Posted on 09/05/2011 1:46:01 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
WASHINGTON - Mitt Romney's loss is Rick Perry's gain in the 2012 Republican presidential race, as the Texas governor, a late starter in the wide-open Republican presidential field, is not only stealing support but also big-money backers from the former GOP front-runner.
Just look at California.
Four years ago, Mike Schroeder was California political director of Mitt Romney's presidential campaign. This year, he dismisses Romney's second White House campaign as "disorganized."
"A lot of the energy that was for Romney has gone to Perry this time around,'' said Schroeder, who has not formally endorsed a candidate.
Former California assemblyman Scott Baugh, the influential head of the Orange County GOP, helped raise nearly $2 million for Romney in the last race in that perennial GOP fundraising gold mine. But recently, he co-hosted a "meet-and-greet" for Perry with local Republicans and calls the Texas governor "an authentic individual who has a clear vision for what the country needs."
Former California Republican Party chairman Shawn Steele remembers that in the last campaign, a "united" Orange County GOP leadership "flew to Boston and raised money for Mitt." Now, "they have deserted the ship."
Defections are exactly what Perry needs as he attempts to build a national grass-roots organization - and fundraising base - to maintain his newfound position as leader of the presidential pack.
[snip]
Perry's goal is to raise as much money as possible before the Sept. 30 deadline for the presidential financial disclosure reports, which will be watched closely as a sign of Perry's political staying power.
"If he beats Romney in terms of third-quarter contributions, in spite of only having about half the time to raise the money, then that will be a major victory for Perry and a major blow to Romney," said Rice University's Jones.
(Excerpt) Read more at chron.com ...
Even unions have pulled back support, retreating to their states to regroup and fight the new GOP strongholds.
Why back Romney, and already proven loser?
As usual, your post here was extremely thoughtful and well written. In this case, your #7 on this thread will be the object of scorn by some very vocal members of FR.
I think what you wrote in #7 is completely logical and, to a certain extent even obvious. But others will be angered by it and see you, the messenger, as a kind of villain. But I’m sure you already knew that when you posted.
As always, thanks for sharing your insights with the rest of us.
Rick Perry is a solid conservative, and it behooves you to admit it.
If you recall 2007, Romney is a nasty campaigner when losing. This thing is going to get very nasty and if far from over.
Really do not care what you have had enough of.
Rick Perry is a solid conservative, as much as it pains you to admit it.
It is clear that many have underestimated Gov. Palin.
The decision to enter and compete is hers, and
the public will LISTEN to them all.
Rick Perry has border issues, and issues regarding
his misunderstanding of what he did with PerryCARE.
These are neither small nor insurmountable.
That said, the next POTUS will be the candidate
most in resonance with the public ... which is ‘fed up’
with the political nonsense, lies, fascism and open borders.
And the other wears celestial underwear....whatever that is.
WHO is your candidate?
I don't think it's too late for Sarah to get in and be successful. I think she is gauging how Perry will fare and will only make the leap if he falters - I would expect her to endorse him at the right time (not too early, just "in case") and would hope that he would provide the same courtesy if he does screw up enough to require another candidate. She is content to have a capable, reasonable hand at ther helm and knows she can also provide pressure from without if he loses his direction. We owe any real hope we have to Sarah Palin for at least this election season and probably for the next 3-5 down the road.
Do you have a problem with male cheerleaders?
IF you'd rather NOT be pinged FReepmail me.
IF you'd like to be added FReepmail me. Thanks.
I never expect to see that great graphic, yet it makes me laugh each time I do.
It is the truth!
Trapped? His immigration positions are a disaster. Worse than even Bush. I don't get it, frankly. (Read these emails from his top campaign bundlers bragging about how they killed dozens of immigration enforcement bills in TX.) Aside from that I would be all in for Perry.
Don't count your strawmen before they get flamed.
There is increasing opposition research on Perry, from both movement conservatives and from Dems.
His biggest achilles heels are (of course) the borders and (less obvious) crony capitalism / wheeling and dealing / "pay to play".
Sarah's strategy is several layers above brilliant.
Obama is trying to run on a classic lib/Marxist class warfare "let's get the rich bastards". But like the ghetto trash Marxist that he is, he can't help but live high on the hog: jet-setting to Martha's Vineyard while demanding that *Congress* "fix the jobs situation* is electoral tetrodotoxin. Palin is taking the same base of resentment Obama is stoking, and subtly redirecting it towards "lets get those bastards who spent all OUR money and want more, while they live like kings."
This is a no-brainer to sink Obama, and with but a slight modification, can be aimed at Perry.
Perry will play the "I'm experienced, she's a quitter card" -- but that makes it *impossible* for him to play the "I'm a downtrodden outsider, let me fix things" card simultaneously.
I understand what you say about Sarah's hurdle: but much of that is resentment of women who are a "7" and below. In person, she's electric. And below the radar, she is being invited to talks with foreign leaders -- Israel, India, Hong Kong or Singapore.
All it will take is one sterling debate for people to shake the cobwebs loose.
I think she enters after a debate or two, hoping that one of her opponents will suffer a haymaker and throw their support to her.
Let me put it this way: would anyone have kept in the public eye with the tweets and speeches, appear at the Iowa State Fair and release the "Iowa Passion" video (the soundtrack at 0:52 has someone asking her "are you going to run for President?", then have the Indianola speech and release The Undefeated on Pay-Per-View and Walmart,
...if she ONLY intended to endorse Perry?
Perry's *attitude* concerns me a LOT. He has a "command and control" mindset seen in Gardasil -- yes, it had to be mandatory to get Federal Funding, but I thought he was all state sovereignty.
Other posters have pointed out issues with the Trans-Texas corridor, semi-flip-flops on gay marriage as a states' rights vs. moral issue, pandering to Mexico, etc.
And who in their right mind calling themselves a conservative would have chosen ANY Democrat over Reagan's own VP during the end of Reagan's second term?
Even more troubling in this regard is his pushing of Rodriguez to the TX Supreme Court and pushing against the lawyer who won the racial preferences case; couple that with supporting Guiliani in 2008, and I think he's a finger-in-the-wind guy.
We had enough problems with a non-movement conservative out of Texas last time.
Obama is weaker than any Dem since Carter, or maybe even LBJ, if the rumours of the Donks trying to primary him are true. This is the best time possible to get a REAL conservative in the White House, especially with the 2010 Teanami, the Donks defending 17 or 18 Senate seats, and the possibility of real coat-tails. We could unravel the work of the left going back a generation. Why throw it away out of cowardice? ("We / she / a conservative can't winTM")
I remain of the opinion that you will not enter the race. Clearly, the train has nearly left the station.
FRiend, your train has derailed catastrophially if you ever thought *I* was going to enter the race.
I hope that was a typo...;-)
Cheers!
“A lot of the energy that was for Romney has gone to Perry this time around,’’
THIS IS THE EXACT REASON WHY WE SHOULD ~NOT~ SUPPORT PERRY!
(Do you really think that these establishment people) would go for a real conservative??
But they are scared to death of Michelle Bachmann..
Perry has practical experience with the border. He knows the geometry and cost of a wall. He knows the timelines associated with building a wall. He knows what the border looks like - he's been there many times. He is aware of the many challenges and has formulated a reasonable and cost-effective method for securing the border with National Guard troops, and later, with 5,000 new Border Patrol agents.
Romney, nor anyone else running for president, has the hands-on understanding of the Mexican border like Rick Perry. It is easy to blurt out ideas and ill-conceived notions from Minnesota or New Hampshire. Perry knows what actually works, and what is too burdensome.
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.