Debates Will Separate the Contenders from the Also-Rans
Unlike most pundits, I don’t count Newt Gingrich out just yet. He shines in the debates and has the most substantive policy positions of any of the candidates. He can generate excitement with big, detailed ideas and present himself as the “change” candidate of 2012. The media often overlooks the huge applause that follows whenever one of the candidates speaks out against Sharia law. There is a highly-motivated part of the Republican electorate looking for its anti-Islamist warrior. Gingrich could very well become their guy. The biggest problem he faces is that people don’t want to volunteer for, or donate to, a lost cause. And that’s what his candidacy looks like. He has to do something to prove that his campaign is viable, and must hope that other candidates drop out soon so he has more time to speak at the debates.
Ron Paul is a significant player this time around, but he has hit the ceiling of his support. Former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson has been given absolutely no attention, so Paul isn’t competing with anyone for the libertarian vote. He could have a strong showing in New Hampshire, and his campaign has made issues like the gold standard, isolationism, and the Federal Reserve part of the discussion. However, he has no pathway to win the nomination, but his campaign has always been more about ideas than viability.
Former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum is the one most likely to target Perry. He had a strong debate performance last time around, and performed surprisingly well in the Ames Straw Poll. His problem is that other candidates have taken away the rationale for his candidacy. He’s lost evangelical and social conservative support to Bachmann and Perry. He lost in a landslide in 2006, so he can’t argue that he’s electable. His only hope is to compete with Gingrich for the anti-Islamist vote and bring attention to weaknesses in Bachmann’s and Perry’s records. It’s hard to see a way forward for him.
Herman Cain came in fifth place in the Ames Straw Poll after hoping to be in the top three. He shot himself in the foot when he embraced a Muslim Brotherhood front to try to make up for his statement in support of communities banning the construction of mosques. He’s a good speaker, but there’s no longer a case for his candidacy.
Former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman is dead in the water. He had a horrible debut debate performance. If you drank every time he said he was proud of his service, you wouldn’t remember the night. He is hoping to rally the moderate vote behind him like McCain did in 2008. The flaw in that strategy is that the Republican Party has moved sharply to the right since then, and McCain’s centrism was tolerated because of the party’s political weakness at that time. Huntsman’s only chance is to appeal in a major way to independent voters in New Hampshire, but it’s hard to see how he appeals to anyone if he performs in the upcoming debates like he did in the last one.
The World Series for political junkies begins September 7.Get your food and drinks ready.
Understandably, everyone want the job. What the nation wants is a unified front, one that will highlight the many failures of Obama and minimize the differences between the candidates.
In other words, no sniping, y’all. This will be an issues-driven campaign, or at least it should be. No more vagarities or platitudes, we want to hear concrete plans for reducing the size, scope, and intrusion of the federal government in our lives.
The candidate who can best outline a common-sense plan, and then support that plan when the MSM invariably attacks them as “extreme” will win.
“Understandably, everybody wants the job”
Frankly, I have never undestood why anybody would want the job.
Sure it’s high prestige, you also get a nifty plane and a fancy house, but President of the United States of America must be one of the worst jobs in the world.
To begin with, you’re hated by about half the population. Obama has been the target of a lot of attacks. Some earned, some not. For those who think it’s because Barry deserves it, Bush was at least as attacked during his terms.
The stress level of the job is unbelievable. Does anybody remember when Obama had dark hair? In 2008 Obama looked fairly young. Now he looks like a broken down old man. Presidents age quickly.
You are on the hook for anything that happens. War goes badly? It’s the President’s fault. Oil prices go up? That darned President did it. The economy has a downturn? Blame the President. Sometimes the President could have done better, but usually factors beyond the President’s control are the culpirt. The President gets the blame nonetheless.
It doesn’t matter if the President is liberal or conservative. They are likely to not get credit for anything that goes well and sure to get the blame if things go badly.
Oh, and the job, compared to the average CEO, pays garbage.
I would rather work for minimum wage than be President.
Only the drive to make a better country, or the hate of and desire to destroy our America such as Barako is doing,is the answer to that !!
“The World Series for political junkies begins September 7.Get your food and drinks ready.”
Better ad Pepto-Bismol to the list because every time the clowns in this circus race step into the ring more voters will go back to supporting Obama.
Leading from behind transforms into winning from behind. Something Republicans always seem to forget when they’re busy fighting each other.
I know, I need to have a positive attitude. But it’s hard for me to pretend that I’m soaring with the eagles when forced to pick with chickens and gobble with turkeys.
Troll alert!
Maybe I should had said, “Wanted: Real Cojones” instead of “Wanted: Moose Hunter”..?
In any event, isn’t it a tad bit strange that one or two ladies jumbles up the remote control buttons of so many real, conservative men?
Go ahead – seduce us with more winning wisdom..
Right on up until Obama takes his second oath of office in January 2012.
2013, Troll. And I sincerely hope the voters will prove you wrong.
Me too, nevertheless if you listen carefully to Messrs. Limbaugh, Hannity and Levine, among others they more, than less agree with what I said.
Someone in the pack needs to muscle up against Obama and the liberal media instead of pussy footing around or, worse yet trying to play their game as if it will win them more votes.
When and if you think about it, if the Republicans manage to gain back the Whitehouse and Congress, it will take the better part of the next four to five generations of them staying in power while at the same time forcefully applying conservative fixes in order to straighten out the mess Obama has made of our country.
The typical assortment of GOP prince powder puffs won’t last 2 years into the first generation. Hence, if a woman is the only one demonstrably willing to do the job versus more G / K Street piddling, then by damn the conservative voters of both genders should drop their chevanistic, knee jerk reactions and get with the program.
If they don’t the certifiable trolls will make certain that Obama wins reelection.
Get it?
No kidding
Troll alert? Nobody is mentioning it but the host for this debate is NBC. If it is trolls then they face attack by Lilliputians.
What we are going to see is how well the smart candidates faced with the enemy can 1) Get down in a political fox hole 2) Return enemy fire which will be coming from the moderators 3) Provide supporting fire for other Republicans (I expect Newt to win this one but anyone can score) and 4) How badly Obama wants to run against one of them. I expect Romney will be getting slow pitch softballs.
No. 3 will be where the critical points are scored. Points for cabinet offices and leadership will be demonstrated by points scored against the MSNBC enemy. Herman Cain could move into a Senate Office, a Governorship or a Secretary post in the next three years based on his scoring Party points.
I don’t think that the hosts will be smart enough to hide their preference for Romney but like the Fox hosts will be tossing questions designed to get the candidates into backstabbing each other. The one who may be tempted is Romney since he now has another Governor from a populous state that can raise money and has a much better record than Mitt Romney’s in Massachusetts.
No need to pick a chicken or a turkey from the Republican line-up.
Take a look at new entry (couple weeks ago) BUDDY ROEMER. Check his website, click on his Dartmouth speech declaring his candidacy. The media (including this comprehensive article) hasn’t seen fit to acknowledge that there ARE newcomers to the line-up. Establishment Republicans who pick and choose who qualifies for each debate have not seen fit to include Romney in September 7th. If we all raise a bit of hell and INSIST, could change future debates.
Here’s the funny thing. If the Republican establishment were shrewd enough to recognize it, Roemer’s key running issues are the only POPULISM pluses the Republican party has. Roemer is unique in that he is in this Republican race with a platform of high appeal to independents like me–challenging the corruption of Congress by lobbyists, etc. and guaranteed winner, moving from “free” trade to fair trade. He actually could beat Obama emphasizing trade/china/etc issue. This is POPULISM ACROSS ALL PARTY LINES FROM LEFT TO RIGHT.
Nobody but nobody wants our “free” trade–we all know we’re being ripped off– EXCEPT multi-nationals who sell us out and move to China to make bigger bucks, and economics professors with tenure.
OOPS! a typo — of course I meant Roemer (not Romney) being kept out of September 7 debate.
This business of Republicans attacking other Republicans must have Reagan spinning in his grave.
I yearn for a candidate who vows up front that “I will never, ever say anything about another candidate for the position I seek, regardless of whether that candidate is a Republican or a Democrat, nor will I tolerate any of my staffers or supporters doing so. I want to win this race on my merits, not on anyone else’s supposed shortcomings” — and holds to that promise throughout his campaign.
I for one am impressed with the primary process so far. I personally hope that Sarah Palin decides to enter the race, but Governor Rick Perry, Congresswoman Michele Bachmann,Governor Mitt Romney, Speaker Newt Gingrich,and most especially Congressman Ron Paul will give the American people a fair representation of the major issues and the possible solutions for this countries current malaise. Well done, America, for once the main stream media will not be the deciding factor in who runs our country. Now if we could only find a way to more speedily vote the Statist Media out of power.
Just curious but does anyone think there’s a chance Ron Paul will move from Republican to Independent. Ross Perot was a key ingredient in Clintons election. Scares me to think of it.
It wouldn’t matter even if he did.
Everyone knows that Paul is a Libertarian who has his hardcore followers and little else.
He can’t get the support of social conservatives or those who actually like a self-defense policy.
1 out of 3 (he is somewhat conservative economicly) is abyssmal.
People know what Paul is. Changing his flag won’t change what he is.
Just trying to figure out why the organizers of these debates did not invite Gov. Gary Johnson? He deserves a spot. I believe he is a candidate that the center of America could vote for.
Love America: I agree with you. Governor Johnson is a strong fiscal conservative and is not a religious socialist who would use big government to impose fundamentalist Christian religious ideology on the country.
Relax everybody – the media and the old guard Republicans will decide for us. That is, they will choose the weakist/McCain-like loser to go against Obama.
You are correct. Also, Obama is causing only a little pain to the American public. We have not felt the full amount of pain that he is capable of.
Therefore, with a weak opponent from the rep. obama followers and independents will have another brain freeze and Obama will destroy the rest.
As the old guard Russians use to say, ” When they have done our work, we will put them under the boot”.
Newt isn’t out of it yet? Ron Paul is a significant player? Well so much for this pundit’s thoughts. Now onto something that matters.
Why on earth do people place so much importance on these debates, when every thinking person knows that some people are better at off-the-cuff verbal jockeying than others. And everybody also knows that the skill has no impact at all on a president’s performance, since a president is always surrounded by advisors and has access to the most and best
inforation in the world.
You could make a better case that the best “debater” (in the formats we are forced to accept) is more likely to be the worst president, since somebody who succeeds in the format is likely to have an inflated idea of the merits of his off-the-cuff abilility to do sound-bites.
2008 finally proved once and for all that the best debate “performer” is likely to be a sociopathic, amoral, narcissistic con artist who has practiced his entire life to act like we have been trained to think a president should act.
Proreason, you’re dead on. Barry wins on two counts: theoretically “best” debater, clearly worst president ever.
Meanwhile, I’m anoyed/turned off by those who attack each other rather than confront the very real threats Obama epitomizes. Are you listening, potential candidates?
Briefly:
Newt – NO
Bachman – Interesting, but not ready
Cain – Interesting, but not ready
Huntsman – No
Paul – Give me a break
Santorum – Who?
Anyone without direct, hands-on executive experience will have a difficult time winning my support. That leaves:
Palin – Not now, maybe never. She’s valuable elsewhere.
Perry – Remains to be seen
Romney – Meh
Just saying.
With apologies to the late W.S. Churchill, never in the history of American presidential politics has so much attention been given so far in advance to so many people vying for the GOP nomination.
Or is that that henceforth focus on the presidential challengers is to be had the year prior to the election, with the challenger chosen no later than January 1 of the election year — so that the mnedia ignoring news development pertaining to the federal government for two years, not just one?
I like Newt. He knows the big issues, especially health care. And as a former Speaker of the House, he knows the legislative process inside-out, and if you want to see some truly trans-formative legislation passed, he’s the guy to lead. He’s also got a strong libertarian streak and wants to roll back both the size and power of government. I’m supporting him.
Look up “erratic performance” and you’ll see Newt’s picture.
The Republican candidates must all go after Obama and his policies, and leave each other alone. Did anyone notice T Paw lost over 100,000 facebook friends after attacking Bachman? I noticed because I was one of them. If Pawlenty couldn’t hold his own this early, he needed to be out of the race.
I’ll have my food and drinks ready. This is my favorite time of any Presidential campaign. Lots of candidates and so many possibilites. I think it was at about this time in the 2008 campaign that John McCain was in heavy debt and all but out of the race. Anything can happen.
What the candidates have to avoid are the two mistakes Tiny Tim Pawlenty made during his debates. First, by not attacking Romney after saying Obamneycare he came across as weak. Then when attacking Michele Bachmann he came across as petty. The moral here is you have to take the attack to your opponents, but you have to do it right. This is pretty tricky.
Romney has to hit Perry with everything he’s got. Sitting back and saying nothing will kill him. He’s been described as a front runner, but if he loses in Iowa, Michigan, South Carolina and Nevada, his win in New Hampshire won’t mean much.
The article suggests that Ron Paul has hit his ceiling. I’m not so sure. If there is a segment of the Republican Party that isn’t on board with evangelical Christians they might vote Paul to oppose “theocrats” (almost everyone else). If Romney falls I can’t see his supporters backing anyone else in the field. Paul probably won’t win, but he won’t be dropping out either.
Perry and Bachmann will avoid confronting each other. For one debate. After that all bets are off.
Huntsman is actually a decent guy. It’s just that he seems to have found himself in the wrong party.
(full disclosure: I support Michele Bachmann)
If we had today’s slate back in 2007, how would it be today?
My pick was Tim Pawlenty,a all around suited for the work ahead. All are suitable for the hard slog ahead, the candidate should be able to pitch in and push for some lagging candidates for the senate election coming up- 21 Democrats are up for another 6 years, many are vulnerable, due to the unfavorable polling.
Updates on Thomas Jefferson and the MSM
With news evolving at warp speed today, it’s challenging to keep up but I can do it, at least if the news relates to developments of some significance. When the news involves Thomas Jefferson and the mainstream media, it’s definitely in need of updating.
For example, contrary to popular African-American belief, the principal author of America’s Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson, may not have authored children by his slave, Sally Hemings, and she may have been the concubine of Tom’s allegedly randy younger brother, the much less distinguished Randolph Jefferson.
No doubt the debatable Jeffersonian DNA evidence will cause widespread consternation among America’s African-American community which has claimed a Jefferson connection for a decade now, a Thomas Jefferson, not a Randolph Jefferson connection, and has to deflate their genetic pretensions.
The only definite link established by the 1998 DNA match between one of Sally Hemings’ six children, Eston Hemings, and a Jefferson was merely that, a male Jefferson match, not necessarily the Jefferson link.
Robert F. Turner, former University of Virginia professor and Chairman of the Scholars Commission, announced the release of his new book which exposes fallacies in the theory that America’s third president fathered Eston, fallacies largely predicated on circumstantial evidence.
Predictably, the new claims by 12 of the 13 members of Turner’s commission are disputed by various parties with a dog in the Jefferson paternity fight, groups and individuals with a vested interest in the matter.
Leslie G. Bowman, president of the Thomas Jefferson Foundation, objectively noted that, “Like the scholars commission . . . the foundation acknowledges there is no way to fully prove or disprove the issue. Our evidence is the same as their evidence–our interpretation of it is different.”
Absent testimony by Sally, Thomas, and Randolph, we will never know the truth.
The truth about the MSM–that it is dominated by liberals, leftists, Democrats, and Obamalovers–is indisputable even as most of the mainstream media continue their absurd pretense of journalistic integrity and objectivity.
Led by the “Old, Grey Lady,” the New York Times which gets greyer and more partisan by the day and which prints all the news it sees fit to print, Obama’s media antedated Obama in their decades-long campaigns to distort news in favor of liberals and liberal points of view at the same time they disparaged, ridiculed, and denounced Republicans and conservatives.
As far back as Dwight Eisenhower whom the media often depicted as a militaristic dolt, through Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush, both of whom were customarily characterized as nincompoops–and worse–the media portrayed anyone who didn’t tow the leftist line as serving far above their pay grade.
Richard Nixon and George H. W. Bush 41 escaped those characterizations, Nixon because he carried so much other baggage that attacks on his intelligence would be superfluous, Bush 41 because he was a war hero and a closet liberal. Ironically, those presidents the MSM delighted most in attacking, Ike, Ronaldus Magnus, and GWB, all won second terms.
Dutifully serving as Barack Hussein Obama’s election vanguard, the so-called mainstreamers trotted out their expected salvos early and often in their efforts to decimate Republican contenders for the presidency of every stripe before they could mount a viable threat to their tainted hero. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5329.)