Friday, September 16, 2011
Been running hard all week, but looking forward to an awesome weekend. I do, however, expect to post!
So, my question for your Friday afternoon diversion: Please answer (1) who you would prefer to win the Republican nomination, and (2) who will win the Republican nomination. Trying to get a sense of the readership -- all the easier to pander!
I would have preferred Mitch Daniels win the nomination. I've been impressed with him from way back, when I was a college student interning in DC, and he was an alum willing to talk to undergrads, at length and very candidly, as OMB chief.
I think Perry is going to take the nomination. And that sucks.
I wish Mrs Daniels had been patriotic enough not to weigh in against Mitch Daniels running. Next, I would prefer Jeb Bush or Chris Christie above any of the active candidates. I am not delighted with any of the active candidates. At his best Newt Gingrich is above all of the rest of the active candidates, but he is far too erratic and usually far from his best.
Having said all of that, I think the only two real possibilities are Romney and Perry. I unenthusiastically prefer Romney and think it will be Perry.
My current odds: Perry 55% ... Romney 25% ... Palin 10% ... Field 10%.
Palin will run if Perry falters. She'd be my choice of the current possibles. She has the best Plan, although I recognize she may not be able to sell it. Let her run Energy.
The goal should be Restoration, not just winning the White House, which means winning 60 seats in the Senate.
Given what just happened in NY-9, where the Democrats managed to lose the Jewish seat Shmuck Schumer gifted to his former aide and protege Anthony Putz Weiner, Obama's odds in Florida just got longer, which means his chances of getting to 270 are below 20%.
With the Solyndra scandal breaking, Obama's *Grandson of Stimulus* Jobs Bill will look even more ridiculous. In 2012, he'll try to blame over 9.0% unemployment on Republicans not passing it, but that will only fool 20% of voters, and they're mostly packed into just a few big states.
I dont think the average Republican realizes how good both Romney and Perry are. In Romney you have a wildly successful executive who helped create one of the largest and most successful PE companies in America; nevermind he took over the unbelievably messy Salt Lake Olympics games and made them the first and I believe only profitable Olympic games. He became governor of frickin' North Korea, I mean Massachusettes. Is Romneycare a great program - "no" but let's not kid ourselves there is not any other healthcare model in America that works based on the same fundamentals that hamstring the American healthcare system.
As for Perry, as long as he can stop stepping on his unit, he is another great legislative executive. I live in Texas and the one thing I like about Perry is that he gets how important a job is and government's limited role in creating jobs. I also like the fact that he gets how wildly intrusive government can be in job destruction. I also love the fact that he has tackled the most intrusive of all entities inhibiting American productivity and that is the American Trial Lawyers Association.
My vote is with Mitt because I dont think Mr. Perry will "play in Peoria." I also think that Mitt will beat Mr. Obama because both Democrats and Independents will be able to vote against him as easily (read: he wont give them enough of a reason to hate him).
I am NOT voting, and I could care less.
When the Senate NY Republicans voted to let the bill for homosexual marriage go thru--that killed anything left in me to vote.
The birth certificate issue is not being investigated. We have a complete and clear and easily identifiable Forgery--and what happens---NOTHING.
The Vote on Libya. The stupid Repubs voted NO and then voted to continue financing this shenanigan.
Why vote? There is no rule of law no more. There is no constitution any more. Why are you playing charades? It's all a game.
Furthermore, Rommney et al, including the Republican party are infected with political correctness. Demography is killing the America I once knew. This thing now, I don't recognize it. Obama no longer gives speeches flanked by American flags.
The media---contra to what I was taught, is no longer the watchdog---it covers up facts now. It doesn't report certain stories and ONLY goes after Republicans.
Why continue the charade? In my opinion, It's Over. It's Finished. It's Done. I recognize that. It might take you guys a little longer to realize reality. But maybe you will wake up to the nightmare that is going on around you.
NOT voting anymore.
I would LOVE a Perry/Rubio pairing, though it might be lopsided in the sense that the fighter would be at the top rather than the bottom of the ticket (but all the better to go after Obama, who I am confident will crack in a direct confrontation with a competent opponent with killer instinct; just look at how he handled being schooled by a polite, respectful Netanyahu or tame confrontations with Senator Clinton). They are both charismatic and principled men, though I suspect Rubio is the better-spoken of the two.
I hate identity politics, but that sort of thing resonates among Democrats and Rubio could help deliver the southwest. And Florida, I guess, but I'm sure that's already going to be a lockup for the Republicans, no matter how many times polling organizations call it a swing state.
"NOT voting anymore."
Congratulations on abandoning the political process at just the moment in history when a presidential election may matter most. Seriously.
But I have to wonder why you insist on continuing to lecture everyone about how misguided, ignorant, and wrong-headed they are about everything while you deliberately sit on your hands. It sounds rather... Obama-ish.
Eh, never mind. I'm sure that I'll find whatever answer I get to be unsatisfactory.
I appreciate hearing from Texans about Perry. Until lately, we've heard little about him in New York and that's been distorted.
Perry can set up a clear choice for voters between Red State economic success (Texas) and Blue State economic failure (California and Illinois). It's a simple compelling theme. CA or IL may go broke before Nov 2012.
Romney muddies this, and isn't well-positioned to take the fight to Obama. Romney plays the role of Dewey to Barry's Harry in a potential repeat of the outcome of 1948.
Calling Social Security a Ponzi scheme isn't a gaffe, not long-term.
I'm afraid we have another Kansas shaping up here. History: In 2002 Sebelius trounced Shallenburger in our Governor race. From what I could see, Shallenburger was painted as a right-wing extremist in the primary, and when he trounced the moderate and went on to face Sebelius, he was promptly stabbed in the back repeatedly by the moderate wing of our beloved party. During her entire term, there was not a single problem she faced that her proposed solution did not include higher taxes in one form or another. (Thank God for a Republican legislature who kept her in check)
Now it looks like we're going to have a well-fought primary between a qualified moderate and a qualified conservative. *Whoever* wins the primary has a *very* high chance of being stabbed vigorously in the back by the other. What I *hope* happens is that Perry wins the nomination and picks Romney as a running mate.
What I'm pretty sure of is that in 2020, Gov. Brownback will be running. 2012? Who knows...
I'd prefer Palin. I fear she's close to unelectable due to the damage done to her by the Democrat media as well as the "hide fearing" RINOs.
As Ignoramus above suggests, Secretary of Energy for her.
Next would be Perry. As with QuakerCat I'm somewhat concerned how he'll "play in Peoria." I actually think he might do well, but I'll have to see more of him in the spotlight.
If he falters then there's Romney.
But I don't trust him.
I would have greatly preferred Mitch Daniels, but all other prospects seem very problematic this year. Perry creeps me out, he just smells like ethical and effectiveness disaster waiting to happen. Romney is another Bush 41 at best. Huntsman may be OK, but he is not impressing enough yet.
Given the likely candidate pool, I slightly prefer Romney I suppose. Who wins is anybody's guess, but given the propensity of the GOP to shoot itself in the foot, Perry is maybe most likely.
From the left here, I'm pretty sure Perry will win. Romney just has too many heterodoxies to win a primary.
As for who I want to run against? Romney polls better, Perry is more conservative. I don't know what to choose, and I imagine it's a tough choice from the other side of the chessboard.
Prefer Christie, but think it'll be between Perry and Romney, and that Perry takes him. Liked Romney last election, but fear his Mormonism could hurt badly. Not loving Perry, but he's got time to buff the pitch and presentation, and I think he's got enough to win.
Perry might be gaffe prone, and folks have jumped on him calling SS a Ponzi scheme, but he's right (they only work when new money is coming in, and not enough is) and he had the balls to talk about closing the damn border down, and calling Obama for what he is (re: El Paso).
I want to see the One running for the Dems, and this might just be like McCain-Jesus ... I don't believe the GOP wanted it, and I don't believe now the Dems want it. Our country needs an adult to clean up what this guy has done, and it's pretty far reaching. The ME is about to implode, and he'll be lucky if we're not in global war before his term runs out.
God help us.
I don't usually read Maureen Dowd, but tripped over her op-ed in this week's New York Times: Egghead and Blockheads.
It's mostly a harangue about Rick Perry being a dumbass and proud of it. Did you know that he got some D's and F's while at Texas A&M? Per Maureen, if you support Perry you're anti-intellectual and anti-science.
To me, this is a sign of how well Perry can do in a general election in places like Pennsylvania.
Will vote for whomever the Repub
Would have preferred Daniels or Ryan to either Perry or Romney.
Am afraid Perry has baggage yet to
Do not trust Romney as his principles seem to wobble with public opinion.
My preference would be for Gingrich. I think he's the smartest candidate of the crowd, and he's not afraid to think out of the box. However, I doubt he'll win. Instead, I bet we get Perry (only okay at best), with Romney the second most likely winner (I can't forgive him for MA healthcare). Still, anyone's better than our current leader...