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.

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

If I were Palin, I would not want you representing me. You set a poor example for her, and in that way, are making it harder for others to see Palin’s virtues, and she does have virtues. But keep on denying reality. It is pointless to argue with someone who is delusional.

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

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

If illegal aliens get a "path to citizenship" the left will have such an overpowering majority they will seize control of all 3 branches of government, and the economy won't be the only thing to collapse.

[COgamer]

Perry is really still an unknown quantity for most people, he has some bandwagoning going on. After a couple debates or other events opinion may change yet again. Remember when Fred Thompson announced and quickly jumped to the front of the pack, only to end up getting among the fewest actual vote totals? Or how Donald Trump was so briefly in the lead?

Right now Perry has a sizeable lead, the biggest of the season so far I believe, but that didn’t happen until he actually announced. Clearly, actually entering the race made a difference for him - and it could for Sarah as well.

[Sudetenland]

No, but distorting the fact is very much Alinsky-esque. You need to at least to attempt to be honest about what you are posting.

[Sudetenland]

Anyone can take statements out of context, in fact that is the sort of thing to which most of those are responding. Funny that you should chose to do the same thing in attempting to prove some point.

I tend to take offense when I see folks posting lies about pretty much anyone, even Obama. That the smearing against Perry has become a cottage industry among some around here is despicable and not what I would expect of people who call themselves "conservatives."

BTW, from what I have seen in the attacks against Perry, they are liars to the core, angry and irrational and very little does differentiate them (or at least their arguments) form the denizens at DU.

Lies are unbecoming and should be alien to any conservative and they are unworthy of respect.

I am surprised that anyone professing to be concerned over the tone and tenor of the discourse on this forum would be defending such attacks, whether or not you support Perry.

[Lakeshark]

One sentence after a series of interruptions, just like I said. You ignore tons of things she's said since 2009, all which point against your one very unclear phrase, but you zero in on that.

You're inferring an entire program from that?

Sorry Charlie, you're the one making it up, not me.

Nice cheap shot in your next post. And you're the one claiming I'm somehow delusional............

[Ditter]

LOL! You send me to the college textbook store rather than answer my question. That is hysterical. I’ll bet you can’t answer my question. In 30 words or less what is Palin’s military strategy? You just made that idea up didn’t you.

[sklar]

All of the quotes I posted in post #360 came from you. They are not "debate". They are personal insults meant to ridicule & silence those you disagree with.

The EXACT same tactic the left uses on people who don't agree with their ideas.

[Windflier]

I’ll bet you can’t answer my question. In 30 words or less

I can answer your question, but not in 30 words or less. That's why I posted the link. Read it, and everything Palin is doing will make sense to you.

Art of War isn't a college textbook, Ditter. It's actually a pretty short read, as far as famous books go, although volumes upon volumes could be written from the axioms it contains.

You can digest the whole thing in an hour if you're a quick study. Perhaps two, if you're the type who likes to slowly savor your information.

[rintense]

Honest about what I’m posting? Clearly you did not read the links. Perry isn’t making Texas less attractive to illegals- his policies are attracting them like flies! But you keep living in denial, k?

[Ditter]

The link you sent went to a site where I could download textbooks. I don’t want to down load even a short text book. If you want to convince people of something you need to be willing to answer their questions.

[Windflier]

I don’t want to down load even a short text book. If you want to convince people of something you need to be willing to answer their questions.

Have it your way, Ditter. I told you that I can't explain it to you in 30 words or less, and directed you to a short text that can answer all of your questions and more.

If you can't be bothered to simply read it, then you're just posturing or picking a fight. I'm not trying to "convince" you (or anyone else) of anything. You wanted an answer, and I gave it to you.

[Ditter]

I am not trying to pick a fight with you. The truth is I am not very interested in Palin now, if she decides to run I will be interested in her. You peeked my interest in her (somewhat) when you said she was using a military strategy and I asked a question, you chose to make me dig the answer for myself. I am not that interested in her.

[Windflier]

I asked a question, you chose to make me dig the answer for myself. I am not that interested in her.

Ditter, you're not listening. I told you that I can't explain what Palin's doing, strategy-wise, in a convenient 30 word soundbite. I gave you the link to Art of War, which is a short text that completely explains what the military technology she's using, but you refuse to just read it.

You would have finished it by now, if you'd just dug in when I first posted it. It ain't that long of a read, and it's one of the most important books ever written.

[Ditter]

LOL! I tried but my computer wouldn’t go past the first few lines. I really tried.

[Windflier]

I tried but my computer wouldn’t go past the first few lines. I really tried.

Well, that's not the only place you can read it. It's just the one link I have handy.

'night.

[factmart]

You are stupid !

[Behind Liberal Lines]

If a politician can’t explain it in a 30 soundbite, he or she has failed to communicate.

[stephenjohnbanker]

” Perry isn’t making Texas less attractive to illegals- his policies are attracting them like flies! But you keep living in denial, k? “

LOL....EXACTLY

[Sudetenland]

I note, you didn't respond to my question as to why you are defending those who are lying and attacking Perry with smears rather than with facts. Again, if you are so concerned about the tenor of the discourse on this forum, why are you defending liars?

Second question, are you stalking me? Why would you spend that much time investigating me and what I have posted? Is it because you are one of those who hates Perry and wants him to be smeared?

You are correct, everyone of those posts was an attempt to ridicule someone . . . but in every case, that someone was engaged in lying about, or distorting some portion of Perry's past.

Let me make it very clear, once again. I have very little tolerance for those who claim to be conservatives, but engage in Alinsky-esque attacks against those candidates who are running against their favored candidate.

In my book, conservatives don't indulge in lying, distorting, smearing, or taking comments out of context to make a point. Conservatives believe in truth, they win arguments with facts, not emotion.

When I detect someone engaged in smearing, I turn their techniques against them and point out their lies in as brutal a fashion as I can. As long as the moderators and Jim Robinson don't object or warn me off, I see nothing wrong in doing so and apparently neither do they. If they do, they can warn me off and I will cease, but if it disturbs you , then I suggest you not read my comments.

Why do you not attack the lies the Perry bashers are spreading? Do they not offend your sensibilities as well?