Perry lags in Tea Party straw poll
The Chronicle is reporting today the results of a straw poll at the Tea Party Patriots’ “national policy summit” in Phoenix this weekend. The voting occurred in two categories, “live” and “online.” The winner of the live poll was pizza magnate Herman Cain with 21.98% of the vote. The winner of the online poll was Ron Paul, with 49.6% of the vote.
The results of the live poll:
Cain 21.98%
Pawlenty 15.87%
Paul 15.04%
Palin 10.08%
Romney 6.45%
Bachman 5.62%
Gingrich 5.29%
Huckabee 4.63%
Daniels 4.46%
Trump 3.14%
Perry 1.82%
Barbour, Huntsman, and Santorum brought up the rear.
The winner of the online poll, by an overwhelming margin, was Ron Paul.
Paul 49.65%
Cain 12.46%
Palin 8.92%
Huckabee 5.88%
Gingrich 4.76%
Pawlenty 4.76%
Romney 4.46%
Bachmann 3.65%
Daniels 1.82%
Perry 1.01%
Barbour, Huntsman, and Santorum received less than 1%.
# # # #
The thing that I find most interesting about this poll is that the Tea Party is marginalizing itself. No organization that chooses Herman Cain and Ron Paul as its favorites for president is going to play a major role in choosing the Republican nominee.
The Chronicle’s take on the poll is “good thing he’s not running.” I would say: What makes you so sure he isn’t running? Maybe not for president, but why not the number-two spot on the ticket?. Perry is positioning himself to come out of this legislative session with the credential of having closed Texas’s budget gap with $27 billion in cuts when other states have raised taxes. That is going to be a powerful message. Add to it Perry’s ability to stir up crowds, as a former Aggie yell leader. He fits the job description for a vice-president: intensely partisan, ideologically unyielding, unrestrained in his criticism of an opponent, looks good on TV, knows how to fire up a crowd, won’t upstage the nominee.
Spiro Eagleton says:
Here’s the thing – the “Tea Party” isn’t one organized force. Its millions of voters that share an ideology and are active, but they don’t all fall under one group or leader. This vote doesn’t mean much. I do think Paul and Cain fit their ideology well, but it seems very likely that neither Paul nor Cain will get the nomination. The question really is who does the typical Tea Party voter support with their 2nd, 3rd, or 4th choice? Do they throw their votes away in the primaries or do they back their next best choice that has a chance to win? That’s the real fight. I can’t see any of them backing Romney.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 4:10 pm
What an interesting list. Possibly the biggest bunch of political losers in American history. The Tea Baggers isn’t an organized force because you cannot organize the misinformed, undereducated and hard wired ideologues that have a stunted worldview. This country needs a moderate reveolution.
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 5:18 pm
I see more open minds in the teaparty than I see here.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 9:01 pm
Truer words have never been spoken.
JohnBernardBooks says:
the teaparty is a force to be reckoned with, and that scares both dems and left leaning repubs.
Reply »
Craig Lewis Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 8:28 am
There’s no such thing as a “left-leaning republican.”
Reply »
Garyfan Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 8:42 am
There used to be.
Reply »
Former Member Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 10:33 am
What would you call Romney, Craig Lewis? There is Romney-care in MA, plus pro-gay and pro-choice history while he was gov of MA. As a Tea Party type, there is nothing I hate worse than someone who adjusts his “values” to suit himself at the moment. I won’t support a chameleon. If Romney is the nomineee, I will stay home.
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 12:29 pm
yes Virginia there are left leaning republicans. However, it is true there are no “moderate” democrats.
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
March 1st, 2011 at 5:06 pm
Nonsense. Most Texas Democrats are moderate. Only those on the far right would consider Texas Democrats to be lefties.
Spiro Eagleton Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 1:05 pm
There sure are left-leaning Republicans. Just look at the vote scores. Sens Snowe and Collins certainly fit that category. Lugar and Scott Brown on many votes as well. In the House there are moderate or left-leaning congressman like Todd Platts, Charles Bass, Greg Walden, etc.
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 2:03 pm
there are no pedophiles in the democrat party.
Reply »
Really Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 2:57 pm
there are no pedophiles in the republican party. There are no senators who hook up with young men in airport bathroom stalls. Remember Mr I have a wide stance.
LinesIntheSand Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 10:54 am
Left leaning repubs????? You mean 85 percent of the Texas house of reps look at the speaker votes and the votes on the rules amendments…….need I say more….leave our party alone nut jobs
Reply »
paulburka says:
I think Spiro identifies the problem very well. The candidates who fit the Tea Party’s ideology can’t win. Palin and Huckabee probably aren’t going to run. The closest fit for the T.P. is Gingrich, but I don’t think he can win. Romney is the frontrunner, but he doesn’t generate enthusiasm. My guess is that the Tea Partiers either go down with the good ship Ron Paul or reluctantly support a Republican nominee that is not to their liking.
Reply »
Former Member Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 10:40 am
I think your analysis is correct, Paul. Most of the people I visit with at TP rallies won’t vote for anybody who was on a Repub Primary ballot in 2008. We’re looking for Santorum, Barbour, would have liked Thune, Bolton except that he’s probably not winnable, and would have liked Daniels until he went soft on unions. For most of us TP types, social issues are secondary unless it’s so obvious as to be Romney-like what their true colors are. I’m going to be looking strictly for a winnable less-govt, less-spending person. Too bad Paul Ryan & Marco Rubio are too young for now.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 11:00 am
I for one sincerely hope you get your wish.
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 12:32 pm
Maybe the teapartiers don’t fall for just anyone as democrats did in 2008. There’s a plethora of candidates to choose from and if the teaparties don’t like any of them I’m sure they’ll vote anyone but democrat.
Reply »
linda says:
Ah, yes. Let’s compare Perry as VP to another great thinker/statesman/VP — Dan Quayle.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 12:07 pm
Yeah, that Dan Quayle, you would think a Harvard educated lawyer would know know better than to say there are 57 states in the United States and then to say his economic plan is “to spread the wealth around” . . . well, you can see why people don’t take him serously. . .Wait, a minute, that’s not Dan Quayle I just described is it??
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 9:05 pm
Or too stupid just to release a G$%D#@% birth certificate so the birther controversy can be put to rest.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
March 1st, 2011 at 11:39 am
right, the president should aways respond to made up crap to satisfy mouth-breathing droolers like Leo Berman.
Former Member Reply:
March 4th, 2011 at 10:35 am
The birth certificate will show his father is a Muslim, and that’s probably got more to do with the cover-up of Obama’s birth than anything.
Kelso's biggest fan says:
Cactus Jack’s “bucket of warm piss” is Yellboy Rick’s “golden shower.”
Reply »
Chuck says:
“Santorum brought up the rear.”
TMML
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Apparently even tea baggers can recognize and empty suit when they see one.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 4:12 pm
Then explain Bachmann and Palin…wait a minute….empty dress?
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 5:27 pm
“Bachmann earned her law degree from Tulsa’s Oral Roberts University in 1986 and a Master of Law degree in tax law from the College of William and Mary in 1988.”
well she’s no algore, but who is?
Reply »
Alan Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 7:35 pm
How is her law degree relevant? I don’t dislike her because she went to a third-tier law school. I dislike her because she’s an idiot.
JohnBernardBooks Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 8:33 pm
yes Michelle Bachman is an idiot and algore is a sage of wisdom.
Anonymous Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 9:08 pm
Bachman’s an idiot, how? Palin, maybe, but Bachman? Did Michelle say there were 58 states recently and I just missed it?
Anonymous Reply:
March 1st, 2011 at 11:40 am
and that means she’s not a moron???
paulburka Reply:
March 1st, 2011 at 5:08 pm
William & Mary is a third-tier law school? W&M is an excellent public university. It’s not UVA, but it’s a very good school.
Anonymous says:
arrgh.
and= anReply »
Anonymous says:
Paul’s foreign policy positions, as well as his associations with 9/11 Truthers, x him out as a serious GOP candidate, but his hardest of hard core fans will flood CPAC or other Tea Party events, because they’re the most passionate of that group (and threaten to become to the Republicans what Lyndon LaRocuche and his followers have been to the Democrats for the past 30 years).
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 12:08 pm
“as well as his associations with 9/11 Truthers”
That’s a new one on me– link please?
Reply »
Spiro Eagleton Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 1:11 pm
Its true. One of Ron Paul’s biggest backers is conspricacy radio host Alex Jones (the guy on whose show Charlie Sheen went nuts last week.) You can find Jones ties to Paul all over the internet. Paul ascribes to the theory that anyone can give him money and it won’t change him. I’m sure that’s true, but he seems to have no concern for how that appears to the general public and is never concerned that much of what he says is seen as code words to radical militia groups, racist groups, etc.
Reply »
longleaf Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 4:21 pm
That makes those who have shut the door on further investigation of what happened on that day “9-11 Liars.” If the shoe fits …
Alex Jones actually predicted 9-11 a few months before it happened. Now Donald Rumsfeld claims to have never heard of the third WTC building that collapsed at freefall speed into its own footprint that day–Building 7.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8HdOABC_U0
TLG says:
In other words, our transportation infrastructure will continue to detoriate with more and more $$$ going to debt service. College tuition has sky-rocketed. And now bunch of folks will probably lose their jobs. All on his watch…
Reply »
Kenneth D. Franks says:
The 27 billion dollars in cuts are going to cause a lot of pain, higher unemployment, former teachers on unemployment, and hurt Texas literally. Perry is mostly likely running and yes, he wants at least the Vice Presidential slot. Of course he would like the top slot and may have to declare for it to get the attention.
Adios
Reply »
Kirk says:
A Perry move to the Naval Observatory would be wonderful for Texas! I would campaign for that ticket. (Don’t nobody tell Perry that fellow Texan John Nance Garner said the Vice Presidency wasn’t worth a warm bucket of . . . spit.)
Reply »
Briscoe Democrat Reply:
March 1st, 2011 at 4:48 pm
Memo to Kirk, Obama is going to WIN reelection very easily next year because the GOP field is too weak.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
but Paul, Perry’s not running…
Reply »
Chris says:
If Republicans can’t do fifth grade math, it won’t matter who can or can’t win. If we’re going to preach “balanced budget” that means we must address our defense spending.
Excluding Social Security, total US Revenues will fall short of paying defense and the interest on our debt!
Total US Revenues excl SS: $1.367T
2011 Interest on Debt: ~$450B
2011 Defense Spending: $929B
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks Reply:
March 1st, 2011 at 6:12 am
so why is the President wanting to spend over $3 trillion?
Reply »
No reason to deal says:
The Tea Party is a dream come true for Democrats. The old coalition of fiscal conservatives, neocons, and the religious right has splintered. The Republican party isn’t going to win consistently going forward with only the fiscal conservatives standing strong. Particularly when that demographic is so skewed.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 4:17 pm
Possible. The census is terrible news for the far right. More and more Americans are no longer identifying with a church, more Latinos and fewer young folks falling for talk radio and Fox News. As time goes on most are recognizing that Reagans “trickle down” didn’t work. Going to fun for the media over the next few years!
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 9:39 pm
“more Americans are no longer identifying with a church, more Latinos and fewer young folks”
So what? These groups mostly stay home on election day unless a once in a life time fraud like Obama comes along. Obama will be old news in 2012 so the young folks will be in their dorm rooms playing X-Box tournaments on Election Day 2012.
As far as “trickle down”– I think a fair reading of Reagan’s economic legacy shows he did very well, particularly since he was forced, for the most part, to work with a Democrat majority in Congress.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2001/03/The-Real-Reagan-Economic-Record
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
March 1st, 2011 at 11:43 am
a report from a reagan fluffer. i’m shocked that it portrays everything he did in a positive light.
Former Member says:
“No reason to deal,” you are dreaming. If you think the TP helps the Dems, maybe you should look at the new numbers in the TX House. The really far Right still makes abortion their one-and-only issue, but most neocons like me are now willing to defray the focus on such issues until such time as we get a grip on the govt spending, as that is the issue that is most likely to bring down America. I still am a social staunch con, but I can wait on it for now. The TP rallies I’ve been to didn’t even talk about social issues.
Reply »
Nick Manning Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 1:20 pm
I thought Reagan taught us that “deficits dont matter”, or at least thats what another neocon told me.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 4:18 pm
trickle down= piss on.
Reply »
White Power says:
Stay away from tea party rallies. Unless you are in the kkk and are frightened by the future of a Hispanic as a governor of Texas.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 12:11 pm
Paul, you need to take down the post from White Power above.
Reply »
Really Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 2:58 pm
I think anonymous is afraid of a Hispanic governor……
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 4:00 pm
Really says:
“I think anonymous is afraid of a Hispanic governor……”
No, Hispanic governors like Susanna Martinez of New Mexico suit me just fine. Oh, wait I see what you mean Really . . .you’re talking about Hispanic governors who know their place and pledge allegience to the Democrats.
Aggie for Kay says:
Governor Perry is supposed to be a tea party darling, and he gets beat out by Donald Trump in the poll? If he’s getting that little support from those who feel a tingle up their spine every time secession is mentioned, I hardly see how he is going to be a serious contender.
Reply »
MikeO says:
Neither poll is anywhere close to indicative. Ron Paul’s troops ALWAYS flood online polls (using automated tools to do so, in some instances), and many of his delegates at these Tea Party (and CPAC) were not paying out of their own pockets to get there. The Paulites are closer to a political cult than anything else, and are a small component of the Tea Parties (and far smaller with the actual voters).
As for VPs, Linda; considering our current one, anyone who doesn’t drool would be an upgrade. However, the VP pick is usually used to shore up some battleground area; Texas isn’t in that category, so Perry’s chances are slim.
Chris, of course you don’t list the non-defense spending, which has been outpacing defense spending by huge margins (both in total and increasing percentage of budget) for a long time.
Reply »
Chris Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 12:47 pm
As far as the online straw poll, they had to pay 10 bucks to make a pick. So, at least it wasn’t automated. People characterize the straw polls wrong. Ron Paul really does have that percentage of people actively following politics. The issue is that the people who actively follow politics is a rather small number compared to the number of people that vote in primaries.
Non defense spending needs to be nipped in the bud as well. But when you exclude the SS program and defense and interest exceeds all revenues, you could cut all non defense spending to ZERO and you’d still be making the problem worse!
Reply »
Really Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 3:00 pm
Mike O, I bet your praying that Palin is on the ticket again. Although she can see Russia from her house.
Reply »
Briscoe Democrat Reply:
March 1st, 2011 at 2:36 pm
Mike O, Texas Fatigue is likely a main factor of why Perry will NOT be the Republican nominee for Prez or VP, because folks are sick of Texans winning on a national ticket.
Reply »
West Texan says:
Have you lost your friggin’ mind, Burka? — “Perry is positioning himself to come out of this legislative session with the credential of having closed Texas’s budget gap with $27 billion in cuts when other states have raised taxes. That is going to be a powerful message.”
The only message that’s going to come out of this session is that GOOPers are nasty, selfish, brutish thugs who will “balance” a budget on the backs of the poor and middle classes.
OTOH, you may be right — that’s what GOOPers like …
Reply »
crazy uncle says:
The republican candidate will be determined very early. There is no presidential primary in the democratic party, voter turnout will be miniscule. The plan is for Tea Party people to vote in democratic primaries against all congressional and senate incumbents rather electing republicans who cannot win in the general.
Reply »
anita says:
That plan is illegal.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 9:17 pm
Not in Texas.
Reply »
No reason to deal says:
More importantly, it is impractical. No movement can survive simply by aiming to elect candidates they find lukewarm at best. The Tea Party won’t marginalize themselves intentionally in such a manner.
Reply »
AreYouKiddingMe says:
I can’t wait to see his TV ads. The gun waving Aggie cheerleader who wants his State to secede from the Nation. The one who hates federal mandates, but has been the governor in a time when more mandates in history have been placed on schools under his watch. The “small government” Republican who amassed a $27 Billion deficit due to his tax cutting scheme, which he was told wouldn’t work, and at the same time living in a 100K per month mansion on the taxpayers dime. So far, I don’t like his chances. The rest of the nation will take him for what he is… a professional politician who is seen as a buffoon on the national stage. Unfortunately, Texans haven’t figured that out yet…
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
February 28th, 2011 at 4:19 pm
Dead on. I agree. Talk to folks outside the state and they see Perry as a big talking, no walking hot air machine.
Reply »
Bean Counter. says:
$15 billion budget deficit, not $27 billion. Scott McCown can say it all he wants, but that doesn’t make hid DC math a fact.
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks says:
I’m not sure if democrats are in a foul mood since being “shellacked” in November or if this is all they have. Oh well, more bad news 2012 is coming like a freight train and its only going to get worse.
Reply »
Kenneth D. Franks says:
2012, will be unique just as every other election. What comes around goes around. Texans actually do support public education and many of the things being slashed, not because we don’t have a “Rainy Day Fund,” but because some ideologues refuse to consider using it.
Reply »
eyeswideopen says:
So the way I see it, our governor is positioning himself to be as attractive as possible to the national TP folks at the expense of the citizens of Texas.
Don’t use the Rainy Day funds, hide the “no new taxes” b.s. behind increased fees, try and continue to bond new road building instead of paying as we go, and offer continued tax incentives to the large corps who contribute to his ascent. Have I missed anything?
All those head in the sand, far right conservatives who voted for Mr. Perry everytime he ran for office as a Republican will end up hating him.
Reply »
Kenneth D. Franks says:
I think you summed it up very well eyeswideopen.
Reply »
Democrats are crybabies says:
Why are you Democrats so bitter on this blog?
It’s not like you were creamed in the 2010 elections. Oh wait… LOL.
It’s not like the polls are showing the Republicans picking up the Senate in 2012. Oh wait… LOL.
It’s not like Obama is going to drop out of the 2012 race at the last minute for some unknown reason. Oh wait… LOL
Reply »
Really Reply:
March 1st, 2011 at 9:49 am
We don’t need tea party types who just fear the Hispanic boom to be so afraid, just go with it.
Reply »
Kenneth D. Franks Reply:
March 1st, 2011 at 12:31 pm
I’m not bitter. I don’t believe any of my posts indicate that I am. I think Perry has been governor too long but I only have one vote. I am a Democrat.
Nothing in the current budget crisis is something to laugh about though. It is serious and will continue to be so if we don’t fix the current structural deficit in Texas.
Reply »
Briscoe Democrat Reply:
March 1st, 2011 at 2:34 pm
Kenneth, you tell that to Jerry Brown of California (whose likely to break Earl Warren’s record of 10 years by 2013 and winnning a 4th term in 2014, giving him 16 years), Terry Branstad of Iowa (already in 5th term), and John Kitzhaber of Oregon (currently in 3rd term).
Reply »
Briscoe Democrat Reply:
March 1st, 2011 at 2:35 pm
DAC, I think some Dems are ticked off that redistricting is going to set them back a decade for awhile.
Reply »
retrocon says:
I like Romney because he knows how to get things done, has already championed the paring down of the federal government in the 2008 campaign, and Romney will never try to impose a national health care like Obama has done (so you can stop worrying about that).
A lot of you sound a lot like Dick Morris on Fox News, who latch onto one issue that you say eliminates Romney, while giving other candidates a pass for MULTIPLE weak points.
And you sound just like Huckabee. In 2008, he was constantly bashing Romney, even after McCain became the front-runner. When asked why, Huckabee could only point to Romney as “a late-comer” to the conservative stance on abortion. Of course, nevermind that McCain’s conservative credentials were deplorable except in a few cases, McCain was given a pass.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Would Perry resign if selected to be the VP nominee? If so, here’s hoping he’s on the ballot! I’m concerned the guy is going to run for governor again in 2014.
Reply »
Briscoe Democrat says:
Anon, here is my take on the GOP Tea Party straw poll: first of all, Perry will NOT be the VP pick for whoever the GOP nominates (likely Romney as the GOP presidential nominee) due to many controversies.
Second, Perry will STILL be governor if picked as VP (remember the late Lloyd Bentsen was running for reelection to his Senate seat in 1988 while being tapped as Dukakis’ VP on the Dem side).
Third, the Dallas Morning News had an article early last year that Perry said he’s considering running again for a 4th term in 2014, which he hasn’t ruled it out.
Fourth, whoever is selected VP on the GOP side will likely be a SENATOR.
Reply »
Briscoe Democrat says:
Aggie for Kay, Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval is also a Latino GOP governor while Bobby Jindal of Louisiana and Nikki Haley of SC are the only 2 Indian-American governors.
Reply »
FredCDobbs says:
I know its not a Christian thing to say, but I hate that turd.
As far as Democrats being bitter, hell yes I am, at least when it comes to politics. My life is great (knock on wood) but not so for many, many Americans. I’ve watched my country swing ever rightward since 1980!, and the party that protects the rich and punishes the middle and working class by shifting the tax burden downward is regarded as the party that represents the Average Joe. That hurts my brain.
The bottom 80% of our country (that’s you know, everyone on this blog) controls 7% of our national wealth. Another measure puts that figure at 15%. If you think that’s great, at least have the decency to say so.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
FredCDobbs, you complain about “the right” sticking it to the middle class. Here’s a question for you– do you really think the rich paid less tax and the middle class paid more tax during the time that Republicans governed? Care to guess the percentage of tax revenue paid by the top 5% income bracket vs. how much is paid in by the lowest 40%?
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
March 1st, 2011 at 9:12 pm
be sure to include the percentage of wealth the top 5% have in your calculations. another wingnut that just can’t seem to grasp the concept of marginal value.
Reply »
Former Member says:
It is hilarious to see all you liberal haters posting about Perry running for VP. He’s not any more running for VP than you are.
And for you class warfare posters: How do you propose to rectify the difference between the rich & poor, taking from the rich & giving to the poor? If so, you are a confirmed socialist. Also, how do you suppose the inequity occurred? Do you think successful people got their money through hook or crook? Are only the poor people “good and honest?” You just can’t get past the fact that some people worked harder, got educated better, and/or invested smartly. People are “poor” because they choose that as their lifestyle. Poverty comes from being shiftless.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
March 2nd, 2011 at 1:13 pm
In the case of wall street and the bankers, YES.
Reply »
Former Member Reply:
March 4th, 2011 at 10:38 am
They are a tiny percentage of the rich. You can’t punish everybody because your perceived actions of those concentrated on Wall Street.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
March 4th, 2011 at 11:37 am
but you can put those crooks in jail. and taxes aren’t “punishment”. it’s the price we pay to live in a civilized society.
Anonymous says:
I expect this kind of stupidity from jbb.
Reply »
Former Member Reply:
March 3rd, 2011 at 9:23 am
Anonymous, you can’t explain how I am wrong about poverty being a chosen lifestyle. All you can do is make a personal attack. (My comments did not apply to those who have mental conditions.)
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
March 3rd, 2011 at 12:31 pm
you’re the one making the outrageous claim. You prove it. Why are you wingnuts so allergic to work??? You always expect someone else to prove or disprove your blathering.
Reply »
AreYouKiddingMe says:
I don’t want to give money from the rich to the poor. But, I am all for closing the loopholes that give wealthy people a very good tax advantage. I am also in favor of ending corporate welfare, farm subsidies, etc. For those of you against welfare, start with farm subsidies, close the loopholes, and I am with you…
Reply »
Former Member says:
AreYouKidding: Why should someone be entitled to Earned Income Credit, which gives them a tax “refund” in excess of the income taxes they paid, yet those dirty old rich people are slimeballs because they might only pay 35% inheritance tax instead of 55%?
Reply »
Former Member says:
@Anonymous 12:31 3/3 – I’m not asking you to prove anything. I’m just asking your logic. How do you come to the conclusion that poverty is NOT a chosen lifestyle for mentally normal people? Everyone has the same shot at the education system, the tech schools, the training programs, etc., and everyone could get a job and stick to it, thereby proving their reliability & becoming an expert at something. Those who do that become successful. Those who CHOOSE not to, become dependent on the govt. That’s all I’m saying, & I just sincerely, not confrontationally, ask you where I am wrong. I enjoy the ideological discussion.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
March 3rd, 2011 at 3:43 pm
bullsh*t. and conservatards like you and perry are making sure the differences become greater and greater. check out any study on teacher training in high income schools and low income schools and tell me what you see. when anyone tries to level the playing field you jerks scream “robin hood” and make sure inequities in the system remain and become more magnified. then you have to balls to claim everyone has the same opportunities and poverty is a lifestyle choice. you are an a**hole of the highest order!
Reply »
Former Member says:
You obviously have a serious hatred for people with whom you disagree. You are the type of progressive liberal who gives liberalism a bad name. All you are doing is building resentment for your socialist movement. I am as convinced as you are that I am correct. The difference is, I don’t hate you for your opinion, and I don’t have the superiority complex that you display.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
I don’t hate you. I think you’re an a**hole. Oh, and making statements like “poverty is a lifestyle choice” is a sign of a huge and I’m guessing undeserved superiority complex.
Funding public education equally isn’t socialism. I’ve yet to find a single conservatard that even knows what socialism is.
Reply »
Former Member says:
Again, how is poverty NOT a lifestyle choice? Are you saying that a kid who starts to school today does not have the same opportunity as any other kid? You can blame the “rich” schools all you want, but if there is a weakness in the homelife, it doesn’t matter where the kid goes to school; he’s not going to succeed. For a student who comes from parents that work & who make sure the kid gets his homework, that kid will succeed whether he is in Highland Park or Dallas Carter.
BTW, I agree 100% with you, though, that there should be literally equal school financing. 100% of the local school’s budget should come from the state. We need a Const amend which creates a STATE property tax so that the state can receive the proceeds of the educ ad valorem taxes; but I know that politically that won’t happen.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
March 4th, 2011 at 3:14 pm
and why do you think the weakness in homelife might exist??? go out and read something besides ayn rand. google is your friend.
Reply »
Former Member Reply:
March 5th, 2011 at 10:06 pm
I think the weakness in homelife exists because there is no incentive to do better. There is a subclass of people in society who are content to live like they do. I suppose you think that if we took money from those “rich,” since they probably in effect stole it and deserve to give it up, then give it to those who won’t work or even try to make themselves more valuable in the workplace, that they will then have more incentive to do better. The undeniable fact is, that the more you do for people, the less they will do for themselves. It’s just human nature.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
March 6th, 2011 at 2:36 pm
Yep, the rich are just smarter and work harder. They don’t have a
dishonest bone in their body. No advantages that we all don’t have.
When you decide to get out of your bubble of ignorance and join the real world, let me know.
Anonymous Reply:
March 6th, 2011 at 2:39 pm
Yep, all those slackers who got the benefit of the GI bill went to college to drink beer and get laid. Those basta*ds are still on the dole. It’s just human nature.
Anonymous says:
This is just for you former member. Why didn’t you tell me you knew the head of 60 minutes??
Reply »
Former Member says:
You didn’t ask.
Reply »
Mike says:
$27 billion in budget cuts will send a loud message all right. You think Wisconsin was a controversy? Just wait – millions of Texans are about to be adversely affected by this knucklehead – and they aren’t going to go away quietly.
Reply »