CNN Poll: Perry Leads GOP Race Even If Palin Runs

Wall Street Journal ^ | August 29, 2011, 2:32 PM ET | By Danny Yadron

[Behind Liberal Lines]

Texas Gov. Rick Perry has a commanding lead in the 2012 GOP presidential race, and that wont likely change if tea party favorite Sarah Palin decides to run, a new CNN/ORC International poll indicates....The poll’s data show that, for now, Mr. Perry is the clear favorite of tea party supporters. Ms. Palin won support from 10% of voters, leaving her in third place just ahead of Mrs. Bachmann.

[Big_Harry]

Much like George Bush, Rick Perry is an open borders globalist, and while he has some positive attributes, he is no conservative and will not affect the change that true conservatives want from the government.

I do wonder why so many of you folks get all mouth frothy when Sarah Palin’s name is mentioned though. Could it be that the thought of a strong woman leading the country intimidates you?

[caww]

Yes I’ve read Texans are about half for and half apposed to Perry . Though he won this last election I hear it was a tough race this time around. On FR it seems many who support him on FR are Texans..of course it may be that they are the ones responding most to my posts since I do not support him...and won’t.

[Grunthor]

“I do wonder why so many of you folks get all mouth frothy when Sarah Palin’s name is mentioned though.”

Not mouth frothy at all here, I think Sarah is great. I look forward to her announcement. Any day now. Or week. Or month. Ya know....whatever.

“Could it be that the thought of a strong woman leading the country intimidates you”

Actually no, it’s her over zealous supporters who, if one does not 100% support Sarah in every word and deed by attempting to destroy ACTUALLY declared candidates, you are a Palin-hater. The majority of my my posts on these candidate threads have to do with poking the zealots. I’ve even done it to Perry backers.

I see Perry as a cut above Bush, two cuts above McCain. Is he my dream candidate in this race? No, but my dream candidate cannot win so I pick who can, that I can support.

[caww]

Sorry you couldn’t find her comment after your search. Why I remember Palin saying that is it was exactly what she should have said when asked about the candidates.

Palin’s made it very clear she would vote for anyone but Obama...and reporters have tried many times to get her to name names that stick so they can run with it. They did just that when she mentioned Romney but they “picked” only part of her statement and ran with that....

It’s not important to me who she supports if she doesn’t run. We should all be voting according to who adhere’s to what we see as significiant....not by how politicians or the media think we should vote.

[caww]

Looking at what.. Palin's.. doing through the lens of military strategy makes all the difference, and explains much about why she’s doing (and not doing) a great many things.

I believe this to be true as well. Reporters and journalists prefer to say she's 'teasing' because they don't understand her strategy...they simply cannot. If they were in a war zone and saw a commander make these moves they would not say he's "teasing".

[Sudetenland]

I'm merely stating facts.

The persistent attacks based upon false or misleading information are being carried out by folks who clearly are motivated by hatred--you don't need to lie if you simply disagree with someone, you only need to state facts and use affirmative defense of your chosen candidate.

Not all Palin supporters are involved in a cult of personality, but a substantial number of those engaged in this smear campaign against Perry are. The individual to whom my remarks were directed is very clearly in that group.

I feel no compulsion to apologize for telling the truth.

By the way, in my book, "conservatives" don't feel the need to lie, they don't make strong emotional arguments or become emotionally attached to a candidate, they support someone based on rational ideals and principles.

[Sudetenland]

False premise. Illegals are not coming because of that in-state tuition--the vast majority of them aren't qualified for college. They are coming to Texas because that is where they can find jobs.

I never said that illegal immigration--again you are using Alinsky techniques distorting what someone says and then arguing against it (that is what is called a "straw man" argument)--I merely stated that there are other equally important issues. I would say that our rapidly approaching economic collapse and an unemployment figure approaching 20% are equally, if not more, important that illegal immigration.

If the economy collapses due to the insane levels of spending in which our government is currently engaged, then illegal immigration becomes almost irrelevant.

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

I've been trying to get a Perry supporter to help me understand how you support him considering his softness on illegal immigration and his continual pandering to the La Raza/open borders crowd. He has a pretty poor record on this subject, one that is extremely important to our ongoing fight against collapse (and liberalism for that matter).
Can you explain this one to me?

I am not exactly a "Perry supporter," (in fact a Perry supported called me nasty names yesterday) but Perry and Palin have a similar plan for immigration (guest worker program).

Watch the video of Palin in 2010 at about 3:15. LINK

She will register illegals and allow them to work to work as long as they "follow the steps."

Perry signed the Texas Dream Act, so that is a point against him. Palin was for a "path to citizenship" in 2008, but seems to have backed away from that. But P and P look pretty similar to me.

[Clyde5445]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,592942,00.html

VAN SUSTEREN: All right, now, I know that your past as governor of Alaska didn’t — was not the same time that Governor Jan Brewer of Arizona has gotten into office, but I assume that sort of governor to governor...
PALIN: Yes.
VAN SUSTEREN: What’s your thought on the heat that she’s taking over this statute?
PALIN: I’m proud of Jan Brewer for standing up for the constituents in her state, sending a message to Washington, sending a message to President Obama saying, Hey, you need to do your job, sir. And if you’re not going to do it, OK, then we are compelled to do the job for you until you get it right.
President Obama has been suspiciously silent on this issue, hasn’t he? We don’t even know where he stands on immigration reform or securing our borders. He doesn’t talk about it. He gets to punt on that one. And that’s unfortunate because this is a big issue. It’s all about national security. It’s about our sister border states that are inundated with violence and with crime because people illegally crossing the border, engaging in illegal activities for too long now. And some of these border states are saying, Now we’ve had enough. I admire Jan Brewer for taking a stand.
VAN SUSTEREN: Why do you think — I mean, for 20-some years, maybe even longer, even going back to President Reagan — everyone has always said, We’re going to secure the borders.
PALIN: Yes.
VAN SUSTEREN: Nobody has done anything. I mean, or almost nothing.
PALIN: Because they’ve made it political and they haven’t understood that unsecure borders isn’t fair to anybody. It’s not fair to American citizens who ware here legally, paying taxes, following the rules, doing all the things that an American citizen is expected to do. It’s not fair to them. But it’s not fair to the illegal aliens, either, here. They want to come pursue an American dream. Some of them do want to be here to work. But they’re forever going to have to hide because, you know, government’s going to crack down on them when (INAUDIBLE)
So they need to follow that path of legal citizenship, obviously. But these politicians, presidents in the past who have not secured the border, they’ve made it a political issue. They haven’t wanted to tick off a potential base of Hispanic voters, so they haven’t made the tough decisions. And that’s no way to solve the problem. That’s no way to solve any challenge in America, by ducking and hiding and creating division and making these partisan issues out of it.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
VAN SUSTEREN: Well, we have still more with Governor Sarah Palin. Governor Palin is blunt about what she would do about illegal immigration. She’s going to tell you.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VAN SUSTEREN: Continuing with former governor Sarah Palin on illegal immigration.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
VAN SUSTEREN: Both parties have made promises. I mean, we pull up sound bites where, you know, both sides, you know, Democrat, Republicans, say, you know, Secure the border, secure the border. And then once in office, we certainly don’t see a whole lot of action. Had the election gone another way, or even if you were president, what would you do about immigration?
PALIN: The very first thing is literally secure the border!
VAN SUSTEREN: How?
PALIN: People mock the idea of a fence. What’s wrong with building a fence? Yes, let’s physically secure the border. Let’s ramp up border control. Let’s provide the tools for those who are putting their lives on the line in order to stop illegal immigration of these aliens. Those are a couple of things.
And then you don’t start talking about amnesty, either, kind of as this last-minute, Oh, anybody who’s here in the country right now, we’re going to provide you amnesty, and even though you’ve broken the law and we are a nation of laws, you’ve broken that, we’ll still give you — because then there’s going to be a huge influx of those wanting kind of at the last minute to come over the border because they know that they will forever then receive that amnesty.
So you don’t start talking about that, but the very first thing you do is physically, literally secure those borders. It baffles me and most Americans why for all these years presidents, administrations have spoken about it but never done it.

[Lakeshark]

That's such a canard you posted. The O'Reilly interview where she is constantly interrupted, the entire gist of what she clearly said is illegal immigration had to stop and she would make certain with everything possible that the border would be secure, no ifs ands or buts. What you are claiming is not what she said, but what a few of you want her to mean (sort of pathetic projections it seems).

Everything she's said, in every interview since her two months as VP candidate has been consistent, that illegal immigration is a huge issue and we need to stop it from happening at all costs.

She was one of the first to step up to the plate and applaud the AZ law when it first passed, she was a huge promoter of Brewer over this one issue, and you have the nerve to crap in the waters, pretending she said something you somehow believe she really meant.

Go ahead, show us the proof of her "guest worker program". Show us one tweet, one facebook post, one editorial, one place where she fleshes this "guest worker program" out for us.

It ain't there, but it sure shows up somewhere in your own mind.

Perry on the other hand, has consistently pandered to the La Raza/open borders crowd. That's one heck of a difference.

[Lakeshark]

Go ahead, try post 349 for example. I'm sure you can find something in that transcript that shows us her guest worker program.....

*rolls eyes*

[Ditter]

I don’t know anything about military strategy, how about telling me what she is doing?

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

That's another point against Perry. He didn't want a law like Arizona 1070. He did sign a voter ID bill though, which is good.

The trouble with Greta is that she doesn't press the issue of "what to do about the illegals who are here after you secure the border."

PALIN: And then you don't start talking about amnesty, either, kind of as this last-minute, Oh, anybody who's here in the country right now, we're going to provide you amnesty, and even though you've broken the law and we are a nation of laws, you've broken that, we'll still give you -- because then there's going to be a huge influx of those wanting kind of at the last minute to come over the border because they know that they will forever then receive that amnesty. So you don't start talking about that, but the very first thing you do is physically, literally secure those borders. It baffles me and most Americans why for all these years presidents, administrations have spoken about it but never done it.

And yet in the later interview I linked, when O'Reilly probed, Palin said she was going to allow illegals to work after they register. That is not the same as GWB's "amnesty" which included a path to citizenship, at least not right away, but it does reward illegals, giving them legal status and work permits, when we have such painful unemployment.

Perry's plan also has a guest worker program. He promises that it would not include a "path to citizenship," but I do not believe it's that easy to have one without the other in the long run.

Rogue judges and bureaucrats, executive orders, more illegals encouraged to come in (deeming the border "secured" is not the same as securing it in fact). And then we hear the same old argument for a "path to citizenship," except that the pool of those needing "a path to citizenship" is now bigger, and includes formerly illegal guest workers.

But we also need to get rid of Obama before Scalia and Thomas have to retire.

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

Palin did not mention the guest worker program on Greta, who was easier on Palin than O’Reilly. Are you claiming that she did not say she said she would allow illegals to work as long as they “follow the steps?” Did you watch the O’Reilly interview around 3:15?

Are you going to ignore Palin’s own words?

[Lakeshark]

Perry has given speeches to La Raza recently, pandering like crazy, I don't trust him on this point. He really seems like W. on the issue, more than anyone else.

If she runs she will have to address the issue more clearly about those that are here, but you are misquoting her when you say she was going to allow her to work after they registered, she never says that, you infer that because you seem to want to.

You really need to listen to all her interviews and comments about illegals since 2009, because if you did, you'd know she is very consistent that this invasion has to stop. I'm really concerned about the illegals issue as are you, and it's pretty obvious from all she's said that she is too. If you stopped grasping at straws (like the O'Reilly one sentence after interruption, pulling it out of an impassioned plea to stop the invasion) you wouldn't try to impute things she didn't say to her like you did.

[Lakeshark]

The only thing hard about the O'Reilly interview was his constant interruption and badgering, there was nothing helpful or revealing about it. I watched it when it first came out, it says nothing like you claim it did, it's one sentence after several interruptions, where she speaks about possible "registration", but it never says what you claim, you have to pretend she's going in a certain direction to get what you think she said.

You're pretending you know where she was going and what she meant.

[Windflier]

I don’t know anything about military strategy, how about telling me what she is doing?

Art of War

[rintense]

Posting measured and concrete facts is Alinsky? You need your head examined. This is Perry’s own damned state! But keep making excuses.

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

What you are claiming is not what she said, but what a few of you want her to mean (sort of pathetic projections it seems).

Look who's talking! You create a cardboard Palin who says and thinks what you want her to say, ignoring video evidence. I would rather believe that you did not watch the video and claimed you did, than believe you watched it and deny what she said.

What does "allow you to work" mean in your universe?

Transcript: And let's say no, if you are here illegally, and if you don't follow the steps that at some point through immigration reform we're going to be able to provide, and that is to somehow allow you to work. If you're not going to do that, then you will be deported.

You think interviewers who make Palin say what she would do after "securing the border" are unfair. I want tough questions on immigration on all candidates. When Rick Perry was on Laura Ingraham last week, she did not ask a single question about immigration. Greta let Palin off too easy.

[sklar]

Here is a quick cut-&-pasted list of Sudetenland's idea of "civil discourse with other Freepers:

Only in your fevered brain

You are a fool

No, it's more like a pot-smoking Paulette experiencing typical paranoid delusions

Have fun in your self-deluded alternate reality.

You sound just like those insular idiots inside the Beltway/Corridor

Have a nice self-delusion filled life.

Have a nice life, and may God protect you from your own ignorance.

You Perry-haters are unworthy of respect. Liars to the core, angry and irrational; there is little to differentiate you from the typical denizen of DU. What a contemptible little thing you are.

flat-out lies people like you are engaged in? Yeah, that sort of behavior is only motivated by hatred and/or fear.

smear merchants like Ansell2 need to have their deceptions exposed for the benefit of others, but it's a waste of time to expect someone like him to care about the facts, he's so full of hatred that the truth doesn't matter.

BWAAAHAAAHAAA!!!! Are you serious, you direct me to a fake authority selling their products by convincing you that you don't need doctors. My God, you really are simple.

"SQUAWK! RED SOUTH WANT A CRACKER!"

I guess when you lack the ability to reason and you are devoid of anything of substance to say, you resort to ad hominems . . . just like your dear friends over at DU. Not just dishonest, but senile as well. LOL

I notice it didn’t take you Perry smearing hatemongers very long to jump on this and attempt to twist it against him either.

You must really hate Hispanics if you object to a governor of a state being "Hispanic-friendly," or are you one of those yankee bigots who automatically assume that all Hispanics are illegals? How sad for you that you are so consumed with hatred.

I don't understand your arrogance and hostility.