and I will be happy. My preferred candidate is Perry because of his experience and record of positive results.

Romney got flustered and lashed out, and it reflects poorly on him.

Cain, in my opinion, has defended 999 too vaguely. He needs to tighten up his message on this, quick. His unforced error on abortion does not help him.

These two things help Perry, for now. With a decent enough debate the other night, plus some likely momentum with his tax roll out, I think he’s going to regain traction, and take points back from Cain.

It comes down to:
Perry, Cain, Newt as the Anti-Romney candidates.

Could some please tell me how Cain can beat down Obama being the gaffe machine Cain is. How can Cain have any path to the primary with no real money, how can Cain win the general with no prior experience (we will be playing to a different field in the general).

Cain has no record, no substance to look at how he will govern.

In my opinion it really comes down to Perry or Newt. I look forward to reading Perry’s tax plan

The longer it is divided in the anti-Romney the greater the chances of Romney winning the nomination.

Romney and Newt. They are the only two with the gravitas to not only take on Obama, but the media which will be unmerciful to them.

Cain’s, 999 Plan is in trouble and he is in last place on being able to discuss any of the other responsibilities of a president.

Perry is in the business of attacking without giving a reason why he should be the nominee. It’s okay to go after an opponent, but in doing so you have to give a reason why you are the better alternative.

Bachman, Santorum, Paul, Huntsman are becoming a waist of time.

I only bring it up here because every time another dictator goes down Obama is praised (whether or not his policies had anything to do with it.) We can expect the focus on our republican hopefuls to shift to military issues over the next few days. Where does our military intervene, how much should we spend, what type of support do we lend?

Taxes, abortion and what have you may take a back burner for a couple of days.

Just hope the polls start reflecting that

..will be interesting. Word has it that Steve Forbes is among his principal advisors who have been fine-tuning the plan. With Forbes’ stamp on it, I find it hard for northeast elites to bring too much criticism of it. New Hampshire was enthralled with Forbes’ flat tax idea when he previously proposed it, so it could be a major game changer.

Perry and Santorum gave the others the blueprint of taking Romney out of his debate performance. Romney is still a marginal frontrunner, but that is closing.

Perry hurt Romney…but did he help himself? I am not convinced. He will come out with a tax policy statement this week, which is great. The question is, can he eloquently explain it, and then defend it in a debate? I an unconvinced.

Cain is taking a lot of hits, but not a lot of significant damage. He has held together far better than Bachmann or Perry did.

Newt is Newt, which is good and bad. The one good thing is if he catches fire, he is a known entity…his baggage is all out in the open. The problem is if history will come back to haunt him.

The other candidates are nonentities, and need to disappear for the greater good.

It’s really premature to talk about a “horserace” when not a single caucus or primary has yet been held, and we decide who the frontrunners are based on the vagaries of polls of Republicans who are still finding out lots of things about the candidates.

In October 2008, Hillary was still the “frontrunner” in that vague sense.

I saw this coming a year ago. The Dems are raising this and forcing Romney to respond. Romney can’t just call people “religious bigots” and move on. It won’t work. Unless Romney can squelch this it will be another roadblock for him on his journey to the WH.

So many people underestimate the likability factor of candidates and how that causes them to win. Bernard Goldberg hinted on that in his column the other day.

Let’s go back to around Ford.

In 1976, Jimmy Carter beats Gerald Ford. You can say that this is because of numerous reasons such as Nixon being pardoned, etc. Jimmy Carter came off as a down to earth, likeable, folksy, peanut farmer that people could connect with. Jimmy Carter won.

In 1980, Jimmy Carter’s presidency had been a disaster. The economy was in shambles and everyone was in a “malaise”. Jimmy Carter had grown quite bitter. Then comes along the actor Ronald Reagan who could light up a room with his sense of humor, stagecraft and humor. He was 100 times more likeable than Jimmy Carter. Ronald Reagan won.

In 1984, Walter Mondale ran against Ronald Reagan. Mondale was a man of principle. (Wrong principles) But he was boring as hell compared to Reagan. Reagan could have Mondale and the moderators gasping for air because they were laughing so hard at Reagan’s humorous quips. It was clear just how more likeable Ronald Reagan was over Mondale. That’s why Reagan won in a landslide.

In 1988, George H. W. Bush ran. This is a bit of an anomaly since George H. W. Bush was not all that likeable. The Democrats screwed up though and nominated the even more unlikeable Michael Dukakis. It was impossible to connect with Michael Dukakis. So riding Reagan’s coattails George H. W. Bush was able to beat Dukakis.

In 1992, the economy had hurt some and George H. W. Bush raised taxes after having been forced to play his hand by a Democratic congress. The Democrats nominated the sax playing, smooth talking charmer from Arkansas named Bill Clinton. It was clear with Bill Clinton’s amiable behavior that he was far more likeable than Bush. As a result, Clinton wiped the floor with him.

In 1996, the Republicans nominated old Bob Dole. Bob Dole vs Bill Clinton. Seriously Republicans? Of course, Clinton won.

In 2000, you had George W. Bush going up against vice president Al Gore. The economy was great, Clinton was popular and the Republicans had the Congress for 4 years. It made sense that Al Gore would win riding the popularity of Clinton and to balance out the branches of government. But he didn’t. Gore came across as a robot while Bush came across as a likeable cowboy from Texas that you would love to have a beer with. It was close, even bringing in the Supreme Court, but Bush won when Al Gore should’ve just skipped into the presidency.

In 2004, you had rich Massachusetts candidate John Kerry nominated to run against George W. Bush. The Iraq war was unpopular, the new media was hounding George W. Bush and he wasn’t very popular. Kerry, however, was extremely unlikeable. The man shows up in hunting gear trying to get a hunting license. It’s quite clear that there was a huge disconnect between him and the common man. Kerry’s policy changes made him comes across as untrustworthy. Other factors such as the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and other things came into play, but ultimately Bush was way more likeable than Kerry. So Bush won.

In 2008, you had a Democratic primary between the inevitable next president, Hillary Clinton vs John Edwards & Barack Obama. The problem with Hillary was, she wasn’t likeable like her husband. She came off as a power hungry entitled b-word. As such, the young articulate attractive black man, as Joe Biden described Barack Obama, ended up ultimately winning the Democrat nomination. Republicans of course nominated the old unlikeable moderate, McCain. In the debates, it was clear that Barack Obama came off better than McCain. Barack Obama was extremely likeable when he gave speeches and had the passion behind him. McCain didn’t. As a result, Obama won.

So what are we going to do in 2012? Will it follow the same pattern?

On so many levels it is not as big of a deal as people think it is.

At this time in 1991 Bill Clinton had practically no money and no real operation in any state. Also he was at about 5% in the polls. He had a very late rise in the polls in 1991. Bill was able to barely get a ground operation going in the early states before taking the nomination. Bill proves that you can be a nobody in October and win a several months later.

At this time in 2003, the wealthy John Kerry had little operational strength in any of the early states. In December of 2003, Kerry decided to “bet the farm” on Iowa and increased his operational strength about 20 fold in the state by shipping in over a hundred operatives a week. Kerry proved there is no requirement to have a ground operation all season long as long as you have a good one on caucus/primary day.

At this time in 2007, John McCain had gone through and spent all of his money for the race. He was forced to drop paid staffers, pollsters, all ads, etc. as his operation shrunk to a tiny fraction of what it was. He even had to take out a loan collateralized by his donor/contact list just so he could stay in the race and not close down. When he took a coach flight to New Hampshire the few days before the primary he had basically no money, barely any staffers, and spent his evening outside in Manchester shaking hands and waving to cars. It wasn’t until after he won NH that he started getting money back in.

So especially today with the amount 24/7 news coverage, the sheer amount of debates, and the prevalence of the internet for distributing information about the candidates money and organization is less of a factor than many think it is. Its still definitely a factor, but the presence of it doesn’t by itself make you a contender and the lack of it doesn’t make you a non-contender.

Also, if Meg Whitman couldn’t buy California in 2010, Mitt Romney couldn’t buy the nomination in 2008, than there is no way in he!! Obama will be able to buy the country next year if his fundraising is really as stellar as liberals think it will be.

I find that hard to believe.

The Conservative Hand: a Manifesto to Achieve Conservative Political Goals

alt2p.org The American Legitimate Tax Second Party

Every other news source from GBTV to Sean Hannity’s Luntz group observed the lame unpresidential pile-on against Romney.

Some seem to hate Romney so much that they are blind to the facts. They revel in “getting under his skin”. Duh. He was being screamed from by two people at the same time, using up his clock and making false accusations. He punched back, and won.

Reminds me of the Japanese celebrating Kamikazees. So happy to land some blows, they seem oblivious that their guys were annihilated. Perry came off EXTREMELY rude and unpresidential.

But this seems the case with these Horserace updates every time I read it. Every week, Romney has cracks, is in trouble… and it never materializes.

aren’t taking Herman Cain seriously because they ARE consultants…which he has very little use for.

http://ideas.time.com/2011/10/20/is-herman-cain-the-most-unctuous-black-man-alive/

If Romney or Newt get the nomination, I seriously doubt I’ll vote for them in the general.

If Cain or Perry get it, I might vote for them.

Sadly, there are no great, perfect candidates, but man, I’m not satisfied with any of this lot.

I’ll take my principles over political pragmatism any day of the week, even if that means Obama would win again.

Let’s face it,Newt is easily the smartest candidate and if it wasn’t for his “baggage” he would be the nominee.That’s why Obama through his media lackeys savaged him early in the game.Guess what? We’re all going to have to get over his sexual trangressions and the sooner he confronts the issue head on and out loud the better.He could destroy Obama one on one and Obama knows it.This country is in trouble and we’re not going to find the perfect human being so let’s quit shooting ourselves in the foot and get over it.Newt has to make the first move and open himself up in the next debate for the onslaught of the media.I bet if he takes the chance the country forgives him and we get rid of Obama with a real conservative.

“He’s running a national campaign convinced that his charisma, energy, and message will get people out in the early states as he builds momentum.”

Which explains why he’s up by 7 or 8 points in Iowa and IIRC up in SC and FL, and second and gaining fast in NH.

Cain’s main mission until 4-6 weeks before the IA caucuses (basically, Thanksgiving or shortly thereafter) is to make people aware he exists, which half of people still don’t know — which is why the book tour and interviews strategy is perfect.

Campaigning 101 says that the ground game isn’t important until 2-3 weeks out, and he needs 2-3 weeks to get it ready. Why is it any different now?

…I’ll scream.

Doesn’t this just support the narrative about why so many of us don’t trust Romney? He seems like an overeager technocrat to me. Will he insist that Congress pass all 59 points at once, like Obama did? As long as the Dems keep 41 seats in the Senate I’m sure it will be DOA.

We don’t need a 59 point plan. 3 or 4 good ideas well implemented will do the trick.

This aired on CNN yesterday.

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2011/10/19/jk-romney-illegal-gardener.cnn

Consultants because it is their lifeblood, they sell opinions in the off season and their services during the campaign cycle. The MSM because they live in the pocket of the Democrat party.

There was an interesting analysis of Cain’s campaign by Robert Costa on National Review Online. It makes interesting reading and suggests that Cain’s lack of a traditional organization may not be the death knell that many assume.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/280725/can-cain-do-it-robert-costa

This is far from a two man race. The pundits, consultants, and media have something in common. They see our national politics through the lens of DC, and perhaps a couple of urban centers. Even when they venture out into the real world in which the rest of us live, their understanding of the depth of anger and purpose that pervades the electorate is blunted by their presumption of greater experience, knowledge, or wisdom.

When Hawaii is not a safe state for Senate democrats:
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2011/10/hi-sen-tightens-up.html
you are looking at a year when anything can happen.

Maybe Cain’s lack of organization dooms his chances, maybe Newt’s baggage is to heavy, but this already an election cycle unlike any in my lifetime. At this point At least for the top four it’s anyones race.

Isn’t one of his proposals to cut the Cap Gains rate but only for those making less than $250K a year? If it is a good idea, why shouldn’t it be for anyone?

I think this is what we will get from Romney. More tinkering around the edges of a system that is failing.

Many of us, perhaps a growing number, really want Ron Paul’s Budget Plan and brain in the race. He has the best Budget Plan – better than the Tea Party Plan. All of the tax discussion is a turnoff, as we do not want more taxes, and restructuring taxes looks dangerous. The greatest problem for our country is the fiscal crisis, and Ron Paul is the only one who has a platform that solves it.

The other candidates are not providing detailed plans for solving our economic problems. They are all looking very anemic and less competent by comparison to Ron Paul. We need good solid non-socialist, non- New World Order leadership. We want the most competent guy with the best plan for president, or our country is gone.

and at the next debate, instead of jumping on each other, hopefully, the candidates will at least attempt to indicate what they like about the other guy’s tax plan and then indicate what they would do differently.
It’s about setting a tone of adults so that all viewers come away with the impression that, whoever, is the ultimate nominee, that it’s REPUBLICANS with the ideas and who are willing to look for and seek the best… FOR THE NATION…. and not about beating the other Republican.

Would be Cain/Gingrich, but I would settle for Gingrich/Cain. They are both largly trying to observe the 11th Commandment and if they do, it would make them the logical choices for each other whoever comes out on top. A two way split can still defeat a 25% at the polls, but a three way split gives it to Romney. Bachmann disappointed me with her Guardasil attack on Perry, and her “devil in the details” comment about 999, so she’s toast, now the only way to redeem herself is to NOT get behind the RINO when she drops out! Unfortunately that still leave Perry, Newt and Cain. The only remaining hope we have is that the chicanery being indulged in by the Romneyites pushing the primaries up to lock in delegates before consolidation occurs get exposed and the resulting backlash erodes the 25% that support him now!

Who else standing on that stage has done the job?

1. Brought record breaking jobs into the state during a recession, technology, automakers, cut the deals gotten the jobs.

2. Implemented risk pools for the non-insured excluded for pre-existing conditions before anybody else even thought of it.

3. Fought off the leftests who wanted to imlement a state sales tax and kept taxes low.

4. Gave Texas parents an opt-out (four years before Gardasil approved) of any immunizations they deemed dangerous to their children since 1950 when immunizations were required. As the leftists tried to make you believe he was forcing immunizations on little girls.

5. Dealt with a 1200 mile border, mostly wilderness, and put more Texas boots on the ground to stop the influx and protect.

6. Implemented tort reform, loser pay. Who started implementing tort reform when he was a democrat and got drummed out of the party for it. I was standing in the gallery watching the Texas Trial Lawyers trying to stare down the legislators that year.

7. Who fights the EPA off our resources and is willing to kick them to the curb.

8. Who’s been elected 5 times in his state because of his record of successes and his ability to admit when he makes mistakes and corrects them.

9. Who’ll damn the consequences and call you heartless when he’s trying to implement a good outcome for our state with children brought here through no fault of our own. AND who aren’t going anywhere because Americans will not have the guts to march 20 million men, women and children back across the southern border. Have any of you actually heard ANY candidate say what their solution is after we secure the border? I haven’t heard any republican even willing to discuss the subject of a solution after it’s secured.

Who else on that stage has actually done the job??? NONE OF THEM!

Mitt Romney is a loser, the mill towns had disappeared and he did nothing to get them back and they’re still disappearing party because of RomneyCare. He claims he produced jobs, but all he did was quick sleazy money deals that fired off the old employees and hired cheap new ones. Voila! Success! Cheap easy money success.

Has Bachmann done what Perry has done? NO. And when she turned into a political hack, with no facts, she turned me off. Has Newt? NO. I love Newt’s scholarship and knowledge. Has Santorum? NO. Rather unstable. Has Ron Paul? NO. Not a republican, he’s a libertarian. Has Cain? NO. I like Cain a lot. He’s my second choice.

Haha, Can you tell I’m a Perry fan? That’s because I’ve watched Texas grow as other states are devastated.

is not going to come along! Even the Gipper had flaws, although I can’t think of any right now, except that he trusted Congress for Spending Cuts/Tax increases…

We need to be careful not to “eat” our own! Let’s pick someone that’s a strong leader with a backbone, who can articulate his leadership, fiscally conservative, has strong morals (socially conservative).

With ANYONE there’s going to be grey areas, some skeletons in the closet, but let a candidate stand by what he’s saying now, prove where he’s at now.

Romney says & does what he needs to to get elected. He’s proved that over & over.

Perry has made mistakes, admitted it & corrected himself. With this education thing, it “seems” to be a bandaid for a large problem – 1st of all, how many illegals are going to take advantage of this? I don’t believe that the hispanics are fighting to get into college anyhow, are they? I’m speaking from what I see in our neighborhood, I don’t know what the national stats are on this…
As for the Gore/Demo stuff, the 1st person I ever voted for was Barry Commoner! Yet, I’m probably as far right now as is Rush or Hannity, maybe even pretty close to Beck & Savage.. People grow up & open their eyes…

Cain has a LOT of chuzpa & financial business smarts AND a LOT of personality. He needs to “mature” his speech & make sure he is really sure of what he’s saying.

Bachman really did ME in because of her HPV crap. I love her in so many ways, BUT…

Then there’s Newt… brilliant, articulate, debator, experience… but where is he on social issues & can he hold to his stands without compromising…

which puts him in 6th! As terrible as Mitt supposedly is, he is at 21%. Cain is leading right now with 28%. Sure, Iowa is a different animal and organization is key and Perry will have cash to build one – but regardless of the wishful thinking of this post – if Perry finishes behind Romney in Iowa and then gets blown out in NH – does Perry have a viable path to victory at that point? I am guessing that a bad loss in Iowa will hurt him somewhat in South Carolina – though he’ll still be favored, but with Michigan, Florida, and Nevada up next – can Perry bounce back in any of those states?

We won’t know until January 15th, but I wonder if his fundraising has stalled out a bit – as you have to think a lot of his early haul came easy and quickly in August/September when he was riding high (38%) in the polls and hadn’t debated yet.

Sorry to be the realist here.