Posted on 01/06/2011 5:44:43 AM PST by pissant
An aide for Minnesota Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann told the media yesterday that Bachmann is mulling a 2012 presidential bid and is headed to Iowa to talk about the possibility with activists. Bachmann is scheduled to headline a fundraiser for the Iowans for Tax Relief PAC on January 21st in Des Moines.
For the most part, the national media isnt taking the news seriously. LA Times politics columnist, Andrew Malcolm, blew off the idea by suggesting she is just raising her profile to in order to run for the U.S. Senate.
Another opinion writer, Jonathan Capehart of the Washington Post, wrote, The Tea Party princess (Mama Grizzly is the Tea Party queen) must be off her rocker if she thinks shes presidential timber. He bases his opinion on Bachmanns performance on Hardball with Chris Matthews of all places.
Im sure these two paid thinkers got a kick out of blowing off the idea of Bachmann running for president. While their friends and cohorts surely slapped them on the back for a job well done, one thing is obvious, they dont know a damn thing about Iowa or the Iowa caucuses.
(Excerpt) Read more at theiowarepublican.com ...
I sure wish I was as dumb as that;^)
After McCain’s mystery come-from-behind primary victory, I find it hard to put much stock into Republican primaries. I’m afraid the libs and media have more influence over who our candidate is than we do. Whoever it is, one thing is for sure, it’s going to be a blood bath during primary season. That said I’d love to see Bachmann enter the race. Either her or DeMint would be mine first choices. Romney, Palin, Huckster and Newt are all media favorites for a reason.
Mmmmmm, not to sure, Pissy. Palin hotter than Bachmann and has her own reality show.
No executive experience. Never won a statewide election.
Missing either of the two is a major impediment. Missing both means you’re a complete non-starter.
Maybe she’ll be ready someday, but today’s not the day.
For the benefit of us less than the brightest bulbs, please explain that statement. To me, Progressive means socialist, communist, Marxist, liberal; interchangeable terms. Have I got it wrong?
Yes, I forgot; being truthful is an ucivil act these days, unless it is directed at an individual to the right of Joe Lieberman...
JMO, YMMV....
She is very noncommittal on many views. She has displayed a kind of “I’ll have whatever he’s havin’ “ type response to issues.
I see her as a high energy, all in a hurry headstrong type person. As long as things are going well, she keeps rolling ahead without a lot of thought as to where she is going. She will worry about that later.
That wasn’t a slam, just a personal observation, strictly mine.
I don’t know her, but I bet some people who are close might say that.
I am not a Catholic, but it seems the Church is about as messed up as this country is. At the same time, I don’t think the Catholic Church is the only Church having the same type problems anymore. Tells you something, doesn’t it?
Thanks, I needed the laugh!
;^)
Oh Lord, let this be an hard to choose election because we love all the candidates instead of hating them!
We already have a black man....oh wait, thats a mulatto girl.
Sorry
Thanks, I needed the laugh!
;^)
I think whomever we pick will be running against Hillary. I’m not sure a white man (R) could beat her. A Bachmann/DeMint ticket might be more winnable.
We would still have Steve King, who is absolutely fabulous!
There are others that are fantastic, but of course we never hear about them.
There are 174 members of the Republican Study Committee, a caucus of House Conservatives.
There are also 52 members of the Tea Party Caucus. There are many overlaps, but from what I have been able to ascertain, there are 9 TPC members who do not appear on the RSC member list.
This would indicate there are 183 republicans claiming conservatism of one sort or another...or 42% of the House. Michele would leave the House in capable hands.
Or did you just use it as an excuse to get your BDS quota up and running for the day?
I like Michelle, but I don’t want to see anyone run for President who’s been inside the beltway for more than 3 months at one stint. I especially don’t want to see anyone who’s been in the House or Senate. These people are not leaders, they are definitively followers. Give me a CEO, General or Governor. I want someone who has been in charge where the buck stops with them.
Exactly! And don't forget she is doing all of that while serving in Congress and...
they own a small business mental health care practice that employs 42 people.
I'm sorry -- YMMV ???
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.