Posted on 12/09/2011 7:32:01 AM PST by SeekAndFind
CBN’s David Brody gets the scoop on Michele Bachmann’s response to the invitation to the Donald Trump forum on December 27th in Iowa. Apparently, she has something better to do one week before the caucuses than ring-kissing:
Michele Bachmann’s campaign tells The Brody File that she will NOT attend the Newsmax debate moderated by Donald Trump on December 27th. Mitt Romney, Rick Perry, Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman have also declined. That leaves Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum as the only ones who have said they will attend. A Lincoln/Douglas debate anyone?
In order to have a Lincoln/Douglas style debate, Trump would have to keep his mouth shut. Odds on that? You’re better off betting that Buddy Roemer wins Iowa in four weeks.
Brody thinks that Bachmann might be working on an upset:
The Brody File has said that Bachmann’s organizational strength among pastors and homeschoolers gives her the real shot at doing very well in Iowa.
And let’s face it — if that’s the demographic she’s aiming to get into her corner, Bachmann won’t convince them by cavorting with Donald Trump, of all people. With Romney not terribly popular among social conservatives and Gingrich carrying a hefty amount of personal baggage in this area, Bachmann could well make some inroads in her native state by hewing to social-conservative positions and venues. Rick Perry has already reached the same conclusion, making overt arguments along faith-based themes in Iowa. Again, Trump isn’t exactly a model for that argument.
So the question now becomes this: will Gingrich and Santorum stick to their commitment to Trump, or will they suddenly find something else to do on the 27th? I’m betting that they find some way to distance themselves from this event, and that it gets quietly forgotten.
“What again that accomplish, besides an opportunity for Trump to glorify himself?”
It accomplished the proffer of a digitally forged document as Obama’s best defense. It is not Trump’s fault that officeholders and officials from both parties willfully ignore that the present charade is a charade.
Wondering since Santorum is in ...if Newt and Santorum will form a friendship. So far, I haven’t heard Santorum slamming the other candidates much. A Trump endorsement would help in New York.
And all the other debates were put on by.......uh.....organizations like CNN, CNBC,......
Did you have a problem with any of those?
This debate is sponsored by News Max, and THIS is the one you object to? Who's side are you on, anyway?
I agree, anyone who is unwilling to be in a debate moderated by Trump has officially labeled themselves part of the establishment that is against anyone but them running things.
I will stand behind NewsMax before i stand behind CNBC, MSNBC, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, or any other MSM outlet holding a debate that is moderated by leftists cronies who’s only aim is to make republicans look stupid.
The moderators from CNN/ABC/NBC/CBS/PBS turn our debates into a media circus, and our response is to up the ante by hiring a genuine Ringmaster?
It solidifies the impression that we're more interested in the entertainment value of the debates rather than the substance.
Why not have The Mythbusters sponsor a debate...at least there would be actual explosions.
Huckabee provided an excellent blueprint for vetting candidates on relevant issues. Let's see who follows.
“She’s running from the media. We don’t need any... who hide under their desks when a liberal reporter walks into the room.”
Interesting you should say that. Lately I’ve noticed the only time(s) I can even tolerate listening to Bachmann is when she’s being interviewed in a very friendly environment, i.e., Hannity or Levin. She comes across as articulate, calm, civil.
Add opponents to the mix and she becomes hysterical in the traditional use of the word. She seems to feel threatened at a very basic level and just lashes out irrationally. And that’s with the guys on her side of the aisle. Not presidential at all.
The POTUS can’t choose who s/he interacts with, and can’t change personality and behavior based on who the individual might be. MB may be good on paper, or in a supportive environment, but in the least challenging circumstances (a debate with fellow Republicans) she fails abysmally.
IMHO...
The sad part about her being Renfield is that even if she drops out and endorses Mittens, I don’t think her followers are going to go for that. Her’s are definitely more Tea party followers and will go to Perry or Newt or Santorum.
Bachmann not getting herself involved with this Jerry Springer like character (Trump) is a HUGE plus in my view.
Remember Trump's phony POTUS run and all the suckers that bought into it (and him) like rats following the leader off the cliff? What did your private investigators find that you claimed was conclusive Don??
This is sponsored by NewsMax. Trump is only the moderator.
“Who’s side are you on, anyway?”
Oh, please...
Go back.. look at my posts... then get back.
It's not even so much the debate as it is to the damned fealty to Trump! What part of that isn't being understood here???
Thank you.
Trump is sizing them up because he's considering running on a third-party ticket. It stinks out loud, folks!
Yes, I fully understand that. But WERE he alive, the comparison to Trump couldn't be more false.
He's trying to scare politicians on our side from taking big money (like the democrats get from unions) from non union businesses for fear of being exposed as "evil rich guy" sympathetic, or "one of them."
Trump is one of those "demons". That's why the other candidates are running away from him. Oboma has easily manipulated the other candidates. If he can get to them this easily, they're toast if they go up against him in a presidential election.
Only two are standing up to Obomas Alinski tactic.
Bachmann is my ideological favorite, even more pure than Sarah Palin by maybe 10-15%
And she is very nice to look at it.
But she just doesn’t have “it”.
Newt does.
Sarah does.
Obama does..for his side.
Magnus did. Cheney did but never got to fully use it given a bad luck health card.
FDR had it. Clinton had it..perversely. Lincoln had it..whoops my dead CSA kin just rolled over..lol...
George Washington had it as did Jefferson and Franklin.
Jim DeMint has it. Haley Barbour has it. I think Ryan does.
Hitler grotesquely had it as did stellar Winston Churchill.
It’s an intangible. It’s like the old EF Hutton commerical. When you speak, all heads turn and get quiet and listen because you project to folks that they should pay attention to you.
My own father had it..as a leader.
It’s just a thing. It’s like watching Lee Marvin in a war movie. It looks real because it is real....
When Michelle stood on that stage she never stood out and seemed diminished...not because she is not worthy but she lacked that intangible.
Newt with all his flaws will never appear ineffective, lost for words, without purpose or scared. That does help.
If Ronald Reagan were alive today, would candidates who sought out his advice, counsel and wisdom be considered to be either feeding his or their own, ‘ego trips’?
<><><<
No, they would be talking with the incredibly successful elder statesman of the Republican party. Something Trump ain’t ever gonna be.
If she drops out and endorses Mitt she’ll be exposed as a fraud who used the tea Party and conservatives to further her own selfish agenda. That would make it very hard for her to keep her seat in Cingress as she may draw a legitimate Tea Party conservative in the primary.
You are right. I had not noticed that but you are on to something about her two public faces. I hate what she has done to herself in this campaign. She has gone from being an inspiring legislator to an annoying distraction. It started with Rollins, and has only gotten worse.
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.