AP critiques Perry’s latest Iowa spot
The Perry campaign has a huge ad blitz under way in Iowa, aimed at the state’s influential evangelical/social conservative community. The campaign has spent some $2 million, according to the Associated Press.
The spot was designed to be controversial. It stretches the facts on several points, and it is very aggressive in its attack on gays and on Obama, whom Perry accuses of conducting a “war on religion.” The rest is just a lot of pandering to the far right. (As always, he looks great on TV.)
The AP did an analysis of the Perry ad, in which it said:
Struggling for traction in the Republican contest, Perry is gambling that the religious conservatives who typically dominate Iowa’s kickoff caucuses will warm to his candidacy if he appeals to them with a socially conservative message. He’s also drawing a contrast with rival Mitt Romney – whose Mormon faith gives many evangelicals pause – and Newt Gingrich, who recently converted to Catholicism but has been divorced twice and has acknowledged infidelity in his first two marriages.
But this ad, which attacks President Barack Obama on gay rights and religion, is misleading and inaccurate.
Perry’s suggestion that Obama has led the way in banning prayer in public school is factually wrong.
The Supreme Court prohibited school prayer in two landmark decisions in 1962 and 1963, calling it an unconstitutional violation of the First Amendment. The court has repeatedly reaffirmed restrictions on religious expression in public schools, including a decision banning the posting of the Ten Commandments in school and another prohibiting students from using a school loudspeaker to offer a prayer before football games.
Obama signed legislation earlier this year repealing the so-called “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy that prohibited gays from serving openly in the military. The legislation was passed by both the House and Senate with the support of several Republicans, and had the backing of several high-ranking military officials including former Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. While many religious conservatives may not support gay rights, it’s a stretch to characterize the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell as an Obama “war on religion.”
I agree with the AP that the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, which was backed by the military brass at the highest level and has even won over some initial detractors, is hardly the equivalent of a presidential war on religion, especially since it had to pass Congress, which, as you may have noticed, can hardly agree on anything these days. But Perry has little choice except to woo the evangelical community. Opponents have shot his claims of Texas exceptionalism full of holes; they have charged him with crony capitalism; and they have found him squishy on the issue of immigration. This ad may gain him support among evangelicals, but it certainly isn’t selling to the general public. As of this post, the ad had 3,499 “likes” as opposed to 159,086 “dislikes.” And a new Time/CNN/ORC poll shows Perry running fourth in Iowa, with 9% of the vote.
Hamburglar says:
Great strategy! While families around the nation worry about job security, medical bills, wars without endings or definitions, taxes to pay for illegal immigrants in schools and emergency rooms, and invasive homeland security on the general (taxpayer) population…. the Perry play is to go after gays in the military.
I know gays in the military is a dog-whistle issue for other social conservative issues, but …wow… just wow.
BTW the tea party was never, ever in the beginning about fringe social issues like gays in military. It was about taxes, bailouts, crony capitalism from the left and right controllers.
Perry’s failure with this strategy should be noted later as a point where religious junk like Rove used to use to rally a base isn’t working, at least not to split off the majority of conservative voters who are more annoyed with the DC culture of corruption than the issue of gays in the military.
People are finally able to de-link the issues and drill into the Ron Paul-led debate, framed by real issues… which for all is why (for all his warts) Newt is still standing with Paul and Romney.
It’s about the pocketbook these days, not the Bible.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
December 8th, 2011 at 2:22 pm
Will someone please ask Toomey to secure Perry with a job already so Perry can gracefully bow out of this race and resign as Governor? How much longer do we have to be tortured? There are much more important things to discuss right now. Such as the Wentworth race..
Reply »
Abbott can't litigate to save a sorry Texas map Reply:
December 8th, 2011 at 8:23 pm
Hahahahahaha!!
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
December 14th, 2011 at 11:33 am
Re Anonymous, above:
Toomey can’t be Toomey without Perry. Toomey needs Perry more than Perry needs Toomey.
Reply »
Teton says:
It’s just the annual War on Christmas campaign. Someone was bound to do it.
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/401791/november-08-2011/the-blitzkrieg-on-grinchitude—fired-santa-claus—colbert-super-pac-christmas
Reply »
Anonymous says:
He is doing anything possible to get traction. I don’t blame him. Each “Not-Newt” bubble eats up about 8-10 weeks. If you account 2 weeks for the holidays, Newt has about a 12 week bubble to enjoy. That is long enough to make him the broker at any convention. At the end of the day it is Romney, but with Newt being the last man out – it will most probably be a Romney/Gingrich ticket. Perry needs to position himself as a good choice for Secretary of Something in a Romney administration.
Reply »
Robert Morrow Reply:
December 8th, 2011 at 10:38 am
Secretary of Mack Daddy.
Reply »
Stevie F. says:
Gingrich’s rise in the polls only proves that Republican voters are looking for economic salvation from their candidate and they’ll find their spiritual leadership elsewhere.
In any case, Perry might have more luck if he stuck with a theme for more than a day or two. Constantly changes messages makes him look erratic and desperate.
Reply »
texun says:
If you have followed Perry’s career, you are never surprised when he lies. It’s default mode for Slick Rick. The truth isn’t in him. The various “truth-tester” columns even stretch their interpretations to give him “half truth” awards. Isn’t there something in the Decalogue about bearing false witness? But, the Commandments don’t apply to you, if God has called you to run for president. Then you get to make your own rules. Ask Perry.
Reply »
Robert Morrow says:
If Gingrich is the Tea Party’s answer to Obama, then the question must be what can we do to ensure 4 more years of Obama.
“Gingrich up Big in Florida, Ohio, Pennsyvania”
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/12/08/gingrich_up_big_in_florida_ohio_pennsylvania_112323.html
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks says:
Voters ain’t buying the democrat’s bs:
“A report released Wednesday by the centrist think-tank Third Way showed that more than 825,000 voters in eight key battleground states have fled the Democratic Party since Obama won election in 2008.
“The numbers show that Democrats’ path to victory just got harder,” said Lanae Erickson, the report’s co-author. “We are seeing both an increase in independents and a decrease in Democrats and that means the coalition they have to assemble is going to rely even more on independents in 2012 than it did in 2008.”
Guv Perry grasps why voters are angry, they ain’t buying the dismantling of America. His ad will resonate with two groups, Americans and voters.
2012 will be a bloodbath for democrats.
Reply »
Red Reply:
December 8th, 2011 at 11:18 am
A majority of Iowa conservatives support gay marriage (25%) or civil unions (35%). On my mobile right now so I can’t find the exact poll or numbers, but I know this is close to the right ones. Iowa has had legal gay marriage for a few years now…he’s running this ad without understanding the politics of it in the state. (“SCREW YOU GAY AMERICAN VETERAN” doesn’t really resonate with any sane person)
Reply »
Jerry Only Reply:
December 8th, 2011 at 1:51 pm
aint buyin what you sellin. keep the bs up and ignoring reality.
Reply »
Jerry Only Reply:
December 9th, 2011 at 12:46 am
also from gallup
“Republicans’ enthusiasm about voting in the election for president next year has decreased, with 49% of Republicans and independents who lean Republican now saying they are more enthusiastic than usual about voting, down from 58% in September. This narrows the gap between them and Democrats, 44% of whom are more enthusiastic than usual, essentially the same as in September.”
Reply »
Indi says:
After this demagoguery, how can Perry come back to Texas and be taken seriously. This is not only humiliating to him and to Texans, but he will pay a political price in Texas for this dispicable behavior. Who in Texas can take him seriously after this idiocy? Even his pollster Fabrizio said the new ad is nuts. This is a new low. And all Texans are implicated in this. We elevated him, didn’t we?
Reply »
Distinguished Gentleman Reply:
December 8th, 2011 at 1:38 pm
Indi, I must say that Rick Perry is the best ammunition available to come along in a quite some time in favor of term limits.
After all, isn’t Perry currently the longest “serving” Governor in the entire United States?
Reply »
Cowboy Bill Weed Reply:
December 13th, 2011 at 9:15 am
Perry talks the anti-guvment talk, but is a career politician. He talks jobs, and created none. He talks the talk his donors tell him to talk and panders to ther far right lunatic fringe. He is done. Stick a fork in him.
Reply »
JFK's Ghost says:
Anybody notice how Perry is wearing the same jacket in this ad that was worn by Heath Ledger in Brokeback Mountain? Just sayin…
http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/rick-perrys-brokeback-mountain-moment/politics/2011/12/08/31424
Reply »
Robert Morrow says:
Question: Why does Rick Perry wear the SAME camel jacket as the Brokeback Mountain guy? ha ha
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=324864320876361&set=a.223098324386295.105971.205344452828349&type=1&theater
Reply »
Robert Morrow Reply:
December 8th, 2011 at 11:38 am
I immediately posted that one without reading the comments above. Karma.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
December 9th, 2011 at 1:09 pm
Perry = Kerry – at least in terms of faux populist outerwear. Wonder if he’s still wearing those French cuffs underneath all that Carhartt?
http://photos.signonsandiego.com/election2004/kerryhug
Reply »
Robert Morrow Reply:
December 13th, 2011 at 4:54 pm
Perry and French cuffs? Read this George Will puff piece on Perry from 6/24/11 in San Antonio:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/rick-perry-a-texans-exceptionalism/2011/06/24/AG79PejH_story.html
“French cuffs and cowboy boots are, like sauerkraut ice cream, an eclectic combination, but Perry, who wears both, is a potentially potent candidate for the Republican presidential nomination because his political creed is uneclectic, matching that of the Republican nominating electorate.”
By the way, George Will’s wife Mari is a paid *consultant* to the Rick Perry campaign. Just buy you the wife of an opinion maker, a la Perry’s contributors funding Anita at the TAASA.
Pikachu says:
Our Gov should have borrowed Sen. Cornyn’s Howdy Doody fringe jacket.
Reply »
Glen Maxey says:
And the YouTube Likes/Dislikes has sprinted past 200,000 dislikes. I expect it’ll be a quarter of a million by nightfall. I don’t know how it’s playing with the fundies in Iowa, but America ain’t liking it.
Any you guys know that all gay cowboys shop at the same stores. Bound to happen about that jacket. LOL
Reply »
Cornholio Reply:
December 8th, 2011 at 4:52 pm
americans aren’t liking it: code for gay activists and libs telling their friends and fellow felchers to traffick the site in great numbers to ramp up the dislikes.
Reply »
Dave Reply:
December 8th, 2011 at 5:14 pm
You have a point, Beavis. OTOH, the fact that so few have bothered to ‘like’ the video in response paints a pretty good picture of how dead in the water Perry’s campaign is. He’s not drumming up any sympathy. Nobody cares.
Reply »
Cornholio Reply:
December 8th, 2011 at 5:50 pm
one side engaged in a campaign to tarnish the video, the other side went forward with more important work besides the sideshow of generating likes for a video.
I think what matters is whether it works in Iowa — not at Rainbow establishments where they like the YMCA — and we will know soon enough.
Col. Mike Kirby Reply:
December 9th, 2011 at 8:41 am
everything’s a conspiracy for you morons, isn’t it.
Reply »
Distinguished Gentleman says:
Rick Perry would do well to remember the old saying about people in glass houses not throwing stones.
Reply »
Nick says:
So is the press only gonna be Perry’s BFF if Gingrich implodes? Seems like they are ready to pounce on him at this point…
Reply »
Texian Politico says:
DADT was repealed by a lame duck Democratic congress that didn’t have the balls to vote for it when they faced reelection. Also, don’t expect the top brass to tell the Commander-in-Chief anything he doesn’t want to hear. Perhaps Admiral Roughhead (real name) liked the idea, but few in the rank and file did. Gen. Amos was one of the few with the guts to speak against it and he got wacked around for that. For the same reason male and female troops do not shower and sleep together in the military, open homosexuals should not be allowed to serve in the military. Serving in the military is not a right. The military discriminates a great deal. You can not serve if you are blind, deaf, too short, too tall, too old, too fat, too dumb to pass the ASVAB, have a criminal background, etc, etc. The repeal of DADT was never about making the military more prepared to fight, but rather about social engineering and the fulfillment of a left-wing agenda.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
December 8th, 2011 at 3:15 pm
You were persuasive until the last sentence, where you then revealed yourself as an ideologue. Strike ” social engineering..I’m a real man..conservative.blah..blah..left-wing..bullshit..” and insert “sex.” Thank you. My editing services are free for now.
Reply »
Alan Reply:
December 8th, 2011 at 6:35 pm
“For the same reason male and female troops do not shower and sleep together in the military, open homosexuals should not be allowed to serve in the military.”
If, in your universe, gays and lesbians are all sex-maniacs who try to screw everything of the same sex that moves, what difference does it make if they’re open about it or not? That makes about as much sense as saying a male soldier can’t share quarters with female soldiers unless he disguises himself as a woman.
A gay soldier who makes unwanted advances towards other men should be disciplined the same way a straight soldier who makes unwanted advances towards woman should be disciplined. Then again, the military has a despicable record of failing to protect female members against sexual assault and appropriately discipline victimizers. So maybe we should ban heterosexual men from serving in the military too.
Reply »
siddy Reply:
December 10th, 2011 at 11:25 am
Alan, Your argument makes no sense. The military does not discriminate against people with disabilities. You have to be capable of the physical & mental aspects of the job in order to have the job. If you’re blind, you obviously shouldn’t fire a weapon (except here in Texas, of course).
What physical impairment is inherent in homosexuality that causes a person to be unable to perform the duties of a soldier/Marine? Oh what’s that? Homosexuality is not a physical/mental impairment? Then they should be allowed to serve if qualified for the job.
No, serving in the military is not a right, it is a service and sacrifice to our country and we should respect ALL people who choose to put themselves on the line for their country. There are many homosexuals in the military who serve honorably and bravely. They deserve the same respect as people who are heterosexual.
FYI, I’m a raging liberal.
Reply »
siddy Reply:
December 10th, 2011 at 11:26 am
Ugh. I meant Texian Politico. Sorry about that, Alan!
Reply »
W. B. Travis Reply:
December 12th, 2011 at 3:17 pm
Well said.
H. Bloodworth III says:
For a long time I shared the bafflement about Perry’s persistence, but it has gradually dawned upon me that his untiring self-marketing may be a judicious investment. The man is a super-model, folks, and we’re paying for one heck of an ad campaign for his future. He is also an exhibitionist, in the harmless sense, and we are enabling him to jet around like a 21st-century Mussolini, leading his pack of armed public servants and laughing, now, at his own former cries for accountability and transparency. He’s a true son of Texas, and, as the song says, his mother has made him what he is. I predict he will be selling boots, successfully, within the decade.
Reply »
WUSRPH Reply:
December 8th, 2011 at 6:33 pm
As for Perry becoming a boot salesman, to perryphrase an old saying about Richard Nixon:
“Would you buy a used boot from that man?”
Reply »
WUSRPH says:
Has anyone but me seen the article in that well-known “fellow traveler”, Communist, Pink, Socialist, Anarchist and otherwise leftist, slanted, liberal publication entitled “National Review” which demolishes one of the favorite “conservative” claims—that 47% of the people “pay no taxes” and are getting a free-ride at the expense of the rest of us? The article terms the claim to be “The Freeloader MYTH” and reports that the Tax Policy Center (not known as a leftist hotbed) estimates that at the current time no more than 18%—not 47%–are “non-payers” of federal taxes. It also says that “that worrying too much about this number will lead conservatives down an intellectual and political dead end.” (Actually, I thought they had gone down that way a long time ago.) What do you want to bet that the big mouths on the right totally ignore the story and continue using this false and alarmist charge? P.S. Just so there is no confusion, the article is on pages 33-34 of the November 28, 2011, edition, not the April 1st issue.)
Reply »
Abbott can't litigate to save a sorry Texas map says:
Lower than low, low, low. Lower than sonograms and sanctuary cities. Lower than that phony eminent domain reform garbage. Lower than low. Rick Perry is an absolute train wreck.
Reply »
Robert Morrow says:
As of about 9PM, the You Tube reaction to Rick Perry’s ad “Strong”
Ratings for this video (328449 total)
7,267 “Likes”
321,182 “Dislikes”
As for the title “Strong” … a high school basketball coach friend of mine had a say .. “Be about it. Don’t talk about it.”
Reply »
Robert Morrow Reply:
December 8th, 2011 at 9:08 pm
go to YouTube, keep hitting the refresh button. literally there are 30 more “dislikes” every 2 seconds.
Reply »
Harry Reply:
December 8th, 2011 at 9:25 pm
I watched it once, then hit refresh. Literally more than 600 more DISlikes in 30 seconds.
That HAS to be some kind of a record.
Reply »
Texas Ex says:
Perry’s ad disgusts me.
But it’s supposed to.
The ad is calculated to stir publicity. It is calculated to make reasonable people recoil. The ad is designed to make decent liberal and moderate people say “Perry is awful.”
The most recent Des Moines Register poll included a question about which candidate is the most socially conservative. The ranking:
27% Bachmann
17% Paul
13% Santorum
10% Gingrich
8% Romney
5% Perry
1% Huntsman
Watch that wretched ad, and ask yourself – do you really think that people who see this ad would rank Perry below Romney and Gingrich as a social conservative?
Perry cannot finish better than a campaign-ending fifth place unless he performs better among social conservatives. If this voting block breaks 2 to 1 for Bachmann instead of Perry, Perry comes in fifth, and this polling suggests that if Perry doesn’t do something dramatic, the social conservatives are going to break 2 to 1 for Bachmann rather than Perry.
In the real world, Perry’s homophobic ad offends 5 people for everyone who likes it, but Perry isn’t living in the real world. Perry is living in a world where he needs Iowan social conservatives (the same nutjobs who voted to replace the supreme court justices who upheld equal marriage rights for gays). Among this insane voting block, Perry’s ad is a home run.
This ad is disgusting.
But that’s what you do when you are tied for fourth place and you have millions of dollars to spend.
Reply »
donuthin says:
Heh, heh, heh must be depressing to be so handsome and cute and all of a sudden realize it counts for so little.
Reply »
Bennie Jetts Reply:
December 12th, 2011 at 3:21 pm
Perry is a professinal politician. He says and does whatever it take to get votes. He has no sand, no bottom. He stands for nothing. He panders to the intellectually challenged and the fearful.
This commercial is repugnant.
Reply »
Lake Worth Monster Reply:
December 12th, 2011 at 4:49 pm
… and his favorite color is plaid.
Reply »
Fred Finster says:
The perry ad team will be laughing all the way to the bank with all the damn money they are waisting.
Reply »
WUSRPH Reply:
December 8th, 2011 at 10:49 pm
There have been suggestions in some races where higher than normal payments for ads including to those doing the placements, etc. have been recycled back to the campaign or to individuals connected to the candidate or campaign. I have no knowledge of Perry’s situation and have no reason to believe that is happening in his case.
Reply »
chickasawelder Reply:
December 9th, 2011 at 11:00 am
Check out Crossroads Media & Dave Carney.
Reply »
Tarry House says:
When will Perry jettison ad maker David Weeks? The guy should be doing small town city council races and ads for dairy queen franchisees.
Reply »
Robert Morrow Reply:
December 8th, 2011 at 11:44 pm
For David Weeks, he has a hammer and everything looks like a nail.
It is funny to watch the Perry folks try to run a national presidential campaign as if it were a Texas GOP state chairman’s race.
Reply »
texun says:
I understand that the White House staff now begins every day by praying for Perry’s nomination. Apparently, they don’t believe that God told Perry to run, either.
Word is out that She intends to humble him yet again, by letting him make another prattfall on the next available occasion. Wait for it.
Too bad that he was born too late to star with Harpo, Chico, and Groucho; Perry is much funnier than their “straight” brother. Larry, Curly, Moe, and Rick sounds pretty attractive, though. He could always star in “The Goofy Governor,” a sequel to Jerry Lewis’s “Goofy Professor.” So, I don’t want to hear any more gloomy talk about Perry being washed up: a brilliant career in slap stick comedy awaits him, if God calls him to it.
Reply »
Robert Morrow says:
RG III of Baylor predicted to win the Heisman running away.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kari-chisholm/heisman-trophy-prediction_b_1137867.html
Reply »
John Johnson says:
Now King Perry misspeaks and states we are at war in Iraq instead of Iran. Deep down, his id must not want anything to do with being President, and is currently at war with his ego and super ego. Freud would have loved Rick Perry… Freud, JBB and a dwindling handful of others.
Let him die in peace, Paul…and let’s move on to the TLR mounting a campaign against Wentworth. I want to tell as many people as possible that I was the initial member of the TLR in Arlington…believed in them, and even hand delivered a couple of campaign contribution checks to local legislators. I also want to tell them how I now feel about what the have morphed into and why everyone needs to take second look at who truly benefits from their efforts. Hint…it’s not the average guy.
Reply »
WUSRPH Reply:
December 9th, 2011 at 12:07 pm
If Rick goes to war with Iran as well as invading Mexico (as he has suggested several times) that will make him only a “two war president” just like George W. He certainly will want to do better than that….Well, there is always Canada.
Reply »
Drew says:
“But Perry has little choice except to woo the evangelical community.”
I’m a loyal Texas Monthly reader and have great respect for Mr. Burka. However, this TV spot is absolutely appalling. I can’t believe Burka wasn’t harsher in his assessment of the ad. To imply that Perry had no choice but to launch this kind of assault on the gay community is not only incorrect, but inexcusable.
Reply »
AreYouKiddingMe says:
I’m just glad he spent $2 million dollars. I hope he runs 8 more of these, so he can deplete his fund. The old “pro-guns, anti-gay, and I’m religious” act is probably not going to win you a national election, Rick. That only works in a state full of Republican sheep…
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks says:
Atty Gen Holder said “laying has to do with your state of mind”….
Dem Sen Corzine chief executive of MF Global said “he was “stunned” to learn that the firm could not locate hundreds of millions of dollars in client money in the days before the firm’s collapse, and said he had no idea where the money had gone”….
Princess Nancy said “We must pass this bill before we can find out what’s in it”…..
Pres Obama said”_____”…..fill in the blank
Only a useful idiot would believe such obstreperous lies.
Reply »
AreYouKiddingMe says:
JBB: And your comments above add something to the topic (AP critiques Perry’s latest ad) how????
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks Reply:
December 9th, 2011 at 12:50 pm
What Guv Perry’s ad says to Americans and voters is you have a choice you can continue to be lied to by corrupt democrats or you can vote for him.
Americans and voters get it, democrats can’t understand it.
Reply »
Bennie Jetts Reply:
December 12th, 2011 at 3:23 pm
Funny stuff, JBB! You should get a job with Rush Limbaugh or Fox News!
Reply »
patriotone says:
I’m not sure that Evangelicals are all that stoked up about reviling men and women fighting and dying for their country. If i’d wanted to bash gays I may have chosen a different group to pile on.(pardon the potential pun) This is a stupid message, stupidly delivered. The war is over. If you are under 30, sexual preference is almost as important as being left handed. Perry has whiffed. He is trying his Texas strategy of appealing to 50% + 1 of the wing nuttiest of the wingnuts and then win the general because your name is followed by an R. Won’t work in the Big Leagues. Game Over.
Reply »
Tom says:
“lied to by corrupt democrats”
As opposed to Mitt Romney when he said he was pro-choice and in favor of government health care.
Or Newt Gingrich who was cheating on his wife while impeaching Clinton for lying about cheating on his wife.
Or Herman Cain, who said he didn’t cheat on his wife.
Or Rick Perry, or Michelle Bachmann, or Rick Santorum.
The only one still telling the truth after all these years: “Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul said Thursday evening that Bush administration officials were gleeful after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks because it gave them a pretext to invade Iraq.”
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks Reply:
December 9th, 2011 at 2:33 pm
When did they lie to Congress under oath?
Reply »
wi Reply:
December 12th, 2011 at 3:24 pm
A lie is a lie.
Reply »
John Johnson Reply:
December 9th, 2011 at 4:01 pm
I think Gov. Buddy Roemer is telling the truth, but for some reason the media has chosen to not invite him to the debates. His number one goal is getting money out of the poltical process and making the purchase of votes illegal. I also happen to think that it is the cancer that is going to kill us.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
December 9th, 2011 at 6:45 pm
I was in support of Roemer way back when he announced. I agree with you – it is a shame to have such a statesman not even a part of the process. If people got to know him, they would like him.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
The only time RP isn’t shooting himself in his foot is when he is reloading
Reply »
Vernon says:
Strom Thurmond, Trent Lott and George Wallace all landed on the wrong side of history with their stances and views about civil rights.
Why would Perry risk his legacy to join their ranks as someone who stood in the way of liberty for all?
I refuse to believe the Iowa social conservative vote is so important that it’s worth excluding an entire section of our citizens from participating in basic functions of American life.
Reply »
Robert Morrow says:
“Ron Paul’s Army Eyes an Iowa Caucus Upset”
I think Ron Paul can hit paydirt if he keeps emphasizing his anti-war themes. He needs to continue taking this message into the teeth of the GOP base. It’s the key to winning the general election, too. Focus on peace and the economy, not war.
http://swampland.time.com/2011/12/09/ron-pauls-army-eyes-an-iowa-caucus-upset/
“While Paul’s young army — his campaign pegged the number of supporters in Ames at 1,350 — is a sight to behold, the diverse crowd at the Boone public library was a sign that he is beginning to shed the fringe tag that has dogged him. “There are a lot more middle-aged folks here, and that’s good,” says Brad Kiefer, a construction worker from nearby Ogden who caucused for Paul in 2007. “He’s becoming a little more mainstream.””
Reply »
Anonymous says:
“Oops he did it again”….can’t name Supreme Ct. Justices or amount when asked by an Iowa newspaper editorial board………geesh…..when will it end?
Reply »
Robert Morrow Reply:
December 9th, 2011 at 11:36 pm
This will go down as the Oops campaign. Question -do you think Rick could name all the *Texas* Supreme Court Justices?
Reply »
wi Reply:
December 12th, 2011 at 3:26 pm
Rick Perry trying to keep up with a newspaper editorial board would be hilarious to watch. He would be so overmatched it would be funny.
Reply »
anita says:
I feel sorry for Perry at this point. Over the course of this campaign, he’s demonstrated that he has such a minimal understanding of the basic form of our government structures. If he’s not willing to invest the time to learn the basics, or lacks the capacity to do so, he should at least hire someone to travel with him who does.
Poor Rick. Another day, another idiotic gaffe.
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks says:
SCOTUS stays democrat judicial gerrymandering. Apparently they’re tired of dems lying, too.
Reply »
Col. Mike Kirby Reply:
December 10th, 2011 at 10:32 am
as performed by republican justices. another brilliant statement by cult boy. Oh wait, I forgot. SISTER-IN-LAW, booga-booga.
Reply »
John Johnson Reply:
December 10th, 2011 at 12:57 pm
No way you’re a real colonel, Mike. Guys that obtain that rank just don’t express themselves quite like you do. Are you just pretending that your are one since you stayed at a Holiday Inn Express? Are you retired and one of those that can’t give up using the “Col.” prefix? If you really were one, please don’t mention which branch of service. We wouldn’t want to embarrass them.
Reply »
Col. Mike Kirby Reply:
December 10th, 2011 at 5:04 pm
Figure it out for yourself, you can do it bright boy.
Anonymous Reply:
December 11th, 2011 at 2:48 pm
Salvation Army???? GI Joe????
Cowboy Bill Weed Reply:
December 14th, 2011 at 3:39 pm
Oh, pooh. The Colonel is Colonel as far as I’m concerned. He didn’t pick his name from some lame-ass John Wayne movie.
Kenneth D. Franks says:
Stayed, only means more court. Briefs are due December 21, and oral arguments January 9, 2012. It’s a little too early to celebrate as there is no decision yet.
Reply »
Blue Reply:
December 10th, 2011 at 10:15 am
A little early but the signs are really good. It will be SWEET is VRA shenanigans are stopped once and for all.
Reply »
Jerry Only Reply:
December 10th, 2011 at 1:08 pm
oh yeah, then the leg will continue their supermajorities and the next session will be even more successful than the last!
Reply »
texun says:
Everybody is missing the real point of Slick Rick’s recent “I am a Christian and I hate gays ad”: He knows that he can’t win the Republican nomination, but he has set his goal higher: he intends to be elected Pope.
That’s bad news for Anita, who will have to accept an annulment and enter a convent,and for whatever church he actually belongs to: it’s almost certainly Protestant, but he’ll drop it in a flash.
Admit it: he’s a lot smarter than we gave him credit for! The current Pope is elderly and his memory is fading. Moreover, Perry already agrees with him on demeaning gays and blocking family planning. So, look for it: Perry Joins Catholic Church; Forms Exploratory Committee to Succeed Benedict.
In Perry’s delusional world, anything is possible!
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Burka-time for a new entry on redistricting.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
He is starting to make Sarah Palin look smart.
Reply »
WUSRPH says:
The difference between Rick and Sarah is that she proabably does not know there is such a thing as the Supreme Court.
Reply »
donuthin Reply:
December 11th, 2011 at 6:50 am
and he is almost as cute
Reply »
Robert Morrow says:
Ron Paul is on his game the best I have ever seen him. He could win Iowa. Paul did great in the debate and he is closing strong and drawing big crowds.
Rick Perry is burnt toast it is not even funny. They say there are a lot of Dems crossing over and this favors Ron Paul.
That is why no one is really calling this if the Dems, independents join in with the Paulites and beat the establishment candidates Newt Romney and Mitt Gingrich.
Reply »
Robert Morrow Reply:
December 10th, 2011 at 10:17 pm
Ron Paul can *neuter* the Newt.
Reply »
Jerry Only Reply:
December 11th, 2011 at 1:08 am
jesus, youre getting to be as much a broken record as JBB. congrats. clicking your heels three times and repeating something you wish would happen wont make it true judy garland.
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks Reply:
December 11th, 2011 at 5:39 am
“clicking your heels three times and repeating something you wish would happen wont make it true judy garland.”
eggaztly. When will democrats learn?
Jerry Only Reply:
December 11th, 2011 at 2:55 pm
i could say the same for you, if you ever posted anything that wasnt yammering rhetoric.
John Johnson says:
One of the major tenats of the Christian church is redemption and forgiveness. These don’t seem to be present in Perry’s or Santorum’s mode of Christianity. Theirs appears to be based more on being judgemental.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
December 11th, 2011 at 8:56 am
And he without sin throw the first stone. To say that you would not do business with a man that has cheated on his wife is just crazy – ok Texas press, now is your time to shine…go back and look at all of Perry’s appointees and see how many are divorced, and if you want to add a layer, go ask why.
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks says:
@ John J
Experience teaches you is forgiveness has to be earned. If you forgive someone who isn’t remorsefull, but only sorry they got caught it becomes a trust issue.
Democrats have a trust problem the voters ain’t buying what they’re selling.
As Bush famously said http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKgPY1adc0A
Reply »
Jerry Only Reply:
December 11th, 2011 at 10:13 am
im just waiting until someone finds newt’s ashley madison account.
Reply »
Bill Thompson Reply:
December 12th, 2011 at 3:31 pm
JBB: Perrys hypocritical form of Christianity is designed to inflame the less educated, less intellectual and fearful folks that can’t deal with change and improvement. Name calling and rote answers, feeding fear and suspicion: the GOP way. This country needs leaders, not career politicians desparate for votes.
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks Reply:
December 12th, 2011 at 4:09 pm
” This country needs leaders, not career politicians desparate for votes.”
I agree, thats why I wonder how anyone could vote for Obama.
Reply »
Joan Bernice Brooks Reply:
December 14th, 2011 at 9:01 am
JBB, doesn’t your shift at McDonalds start soon? Don’t be late. Mom
Robert Morrow says:
Raw Story – Perry advisor Tony Fabrizio outed as a homosexual by GOProud. GOPround is incensed that Fabrizio is working for anti-gay Rick Perry.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/12/10/breitbart-feuds-with-republican-gay-group-over-outing/?utm_source=Raw+Story+Daily+Update&utm_campaign=3bb05551df-12_11_1112_11_2011&utm_medium=email
The chips are falling.
Breitbart was reacting to the group’s controversial decision to “out” Republican pollster and Perry staffer Tony Fabrizio. GOProud’s Executive Director Jimmy LaSalvia revealed Fabrizio’s sexual orientation to the world on Friday via Twitter and an article at The Huffington Post.
LaSalvia Tweeted, “I’ve just about had it with faggots who line their pockets with checks from anti-gay homophobes while throwing the rest of us under the bus.” Later he specified that he was referring to Fabrizio. GOProud cofounder Chris Barron also outed Fabrizio on his own Twitter account.
===============================
Andrew Breitbart – that is another hypocrite and fraud. Breitbart is the one who after taking down Anthony Weiner said that he would be willing to go after Republicans, too and that he, Breitbart, had a public email address – andrew (at) Breitbart (dot) com – and just email him with info on any Republican hypocrites and frauds.
So early on, I emailed Breitbart with everything I had on Perry – all my best leads, info, background material, etc. – and what was the response of Breitbart? Crickets …
The sound of crickets chirping and nothing else from this big talking, one way fraud and phony.
Andrew Breitbart is a chump and not a truth seeker.
Reply »
Robert Morrow says:
ABC news favorable mentions of Ron Paul:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAaTxXtDMZI&feature=share
It is all coming together for Ron Paul in Iowa… Ron Paul could WIN Iowa, perhaps a very strong second place in New Hampshire – but you would never know that from Jason Embry’s coverage in the Austin-American Statesman or Paul Burka Establishment Flack over at Texas Monthly.
What did Gandhi say? “First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win…. Then the Texas Media STILL doesn’t cover you!”
Reply »
Anonymous says:
And the hits just keep on coming. In Ames, Iowa, RP said millions of dollars went “to the country of Solyndra”. Oops….Solyndra is a energy company, not a country.
Reply »
Derby says:
wow, just saw the ad and it gave me the douche chills
Reply »
Anonymous says:
I see where Rick is now leading Herman Cain (8% to 4%). Has he sent somebody in to measure drapes yet?
Reply »
Texian Politico says:
Burka,
How about a post about the latest with the maps and the Supreme Court, speculation about a split primary in March and May, predictions, etc?
Reply »
ghostofann says:
Burka–
You there?
Reply »
Robert Morrow says:
WSJ:
“Paul Could Lead From Behind” – I agree completely
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204336104577094384060886756.html
Ron Paul is the wild card in the Republican presidential deck—and that makes him one of the most important cards of all right now.
It was possible earlier this year to write off the libertarian Texas congressman as an eccentric simply looking, as he did four years ago, for a place on a debate stage to proclaim his gospel of small government and hard money. But now Mr. Paul appears to be the man who could shape the outcome of the Iowa caucuses, which could go a long way toward shaping the overall race.
Nationally, Mr. Paul’s support runs a modest 10% or so in most polls, putting him well behind front-runners Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney. But in Iowa, four polls in the past couple of weeks have put him at an average of 18%—high enough to compete for second place.
Indeed, to watch Saturday night’s Iowa debate, and hear the audience reaction to Mr. Paul, was to sense how well he is striking chords with voters. A strong Paul performance in Iowa would go a long way toward determining not just the outcome of the Jan. 3 caucuses there, but the path of the crucial phase of the race that immediately follows Iowa.
Here’s why.
If Mr. Paul does well in Iowa, he could so muddy the waters that there is no clear winner. An inconclusive outcome would be a boon for Mr. Romney, who hasn’t done all that well in Iowa, and who is counting much more heavily on winning the New Hampshire primary a week later. A murky Iowa result would reduce any momentum the upstart Mr. Gingrich might enjoy heading into New Hampshire.
New Hampshire, in turn, is looking ever more important for Mr. Romney, because it’s followed by South Carolina and Florida, where Mr. Gingrich is surging. So the way Iowa sets the table for New Hampshire is highly important, and the Paul factor will be central to the table-setting.
If Mr. Paul really exceeds expectations in Iowa, that also might set the stage for him to break away from the GOP down the road and mount an independent presidential run. After all, he ran before as a Libertarian Party candidate, in 1988.
“If Paul wins Iowa, which is not out of the question, then you’re going to see a lot of forces [within the Republican Party] try to denigrate him and cut him back,” says Norman Ornstein, a political analyst at the American Enterprise Institute. “Then I could see Paul saying, ‘I’ve been screwed by this party’s establishment, so screw you, I’ll run as an independent.’ ”
There are two particular reasons to take Mr. Paul seriously in Iowa. One is the strange nature of caucuses, and the second is the resonance of his libertarian message in this year of evaporating faith in government.
Doing well in caucuses requires finding supporters who would go the extra mile for you. Voters aren’t merely asked, as in a primary election, to show up at a local polling station and check a name on a ballot, but rather to venture out on a cold January night, in the case of Iowa, to a meeting and voice public support.
That assignment seems to fit Mr. Paul’s followers, who carry a special degree of intensity into their political activity. Their passion “isn’t about personality but philosophy,” Mr. Ornstein notes.
That may be especially true this year, when the Paul message of radically scaling back the size and scope of government would appear to match a mood of public disgust at Washington and its seeming inability to come together to perform even the most basic of functions. To be the man identified with cutting down government at a time when everybody hates government may be the political equivalent of selling hot chocolate to a freezing crowd at a football game.
There are some significant soft spots that would seem to limit how far Mr. Paul can rise. His laissez-faire attitude toward social issues and his nearly isolationist views on foreign policy run into resistance among the GOP’s social and religious conservatives and its national-security hawks.
In addition, a surprisingly large bloc of support for the 76-year-old Mr. Paul comes from young voters. A compilation of recent Gallup polls shows Mr. Paul runs 10 percentage points higher among Republicans aged 18 to 34 than among the population at large. That raises the question: Would young voters, particularly those still in college and on winter break, show up for caucuses in the same way older Paul backers would?
Still, there is that intensity, remarked upon even by one of Mr. Paul’s foes at Saturday’s debate. Mr. Romney noted admiringly that what “amazes me is, when I come to a debate like this, the only signs I see are the Ron Paul people out there.”
Reply »
Robert Morrow says:
Wash Post with a favorable article on Ron Paul
Five myths about Ron Paul:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/five-myths-about-ron-paul/2011/12/07/gIQAu3vOiO_print.html
So we have the WSJ and WashPost – 2 national, establishment publications with interesting, insightful and current articles on Ron Paul. They are responding to reality. Read them and learn.
It just makes me even more disgusted with the pathetic beyond belief coverage of the Austin American-Statesman. Ron Paul is a player in the GOP nominating process and these mfers are intentionally ignoring that and pumping out endless drivel all focused on the Oops Humiliation Tour 2011.
I guess Rick was right after all – a prophet is not loved his own hometown (home state). I wonder if Ron Paul will end up pulling more delegates from Texas than Rick Perry …
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Burka please come back…Morrow is taking over your blog.
Reply »
LANCE JORDAN says:
WAKE UP SHEEPLE! RON PAUL IS OUR ONLY HOPE! THE NEW WORLD ORDER, ILLUMINNATI, AND THE BILDERBERGERS WANT TO HOLD YOU DOWN. ROBERT MORROW AND ALEX JONES SPEAK THE TRUTH. ONLY RON PAUL CAN SET YOU FREE! FREEDOM!! NOW!! FREEDOM!! NOW!! YOU NOW 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB. YOU NOW WHY YOUR GAS COST SO MUCH WITH YOUR FAKE MONEY WHILE YOU ATE YOUR BIG MAC AND DRIVES YOUR TOYOTA AND WATCHED YOUR FOOTBALL. YOU KNOW WHO REALY RULES THE WORLD. TAKE BACK YOUR WORLD. RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT!!
Reply »
Robert Morrow Reply:
December 13th, 2011 at 12:42 pm
Inflation is caused by a debased currency that is backed by nothing. A federal reserve note is not worth a bucket of spit.
Reply »
Hello? says:
Paul, please come back. We need to talk about Perry’s latest ad saying public officials becoming lobbyists is public corruption. This is hysterical!
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks says:
The Light shown down on Paul…
He has seen the error of his ways and is ashamed to be associated with democrats.
He’s regrouping and has plans to come back and change Burka blog into a conservative blog as his penance.
Reply »
Bill Thompson says:
Conservative blogs are boring, full of errors and the home of the AM radio weirdos.
Burkas seems to be pretty much in the middle of the road, he picks viable topics and his audience runs with it.
There are some notable loonies/neocons/teabaggers, but for the most part, JBB excluded, pretty intelligent talk.
Reply »
LANCE JORDAN Reply:
December 13th, 2011 at 9:46 am
VOTE RON PAUL!!!!! YOU ARE SHEEPLE IS YOU DOES NOT!!
Reply »
Garvin Reply:
December 14th, 2011 at 9:03 am
BAAAAAAAA.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Burka is AWOL or abducted by aliens. Send out a search party,
Reply »
William Ward says:
I’m guessing that like so many Americans, Perry’s last gasp “I hate gay soldiers ad” just left Paul speechless and blogless.
Reply »
Phil McNichols says:
Looks like we Paulians have taken over your blog. Bwah hah hah! Get used to it fools as we take over our govt, too. We are modern day patriots and will reclaim this once great nation from the Zionist and Socialists that seek to drive us down! Ron Paul Forever!!!!
Reply »
Vernon Reply:
December 14th, 2011 at 9:31 am
What’s a “Zionist”?
Reply »
Officer Karkovice says:
A missing persons report was filed today with the Texas Department of Public Safety, the Austin Police Department and the Travis County Sheriff’s Office for one, Mr. Paul Burka, a 64 year-old white male, 5’10″, 315 lbs, with gray hair and a gray mustache. Mr. Burka was last seen in the vicinity of the Texas Capitol Building on the morning of Friday, December 9th at close to 10:30 AM central standard time. He was surrounded by several individuals who were wearing assorted articles of clothing with the words “Ron Paul for President”, “9/ll Truther”, and “Death to the New World Order” printed upon them. The individuals in the group were seen yelling at Mr. Burka. The entire party followed him out of the Capitol and proceeded east towards Lavaca St. If you or anyone you know has information related to this situation please call the missing persons bureau at 512-320-6900.
Reply »
Robert Morrow Reply:
December 13th, 2011 at 3:12 pm
How do you know Burka has not gone to Iowa to do some last minute campaigning for Ron Paul? When Ron Paul wins the Iowa caucuses it will be a damn good story.
Reply »
anita says:
Fascinating. Perhaps they are holed up in the dank bar of the Chili Parlor.
Meanwhile, Perry releases another ad that has no connection to the reality of his tenure as Governor of Texas, this time questioning lawmakers-turned-lobbyists, while some of his closest friends fit that description, and he’s done nothing to limit this activity in Texas in his entire career.
Reply »
texun says:
How about a moment of silence to mourn the death of the 4th, 5th and 6th Amendments to the US Constitution, done in by the new military appropriations bill, assuming Obama signs the bill as is.
Just a reminder: one of the justifications for the American Revolution offered in the Declaration of Independence was that George III denied the colonists their right to trial by jury.
So, right out of Brave New World, the authoritatians are trying to use the danger of external-internal threat to destroy the fundamental liberties that sustain freedom. As a distinguished retired Navy admiral, once that service’s top lawyer put it, if we lose habeas corpus and trial by jury, the terrorists will have won.
Reply »
Robert Morrow Reply:
December 13th, 2011 at 3:22 pm
Totally agree. Obama needs to veto that thing.
Reply »
Col. Mike Kirby Reply:
December 13th, 2011 at 5:37 pm
But, but, but I thought Obama was the face of tyranny. Now you’re telling me that republicans in congress are willing destroying the constitution??? Say it aint’ so, Joe.
Reply »
Robert Morrow says:
Rasmussen New Hampshire:
Romney 33%
Gingrich 22%
Paul 18%
Huntsman 10%
Sanitarium 3%
Bachmann 3%
Perry 3%
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012/election_2012_presidential_election/new_hampshire/election_2012_new_hampshire_republican_primary
If Ron Paul wins Iowa, he could easily blow past Gingrich in New Hampshire.
Reply »
Texas Ex says:
It will be interesting to see the Iowa polling numbers after Perry’s homophobic ad has been running.
If you project out current polls in Iowa, you might expect a result like this:
27% Gingrich
19% Paul
19% Romney
13% Perry
13% Bachmann
7% Santorum
2% Huntsman
But a caucus is not a primary.
A caucus benefits those who have the most dedicated followers (depth of support is nearly as important as breadth of support) and a well organized campaign infrastructure while a caucus penalizes those with half-hearted supporters and those with loose campaign structures and those who cannot meet the minimum level of support to attain the viability threshold in each caucus location.
These caucus fundamentals in should have the following effects:
Gingrich will not meet his polling numbers because his support is broader than it is deep and he has virtually no infrastructure (plus he has three more weeks of relentless attacks aimed at him).
Paul will exceed his polling numbers because he has the most dedicated supporters and has a very good campaign infrastructure.
Romney will probably not meet his polling numbers (but he should not see a falloff as dramatic as Gingrich’s falloff) because he also has a fairly weak campaign infrastructure (although it is not as weak as Gingrich’s).
Looking at these three as the top tier, it is not certain with three weeks remaining, but it is increasingly likely that Gingrich and Paul will finish 1st and 2nd. I doubt that Paul will catch Gingrich in the polls, but there are a lot of factors on the ground in Iowa which foretell of Paul beating his polling numbers and Gingrich falling short of his yet it remains unclear whether this polling-to-caucus discrepancy will be enough to give Paul the lead.
With respect to the bottom tier (Santorum and Huntsman), Huntsman has everything going against him in Iowa. His polling numbers are within the margin of error from zero and his polling likely overstates his caucus support. There is no scenario where he does not come in last. Santorum has a decent campaign infrastructure, but he will not reach the viability threshold in many areas around Iowa. These factors may balance each other out out.
That leaves Perry and Bachmann — both have a decent campaign infrastructure (Perry’s is better funded; Bachmann’s is more grassroots, but seems to have come a bit unraveled since the straw poll). On a good day, either could catch and maybe pass Romney for 3rd place if the votes that Perry and Bachmann are both chasing break decidedly for one of those middle-tier candidates rather than the other. On a bad day (from their perspective), neither Perry nor Bachmann break out and finish 4th and 5th to Romney’s 3rd.
Unless there is a big shift in momentum over the next three weeks, I expect the caucus to unfold along these lines:
22-26% each – Paul and Gingrich
14-18% each – Romney, Perry and Bachmann
4-8% – Santorum
1% or less – Huntsman
Santorum is done (listen for all the nice things the other candidates say about him as the jockeying for his endorsement ensues).
Bachmann is done if she finishes 4th or 5th.
Perry is done is done if he finishes 5th.
It’s possible, but unlikely, for Romney to come back from a 5th place finish (just as it is possible, but unlikely, for Perry to come back from a 4th place finish).
If Paul wins Iowa and Romney wins New Hampshire (both of which are entirely likely), look for Gingrich to set a new world record for behind-the-scenes-nasty in South Carolina.
Reply »
Twinkie Pete says:
Homophobic is not an accurate term. I don’t think people are afraid of homosexuals, they just doesn’t like them. We need a better and more descriptive term than homophobic for them. I propose gayngry for “gay angry” or queerage for “queer rage” or something along those lines. Toodles.
Reply »
Robert Morrow says:
That is about right for what is going to happen in Iowa. Gingrich has a big puffy, fluffy, transient lead that is going to shrink on caucus night due to lack of campaign organization.
Ron Paul has a rock solid 18% that has been slowly, steadily building. With the intensity of the Paulites and excellent ground game Paul should be a lock to finish #2 and if he is lucky he has a 30% chance of winning Iowa (Intrade).
Reply »
Greg Knapp says:
Ron Paul is the ONLY logical candidate for those who actually love the Constitution! Washington, Jefferson and Madison would ALL vote for him, so if you love them, why not do the right thing and SUPPORT RON PAUL!!!
Reply »
TexianPolitico Reply:
December 14th, 2011 at 11:31 am
That’s amazing that you know how men that have been dead for decades would vote in this presidential election. You must be quite gifted. I hope you use that gift for good and not evil.
Reply »
Robert Morrow says:
Business Insider: “Poll Bombshell: Ron Paul is close to a Win in Iowa”
http://www.businessinsider.com/shock-poll-ron-paul-is-closing-in-on-newt-gingrich-in-iowa-2011-12
Ron Paul, the once-forgotten presidential candidate, is picking up steam in Iowa and now appears poised to overtake frontrunner Newt Gingrich, according to a new survey released today from the left-leaning Public Policy Polling.
The poll finds support for Gingrich has slipped to 22%, with Ron Paul just behind with 21%. Mitt Romney trails in third place with 16%.
That’s a five-point drop in favorability for Gingrich, who has raced to the top of the Republican presidential field over the past month. PPP found Gingrich’s favorability numbers have fallen 19 points over the past week.
Meanwhile, support for Paul is on the rise, particularly among younger voters and voters who identify themselves as “new.” Among likely caucus-goers under age 45, Paul leads Gingrich 30-16. The numbers are nearly flipped for caucus-goers over age 45.
But what Paul’s fans lack in age and experience, they make up for in enthusiasm — 77% of Paul supporters say they are definitely going to vote for him, compared to 54% for Gingrich.
Interestingly, Romney’s support is also stronger than Gingrich’s in Iowa, despite Romney’s relative absence from the state this fall — 67% of Romney supporters say they will definitely be voting for him.
In fact, there is strong evidence that Romney actually could have been a major factor in Iowa this year, if he had not stayed away from the state. As PPP notes, only 44% of Romney’s 2008 supporters plan to vote for him this time — which means if he had just managed to keep his support from last time, he would be leading in Iowa by now.
The PPP survey finds the rest of the field largely unchanged. Michele Bachmann comes in fourth with 11%, down from 13% last week. Rick Perry stayed stagnant at 9%, apparently unaffected by his controversial gay marriage/war on Christmas ad last week. Rick Santorum came in with 8%, while Jon Huntsman rounded out the field with 5% support.
Reply »
Texas Ex says:
Soon after I mentioned being curious about Iowa polling after Perry began running his homophobic ad (or, if you prefer, his “I hate gay people” ad), Insider Advantage released its most recent polling which shows Perry rising into 3rd place ahead of Romney:
27% – Gingrich
17% – Paul
13% – Perry
12% – Romney
10% – Bachmann
7% – Santorum
4% – Huntsman
It might be possible that this disgusting ad is working (or perhaps people are just glad to see Perry negotiate a debate where he was not apparent as the biggest imbecile on the stage for a change).
If the results of the caucus mirror this poll, there would be some major ripple effects.
Perry would still come in 5th in New Hampshire but Bachmann and Santorum would be out of the race by the time the South Carolina primary came around and Perry would have an excellent chance to pick up their (meager) support.
If he comes in 4th in Iowa, Romney would be bruised heading into New Hampshire which would become a “must win” firewall for Romney. If Romney comes in 4th in Iowa, even if he rebounds in New Hampshire the results will be discounted because he is almost a native son there, and there would be a real risk that Romney could come in 4th place again in South Carolina. The Florida primary would become very interesting.
In summary, if Perry comes in 3rd in Iowa, there is an excellent chance that there will be four contenders still in the race for super Tuesday.
Reply »
Texas Ex says:
Nate Silver has his first Iowa projection up, and it has
25.1% – Gingrich
20.7% – Paul
15.6% – Romney
12.3% – Perry
11.4% – Bachmann
8.6% – Santorum
5.7% – Huntsman
This is as good a model as you can make using polling numbers alone (Nate discusses it at length at his fivethirtyeight blog).
Interestingly, because this is a “polling numbers only” projection, there is no penalty assigned to Gingrich because he has virtually no campaign infrastructure in Iowa and assigns no benefit to Paul for the opposite circumstance.
If I was a Paul fan, I would be very happy with such unweighted numbers that show Paul 4% behind Gingrich and closing.
Likewise, if I was a Perry fan, I would be happy being just 3% behind Romney and closing (and I would be equally happy to be able to point to yet another set of numbers which showed me ahead of Bachmann because Perry cannot beat Romney if Bachmann convinces the persuadable social conservatives to join her cause instead of Perry’s).
Reply »
Robert Morrow Reply:
December 13th, 2011 at 8:19 pm
Ron Paul, who is closing strong in Iowa, and who has a fabulous organization, could very well win the Iowa caucuses if the polling numbers are as close at Gingrich 25% and Paul 21%.
Gingrich is going to come under sharp fire from the establishment for the next month and that all redounds to Paul’s favor. The establishment figures Paul will never be the nominee, but they can use him to kill off Gingrich and ensure a Romney nomination.
That is probably what is going to happen. I am telling my Ron Paulers to say hell no to Gingrich.
Glenn Beck agrees. Michael Savage agrees. I bet Eagle Forum agrees. Gingrich is in store for a razor blade wind tunnel.
Reply »
Jeff Coulter says:
Ron Paul will end the Fed, end the IRS, streamline the government, starve many of the cabinet bureaucracies such as the Department of Energy and others that are not only useless but unconstitutional. He would wean us off of the government teets, to the extent that he would be able to with executive power. He would still have to get some things passed through the House and the Senate, but he would cut spending about a trillion dollars his first year.
I don’t know any of them that would do what he would do domestically. He’d bring the troops home and put them on the border if necessary to stop illegal immigration. We would see a dramatic change in the conversation of the philosophy of government. The press would hate him. They (the Republicans) want to identify him as a liberal, but he is, in most ways, the absolute opposite. It’s why some folks, including myself, consider him to be the only legitimate conservative running. The best the others would do is slow the growth of government, like Reagan, or like Bush, expand it, just not as much as the Demoncraps, and let the status quo continue vis a vie the border and government bureaucracy.
Reply »
Cowboy Bill Weed Reply:
December 14th, 2011 at 8:57 am
The Department of Energy in unconstitutional? How about the Department of Defense?
Reply »
Robert Morrow Reply:
December 14th, 2011 at 12:12 pm
DOD needs to be slashed but not eliminated.
Reply »
Col. Mike Kirby Reply:
December 14th, 2011 at 12:27 pm
Things I like are constitutional, things I don’t like are unconstitutional. Excellent standard.
Texas Ex Reply:
December 14th, 2011 at 1:43 pm
@Col. Mike Kirby Reply:
December 14th, 2011 at 12:27 pm
Things you like are constitutional, and things you don’t like are unconstitutional.
Really?
The crucifix submerged in urine (constitutionally protected free speech) is something you like, and public school children praying to Jesus Christ during school hours at Christmas time (an unconstitutional violation of the establishment clause) is something you don’t like.
Good to know …
Col. Mike Kirby Reply:
December 14th, 2011 at 3:25 pm
Texas Ex: You must be jbb’s brother because you have the same reading comprehension problems he does. Did you even look at the prior 2 comments from Cowboy Bill and Robert Morrow??? Did it occur to you that my comment might be related? Do you understand how a comment thread works??
Now you’re just showing how much of a clueless dolt you are. Children can pray all they want, schools just can’t force kids to pray. Is that so hard for you to comprehend?
Reply »
Cowboy Bill Weed Reply:
December 14th, 2011 at 3:34 pm
Many Evangelicals misinterpret prayer in schools to set up some kind of logic by which they, as Christians, are discriminated against.
whilethecatsaway says:
Why Big Oil wants the Canadian pipeline built. Hint… it’s not to help the rest of us.
If we are serious about weaning ourselves from Middle Eastern crude, why is it necessary to build a pipeline all the way from Canada to refineries in Texas? Why not just build a couple of refineries in North Dakota? There has not been a new one built in the U.S. since 1987, and every year we get hammered by price increases at the pump when Big Oil shuts down a couple of their refineries for “maintenance” or because of tropical storms along the Gulf Coast where most refineries are located.
The fact that they want to run oil all the way to Texas makes me think that the refined fuels derived from this heavy, “dirty” crude are destined for places other than the United States. If this is truly the case, Texas will only get to keep the carbon emissions from the refining process. Isn’t it just what we need here in the land of the perpetually plugged up sinuses?
Here’s what Tom Kloza, chief oil analyst for the Oil Price Information Service, had to say to say about the exportation of refined fuels from the U.S. in a Los Angeles Times article back in September of this year. This has some bearing on why Big Oil wants to cut a big scar through the center of our country down to Texas and the Gulf of Mexico.
“Five years ago, U.S. imports of refined fuels outpaced exports by 3 million barrels a day, according to Energy Department statistics. Two years ago, fuel imports into the U.S. were still outpacing exports by 1.5 million barrels a day”.
“This is no longer the case. Recent statistics show exports of refined products from the U.S. outpacing imports by 476,000 barrels a day. That figure is a new modern-day record. We are a net exporter now. If not for high prices in the U.S., it would be something to cheer about in terms of helping the deficit. But in the U.S., it’s just going to get under people’s skin. It’s like we’re selling off our birthright,” Kloza said”.
The cynical side of me thinks that a pipeline would not benefit the U.S. one bit, but would certainly be a boon for the Big Oil owned refineries along the Texas coast because it positions it to be loaded onto tankers and sold to the highest bidders around the world.
This also makes me question why we would open up all our federally controlled land and offshore areas to Big Oil in return for just a small royalty. Does anyone, besides me, see the merits of having our federal government subcontract the drilling and well completion in these areas and then own the oil and gas when it is recovered? This oil and gas could, by law, be required to be refined and processed in the U.S. and sold into the system at a price below the world market price.
If we truly want to put an end to price gouging and being at the mercy of Big Oil, hedgefunders and OPEC, it seems to me that this is the answer.
This being said, Big Oil and Wall Street would put up a fierce effort to see that it would never be implemented. They would spend millions to buy the votes to keep it from becoming law, and their paid shills would be bombarding the talk shows and blog sites poo-poo’ing the idea.
In other words, it would be business as usual.
Reply »
donuthin says:
Interesting article. Guess I am not enthusiastic about the gov being in the refinery bidness, but on the other hand big oil acts way to monopolistic which is not intended to be a part of the good ole free enterprise system. They need competition.
Reply »
Mia says:
PAUL, PLEASE COME BACK BECAUSE YOUR BLOG HAS BEEN TAKEN OVER BY RON PAULIAN ZEALOTS! GOOD GOD!
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
December 14th, 2011 at 9:37 am
Paul save us! As Mis said, the zealots are “Ronning” away with your blog. Please come back …….and HURRY!!
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Mia…I don’t think that Ron Paul would advocate the Feds getting into the oil business, so this leads me to believe that you don’t know what you’re talking about. It would appear that you are just another one of the lost sheep who follows a lost shepherd.
Reply »
John Chisolm says:
Paaaaauuuuuullllll! Please come back!!!!! Hurry!!!!
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks says:
Democrats promised 2012 would be “down and dirty”.
The dems and the Paulbots have kidnapped him and will not release him until he promises to stop writing Guv Perry will win the republican nominee.
Reply »
Blue says:
http://www.chron.com/news/article/Holder-issues-challenge-to-Texas-on-voter-rights-2401340.php
Holder is at war with Texas, simple as that.
Reply »
Blue Reply:
December 14th, 2011 at 10:24 am
Note this, by the way, from the Stateman article:
Holder cited the Legislature’s redistricting plan as an example of discriminatory changes that the U.S. Justice Department is seeking to block “because the state has failed to show the absence of discrimination.”
That’s an absolutely absurd standard to hold and yet one more reason why the USSC should strike down pre-clearance.
Reply »
anita Reply:
December 14th, 2011 at 2:26 pm
It’s the state’s burden. Funny that you say Holder is at war with Texas. Perhaps our forefathers shouldn’t have been at war with Blacks and Browns, subjecting them to intentional discrimination. How quickly we forget.
Reply »
Cowboy Bill Weed Reply:
December 14th, 2011 at 3:36 pm
Holder is not at war with Texas. He is at war with ignorance. There just happens to be a lot of that in Texas and Arizona.
Reply »
TexianPolitico says:
Perhaps Burka is trying to get to 1,000 comments before he puts a new post up? Its either that or he went on a very early Christmas vacation. With most bloggers they let you know when they are going on a sabbatical, but with Burka he never tells us what’s going on. I just hope he’s ok and that there isn’t any truth to the missing persons report I heard people talking about at the capitol yesterday.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Absence makes the heart grow finder….we miss you Paul. There I said it
Reply »
Robert Morrow says:
Here is some key truth on the JFK assassination, out of the mouth of Lyndon Johnson himself:
Madeleine Duncan Brown was a mistress of Lyndon Johnson for 21 years and had a son with him named Steven Mark Brown in 1950. Madeleine mixed with the Texas elite and had many trysts with Lyndon Johnson over the years, including one at the Driskill Hotel in Austin, TX, on New Year’s Eve 12/31/63.
In the early morning of January 1, 1964, just 6 weeks after the JFK assassination, Madeleine asked Lyndon Johnson:
“Lyndon, you know that a lot of people believe you had something to do with President Kennedy’s assassination.”
He shot up out of bed and began pacing and waving his arms screaming like a madman. I was scared!
“That’s bullshit, Madeleine Brown!” he yelled. “Don’t tell me you believe that crap!”
“Of course not.” I answered meekly, trying to cool his temper.
“It was Texas oil and those fucking renegade intelligence bastards in Washington.” [said Lyndon Johnson, the new president.] [Texas in the Morning, p. 189] [LBJ told this to Madeleine in the late night of 12/31/63 in the Driskill Hotel, Austin, TX in room #254. They spent New Year’s Eve ‘64 together here. Room #254 was the room that LBJ used to have rendevous’ with his girlfriends – today it is known as the LBJ Room, and rents for $600-1,000/night as a Presidential suite at the Driskill; located on the Mezzanine Level.]
Reply »
Fencing in Oxford says:
Pretty section of content. I simply stumbled upon your blog and in accession capital to claim that I get actually loved account your blog posts. Anyway I will be subscribing for your feeds or even I fulfillment you get right of entry to consistently fast.
Reply »
Buy Made from Us! says:
Hello, i feel that i saw you visited my site thus i got here to return the want?.I’m attempting to find issues to enhance my site!I guess its adequate to make use of some of your ideas!!
Reply »
We took over this company... says:
hey there and thanks on your information ? I’ve definitely picked up anything new from right here. I did then again expertise several technical issues using this website, since I experienced to reload the website a lot of occasions prior to I could get it to load correctly. I have been brooding about if your web host is OK? Not that I’m complaining, however sluggish loading cases instances will sometimes impact your placement in google and can damage your quality score if advertising and marketing with Adwords. Well I’m adding this RSS to my email and can look out for much more of your respective fascinating content. Make sure you replace this once more very soon..
Reply »
Goods at auction says:
Great post, very informative. I ponder why the opposite specialists of this sector don’t notice this. You must proceed your writing. I am confident, you have a huge readers’ base already!|What’s Going down i am new to this, I stumbled upon this I’ve found It absolutely useful and it has aided me out loads. I am hoping to contribute & help other users like its helped me. Good job.
Reply »