Posted on 06/28/2011 1:52:14 PM PDT by Kaslin
Thank you. I wonder where I got the crazy idea they where connected...
Romney on all counts! (until he wins the primary)
It’s business. Customers come, they request a service, and their insurance pays.
I wonder if her clinic can even legally turn down the customer because of their insurer.
She's an inexperienced, no achievement disaster, and yes, they will devour her as a result.
You all are beyond the capacity to think. Just because someone talks like a conservative doesn't mean they can win anything. I have more business experience than she does, I talk conservative, but it doesn't make me presidential material. It doesn't make her that way either......
Bachmann's big media splash came immediately after her performance in the New Hampshire debate, in which she did very very well, much better than expected. Commentators all around praised her performance that night.
I watched the debate, and I was pulling for Pawlenty. While he was very good on most answers, he disappointed with his backdown on "Obamneycare." I wasn't expecting much from Bachmann, but overall she shone, she stood out.
You know, it really might be that simple. No nefarious plot needed. It's not like the media love Bachmann--you'll notice more negative press now--it's just she helped herself very much with that debate.
This Rollins obsession, over a *relatively* mild critique that no one except the most zealous Palin supporters noticed or will remember--it's . . . something, alright.
Personally, I'm not convinced that either Bachmann or Palin will get the nomination, much less beat Obama. Right now, if I had to rank chances of getting the nomination (not who I *want* to get it), I would say, in this order: Romney, Pawlenty, Perry, Palin, Bachmann, and then, with almost no chance, Huntsman, Santorum, Cain, and then the rest with zero chance.
Bachmann the Romney Backstabber is FINISHED.
Her choice of Rollins and the attack on Gov. Palin.
Her judgment.
And it is NOT minor.
She pimps Global Warming for her “President Romney”.
That is not minor, either.
But it IS impressive to a RomneyBOT, right?
Go ask someone who supports Romney, which ain't me.
I'm not sold on *either* Bachmann *or* Palin. I was leaning toward Pawlenty, but not sold on him yet, either. Frankly, no one jumps out yet as an ideal candidate.
Disaster = not Sarah Palin.
No one here has come up with one decent life achievement for her, other than passing the Minnesota bar exam. I've thrown out the challenge, and so far....
**crickets**
Is that who you want for a candidate?
Of the ACTUAL candidates, Bachmann is the best available.
Are you seriously saying Hermann Cain doesn't have a better resume and isn't a better candidate?
Heck, I'd give the nod to Pawlenty (the boring one) over her.
She talks a good conservative game, when you get past ethanol and farm subsidies (which gives her a bump in Iowa), but she has no substance. Period.
Do you really think you want a candidate with no substance?
Telling!
Thanks for the name-calling; it really helps. (Is the /s tag necessary?)
No one said Bachmann had been thoroughly vetted yet. But there’s nothing wrong with dealing with the information we do have and evaluating it, however it turns out.
There will be disagreements as to every candidate’s suitability. Points will be made, people will throw out counterpoints so things get hashed out. Expect it and try to deal with it substantively. Just part of the process.
Anyway. If all you’ve got is to call those whom you perceive to disagree with you, or whom you perceive to not support “your” candidate (whoever he or she is), is to call names, such as the very revealing “prima donna” (an accusation of “acting superior”), you don’t need to post to me further on this matter. I can easily go get called names by Liberals any day of the week.
Thanks.
I let my frustration with you not replying to my points get to me and that was wrong.
Exactly.
If people want a candidate the media isn’t going to be against, they need to support Romney or Huntsman or one of the other Crickets Chirping Candidates.
Until the nomination is won, yeah.
Perfectly legitimate concern. However, I disagree that this is a worse or insurmountable risk for Bachmann. In fact, I think the Palin case shows that it isn’t.
I’m not suggesting Bachmann could make it through the gauntlet that Palin has successfully run. But I am saying that it’s possible. There were many days early on when people didn’t think Sarah could survive.
My larger point is that I don’t see making the media’s reaction to a candidate a huge part of how we evaluate a candidate’s prospects. It’s a factor, don’t get me wrong, and an important one! But this early in the game to make that what waves one off a candidate, no — not me, just saying.
You may be right. I’m open on the point and will see what develops.
I see no harm in her running, though (except perhaps to her own political future — more on that in a second). In fact, I think she is the only one to shake things up so far. She’s certainly going to force the rest of the candidates, many of whom have natural tendencies to go Old Boy at any moment, to deal with the present Tea Party zeitgeist and all it means for our country and her future.
Of course, the earth moves if Palin gets into the race.
As for harming her political future, this is a tough call and times, they are a’changing. But I would hate to see Bachmann, Palin, or even someone like Christie or Perry, more or less “waste” their best shot when they all have plenty of time and we may need them in the future. (Assuming the Republic survives -— lol/cry.)
I’m not saying I think those mentioned should not run this time. I’m just saying that historically (and again times are changing) it can be rather hard to overcome a failed presidential bid. So if you’re NOT ready, either personally, organizationally, whatever, there can be a price to pay for trying to run anyway.
One other point:
My thoughts on “this is just ego . . ..” I sincerely don’t see that in Bachmann.
She may be unprepared and all those other things that you conclude about her. But I don’t see “ego” as motivating her.
Yes, it takes fortitude at all to think you can be President of the United States. And it is kind of “upstart” to think you can go from congress member to POTUS (as discussed in the article). But I just don’t find that equals “ego,” as I think you mean here.
Just MHO.
Bachmann was not at risk of wasting her best time, her ego drove her to reach for leader of the free world when in fact she hasn’t accomplished anything politically yet.
She has not actually done anything since she first was elected to office many years ago, nothing, it is a decade of no (effective) leadership, no talent for getting things done.
If she can’t do anything, then why would anyone think that she would suddenly become a great historical executive leader, able to wrestle the federal beast as president, the evidence is that the legislaters would continue to totally dominate her and ignore her.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.