River wrote:At this point in 2007, the media had declared it a race between Hillary Clinton and some Republican I can't remember. Not McCain though. McCain was supposedly some sort of dark horse. He wasn't going to get anywhere.
Anyone remember how that turned out?'
Giuliani v. Hillary, a reprise of their senate race.
But Giuliani dropped out after figuring out that his program of collecting no delegates would be a losing strategy, and Hillary led in superdelegates but not in delegates chosen by the voters.
It was Romney who won the poll last time.
To be fair, it was Hillary's race until Obama entered.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen."
-- Samuel Adams
Michelle Bachmann has won the Ames Straw Poll in Iowa, with 4,833 votes. Coming in a close second was Dr. Ron Paul with 4,671. Lagging further behind was Tim Pawlenty, the former Minnesota governor, with 2,293. Pawlenty put a lot of effort into this, and his disappointing placing puts great doubt on the viability of his campaign.
Mitt Romney was on the ballot, but did not actively campaign, and had only 567 votes. Interestingly, Rick Perry was not on the ballot, only declared that he was running yesterday, and still received more write-in votes than Romney got, with 718.
With all due respect to C_G, I don't think that Rep. Paul has any real chance to win the nomination, but his showing demonstrates that he is likely to have some significant influence on the process. But it is appearing more and more likely that it will be a three-way race between Bachmann, Perry, and Romney. Romney's hope is that the other two will split the social conservative and Tea Party votes, leaving a clear path for him to get the nomination. I doubt it will be that simple, but it might turn out that way. I would still put my money on Perry (not that I have any interest in betting on the outcome).
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
I heard on the news this morning that Perry is definately in. I'm not sure how much pull on the Tea Party he has, though. Some seem to like him and some may be willing to back him for pragmatic reasons but plenty of others seem to view him as a RINO (along with practically every other Republican who has held a position of executive responsibility for long enough to have had to make hard decisions). The TP seems split between Palin, Bachmann and Cain. Based on this, they may end up uniting behind Bachmann.
Perry was an early Tea Party supporter. Cain is unlikely at this point to be much of a factor, and Palin isn't running.
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
I hope so, because I really don't think there is any way that she could win the general election. Realistically, though, I think the chances are very, very low, particulalry with Perry now in the race.
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
Voronwë the Faithful wrote:I hope so, because I really don't think there is any way that she could win the general election. Realistically, though, I think the chances are very, very low, particulalry with Perry now in the race.
Well, I can see your point about her not winning but I also think it would be a very ugly and divisive campaign. Mr. Perry doesn't appeal to me any more than she did, he's just a man version of her. But I'm not an American and can't vote, so it's all just philosophical to me.
Voronwë the Faithful wrote:Realistically, though, I think the chances are very, very low, particulalry with Perry now in the race.
Jesus: Whenever you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, because they love to pray while standing in synagogues and on street corners so that people can see them. Truly I say to you, they have their reward. But whenever you pray, go into your room, close the door, and pray to your Father in secret. And your Father, who sees in secret, will reward you.
Rick Perry: *claims his reward*
I won't just survive
Oh, you will see me thrive
Can't write my story
I'm beyond the archetype
I won't just conform
No matter how you shake my core
'Cause my roots, they run deep, oh
When, when the fire's at my feet again
And the vultures all start circling
They're whispering, "You're out of time,"
But still I rise
This is no mistake, no accident
When you think the final nail is in, think again
Don't be surprised, I will still rise
Voronwë the Faithful wrote:I hope so, because I really don't think there is any way that she could win the general election. Realistically, though, I think the chances are very, very low, particulalry with Perry now in the race.
I always advise that you choose the lest bad of all the primary candidates and hope that one wins the primary, because there is always a chance that the winner of the primary will will the general election. The fates are mischievous, and love to half-grant requests. So if you say "I hope Bachmann wins because Obama can beat her" you set yourself up. I never count on luck, and always prepare for the worst. It's the only reason I've done as well as I have, because luck never works for me.
Now I don't think Perry's going anywhere. Those who have actually declared by now have been building up bases of support and campaign structure. Perry is the latest in a long line of "we can't let it be someone we can't control", the only real common trait between Bachmann and Paul. They need someone for Romney to compete with as he strides towards his "inevitable victory", and they want to make sure the competitor is someone they can handle if he actually beats Romney in an upset.
The nice thing about Ron's 2008 race was that it put some spine into the Republican Liberty Caucus. They had fallen into a rut of always delivering the vote and never speaking up, and hoping to influence the GOP that way. The Paul campaign saw the RLC getting invaded by fans of Ron Paul - and the Texas Chapter just released a strongly worded condemnation of Perry. When was the last time you saw a GOP organization so strongly oppose a GOP candidate?
AUSTIN, TX – Texas Governor Rick Perry may be the flavor of the day for a lot of Republicans, but Texas Republicans who are familiar with his record are a lot less enthusiastic about his presidential run. “Perry has a unique talent for finding new ways to raise taxes and loves to use taxpayer money to subsidize his business cronies,” says Secretary Dave Nalle of the Republican Liberty Caucus of Texas. “His supposed belief in limited government and states rights conveniently disappears whenever it conflicts with the demands of the special interests and corporate cronies who he serves.”
Governor Perry’s record of big government, big spending, big taxing and attacks on the fundamental rights of Texas citizens is a familiar to Texans, but seems to be much less well known to Republicans outside of the state, which may explain his high initial showing in the polls. The Republican Liberty Caucus of Texas is compiling a complete dossier on Perry to share with fellow Republicans outside their state so that they can be informed about what they are being sold in a Perry presidential candidacy.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen."
-- Samuel Adams
Voronwë the Faithful wrote:Realistically, though, I think the chances are very, very low, particulalry with Perry now in the race.
Jesus: Whenever you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, because they love to pray while standing in synagogues and on street corners so that people can see them. Truly I say to you, they have their reward. But whenever you pray, go into your room, close the door, and pray to your Father in secret. And your Father, who sees in secret, will reward you.
Rick Perry: *claims his reward*
I'm not sure I understand how your post is responding to what I said.
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
It wasn't so much responding to what you said as making a general comment about Perry.
I won't just survive
Oh, you will see me thrive
Can't write my story
I'm beyond the archetype
I won't just conform
No matter how you shake my core
'Cause my roots, they run deep, oh
When, when the fire's at my feet again
And the vultures all start circling
They're whispering, "You're out of time,"
But still I rise
This is no mistake, no accident
When you think the final nail is in, think again
Don't be surprised, I will still rise
I confess that this apparently ridiculous struggle for Presidential nomination simply makes me question the certainty with which 'Liberal Democracy' is forced, by means militaristic and other, on the 'developing world'...
When the "World's Greatest Democracy"TM is demonstrably dysfunctional, what on Earth (sic) is going on?
Of course, it could just be that he is the new flavor of the week, but I continue to believe that he is the most likely to appeal to the two main wings of the GOP.
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
As soon as he dropped his hat in the ring I believed he was the GOP favorite, due to the "tenor" of the party at this time and the unhappiness of many of the people in the country. Romney will put on a good show, but he has too many skeletons in his closet (his policies and then not his policies) and the fact that the GOP isn't very likely to elect a Mormon.
Bachmann is the Palin of 2012 with even more baggage. The rest are meh.
Unless the Congress and Obama fully realize that it really is "the economy stupid!!", then we are in for dolt from Texas part 2.
Perry won't appeal to the center; it will be way to easy to paint him as a radical. The country is increasingly full of radicals, but there aren't enough of them yet that they can carry elections all by themselves.
Bachmann is laready losing her standing as the press switches to the new "flavor of the month" with Perry. The press described the straw poll as having Perry, Bachmann, and Romney as winners, forgetting to mention someone who nearly tied with Bachmann.
Perry can appeal to Bachmann's support, but has the advantage of being more controllable by the party. I think the inner GOP wants it to come down to Perry v. Romney. But Bachmann won't get the memo, and will continue to compete as if she has a chance, taking votes from Perry.
Romney still has to connect with his own party membership, although he's the favored of the leadership.
The blackout of Ron Paul is resumed from the 2008 campaign, but even harder to maintain.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen."
-- Samuel Adams
I watched the debate. There weren't any surprises.
The GOP and Media have been looking for a rival to Romney, and they finally found one in Perry. That was confirmed at last night's debate. Now no matter which of the two win, it is an establishment candidate. Bachmann has melted away having been deprived of her coverage boost. I never believed she was a front-runner in the first place.
So most of the debate was between the two people who the GOP and the Media have designated the front runners.
After them, there were a few interesting points.
Santorum is still a hawk. One would think that after the previous debates he'd have seen that was a losing position.
Paul drew blood (metaphorically) when he pointed out the Gardasil-Perry connection and Perry's endorsement of Al Gore. Then he pointed out that if we got rid of our welfare state we wouldn't have an illegal immigration problem.
Cain stopped talking about Muslims (good), but he continued to praise the Chile pension privatization system (bad).
Huntsman did surprise me a little when he said he wouldn't take any pledges to not raise taxes, calling them silly and unnecessary.
Gingrich tried to hype his experience from before the memory of the average voter. Seriously, he left office in the late 1990s, and the average voter has a hard time remembering last year.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen."
-- Samuel Adams
