this country.

chickenlittle said...

The closet Sullivanist and Palin-loather Cedarford despises Perry so there must be something to him.

traditionalguy said...

Andy R...That is like asking which rookies in the minor leagues are serious about playing in the Big Show.

Many start by running to learn how and make contacts. That would be Cain and Huntsman.

The media than try to "kill" them and we get to see if they can take the heat of intense ridicule and slander.

The vetted repeat candidates are usually the serious threats. That would be Romney and Palin.

Others are running to be part of the TV debates, like Kucinich, Nader, Trump, Gingrich and Paul.

Then we have Perry and Daniels who only want to jump in at the last possible moment, and only if it is a sure thing.

Lucius said...

I'm not happy with Perry putting himself in.

He seems like a middling governor of a terrific state. Doesn't seem to command a national station on his own merits.

Sort of like a less interesting Barbour, but with as much baggage.

And why was the big Wagnerian prelude to his presumptive announcement a giant prayer rally?

Palin is sincerely religious, but I don't see her needing to put it on her sleeve like that.

All respect to Fred Thompson (or Fred4Prez for that matter) who got dissed unfairly, I think, for not being 'serious' enough about it, but I don't think Perry really knows what this is about.

Cedarford said...

Andy R. said...
I guess he's just going to further divide the vote among the joke unserious candidates, which I imagine benefits Romney.

=============
Might be that Perry is considered the 2nd mainstream candidate besides Romney capable of beating Obama. If so he would take some votes from Romney and some from the vanity candidate crowd. If Perry is someone like Romney with a serious shot at winning the Presidency and wouldn't put a Debbie Wasserman-Schultz or such on the Court if Scalia dies or retires...he is no joke.


I wouldn't call the others "joke candidates" either - but those translating appeal to a ferverent fan faction into the prestige and free publicity of a national stage..which will help them sell books, make a million or two as a talking Head on TV...Even help their fundraising if they seek a political career outside a doomed run for President.

The "joke" is really not on candidates like the pizza Godfather or Bachmann, Gingrich, Palin if she comes in from her lucrative media empire.....

It is on the joke the supporters play on themselves thinking that if their fave loses pure and noble to the ideology....that that will "Sure Send a Message!!" to Obama before his 2nd term starts. And make him rethink his economic policies and Pelosi's list of approved court nominees.

Lucius said...

Btw: I don't mean to imply something fascistic by "Wagnerian." I just mean, it's dramatic. And in Perry's case, it's the drama he clearly chose.

There's a nice sermon of Samuel Johnson's on the importance of spiritual leadership from national leaders. But even for 18th Century England, I think Johnson was laying it on thick.

Does Perry think *he* in particular is the most spiritual of politicians, the most qualified therefore to lead? Does he think the Tea Party is primarily a spiritual movement?

He seems like a Huckabee with delusions of grandeur. And less articulate.

michaele said...

I'm receptive to Perry. He seems like a man comfortable with being decisive. He's very pro business and can defend what that means in actual practice. I was a bit put off by his appearance at the recent prayer event but then did some self examination about why I felt that way.I decided that unless he starts talking in tongues, I'm comfortable that he is comfortable being a person of strong Christian faith.

Kensington said...

You never seem to have an appropriate option for me in your polls, Professor.

For example, I looked all over for "couldn't care less," but it wasn't there.

Cedarford said...

Tradguy - "The vetted repeat candidates are usually the serious threats. That would be Romney and Palin.

Others are running to be part of the TV debates, like Kucinich, Nader, Trump, Gingrich and Paul."

Generally a good analysis. I would note your blindness about Palin, however.
She was not vetted in any Primaries last time around. She was not well regarded by the Republican Presidential Campaign that saw her as initially helping by tossing out canned red meat to those wanting good slogans, then hurting the ticket by her talk. Nor has she done well being "vetted" in interviews...save with Fox News softball pitchers.

Peter Hoh said...

He's not a lawyer and he didn't go to Yale or Harvard, so he's got that going for him. On the other hand, he's yet another boomer. I was hoping we were done with them, after Clinton and Bush the younger.

I assume that Perry enters the race as a front-runner, or close to it. He's got Tea Party appeal, establishment cred, and he's not Romney.

On the other hand, it's possible that no matter how good he seems in theory, he will be unable to connect with voters. Think Wes Clark or Fred Thompson.

If Perry does well, however, he takes from Bachmann and Romney. I suspect that Bachmann has the most to lose, however. I wouldn't put it past Ed Rollins (Bachmann's campaign manager) to try to find out if there's a skeleton in Perry's closet.

Andy R. said...

I wouldn't call the others "joke candidates" either - but those translating appeal to a ferverent fan faction into the prestige and free publicity of a national stage..which will help them sell books, make a million or two as a talking Head on TV...Even help their fundraising if they seek a political career outside a doomed run for President.

Yeah, that's what I meant by joke, in that clearly they aren't taking their campaign to be President seriously in terms of their chance of actually becoming President. Whether they are grifters or some other reason is really besides the point about how we shouldn't pretend the idea of these people talking about being president is fundamentally hilarious.

lyssalovelyredhead said...

did some self examination about why I felt that way.I decided that unless he starts talking in tongues, I'm comfortable that he is comfortable being a person of strong Christian faith.

I wish more people would self-examine their reactions to religious expression like that. My general opinion is that as long as he's not really weird (more than mormon weird), not advocating hurting anyone, and fully supportive of the first amendment*, it's fine. But, at the same time, I'd sort of prefer a little bit more privacy about it, but that's just a preference. (I do disagree with using state funds for something like that- I don't know that that was the case here, though.)

* I liked Cain until he came out against the rights of Muslims to build a Mosque in TN. I'm no fan of their religion, but they still have rights.
*******************************

pm317, thanks, I'll definitely read that.

Is Althouse blogging the debate tonight?

- Lyssa

Peter Hoh said...

I should add that it's unlikely that Perry will do poorly on the stump. He's engaged in enough retail politics in Texas that he ought to be able to campaign well in the primaries and on the national stage.

Wes Clark, on the other hand, was untested as a candidate. Thompson -- I remain puzzled as to why he just couldn't do better in 2008.

madawaskan said...

He actually will pull votes from Romney I suspect.

Wes Clark and/or Thompson-I'm not seeing it.

Basically in your formalities input-

sitting governor.

Viva la differences in about all of those equations.

madawaskan said...

*formularies*

damn auto correct.

TMink said...

Well, since Texas has created 2/3 of the new jobs in America over the last few years while he was governor, he should be a strong candidate.

Really, what matters more? Who beats Obama or that SOMEONE beats Obama?

Trey

edutcher said...

From what I know of him, I like what I see, but, like lyssa (and I agree with her), I'd like to see and hear more.

Andy R. said...

I guess he's just going to further divide the vote among the joke unserious candidates, which I imagine benefits Romney.

Considering that was written by a joke Lefty, the answer is,

No, it doesn't. If anything, it's going to make things harder for ol' Milton.

Scott M said...

Really, what matters more? Who beats Obama or that SOMEONE beats Obama?

As time wears on and things don't improve (which the Fed has pretty much telegraphed), that "someone" bar will get lower and lower.

TMink said...

Peter, I am in Nashville and talked to some people who worked with Thompson. The problem was he did not want the job enough to work hard for it.

They told me he would get a list of proposed campaign events and appearances and cross most of the off. He could not be bothered.

I really like his politics, and I was a huge supporter, but I think I was moer excited about his candidacy than he. And I mean really, he has a smoking hot wife, a cushy job and is wealthy. Why be president?

Trey

traditionalguy said...

C4...Palin is safe. She is not pursuing lucre on TV.

She is a winner who wants to use that ability to see a real Conservative win one for her middle class.

The middle class has had no friends in high places since Reagan.

Reagan understood the middle class and their guns and their religion, and felt no threat from them. He was one of them.

And Reagan started the GOP's evangelical outreach that has so divided the GOP Brahmins from the middle class GOP voters ever since.

And by the way C4, Rick Perry is a total disciple of the John Hagee version of Christian Zionism.

Now will you give Palin a second look?

cubanbob said...

Andy R. said...
Actually, maybe some of the commenters here can help with a question I have. Which of the joke Republican candidates know they are a joke and which are serious about their joke campaigns?

I mean, clearly Gingrich knows he's a joke, and Bachman seems to be serious about her joke campaign, but some of the rest have me confused.

Is Perry in the serious camp?

8/11/11 3:21 PM

Compared to Obama none are a joke.
Obama bin Biden now there is a comedy act.

Peter Hoh said...

madawaskan, the Clark/Thompson thing gets mentioned to point out that pundits sometimes are completely wrong. I don't think that Perry will be a Clark/Thompson, but there are times that a presumed strong candidate just fizzles on the campaign trail.

Trey, I remember you sharing that anecdote earlier. It's about the best explanation out there. It certainly seems to fit what happened.

I think Perry wants it. I think all of the announced candidates want it, but some of them are kidding themselves. Gingrich should have stayed on the Mediterranean cruise.

Romney and Pawlenty have been working for this moment since 2006 or so, but neither one seems right for the moment.

It's Perry's race. I'm not sure who he picks as VP, but I'm sure it won't be Bachmann.

madawaskan said...

Peter
Are pundits predicting Rick Perry in the same way?

I haven't seen that.

madawaskan said...

You'd think they would have waited till he announced.

Peter Hoh said...

No, pundits seem to like Perry's chances. I like Perry's chances. But early on, I thought Thompson was going to be the nominee in 2008.

The fact that someone seems like a strong candidate isn't enough to determine that they will be a strong candidate.

On the other hand, it was fairly easy to see that Giuliani was going to have a hard time turning his pre-primary buzz into a nomination.

B said...

I'm not sure why so many commenters think that Perry displaying his faith is a downside.

People who see it as an issue - the 'sophisticated' crowd - aren't going to vote for him under any circumstances. They do not determine elections. Independents, republicans, and democrats who self-identify as conservative or even moderate aren't going to see it as a downside. More likely as a plus.

President Bush made no bones about his deeply held faith and neither did his father when he was in the Oval office. I don't recall it being a downside in any of those 4 presidential elections.

Phil 3:14 said...

I'm not sure why so many commenters think that Perry displaying his faith is a downside.

Its an easy target. but as already mentioned it didn't prevent Carter, Bush I, Clinton or Bush II.


And jobs will drown out a lot of the bitching about his faith.

So what’s our (latest) ruling on job creation?

The foundation’s claim that Texas "created more jobs than all other states combined" stands up — considering only those states that had net job gains over five years. That’s the methodology usually used to define job creation in public discourse.

Roger J. said...

no feelings either way--too early to tell who the republican nominee might be--but I gotta tell you--any republican will be better than the boy in the white house--(disclaimer: boy is not racial; only refers to an experienced callow youth)

madawaskan said...

Peter

Now if we could only figure out the Ames Iowa straw poll-I don't get why they put so much stock in it.

And no offense to Iowa but a small state that is so dependent on government subsidies-farming, ethanol-shouldn't have so much sway.

I don't think that it is representative enough to determine the candidate that wins the general-but -

*there it is*.

chickenlittle said...

@RogerJ: I learned just today that a "yob" means narcissistic boy.

Lance said...

Bring back Mitch Daniels!

Roger J. said...

Chickenlittle--now I understand--thanks for the insight!

As to Gov Perry--watch the journolister types and the white house personal destructors start on him--if they think he is a threat we should be seeing the politics of personal destruction start this weekend.

Now I still think Haley Barbour would have been a stellar president, but he was smart enough not put himself and his family through the meatgrinder of a national campaign.

A stray dog could do a better job that the NIC is doing. But thats just my opinion.

MadisonMan said...

A little too Christ-on-his-sleeve for me.

MadisonMan said...

President Bush made no bones about his deeply held faith and neither did his father when he was in the Oval office. I don't recall it being a downside in any of those 4 presidential elections.

My impression is that Perry is much moreso than the Bushes ever were.

Roger J. said...

So mad man--in a hypothetical between Obama and Perry you will use one's religion as a factor?

Obama and his church and Perry and his church? what side do you come down on?

Roger J. said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Steven said...

He seems like a middling governor of a terrific state.

Pretty much my opinion. But I don't see anybody better in the Republican field right now, either.

section9 said...

Yeesh, I just found out that Perry had his Johnnie Fontaine moment with George W. and the Bush Familia.

You can forget Perry as any kind of Reaganite. He got the laying on of hands from the Bush family. That makes him toxic to me.

I'd vote Ron Paul before I'd vote Perry now, so make mine Sarah Palin!

The rest of you Establishment RINO suckers can jump on the Perry bandwagon if you want, but I'll stick with Sarah. She's the only Reagan Conservative left.

Peter Hoh said...

madawaskan, here's a skeptical take on the straw poll from Arne Carlson:

On the face of it, the Ames Straw Poll would appear to be a slice of Americana with Iowans 18 years of age and older visiting the Iowa State Campus and casting their ballot for the candidate of their choice. One does not even need to be a Republican to participate.

But upon examination there emerges a much darker picture. It is not about an open nomination process but rather a shabby large-scale fundraiser for the state party disguised as an exercise in democracy. Look at the facts:

1-Candidates in order to participate purchase booths in the poll area for a minimum of $15,000. Ron Paul paid $31,000 for his better location.

2-People desirous of voting must pay $35 per ticket which entitles them to vote, hear the six Presidential candidates who paid, and enjoy a variety of foods and beverages.

3-the Iowa GOP brings in over $900,000 for sponsoring this event.

Further, candidates will buy those $35 tickets for their supporters and they will bus them into the event at no cost. But there is a huge cost to candidates. For instance, in 1999, George W. Bush and Steve Forbes spent over $2 million apiece on tickets and activities according to Conservapedia (http://www.conservapedia.com/Iowa_Straw_Poll). The same source reports that Romney spent up to $1,000 per voter in 2007.

Peter Hoh said...

Roger J upthread: "boy is not racial."

Glad you cleared that up. Do you want to add that disclaimer to your 5:17 comment, where you wrote:

A stray dog could do a better job that the NIC is doing.

Roger J. said...

Peter Hoh--what is it about my comment that you dont like?

you may be projecting here

but please be explicit-

Peter Hoh said...

Madawaskan, the Ames Straw Poll is all about getting early attention.

The straw poll doesn't really tell much. There are three requirements for winning: a good organization in Iowa, plenty of cash to throw at this event, and appeal to the party insiders who show up at this event.

Romney knows that he can't pass the third of those tests.

Bachmann can. Both she and Romney would like to make the run up to the primaries to be Bachmann vs. Romney.

Perry is pulling a cheap stunt -- but not that I fault him for it. He'll get a lot of attention for announcing on Saturday, but he will have avoided the possibility of coming in second in this staged event.

Roger J. said...

Well let me make this clear to you Peter--you seem to have caught the vapors over my postings--as I said I use the term "boy" to denote a callow and inexperienced person; and NIC refers, in my frame of reference to "Nincompoop in chief"

Now please tell me what your interpretations of what I said were?

I find your comments absolutely egregious and filled with your own bullshit--but do carry on--its a blog and you can spew your own crap.

Roger J. said...

Peter Hoh? Bueller?

Roger J. said...

OK enough of this game--clearly Peter Hoh cannot man up to his comments and prefers to engage in innuendo--had your chance Peter--

You lay the turd on the table but dont take responsibility for it. Cowardly at best. Craven at worst. doesnt say much good about your character.

somefeller said...

I don't underestimate Romney, but right now I'd suspect Perry will be the GOP nominee. He can bring together different parts of the coalition pretty well. But he hasn't been tested in a national race or been in this sort of spotlight before (the press in Texas isn't that challenging), so that may work against him. We'll find out soon enough.

One thing about his campaign may be helpful, in that it will make it clear that social conservatives may talk a good game about federalism and states rights, but in practice they have no real support for the concept for their pet issues.

Peter Hoh said...

Roger, it's called making supper and time for my family.

And you can pretend that "NIC" stands for Nincompoop in Chief all you want, but I'm not buying it.

Ralph L said...

he's yet another boomer. I was hoping we were done with them
The baby boom officially went through 1964, so O is a late boomer.

Roger J. said...

as I said peter--you are projecting

I told you what I meant and you dont buy it

your problem not mine

unless of course you passed the course in mind reading on the internet

ricpic said...

Perry had a call from God? God only calls me to bawl me out.

Roger J. said...

Peter Hoh: enjoy the evening with your family and when the dust settles, think about projecting your beliefs on to someone else--I dont think it is a stretch to believe you thought NIC referred to "nigger" in chief. as a matter of record I do not and have never used the word "nigger" I find it repulsive. But you, sir, I suspect filled in the blank in your little mind and assumed I was a racist lying bastard.

Enjoy your family time, and I hope you bring them better than their father's belief system

have a nice nite

Palladian said...

Doesn't seem to command a national station on his own merits.

Barack Obama!

Whether they are grifters or some other reason is really besides the point about how we shouldn't pretend the idea of these people talking about being president is fundamentally hilarious.

Barack Obama!

Joe said...

No doubt the Lefties will exploit Perry's religion as well as anything else they can dig up. But if you're trying to evaluate Perry instead of criticize him, don't sweat the religious aspect regardless of your own views. He'll talk about it, because he wants that vote and because it's a Texas thing. But he's not going to start an Inquisition.

I honestly don't know how good a president he would be, but of course he would be better than who we have now. Any of them would be.

As a Texan myself, I wonder whether the rest of the country will accept another candidate with a Texas twang. It doesn't bother me, but . . .

Palladian said...

No doubt the Lefties will exploit Perry's religion as well as anything else they can dig up.

Perry's already done an awful lot of the exploitation of religion himself.

Maybe it's just me, but politicians making a big show of their religious beliefs (or lack of them) grosses me out.

Put away the damn prayer book, stop with the nonsensical blathering at revival meetings, and explain what the hell you plan to do as the secular manager of the country.

somefeller said...

Speaking of wearing one's religion on one's sleeve, I mistyped this website's address as http://althouse.blogpsot.com and this is the website that came up. Clever URL writers.

madawaskan said...

Peter

Still catching up on comments but had to put this down from your link-

And then we have the attendance factor. Iowa has a registered voting population of approximately 2 million with the following breakdown: Democrat – 710,017, Republican – 607,567 and No Party – 772,725. The total number of people who participated in the Ames Straw Poll in 2007 was 14,302. That is approximately .7 percent of the eligible registered voting population in Iowa.

Aaaaaaarrrrrrgh!

***

OK back to reading the thread.

sydney said...

section 9 said: "You can forget Perry as any kind of Reaganite. He got the laying on of hands from the Bush family. That makes him toxic to me."

You are right. He is no Reaganite, but Bush III. A few years back he tried to force all teen girls in Texas to get Gardasil vaccines. Gardasil protects against HPV, a virus transmitted sexually that can increase the risk of cervical cancer. It isn't exactly the same public health pressing need as vaccinating against smallpox or whooping cough, so hard to fathom the heavy handed over-reach of government there. I don't trust him. He'll want to continue to over-regulate and mandate the country.

traditionalguy said...

Roger J...You are definitely a SOB.



Of course I only meant you are a Sweet Old Boy.

madawaskan said...

somefeller

Oh ya I've ended up on that site by accident plenty of times.

I blame El Typo.

Peter Hoh said...

Trad guy, thanks for that.

I suppose it's quite possible that Roger is a liberal troll.

Saint Croix said...

Sarah Palin is also announcing this month whether she is running or not. She's frickin' amazing, as far as I'm concerned.

The people who like Sarah Palin, really like her.

She is the Tea Party.

The question the Republicans need to figure out is whether they want a Tea Party nominee or not.

Perry is right-wing, and conservative, and would not be a bad nominee.

But he's not Tea Party.

And of the Tea Party candidates, Palin is the strongest, by far.

The question for Republicans to decide is whether we will go all-in on the Tea Party, or nominate somebody who is a far more typical Republican.

How bad is government right now, and how much reform do we need? That is the question.

Do we just need a typical Republican?

Then nominate Romney, or Pawlenty, or Perry. All of those guys qualify as typical Republicans. They are similar to the Speaker of our House, or our Senate Majority Leader.

So if you don't think our debt is much of a problem, nominate one of those guys. They will fit right in and do the normal thing of slowing our descent into bankruptcy.

Nominate them if you want to cut $6 trillion in spending in 2025, or some horseshit like that.

If you think we are in big, big trouble, then we should nominate a Tea Party person.

Sarah Palin is the strongest candidate out of the Tea Party movement. Hands down, no brainer.

chuck b. said...

"Maybe it's just me, but politicians making a big show of their religious beliefs (or lack of them) grosses me out."

Indeed. If I care about your religion (I DON'T), I'll look it up on Wikipedia. Talk about something else.

Still more than a year to go, but you can mark me down for some third party candidate next year.

Nichevo said...

section9 said...

Yeesh, I just found out that Perry had his Johnnie Fontaine moment with George W. and the Bush Familia.

8/11/11 5:28 PM

Data please? And it's "famiglia" if you're playing an Italian on the internets.

Roger,

There is a fairy well known acronym, HNIC. This is short for "Head [Negro] In Charge." I'm not positive its shades of meaning but there you are. (I suppose "ace boon coon" is also racist? Wherever I read it, ISTR it was meant affectionately.)

sydney,

HPV is a lamentable illness which seems to be extremely widespread these days. It is worth eradicating. Even if you raise your precious little girl to be cherry on her wedding day, odds are her hubby won't be and his odds of catching it are apparently pretty damn good.

Symptoms range from warts to infertility to cancer. I can see the other side of the argument but HPV is not a joke. I only wish it were available for boys as well. (Gummint paying for it may be another story of course and the price does seem high, but that's why I'm not a healthcare czar.)


MadMan,

GWB was well flogged for frank and sincere religiosity. You calling Perry worse is strong medicine. Can you back it up or should I assume it is a leftist ad hom?

St Croix,

If Palin runs I would crawl over broken glass to vote for her as I did in 2008 (McWho?). Brace yourself for the possibility that she may not get the nod, and who would be your second or even third choice?

If she doesn't run, I think she will look all the better in 2016 with more seasoning and maybe some more significant public position. If nothing else BO does not incent me to vote for another 40-something :> Frankly she is so effective where she is...for a far-out example would Rush be of better service as POTUS than as EIB host?

Whoever babbler,

Jeb Bush is running in 2016. Not now. Tongue back in mouth, mouth closed, breathe through your nose, please.

Nichevo said...

Oh, sorry Carol, I didn't know it was you. No, Jeb is running in 2016, he wouldn't like the risk of running against an incumbent.

TW: fordocar. Indeed, the Bushes are not a Chevy family.

Lyle said...

No apologies, but Rich Perry is not a good candidate. He's the Al Gore of Republicans... a superficial blowhard.

Bad choice for Republicans.

Lyle said...

Rich was a Freundian slip, I think.

Lem said...

The answer is @2 Excellent. Best person to enter the race so far.

(I have no idea who this Perry is)

Peter Hoh said...

Cobert is throwing his PAC money behind Rick Parry.

That's Parry, with an A, for America.

Peter Hoh said...

Saint Croix, has Palin definitely committed to announcing a decision this month?

Titus said...

He really really loves God and I think a National Prayer Day should be something we can all get behind.

He looks like he has sucked some cock though.

Saint Croix said...

Saint Croix, has Palin definitely committed to announcing a decision this month?

Yeah, I read that somewhere. It wasn't an explicit promise. More like, "You pretty much have to decide by August if you're running or not. I'm going to get together with my family and discuss it, and we'll decide then."

Announcement could come later, I guess. But she definitely mentioned the month "August."

Paddy O said...

Right now I'm really wishing that Palin had turned McCain down for the VP slot.

She would have stayed out of the limelight for the last four years, governing Alaska, and really would have been in a prime spot to take an easy lead had she continued to govern the way she did.

I honestly think, of all the candidates, she's the one with the best instincts and decision making skills, who can find a way to tap into the broader American psyche. But that VP run really trashed her public image among most people, and while she has definitely been influential in the national debate, having more experience as a governor would have been better.

Saint Croix said...

If Palin runs I would crawl over broken glass to vote for her as I did in 2008 (McWho?). Brace yourself for the possibility that she may not get the nod, and who would be your second or even third choice?

Honestly any Republican is better than B.O. Hard not to be.

I really do think the Republican nomination is like a fight between Boehner and Cantor.

Boehner says he's cutting trillions. Did he? (No).

Boehner plays golf with Obama and cuts deals with him. Cantor pisses Obama off and drives him out of the room.

So that's the question for Republicans. Do we need a Republican nominee who can cut deals with Pelosi, etc?

Or do we need a Republican who drives them batshit crazy?

Perry prays in public, which is a typical Republican move to get people to think you're a Christian. It may or may not be hypocrisy. But I'm so cynical right now I really don't care what you say or do in public. I want somebody authentic. I want somebody, when they say, "we cut trillions," they actually cut trillions.

I want Cantor, not Boehner.

I want Palin, not Perry (or Romney or T-Paw).

The problem with the other Tea Party candidates is that they all scream fringe to me. The press has tried mightily to push Palin out there, but it's not working.

If Palin doesn't run, then I got to make the decision on whether any of the other Tea Party candidates has a chance in hell. Sarah Palin clearly does.

And if McCain thinks she's a hobbit, he probably shouldn't have nominated her. Can you imagine calling Palin a hobbit? What a nimrod.

m stone said...

Don't dismiss people with faith so quickly just because your faith is wanting. Those of us who believe generally trust a leader who has a substantial worldview with a God at the top.

Saint Croix said...

Don't dismiss people with faith so quickly just because your faith is wanting. Those of us who believe generally trust a leader who has a substantial worldview with a God at the top.

Yeah, but the Bible warns us too about people who make a great show of their faith.

When times are bad, a lot of people do look to religion. You can mock those people (as B.O. did) or you can attempt to manipulate them for political gain (as some people do).

I hope Perry's not in tha latter category. I'm reserving judgment.

Peter Hoh said...

I thought the blogger lady was going to live-blog the GOP debate tonight.

Saint Croix said...

I just googled Rick Perry. Boy, the libs are already attacking him hard.

Or look at Romney. Already the left is sending in people to hector him at events. (Do you think that's spontaneous? Ha!)

Look what Newsweek did to Michelle Bachmann.

Whoever the Republican nominee is, they will be body-slammed in the press and attacked as a nutjob.

Count on it.

I mean, these are the people who think Scott Walker is a Nazi.

This idea that we can nominate a "safe" Republican that will be spared this ugly and divisive fight, no way.

Don't you know Paul Ryan pushes little old ladies off cliffs?

There is no safe Republican. Forget it.

This is going to be a fight.

Luther said...

I think he's a jerk, living off his jawline.

I don't give a fuck anymore.

We're too far gone, and 'I'm' too far gone to give a damn.

You folks have fun debating the nuance of your end.

Canuck said...

my prediction:

next President of the USA

Matt said...

Titus @ 8/11/11 8:28 PM

Your post is one of the reasons I like to visit this blog. Lol....

JAL said...

One thing going for Palin is that the left shot themselves in the foot with that email fiasco.

I mean -- if they were going to find dirt beyond the Ground Hog Day "I can see Russia from my porch" cr*p -- that was the time.

What did we get? "Gee -- she worked hard as governor."

And now?

Crickets.

If the economy gets any screwier Palin showing us she balances her checkbook might be enough. The present POTUS sure can't.

JAL said...

What about the Thaddeus McCotter guy?

Kirby Olson said...

Ron Paul has surprising idea,but his hands visibly shook.

Cain looked good but I didn't know if he was Able.

Pawlenty and Bachman should have a squirt gun fight off camera and get over the turf war.

Huntsman and Newt seemed beside the point.

Romney! He's a businessman with gubernatorial experience. That's the right combination.

Saint Croix said...

I thought the blogger lady was going to live-blog the GOP debate tonight.

If Palin was in it, she would be!

They're blogging it over at Pajamas. People are saying Newt was on fire.

Yikes! Not my guy.

Palladian said...

They're blogging it over at Pajamas. People are saying Newt was on fire.

Hopefully nobody put him out.

Lucius said...

@Saint Croix: Jesus, you can drive Pelosi and her crew batshit crazy all you want, but at the end of the day as long as her constituents and her cronies' constituents keep sending them back to DC *you still have to make a deal* with them!

Some of this magical thinking is mirroring the Obama progressives of '07-09.

It's like some Tiger Beat thing where every new one-hit wonder to get on stage gets swooned over, till the next one takes a nod.

If John Thune announced next week he's in, does he get to be the Messiah for a week too?

Maybe Thune should run, btw.

What does Perry know about running the world? "Beats Obama" isn't a morally sufficient argument here. There's gonna be a primary and you get to pick teams. Right now we can still drool over 'drafting' so and so.

So what in god's name is so great about Rick Perry that he's the new Greatest Statesman Ever, The One, The Saviour?

Looks an awful lot like Josh Brolin's caricature of Dubya to me.

Saint Croix said...

Lucious, I'm a Palin man. Don't know who you're talking to, it's not me.

My mind's open on Perry, I don't really know him. My sense of him is that he's not really a Tea Party guy. He's Texan so I'm sure he's to the right of Romney, but that's like saying Bush is to the right of McCain.

Lucius said...

@Saint Croix: Fair enough, vis-a-vis Perry. And Palin is vastly more satisfying.

But you did draw a colorful distinction (which speaks articulately for a swatch of opinion in these parts) that the GOP nom fight is between, in so many words, a status quo RINO who puts a bandaid on a gunshot wound, versus somebody more extreme who would really make life wretched for progressive Dems (drive them batshit, as you put it).

And what I want to emphasize is: in our two-party democracy, those Progs are going to get to tug their end of the rope as hard as they like too. And a bunch of them will always be around (cf Wisconsin).

Cutting a solid $6 trillion at this point wouldn't just be shaving for drill. It's not easy getting anywhere near there as it is. It would go a ways to restoring long-term sanity.

If you wanna play real-life Budget Hero 2 and get the country fixed past 2036, you're gonna have to chop off some heads. Literally.

Saint Croix said...

Cutting a solid $6 trillion at this point

Yeah, but that's not what I said. I was referencing the Congressional practice of making huge future cuts, while not cutting anything this year or next.

It's completely dishonest.

When they cut $2 trillion, what they mean is the debt is going up $8 trillion over the next 10 years, instead of $10 trillion.

Increasing our debt by $8 trillion dollars!

And Boehner is patting himself on the back?

The baseline is that spending doesn't grow at all, and then you talk from that baseline.

I don't object to the deal so much. What I object to is the pretense, the lie, that they did anything about our debt problems at all. They did not.

I don't want to vote for anybody who just assumes we can add trillions of dollars of more debt. And too many Republicans are on board this runaway train.

Joanna said...

No doubt the Lefties will exploit Perry's religion

Will they? If they do, that means Rev Wright can legitimately be dragged out of the closet...

Kirk Parker said...

"no matter how good he seems in theory... think Wes Clark"

Wow, that's some amazing theory you've got there!

Kirk Parker said...

Palladian @ 11:16pm:

LOL!

Beldar said...

@ Lyssa: You wrote,

"... I still feel like I need to know more about him. I know he's a former Dem (although Blue Dog, from what I understand. I'd like to know more about his conversion ...."

This is an excellent question. As a Texas conservative and fellow west Texas native, I've watched Perry's entire career with interest. As I wrote on my blog recently,

"Hilary Hylton [in, of all remarkable places, TIME,] has a nicely detailed and perceptive examination of Perry's history [as a Democrat, including his service as Texas manager of Al] Gore['s 1988 campaign for the Dem presidential nomination]. The Perry campaign should be absolutely thrilled with this essay, since it ends up not only 'pulling the tooth' before it could be used to bite Perry, but indeed it presents a compelling tale of Perry's conversion to the GOP as part of a contemporaneous and much larger shift to the GOP throughout Texas."

The post in which I made that comment was my reaction to a bizarre and counter-factual claim by a pollster that Perry "never really has done all that well in Texas." Whatever else one may say, one cannot reasonably deny that Perry has been consistently and convincingly successful in winning elections in Texas.

Steve Koch said...

My candidate is the guy or gal most likely to beat Obama. Those on the right who want a 3rd party candidate if the GOP nominee is not ideologically pure enough, should remember 1992. In 1992 Ross Perot siphoned off enough votes from Bush I to let Clinton slip in with less than 50% of the vote.

supergirl9632 said...

RICK PERRY IS A RINO!!!!! HE JUST PASSED THE DREAM ACT IN TX.