Colin Powell.

Look. Perry has done a TERRIBLE job. I wanted to support him and so far cannot. He has no plan for virtually anything, appeared lost when challenged at the debates, and basically his answer for everything is ‘Look at Texas’. That is not good enough.

Perry has a LOT of time to recover. Ignore the media about his early demise. But he needs a course correction. Saw him on CNBC this morning, and he was far better. Erick is right…a good debate performance is essential to get things on the right track.

Until that happens, Romney has to be considered the favorite…for good or ill.

Thanks for not only blogging the idea a few days ago, but following up on it and making it happen! This is the kind of big idea that attracts people, like the Lincoln-Douglas debates Newt references so often.

He just needs the next debate performance to be solid. I agree it doesn’t have to be win, just a solid performance.

Romney is just plain too liberal for me and while he polls better in the general election we just don’t need more of the same, this should be obvious.

While I favor states being able to control their own primary process, there doesn’t seem to be any self regulating mechanism. The primaries are getting ridiculously drawn out and too far from the general election. There is no reason for any state not to continue to push the start of the primaries earlier and earlier. There is also no reason Iowa should always lead off. There are certainly worse states that could start, but why not some comparable start or small group of small states?

I definitely do not want a national primary and I don’t like leading off with big states. Big States have a lot of power already with House Representatives, number of primary delegates, and electoral votes. On top of that they tend to be more liberal. Sure that is more of a practical matter, but it is not something we should ignore.

What Romney proposes to do as President is conservative. Along with the fact that he has a strong command of public policy and is a very effective communicator, that is one of the reasons why people are starting warming to him.

to hear the candidates in a non-debate format. I hope that all of you can pull it off.

I guarantee the lower candidates will jump at it, and hopefully that will put pressure on the big boys to join (though I suspect Perry will jump at the chance, which puts pressure on Romney).

Romney is stuck at the low 20s right now, 75%+ don’t want him. It’s going to be a matter of someone taking the “not-Romney.” I thought Perry would do that, and he still can, but he’s about it. Maybe, maybe Huntsman has a shot at it.

“In fact, I’m rapidly concluding that I should have never bought into the rest of the media’s declaration that Perry was the front runner.”

This statement really is disingenuous. There has been no conservative site which has been more out front on the Rick Perry bandwagon than Redstate.

Redsate had lead the way in pushing Rick Perry as the frontrunner.

didn’t think so.

This would be miles better than the debates. Any candidate who does not take you all up on this offer is very foolish.

I am very puzzled about Cain saying he could not support Perry. He was running a positive campaign and this is really disapointing to me. I reallly liked Cain, but this coupled with his support of Romney takes him down a peg in my eyes.

without actually saying the words I’m not running? Here is her direct comment-

“Does a title shackle a person? Are they, someone like me who’s maverick – you know I do go rogue and I call it like I see it and I don’t mind stirring it up in order to get people to think and debate aggressively and to find solutions to the problems that our country is facing – somebody like me, is a title and is a campaign too shackling? Does that prohibit me from being out there, out of the box, not allowing handlers to shape me and to force my message to be what donors or what contributors or what political pundits want it to be. Does a title take away my freedom to call it like I see it and to affect positive change that we need in this country? That’s the biggest contemplation piece in my process.”

Does Palin not understand that she has complete control of her own message, and that she is only “controlled by handlers” if she allows herself to be handled?

Does Palin not understand that having the title President gives her a big microphone, and a big audience to promote her ideas, policies and positions, and it doesn’t shackle her as she claims it would? Even with her facebook comments and Tweets, she is expected to have at least a certain amount of decorum if she wants to be a respected voice for conservatism?

I’ve been convinced for a long while that Palin wasn’t going to run. If this is how she bows out of the race, she has seriously taken advantage of all of her supporters. No wonder her PAC sent out it’s last big push fundraising letter a week ago.

is that so many are still in the Perry camp to the point they cannot see his shortcomings: weak on the border issue and a very poor, inarticulate debater.

I will vote for the Republican nominee in the general election no matter who he/she will be. That is our only chance to get rid of the present nemesis in the WH; in the meantime I listen and keep my mind open.

I have ONE single minded goal: OBAMA MUST GO! I will always gravitate towards the person most likely to be able to defeat Obama. Perry is NOT the one, as Ron Paul isn’t.

A Herman Cain/ Newt Gingrich ticket would be a winner in my opinion; they complement each other very well. I don’t want to hear about Newt’s “baggage”, since, as we can see by now, no candidate is without any baggage. If the person was alive for a few decades, especially in the public life, he/she WILL have “baggage”. We cannot afford to shoot ourselves in the foot by nominating a weak candidate vis-a-vis the Obama-Machine!

I just watched the video of him saying that he felt Romney can’t win. He said that he didn’t think Mitt would be better this time than he was last time, in ’08.

Mitt didn’t win Florida, South Carolina or Georgia, and if you don’t carry them you can’t win.

I agree with Herb on this one…I think Mitt will still have trouble carrying GA, SC and probably Florida.

So, if Romney can’t win the nomination, and if Rick Perry wins it, is Herb saying he will support Obama?

With positions like this, I think Herman’s rise will be short lived. I was excited for him, but now he has lost my support with what he said to Wolf Blitzer, and judging from the comments, others feel this way too.

I’ve tried to find something to like about Romney, but it’s tough to like someone when you just don’t know what they honestly believe. Plus, I don’t like the dishonesty and misrepresentation of Perry’s positions.

By definition, the frontrunner is the one who can win by simply not erring, which was Perry, two bad debates later, he was still leading. It took a disastrous debate when he most needed a strong one to change his status. Just because he dropped frontrunner status doesn’t mean he never took it.

There’s are a couple of dirty little secrets about presidential campaigns that ought to be mentioned.

First, it helps to have some government experience. I know many think that’s crazy, but it’s true. Understanding the process is key to getting things done. Amity Shlaes mentioned this in a piece about Coolidge. He had wide experience in government before he came to Washington and it greatly helped. Same for Reagan, Bush 1, Clinton, LBJ, and FDR.

Second, running for president is nothing like running for the House, Senate, or even governor. We can’t just run anyone and expect to win just because the other guy stinks. It doesn’t work that. It’s pretty easy to get Tea Party types into the House and, in some cases, the Senate, but not the White House. It’s a bridge too far when the whole country is involved.

Why do I bring this up? Well, look at the candidate who’s shooting up the polls. Cain is a great guy with a great message, but he’s never had any experience in government. I know he worked for the KC Fed, but that’s not the same. It’s also true he doesn’t have a big campaign that can incorporate any polling bounce. He’s like Huckabee in 2008.

Somehow, and despite huge victories in 2010, we’re likely to end up with a nominee no one really wants. Just a few months ago, everyone thought Romney was DOA due to healthcare, but no one with enough stature, prowess, and smarts stepped forward and now Romney looks head and shoulders above the rest. Maybe Perry can turn it around, but I doubt it.

Every week when Erick gives these updates I scroll down the page waiting to see the big name choices, but they’re never there because none decided to run. As an emailer mentioned to the Weekly Standard, our field resembles the 1980 field if Reagan, Bush, and Baker didn’t run and we were left with just Connelly, Anderson, and Phil Crane.

One day they’ll write a book as to why so many of the top names (Christie, Jeb, Daniels, Barbour) all passed and left us with retreads, vanity candidates and screwballs.

The bottom line is that only Perry and Romney can raise the funds necessary to win. The Establishment and the media know this. Their candidate is Romney. Always has been. So, they attack Perry while promoting another conservative who will split the vote with Perry. First it was Bachmann and now it’s Cain. (Although Cain’s record isn’t as conservative as we first thought.) Think about the end results. Do you want Romney? The guy who supported McCain’s amnesty plan and abortion and gun control and Romneycare? If not, don’t allow the media and the Establishment to convince you to split the vote.

With all due respect you have been incorrect numerous times in the last few months. You have been pampas in your attitude and your ‘knowledge’ of all things political. You have accused a speaker of being an alcoholic and then took a step and said “you heard” she was a blathering drunkard. You have lost quite a bit of credibility lately. I remember last week your ‘horserace’ column included that Herman Cain was done.. put a fork in him done… And as for Palin, you are making an assumption she is not running, as her supporters are assuming she is.. Mrs. Palin has not given an answer yet to her intentions. I would take that paragraph out so that does not become yet another statement you have to walk back. The real Horse Race, is that it is an open field, and a decision will be made by many and the result will be a nominee.

Whoever the GOP nominee is. Can Herman Cain say the same?
Hold him to the same standard as GOP voters.

On Newt. Yes, he’s very smart and a good debater. However, Newts personal moral conduct tells me more about his character than any smart responses that may come out of his mouth. It’s about trustworthiness.
There is moral baggage and then political baggage. If you have differing moral standards of acceptability, that’s fine. I don’t trust someone who lied to the love of his life, to be truthful to people he doesn’t even know or care about. That’s my moral stance.
I see Perry’s shortcomings, I’m not ready to throw him under the bus yet. It’s my personal choice, it’s my vote. I live in Texas, I have known Cain for less than 2 years. Convince me, don’t show false concern for my “vision problems”.

looking forward to hearing all of the candidates. I hope they all participate.

Romney will appear on Huckabee’s Fox show this coming Saturday. In recent weeks, Huckabee has been critical of Rick Perry. Cain, Santorum, Paul, and Bachmann have been piling on Perry. Also Ann Coulter and Michelle Malkin have been making jabs at Perry. The people who are wishing for Christie to run may settle for Romney. David Frum asks why not Romney. The establishment have well line up for Romney. Perry could still win the nomination if he steps up his debate skills.

And today, It looks like a three man race now because yesterday everyone said nice things about Cain. Well, except the newly minted resident loon, of course.

Yesterday the polls came out with changes and now Cain is the new pinata.

I look forward to the day Romney is in third and Cain and Perry are the leaders.

Maybe tomorrow…

Fox News and all the talking heads (w/the exception of Levin and Rush) are all dissing Perry. It’s so obvious that Fox’s choice this campaing cycle is Romney…Sean is so obvious about it, it makes me sick. But you all hold on to your hats, because Rick Perry has NEVER lost a race, and Romney is the perpetual loser…he’s only won one election!! If you have any doubts about what Perry believes in, just read his book, “Fed UP!” It’s a great read and it reinforces my faith Perry. He’s about keeping the fed govt small and will go to great lengths to do it…and he believes in states rights. He follows the U.S. Constitution………he is a true conservative. Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin endorsed his book and Newt wrote the forward in the book! Perry doesn’t lie, he’s a good, solid Christian, and he’s not afraid to tell it like it is. It’s unfortunate his last debate was so bad, but think about it…..he had a raging fire in his state of TX, and he’s still a Gov of one of the largest, most productive states in the union! He obviously has less time to devote to debates, and he probably didn’t put much into that last one because he simply didn’t have the time. Also, I think whoever his “handlers/consultants” are, they must have advised him to tone it down, because he was much more passiionate in his first two debates, and this last one, he just wasn’t himself, plain and simple. Give the guy a chance, and he won’t let you down! Rick Perry knows how to win…he’s been doing it all his life. He will defeat BO, hands down!

Poll out today for FL – Romney 27, Cain 25, Perry 13.

I disagree with Erick about what Perry needs to do. He needs to knock it out of the park in the upcoming debates and show some depth, which he has heretofore failed to do.

Cain vs Unable (with kudos to Dennis Miller)

- and if the no-guts crowd captures the top of the ticket, Cain as VP.

We go nowhere good into Nov. 2012 election time or beyond without the light Cain shines on the power of Reagan’s posive leadership.

If you look at his numbers, even with Perry’s implosion (which I think will eventually pass and he will regain ground), Romney keeps hovering in the 20-24 percent range. He has been steady in that regard, but it pretty much is lining up to be Romney, Paul, and anybody but those two. As parts of that pool slowly drop out, I think you will see the remainders increase. As long as the field narrows to one other candidate, that person will win the nomination over Perry and Paul. I see a result of Romney with 25%, Paul with 65%. You saw it here first……

could be held sooner than December. By December, the candidates have already pretty much gotten their supporters, and fundraising from them. What good will it be to have a candidate have a fantastic conversation when the first primaries are just weeks away? I believe it is critical to get them all on record now so that people can decide where to send their dollars.

Romney and Perry Steady: With Romney slightly ahead and both candidates coming in at more or less low 20s, the frontrunners have stabilized. Each dominates their constituency: Romney leads in the Competent Proven Manager With a Vision category (aka the Establishment) which includes Huntsman, Pawlenty when he was in, Christie if he came in. Perry leads the Tea Party/Ideologcal Conservative Wing, which also includes Cain, Bachmann, Santorum and Gingrich. Romney benefits from having fewer competitors for his votes, and from the attacks on Perry from Bachmann et al. Both have serious problems, however. Romney has just flip-flopped on flip-flopping, illustrating his continuing problem of trustworthiness, as well as his issue problems, mostly Romneycare. Perry is a poor debater and also has issue problems (immigration).

Cain and Gingrich Rising: These two candidates have maximized the opportunities of various free fora, including debates, straw polls, conventions, etc. Their campaigns have been plagued with staffing, organizational and funding problems. This will continue because these are fundamental to these candidates. They like to operate on the edge of their seats. This is why they are interesting and why they won’t be the nominee. However, both bring a great deal to the primary campaign. Cain is a great communicator, brilliant at simplifying complex issues and connecting with voters. Like Gingrich, he makes numerous unforced errors that undercut his viability. His 999 plan is not revenue neutral, and is gimmicky. He would be better off with the fair tax, which is simpler, and which is his real goal. Gingrich is a great source of ideas and a brilliant strategist. One example: On immigration, Gingrich remarked in a debate that we have made legal immigration too difficult and illegal immigration too easy. Exactly! Today he offered a solution in his new Contract: Move half the bureaucrats in Homeland Security from Washington to the Southern Border. You have to admire that kind of audacious thinking.

(Our current immigration problems, incidentally, are the result of legislation authored by Ted Kennedy in the 1960s. I too have a simple plan for immigration reform — my Comprehensive Ted Kennedy Repeal Act. Simply repeal every law Teddy had anything to do with and many of our problems — Obamascare, No Child Left Behind, etc — would go away.)

Christie and Palin Not Running: Neither would do well at this point, and I think they know it.

Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman: I pair them because while Ron Paul has the most passionate supporters, Huntsman’s are the least passionate. As we know Paul’s followers are everywhere, sending him money, turning up at events, spamming online polls and straw polls, etc. However, most voters are not looking for that level of commitment, and Paul’s pattern in 2008 was that his supporters dropped off during the campaign and moved to other candidates. This is happening in 2011 at an even faster pace, though paul is better known this time around (possibly because of that). He is diminishing as a factor and should not play a role after Iowa and NH. Right now he functions as a foil for Huntsman who is struggling to overtake Romney in New hampshire.

As Huntsman’s only conservative supporter (certainly the only one at this site) I must confess it’s dispiriting to visit his website and read the vapid comments of his listless supporters: the international relations student in his fifth year of college (what?fifth?what?), the moderate Democraps, the independents, the people for whom politics is a fashion statement, those who are repelled by strong political convictions — they’e all there, attracted by Huntsman’s frictionless persona, his orthodox unorthodox views(gays, crap&tax), his ties..whatever.

Huntsman has bet the ranch (and keep in mind it’s a very big ranch with lots of money on it) on the belief that — since after 2012 America will be Wisconsin writ large (and that’s the best case scenario) – the country will want a President able to rise above the ideological conflict, while still retaining core convictions by which to govern. So far this has been a losing bet, but even as Paul is dropping to his core of true believers, Huntsman is slowly rising — coming in ahead of Santorum and Bachmann in the Fox poll, for example.

Santorum and Bachmann: Falling. Their campaigns are underfunded and suffer from lack of organization, but unlike Cain and Gingrich, they have not benefited from the debates and other appearances. This was predictable for Bachmnann. It is simply hard to run successfully from Congress. Her other faults have been on display during these debates — exaggerations and misstatements have always featured prominently in her dramatic self-presentation.

Santorum has a good base as a religious conservative and as a former Senator from a large swing state. Yet he is failing. He has made the same mistake Tim Pawlenty made. No, not the failure to confront Romney on the Obamneycare in the debate. Not being too nice. Not being unable to beat back attacks from Bachmann. No, what killed Pawlenty, especially in the Midwest, and especially in Iowa, was the remarkably hawkish speech on foreign policy he delivered at the end of June. In it he gave a resounding cheer for the neoconservative project of bringing Democracy at the point of a gun (or the sharp end of the Drone) to all benighted corners of the world. The very policy pursued actively by George Bush and secretly by Obama, widely discredited by the end of the decade for its lack of results. Santorum espouses a similar hawkish worldview, and it is this that is costing him support he cannot afford to lose, especially in Iowa an New Hampshire.

Erick has decreed that foreign policy is not an issue, otherwise I could say a lot more about the need for Republicans to figure out this issue before the election.

he has a Mormon problem that nobody wants to talk about. I went to my church and asked 20 people, all but one stated there was no way they would vote for him. Evangelicals will not come out in mass for him. He has lost any chance of gain 30% or more in the Latino group. His John Kerry like flip flopping on everything will get him deemed untrustworthy in the general election. His stint at Bain capital has been a job crusher, how do you think that is going to look to the unemployed. This is the reason Romney will lose, he cannot win. Perry is tested, he has been through the fire. There is nothing more the right or left can through at him. He sticks to his guns, and that is so awesome it make me smile. Cain has lost my respect, as well has Bachmann. Romney can only win this nomination if the conservative vote is split up between four or more people. This is what Fox wants, so they are upping Cain, after weeks of pushing Romney. They have already admitted to building Perry up just to crush him, all by design. The establishment is gaming us, and we must fight back. This is the future of the republican party, and one I care about.

This question was just asked by a political analyst on a SC channel out of Greenville. He was hinting that the person who thinks he will benefitting is behind the FL push to move up their primary date. I thought of Romney and the establishment political elite.
Any FL GOP ‘insiders’ here that can shed any light on the FL push to break the rules and have an early primary?

Interesting article from of all places a boston site takling about the fact that Perry and his team let Romney do the talkity talk, and now is hitting back hard. I keep seeing people from Texas saying that Perry gives his opponents enough rope to hang themselves, and then comes in for the kill, so to speak. Seems that that is what is now happening.

“Florida has decided to move up to January 31, 2012, which will force Iowa and New Hampshire to move up to the first of the month.”

The only thing “forcing” IA and NH to move up is their inflated sense of importance. Granted, I’m biased — from FL — but seriously: why should a small midwestern state whose voters will disqualify anyone who doesn’t promise SCADS of cash in the form of ethanol subsidies and mandates, deserve a permanent place at the front of the line?

For that matter, why do we worship at the feet of a TINY state packed full of NE RINOs and Massachusetts (Massachusetts!!!) transplants, and wait breathlessly for the votes of the 127 residents of Dixville Notch every four years?

And finally, under what rationale rule does SC, with its open primary, get the final say in who lives to Super Tuesday — especially with the SC history of gutter-street politics (just ask Nikki Haley about that. Or, as much as I despise the man’s politics, ask John McCain about SC’2000. John blamed the wrong man — I don’t believe W had anything to do with the scurrilous, racist attacks on McCain — but there is no question that those attacks occurred. In SC.)

The “first” (or first couple) of primaries should be assigned on a rotating basis, and not automatically granted to a select bunch of increasingly non-representative, self-important blowhard states.

End Rant.

Is this yet another ploy…BY A DIFFERENT PARTY to get their guy into place before people have time to hear the rest of the story. I was listening to Erick the other night and I happen to agree with him. He would like to have each and every candidate there in Atlanta and have a two hour conversation with them ABOUT EVERYTHING. This one and one half minute crap is garbage and then the pundits interpret it for you.

People…WE CANNOT AFFORD ANY MORE MODERATES AS A PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE. We have mega problems in the USA and they don’t get solved by moving to the center left. That is what happens with compromise. Here’s the deal…Daddy Bush was a Moderate, GWB had a lot of big spending ideas..didn’t know how to use the veto pen. Mitt Romney is a big spender. Why doesn’t anyone ask him about the over run and the SEC investigation into the Big Dig in MA? Why. If we are going to counter-balance the left…we need a real Conservative..and someone that is wise to the left’s tricks. Look at Reagan … he believed Tip O’Neil and look at what happened with spending.

We had to have McCain…the moderates would vote for him. Well moderation is not going to get us out of the mess we are in…and people…we are in a mess like nobody’s business. We don’t even have a deficit of $15 trillion…the Fed has been lending money out the back door to Europe to bail out their banks…AND OURS AGAIN. No Congressional Oversight. DOES THAT SOUND LIKE WE NEED A MODERATE? Does that sound like we need a big spender. We cannot spend ourselves out of debt. Kenysian Economics DOES NOT WORK and Washington EVIDENCE PROVES THAT EVERYTHING THEY TOUCH TURNS TO A DISASTER.

Then we have a guy that says we will make Washington as inconsequential in your lives as possible. You all like that…right? Does he believe in centralized government (Perry)…NO. Does Romney…Yes he does…he lied in the last debate about healthcare and about education …AND THE PRESS NEVER LET YOU KNOW ABOUT IT EITHER. Oh..he wants healthcare offered by private companies…he just wants to administer it from DC. And then…that very day, he agreed with Obama concerning Race to The Top…Centralized Educational System in DC.

I know…the guy has a “pretty face”…but that’s all. Can he identify with the person that is living paycheck to paycheck…NOPE…BUT PERRY CAN. He was dirt poor growing up. Go read the Time Magazine article about him.

So…the State chairmen of the GOP are in a mighty hurry to get their state’s primary moved up…why…because that way you don’t get to hear all sides of the story…you only get snipits. No more Party controlling our pick…it’s time for the people to pick their president…and I hope they look at the evidence. THIS IS OUR LAST SHOT PEOPLE…WE NEED TIME AND EVIDENCE…NOT HURRY UP TALK. BTW…You do remember…that is how we got the stimulus, the bailout, Obamacare and he also wanted his supposed Jobs bill passed NOW. Does hurry up get it? Don’t let this happen…we need to hear all the candidates and their SOLUTIONS. We don’t need to hear about Obama…we know all about him…WHAT IS OUR FUTURE AND HOW WILL YOU GET US THERE.

Be sure to ask ALL of the candidates about immigration…because just one is being painted wrongly here. Please let Romney know that ladders were made to overcome fences.

Shame on Fox News for labeling themselves “Fair and Balanced”. Is there anyone on that network who has yet to get in a good punch on Rick Perry ? How convenient of them dumping Glenn Beck just before the republican debates started. How convenient of them having a bunch of ex Bush administration shills making digs on Perry to settle scores from years gone by.

For years conservatives have exposed network bias on CNN, MSNBC, CBS, etc…and for good reason. But if we are to have credibility, we must also expose Fox News for engaging in the same type of biased reporting we’ve condemned others for.

is a dangerous gambler’s mind-set. All conservative, nothing but conservative may just get you another four years of Obama, and then that WILL BE THE END!

What is REALLY the first priority? Get rid of the nemesis in the WH, by hook or by crook! Pure conservatism WILL NOT DO IT! Solid “principles” WILL NOT DO IT!

“Be ye as wise as serpents and harmless as doves”. Chasing rainbows or perfection is not my aim, but get somewhere where at least there is a chance to continue the fight. Priority number two cannot be put ahead of priority number one. Who gets the “gold ring” is what we have to go for: who has the best shot to get into the WH! If he/she is straying, we still have the House and hopefully the Senate and behind them, pushing and cajoling will be “We the People”!

If anyone thinks that the job is done once the new President is installed, only shows superficial commitment and lack of understanding the mammoth job AFTERWARDS! We have to get united behind the most likely winner and then take it forward towards saving the salvageable. It will be a long, arduous and committed work to make wise decisions to get us out of the “ditch” (by now a deep hole!) and continue driving towards the goal of restoring out nation onto prosperity, security and Constitutional lawfulness that assures us freedom.

I cannot say for sure who that person will be. We cannot know which candidate can get us the WIN, but he/she cannot appear to be a strict, inflexible ideologue but will have to keep it under a cloak of “flexibility and compromise”.

There is too much at stake to gamble it ALL on ideology! I’ll take an ounce of practicality and common sense to a ton of purist ideology.

Erick, is there any update on your conversations with the candidates?