Posted on 09/16/2011 5:52:05 AM PDT by The Bronze Titan
:-) I like the way you think!
would you vote for him KNOWING he would increase the size of Fed Govt and would massively increase the debt and would support corporate bailouts?
Yes
We must not elect another Big Govt, go along to get along RINO. That would be 95% as bad as re-electing Obama!
No it wouldn't.
The number one priority is the repeal of obamacare. After that the economy and fiscal constraints on the govt, so if it were George Bush or obama I know how I would vote in one second. The only other make or break for me is Pro-Life.
Absolutely not, which is why I prefer Palin over Perry.
There will be no repeal bill because he will take actions that will undermine the political will to repeal it. He will not fight for it in the Senate, and he will not be tenacious enough to force them to pass it.
Make no mistake about it, Perry is part of the permanent political class.
:-D
If the Courts let obamacare stand, what ON EARTH would make you think Big Govt Rinos like Bush or Rick Perry would spend their political capital to repeal it?
Everything we know about them screams just the opposite! That's the point we are making.
By all means, please join in.
Nobody is unelectable against zero. A warm bucket of spit could beat him.
Actually, Sarah is in the best position to defeat him. She is a known quantity and already vetted ten times more than any politician in history. Perry has serious policy issues, but I’m confidant he’d win too. The difficulty is, he’ll only be slightly better than Bush 43. That won’t undo zero care or any of the other cancer eating at our Republic.
The second point is that if you punt who you admit is the best policy-wise, you’ve just ceded all power to the media and liberals. Every time we get a really inspiring, authentic conservative, they can take them out by making them “toxic” and “radioactive”. They know we won’t defend them, and we’ll pull them for fear of high negatives.
If you allow their assault on Palin to determine our nominee, you have telegraphed a permanent victory plan to our opponents. No conservative will ever again be elected or even try to run.
From a practical standpoint, her negatives are very soft. After three years, people have a negative reaction, but don’t know why. Those will melt away as she campaigns. What won’t melt away are the hard negatives of this disastrous economy around zero’s neck. Even his own party knows he’s toast.
If Palin stood a snowball's chance in hell of getting elected and if she was actually running, I'd agree. But that's not going to happen, so we have to deal with reality. The reality is that Perry is better than Romney and if Perry doesn't win the nomination, then most likely it will be Romney.
It is possible that neither of them will get enough delegates and it could go to the convention, in which case all bets are off. That would actually be cool.
Perry is a believer in States Rights and has enough political savvy to get the job done.
Everything we know about them screams just the opposite! That's the point we are making.
This makes no sense. The only candidate running who might not repeal obamacare is Romney. If you think a non-candidate who quit the last time holding elective office is electable you are wrong. America will not back a quitter.
Lukewarm support will not get it through the senate.
Perry will score some easy symbolic points by limiting its effect, granting waivers, or reducing its funding. That will undermine any effort at full repeal.
He will be more concerned with passing a budget, getting nominees appointed, and promoting his agenda than digging in to insist on full repeal.
We need somebody who will stake their presidency on full repeal, who will drive straight at the cliff, full throttle without blinking. Perry will not do that, and we’ll be stuck with zerocare forever.
There is NOTHING in Perry’s background to suggest he will engage in a knock-down drag-out over principle. He will compromise, tinker around the edges, and try to get a percentage of what he wants.
Well, I don’t have a crystal ball and I wouldn’t rely on it if I did.
I’ll wait to see if she gets in. If she does, she absolutely can win.
I won’t hang out on Perry threads, pretending to be a supporter of his, while undercutting him and trying to undermine others’ support for him.
Do you know the facts and particulars about why Sarah resigned?
We thought that in NV in 2010 vs Reid.
From a practical standpoint, her negatives are very soft. After three years, people have a negative reaction, but don’t know why. Those will melt away as she campaigns.
When she resigned she sealed her fate as far as the POTUS.
That assumption makes absolutely no sense. Have you watched how Perry has fought the Feds and their bullshitte here in Texas. Obviously not or else you would have not made those asinine statements..Get your panties un-waded from around your neck...you may come to your senses when you can again breath..
It doesn't matter who is the POTUS on this point. It's all about who is inchage in the Senate and how willing they are to suspend, or change the rules. I don't see us having 60 Senators, so how they get it past a filibuster is the quiestion.
There is NOTHING in Perry’s background to suggest he will engage in a knock-down drag-out over principle.
There must be something, he has spent a lot of time in politics has never lost an election and the establishment blue blood Pubs don't like him.
Perry didn’t even understand the concept fully before somebody wrote the book for him.
A bill reasserting Texas’ rights under the 10th amendment was being pushed by a group of legislators. Perry went to the media event and opened up. He stammered, he back-tracked, and could not simply explain why the bill was important. After two minutes of agonizing torture, he handed the mic to the bill’s author, who gave a concise and passionate explanation.
Perry is smart. Perry is not a crook. Perry is a politician. Perry is not a movement conservative. His guiding philosophy is supporting those who supported him (so, he’s no flip-flopper like Romney), but he is lost on new issues. All those deer-in-headlights moments in the debates...that is the real Rick Perry. He doesn’t have an over-arching philosophy that guides his responses. He think short-term and seeks to “get things done”.
It is exactly that approach that will saddle us with zerocare forever. He will trade allowing a limited zerocare to exist for his larger agenda and budget. He’ll look good, deficits will come down to ~$200B a year, and our decline will slow.
We’ll still be headed for the abyss, at a slower rate. Four years later, zerocare will be an unmovable growing behemoth strangling the Republic.
You've missed the point. The fact that she did will turn off enough voters.
Do you know the facts and particulars about why Sarah resigned?
I’m making reasoned arguments, and your comeback is to attack and impugn me personally. Not classy. Very immature and unprofessional.
I volunteered for Perry in 1990. I voted for him in every statewide election in which his name appeared.
He fought the feds because it was all upside for him. Win or loose, it made him look good in Texas and cost him nothing.
...and what was his biggest fight against the Feds for? That’s right, to turn I-35 into a toll road as part of pet TTC project even though the vast majority of Texans opposed it.
I’ve posted numerous incidents showing 1) he is a typical politician primarily concerned about achieving his own agenda, 2) he is not a movement conservative.
If you want to argue those, fine, then point out where I am mistaken or lacking information.
Failing to address the specific incidents and issues, you are just blowing smoke...and rather noisily at that.
Then point to something?
Once he won Ag commissioner in 1990, he was guaranteed rising star. The only near-miss he had was against John Sharp for Lt Gov. Sharp was good, but it was a strong Republican year in Texas. Sharp was the last good state-wide democrat who wasn’t a commie. I still voted for Perry.
In 2006, Perry only won because of a 3 way race. In 2010, he narrowly avoided a run-off (because the real conservative imploded), and then had a cakewalk in the most Republican year since the 1920s.
Being lucky doesn’t make you good. Another way to look at it is almost all democrats and nearly 50% of republicans voted AGAINST Perry in 2010. That’s not a strong endorsement.
The only way to get it through the senate is to force their hand through absolutely brutal pressure. Palin can bring that to bear, Perry will choose not to.
Under your analysis, we’ll lack 60 senators (I think that is correct), and zerocare is permanent anyway. It will not be repealed regardless of the president (I disagree, I think Palin could do it).
If you are right, we’re done for...there is no saving the republic.
If Rick Perry had to endure a TENTH of what Sarah has already triumphed over, He'd be saying, "Hey Nancy & Harry, whatever y'all guys want. Just tell me what to sign."
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.