Posted on 06/11/2011 1:36:32 PM PDT by Brices Crossroads
While I freely concede that both Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry have a right to run for President, it is impossible to overlook the fact that their recent benefactress, Sarah Palin, is rolling out her own Presidential campaign at the same time. This would not generally be extraordinary. In politics, alliances are sometimes (although not regularly) forged and broken. However, in my forty years or so of close political observation, I cannot remember an analogous situation in which the beneficiaries of one politician turn on their benefactor (especially a benefactor as conspicuous as Palin) so shortly after having obtained and used the benefactor's endorsement and appearances to secure both campaign cash and votes. In fact, not since Judas hustled away to the Chief Priests from the Last Supper has there been such a propinquity between the favor and the betrayal. I predict that this disloyalty, spotlighted by the freshness of the favors spent upon these two by Palin, will sour the stomachs of GOP primary voters who tend to place more emphasis on character, which is to say: loyalty. Americans despise disloyalty. Disloyalty and its associated character flaws are a tragedy in a human being, but they are a catastrophe in a President. The association, in the American psyche, of disloyalty and the traitor, Benedict Arnold, bespeaks the level of national revulsion with this particularly poisonous character flaw.
Michele Bachmann, by all accounts, faced a tough reelection fight against State Senator Tarryl Clark, a more attractive and far better financed ($4 million war chest) candidate than she had faced in in 2008, when she narrowly beat lightly regarded and under-financed lobbyist Elwyn Tinkenberg by less than 3% of the vote. At Bachmann's request, Palin rode to her rescue early, appearing on her behalf at a packed rally of over 10,000 in Minneapolis on April 8, 2010, which was nationally televised on Sean Hannity's FOX program. Bachmann parlayed Palin's endorsement and high profile support into a fund raising bonanza of $13.4 million, which she used to swamp Clark. Indeed, the lopsided money advantage freed her to travel around the country campaigning for others and posing as the real TEA party heavyweight. Armed with this Palin-generated largesse, she easily beat Clark by 12%, the largest margin of victory in her career, including her two state Senate Races. Now she is using the balance of these "thirty pieces of silver" to pay odious characters like Ed Rollins to smear Sarah Palin as "not serious" and too lazy to "gain substance" in contrast to Bachmann, who "ha[s] worked hard" and been "a leader of the TEA party". Such treachery, which is both frank and fresh, makes me and every fair-minded person (whether pro- Palin or neutral) sick to our collective stomachs.
Rick Perry similarly faced a very competitive GOP primary against a sitting U.S. Senator, who is more liberal than he, and a solid conservative, Deb Medina, who was very popular with conservatives in Texas and nationally. In essence, he was squeezed from both directions, a challenge on the left and on the right. As she did with Bachmann, Palin went to Perry's aid early and often, endorsing him in the summer of 2009, ahead of the March 2010 primary. The first poll of Perry (by Rasmussen on September 16, 2009), which included both Hutchison and Medina, showed Hutchison pulling ahead of Perry 40-38, with Medina in single digits at 3%.
Perry crowed ad nauseam about Palin's endorsement in order to prevent Medina from gaining real traction and eclipsing him among conservatives. At the time of the endorsement, Perry had this to say about the value of Governor Palin's endorsement and their warm personal friendship:
'Facing a tough Republican primary fight next year in his bid for a third term, Gov. Rick Perry of Texas is brandishing the heavy artillery: Sarah Palin's endorsement of his campaign."If there's a bigger endorsement in the Republican universe, I don't know who it is than Sarah," he declared in a telephone interview over the weekend. He described the Alaska governor and 2008 vice presidential nominee as a "close personal friend" who knows my heart."'
As Matt Lewis observed in the article, "Palin's nod is indeed an asset for Perry, helping him cement his appeal to social conservatives in the Lone Star State." While Perry never again fell behind, even Palin's endorsement could not totally blunt the momentum for Deb Medina, who continued to rise in the polls, reaching a high point of 24% on February 7, 2010, three weeks before the primary, and reducing Perry's showing to 39% (Hutchison had 28%). Enter Palin again. She appeared at a nationally televised rally in Houston that drew over 8000 people on Super Bowl Sunday, February 8, 2010. After the rally, Medina never again broke 20 in a poll.
With Palin's conspicuous and staunch support, Perry barely beat back the challengers in March 2 primary, winning 51% to 30% for Hutchison and 19% for Medina. Even with Palin's support, Medina nearly forced a runoff, so great was conservative revulsion with Perry in Texas. Had Palin backed Medina as strongly as she backed Perry, it is quite possible that Medina and Hutchison would have been in a run off, and Perry would have been odd man out. Had Palin done nothing for Perry, it is a foregone conclusion that he would have faced a tough runoff. In other words, Perry owes Palin his political hide.
As I said at the outset of this article, both Perry and Bachmann are free to run for President or any other office for which they are constitutionally qualified. The First Amendment however also grants observers the right to express themselves on both the timing and the circumstances of their putative candidacies as well as their previous interaction with "close personal friends" who come to their aid. In assessing both Perry and Bachmann, conservative voters should ask themselves the following question: "In light of how these two have conducted themselves toward Sarah Palin in the last year or so, do you trust either of them---should they be elected--not to double cross you?"
I believe that question answers itself.
Brice,
I sympathize with what you are saying, but let’s be clear about something.
Palin has been too opaque as to her intentions. When she plays the “I don’t need a title to serve” game, that gives others an opening.
This is Palin’s own damn fault. Now she’s going to have to fight these people for bandwidth, because she jinked around about ramping up her game.
Palin has no one to blame but herself, and let’s be clear, both Perry and Bachmann have the right to compete.
Bachmann is a Potemkin villiage candidate who is working for Romney, but she has the right to compete.
Best,
Chris
Bachmann has indicated she is running. Is she supposed to wait for Palin? It is time for Palin to make a move if she's going to run. The others have no reason to wait.
You’re wanting another four years of Obama, huh?
Here’s our problem: Perry could never convince himself to believe we were all voting for Sarah and not McCramp. He also probably doesn’t believe what Sarah did last November.
And he’s not likely to settle for anybody’s VP.
He has two choices: take the RINO Establishment up on destroying Sarah (no cabinet posts or otherwise) in exchange for a POTUS shoo-in, knowing he
can destroy zero by 5 points WITHOUT Sarah’s support, or include her as a matter of principle, and courtesy to conservatives.
The Establishment wants Sarah gone, vaporized, regardless of what her base is willing to do to keep her relevant.
Sarah loves the country too much to go third-party and put zero back in. She may decide Kingmaker is the way to go. If the Establishmnt can keep the MSM silent about certain parts of his past, he’s got her checkmated already.
Upon further thought, I think Perry want pick Cain for VP, although I doubt Cain’d take him up on it. Not that I expect Cain to get past Florida.
Between the three of them; I would vote for Sarah without hesitation.
On KOAI (San Antonio) they were reporting last week that Perry would not run if Palin ran. I assume they based this on SOMETHING.
Part of what we do on these forums is to project ahead. I don’t need to wait until any of them has declared in order to comment. If anyone thinks that the activities of last year and the scenarios I posit (which is far from improbable, since all three have made unmistakable moves toward running recently) reflect well on Perry or Bachmann, then by all means vote for them. I merely identify what Palin did for them in the very recent past and speculate that, if they run (which I said, but won’t repeat again, they have a right to do), it will reflect poorly on their character.
As for Palin’s timing, that has no effect on the scenario. Maybe they think she is not running. She goes on the bus tour. She is releasing the epic film to set the record straight on her governorship. She is doing it first in Iowa, NH and south Carolina. I think that is pretty good evidence that she is. Bachmann has said she will not be deterred if Palin enters the race. Perry’s people have walked back his assertion that he would only run “if she didn’t”. So the assumptions I make are not at all off the wall.
I never said Perry said anything negative about Palin. Phil Crane never said anything negative about Ronald Reagan. His challenge to Reagan in 1980 left him held in contempt by Reagan and his men as a traitor. And that is a documented fact. I contend that people may well draw the same conclusions about Bachmann and Perry (if they run)
Not a truther, just didn’t belive the government’s story.
As any rational person would.
No, that's divisive hype, mostly driven by Paulbots and Obama trolls, don't fall for it.
Beyond that, Bachmann made a boneheaded move bringing in Rollins. If she hasn't dumped him already, she should.
Perry and Palin could actually make a formidable team, such an eventuality wouldn't bother me...
Followed your story a bit until you claimed how Debbie Medina was the darling of Texas Cobnservatives.
FYI, Miss Deb was a “shooting Star” or “flash in the pan” and did get a lot of short term attention UNTIL she opened her mouth and showed us all that Libertarian Deb was no more than a ronpaul type nutcase. Her shooting star was just like the ones we can see on any beautiful Texas night, gone in an instant.
“Now she’s going to have to fight these people for bandwidth,”
You couldn’t be more wrong. Palin will completely overshadow the both of them. That is so self evident that it almost doesn’t need to be said.
Take a look at their facebook numbers.
Palin: approaching 3.2 million
Bachmann: 188,000
Perry: 56,000.
Give me a break.
Dude, I heard the Glenn Beck radio interview live with my own ears. I knew immediately that she was toast, and rightfully so. It wasn’t the “government’s story,” it was what happened in front if our eyes on 9/11.
I appreciate your POV, but I think, in the end, it won’t matter. Let them run.
It will take $100 million to win the nomination. Sarah Palin can afford to wait a few months to get in. Even if Bachmann and Perry raise $10 million/month each, once Palin enters, she’ll not only swamp them donation-wise, their funding will precipitously dry up from that point going forward. Not only that, but once Palin makes inroads into the race, she’ll make inroads with their supporters, as well.
Of the candidates left in the race, I only see two of them raising $100 million for the primary. One can primarily self-finance that amount, the other is Sarah Palin.
Are you actually saying that the rest of the GOP candidates should wait it out to see if Palin's running? Seriously?
Also, what's this "benefactress" bs? Did Perry and Bachman never win election without Palin's endorsement?
Where do you get this immature thinking from?
“I appreciate your POV, but I think, in the end, it won’t matter. Let them run.”
I agree. She will swamp them both. But if they run, this question is going to be lurking out there in the voter’
s minds, in spite of what the usual trolls on FR say.
Rational people are the ones who see passenger jets fly into buildings and understand the logic behind those buildings collapsing. The government simply confirmed what most of us saw with our own eyes. It is the irrational that see nefarious plots where non exist.
It does to some Palinistas.
Pardon me, please, for holding my fire. I am waiting for more trolls to show up. Sadly, thus far, even some good loyal supporters have missed your point. Rick Perry is well aware that he is being drafted as part of the Stop Sarah campaign by the desperate GOP-E. It wil be interesting to see how his ambition plays this out. Heretofore, he’s never had any presidential *fire-in-his-belly*. I am certain he will contact Sarah Palin and we already know that she’s for competition.
What if Palin is not running, only running interference?
What if she's keeping the media on her "not a campaign because I haven't announced" campaign, building support in a general sense for conservative values and, in the end she'll publicly endorse one or both of these two?
Personally, I'm firmly in the camp that loves Sarah Palin and all she stands for but... I believe she's far more valuable as a king maker rather than a candidate.
I can see this playing out differently than has been described here and I hope the players involved are truly that strategic.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.