Posted on 12/15/2011 8:09:38 AM PST by wolfman23601
At this stage, that seems unlikely. But Politico is reporting that internal polls from both Mr. Perry and Mitt Romney find significant slippage in Newt Gingrich's Iowa standing. And Perry is one of the beneficiaries. "I believe [Ron] Paul can trip up Newt here, and that's great news for Romney because Newt is done if that happens," one Iowa caucus-watcher told Politico. "Watch Rick Perry. He's going for a top-three finish, and that could be to Romney's expense." How well do you know Rick Perry? Take our quiz Perry's strategy amounts to betting everything on Iowa, where he's making a major push, despite being stuck in the low double digits in the polls. His controversial antigay-rights ad – which went viral, mostly for negative reasons – actually seems to be helping him there. As is Mr. Paul's all-out assault on Mr. Gingrich. (And just in case you're not paying enough attention, Perry is one of those arguing he's due for a bounce. His campaign just released an ad titled, yes, "Momentum," that weaves together debate clips, quotes from pundits, and a clip of wild horses galloping to argue that's just what his campaign has.) On Wednesday, Perry launched an Iowa bus tour in Council Bluffs, labeling himself "a conservative fighter" as he prepared to swing through more than 40 cities in two weeks. It's hard to imagine Perry's bus tour doing more than giving him a modest rise in the polls, but that may be all that's needed to shake up an already shaken Republican primary race.
(Excerpt) Read more at csmonitor.com ...
Among my best friends, we're all over the place. We're Perry, Santorum and Newt. Unless something unforseen comes along, I don't see any of us changing.
The attacks on Newt are intense. The good news is that if Paul is rising to the top, he now can get his anal exam, too.
How the heck do you know this? You don't. We have all these experts all pretending they KNOW what is going to happen--they don't. None of us do. I'd like to think that any one of our people would destroy Obama.
Perry has done that.
When we one is a perpetual ass, anal exams are constant, open and notorious. Paul has a perpetual latex glove dangling from his colon, he doesn't hide his goofiness and doesn't need to rise to the top to expose his innards.
>>Perry seems like a super nice guy and all around good and moral man. However, he will get slaughtered in the general.<<
Because?
That’s a rather courageous thing for a presidential candidate to say. Corn subsidies have always been something of a third rail when it comes to getting those western votes.
Because he will look like a bumbling imbecile when Obama debates him, 30 second brain farts are going to make a lasting negative impression.
ROLOL, what kind of brain fart will perry have in the next debate. You could start a game board on when it will happen.
>>Among my best friends, we’re all over the place. We’re Perry, Santorum and Newt. Unless something unforseen comes along, I don’t see any of us changing.<<
How about if they meet Perry on his bus tour and actually are personally impressed by him.
I campaigned as a Republican when Clinton was running for election. He got off a bus, met one of my Republican campaign workers, and that was it. She stopped helping out in her area, and could even have voted for him in the end. From what I hear, Perry is an extremely effective retail politician.
Also, I think the fact that the story of his recovering from back surgery during the early debates is cropping up only now will help him quite a bit. It gives him some cover for his performance at the time, and it speaks well of him that he didn’t use it as an excuse at the time, but just accepted the outcome and then worked on his weakness. The better he does in upcoming debates, the more people will forgive his earlier performance.
>>Because he will look like a bumbling imbecile when Obama debates him, 30 second brain farts are going to make a lasting negative impression.<<
I love the way we’re trying to choose a nominee based on how they debate. The purpose of a political debate is to learn where candidates stand on the issues, not how they articulate those issues.
Granted, a flub can set you back...a lot...but if we run a conservative versus Obama, the next election isn’t going to be determined by the classiest debater; it’s going to be determined by whether this country still has more conservative-leaning voters than liberal-leaning ones. My money is on the former, by the way.
Obama could obfuscate in 2008; today we know his positions, regardless of what he says in debate.
And for those who think Gingrich will bury Obama in a debate, if that were actually true, what makes you think Obama would ever consent to debating him? Instead, he’ll just pick him apart by comparing his present vs. past positions, letting the MSM do most of his work for him.
Neither Romney nor Gingrich are conservative at the root. Nominating either is likely to prove to be a mistake because we might not win even if we do win, and furthermore, we might not win at all.
Please six months of reruns of getting help from Ron Paul on what departments he would close. End of game. The little women was the one that told me the new perry joke by Leno last night, I thought is was really funny.
>>Please six months of reruns of getting help from Ron Paul on what departments he would close. End of game.<<
Okay, and by that logic, six months of “57 states with one more to visit” would defeat Obama, right? Get real. We’re picking the President of the United States, not a game show participant.
For 3 major Debates in a row, Perry branded that image into the minds of the voters. You know as well as I do, that there is not even a remote chance that Perry can turn that image around. Most Americans fear incompetent politicians. If you doubt that, just ask Jerry Ford, Carter, George HW Bush and McCain.
I stopped reading after that, as much as you think that articulation doesn't matter, it does, it makes and breaks a campaign as much as you think the contrary. That's just ONE problem with Perry, his stances on immigration and penchant for crony capitalism is another matter.
Very.
In Iowa, Newt chose to embrace the ethanol subsidies.
You ask why he cannot win I tell you, and you answer with a cheer leading demonstration for obummer. Republican voters are not democraps, what moves them is not the same as a democrap, get use to it.
Bingo.
The Cult of Rick... I mentioned on another thread that these buffoons are like the Obama supporters of 2008, rabid, foaming at the mouth cultists.
>>You know as well as I do, that there is not even a remote chance that Perry can turn that image around.<<
Yes, like most of us thought Gingrich was toast soon after he opened his campaign. Even his own campaign workers deserted him for what were clearly “stupid” comments.
But we forgive Gingrich, who truly does come with some serious baggage related to issues important to us (Freddie Mac, 2nd Amendment, Cap and Trade) and yet we won’t forgive Perry for some sub-par debate performances, even though he’s clearly improving and stands clearly on the side of the 2nd Amendment, downsizing DC, and calling global warming for the scam it is.
So, yes, I think there is more than a “remote chance” that Perry could do well in Iowa. At least we’ll know the answer in just a few weeks.
Your question may have been rhetorical - not requiring an answer.
But in case it's not, my answer to that is that independents don't want to see another four years of Obama, either. Also, Perry is not Bush. His life story is much different.
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.