Perry Out

Re: Perry Out?

Of course the difference is that Perry's campaign came apart only because of himself--the guy's a dimwitted fraud--which became painfully evident the moment he had to start answering questions without a script in front of him.

That wouldn't have happened with Christie or Daniels, who are both immeasurably more intelligent and prepared to handle those questions than Perry. But, then, their campaigns might've imploded for other reasons--like not properly coddling to the Tea Party line.

 

Re: Perry Out?

How have the campaigns of the folks who have "properly coddled the Tea Party line" gone?

There's just no way to predict how someone's campaign may have gone -- especially when they have not run nationally before.

Who would have predicted Huntsman's dismal campaign, which flopped from the start with the poorly organized announcement, featuring a tour boat and dock as backdrop, not the Statue of Liberty?

Who would have predicted Giuliani's terrible campaign? or Fred Thompson's?

Christie or Daniels may have flopped terribly. We don't know what flaw was not exposed. We don't know what idiot campaign aids they may have relied on.

Giuliani relied on one of the dumbest people I know for campaign advice. Truly stunning who he relied on and surrounded himself with.

 

Re: Perry Out?

Rick Perry then "If you cheat on your wife, you'll cheat on your business partner."
Rick Perry today, "Newt I'll trust you to be my business partner."

 

Re: Perry Out?

The more I watch the campaign, the more I think Santorum has a legitimate chance. Not that it's a good chance, but he has some positives.

In the Fox News debate Monday, he took a slew of *relatively* moderate positions:

1. Saying that 28 percent should be the highest possible tax rate. (Romney said 25, Perry said 20, Gingrich said 15, and Paul said 0.)

2. Restoring the right to vote for felons who have served their time.

3. Only supporting a 0% corporate tax for manufacturing (something that would play incredibly well in PA-MI-OH).

4. Saying that Social Security can't go private for young people right now because the lack of an actual trust fund and deficit makes it fiscally irresponsible and impossible, even though he wishes there was a private option.

Obviously, he has a slew of positions that put him far outside what many people see as the mainstream. But for Republicans, those opinions are not atypical. And his economic policies are probably the most moderate out of all the Republicans.

 

Re: Perry Out?

Didn't I basically agree with this by saying their campaigns "might've imploded for other reasons"? I wasn't guaranteeing they would've had succesful campaigns, but simply noting the flaw in analogizing their cases to Perry--Perry's campaign imploded because of his own glaring intellectual limitations, the guy simply seemed too dumb for the job--that wouldn't have happened with Daniels or Christie.

Sadly, I think what might've been the achilles heel for Christie/Daniels is their physical appearance--Christie being morbidly obese, Daniels being a short little balding guy--neither come close to what today's superficial America expect its candidates to look like.

 

Re: Perry Out?

Good riddance, indeed. Seems like he got out just in time before he got embarrassed in SC.

 

Re: Perry Out?

With Rick Perry ending his campaign, I'm now with the Tea Partiers in cheering a Perry execution.

 

Gingrich and Santorum cancel each other out.

If you get rid of one, the other has a shot at the nomination, but Santorum is too socially conservative for moderate republicans and independents and Gingrich just has too much baggage, even though I frequently like what he has to say in the debates.

 

From Santorum's Wiki page:


There is much debate on the Wikipedia talk page about whether the definition of Santorum being "the frothy mixture of lube and fecal matter that is sometimes the by-product of anal sex"[148] should be mentioned on this page. Additionally, whether there is enough substantial evidence behind the oft-uttered nickname "Ol' Frothy" to be mentioned in the info box.

 

Gingrich is actively disliked by a majority of voters in most polls. Santorum would be, but most voters aren't sure who he is. Voters are at least ambivalent about Romney -- so far. Since they're ambivalent about Obama, too, polls show a close contest between those two, and Obama beating Gingrich by a telephone number.

 

open marriage

man on dog

not very much

 

Gingrich : Republican Party :: Hillary Clinton : Democratic Party

At least, that's how I see it. Both turn off such a large portion of the base, and then the general public at large, that I can't see either one ever being a serious presidential candidate. I've always thought this election resembled 2004 more than anything else - Bush was incredibly unpopular (as Obama is now to some) but the opposition doesn't really have a credible candidate for voters to sink their teeth into.

As bad as Bush was going into his re-election in terms of popularity, I didn't think there was a conceivable way John Kerry beat him, and short of Obama getting involved in Nixon-level political self-sabotage, I don't think he loses to whoever comes out of the motley crew of Republican candidates.