Posted on 09/08/2011 7:33:58 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
For a while there, Rep. Michele Bachmann seemed to be all anyone could talk about in the race for the Republican presidential nomination.
Telegenic, controversial and aligned with fiscal and social conservatives, she soaked up media coverage and seemed to be emerging as the GOP base's preferred alternative to Mitt Romney - particularly since Mike Huckabee decided to forgo the race and Sarah Palin continued waffling about whether she would jump in.
Then came August 13. It was, in once sense, a triumphant day for Bachmann: She won the (albeit overhyped) Iowa straw poll, generating headlines about how she was a top-tier contender with a legitimate shot at the nomination. But August 13 was also the day that Texas governor Rick Perry decided to throw his ten-gallon hat into the race.
Ever since then, Bachmann has steadily faded. Perry shot to the front of the polls on the strength of his dual establishment/base appeal, while Bachmann sank back to third or fourth, alongside Ron Paul. Unable to capitalize on her straw poll momentum, she shook up her campaign staff, removing campaign manager Ed Rollins - who promptly declared the contest a two-man race between Perry and Bachmann.
Wednesday's debate was Bachmann's chance to show she had come up with some sort of plan to regain some semblance of momentum. And despite a strong performance in past debates, she let the opportunity pass her by. While Perry and Romney sparred, a sbdued Bachmann failed to get in any memorable lines and looked like a footnote who belonged with the also-rans, not the contenders.
In the spin room after the debate, Rollins - who is still with the Bachmann campaign - tried to frame Bachmann's unmemorable debate performance as no big deal.
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
Surely, you jest. You think she has NOT been on the receiving end of slights and barbs? Are you serious?
I have never seen Palin “waffling” - interesting choice of a word to disparage her. If the current lineup does not lead to producing a strong Conservative candidate - Palin will get in. In her heart - I think she is hoping there is someone who will emerge with her values and commitment to restoring this nation’s liberty loving character - but if duty calls - she has a servant’s heart.
He then stated that she was asked her FIRST question a mere 19 minutes into the debate!
He mentioned that in a similar situation, Rick Santorum interrupted the earlier debate to demand to be included, indicating that Bachmann, in failing to do so, missed her chance to promote herself when she was ignored.
I don't know that I agree w/Wallace (whom I dislike intensely as being the carbon copy of his dad, a sniveling smart-ass, looking his nose down on everyone not him) because these "debates" are really anything but.
I've not had speech nor debate since high school but do remember the structure of debate and nothing that has happened so far has in any way allowed significant candidates to "show their stuff!"
To give so much time to Jon Huntsman was absurd and what a jerk, next to Chris Wallace, Huntsman makes Wallace seem almost pleasant.
Well first of all (giggle), one must suspect the motives of the person who posted a CBS article putting down Michele. The headline alone gives one pause. There are those who support someone else and are only too happy to say it’s over for Bachmann. I think she is the Energizer bunny. Stay tuned:)
Sarah Palin continued waffling about whether she would jump in.”
Not according to many here. She’s totally in, she’s going to walk away with it, and you are a fool rino if you don’t buy that. (Sarah’s coming, and you have NO IDEA what the tsunami is going to be like!).
Maybe so.
But at least a little, teensy weensy amount of skepticism is not irrational at this stage....
We’ll see soon enough. Until then, we’ll enjoy the speculation, even if it is rather heavyhanded at times...
Nice lady, good for the debates, out of her league. She simply doesn’t have the experience needed.
Surely we’ve learned that after electing the current disaster.
He was just trying to remeber which set of core convictions to fake.
People forget how hard the democrats have tried to defeat Michele Bachmann in Minnesota yet she’s always been there at the end.
The left spent something like $20 million trying to defeat her last year.”
Hopefully she will see the reality soon enough and stay in Congress.....
Yes, the employers claim that the illegals work harder, have a better work ethic, etc. but again, I trace that back to the failure of the education system that refuses to educate black children - black males suffer the most from this criminal act perpetrated by our beloved Dept. of Education (NEA!)
Do you know this for a fact? I assumed it was just as likely that he dumped her. She's notorious for losing staff in record time.
Not one of the candidates has had to deal with the barbs and questions that Palin has had to endure.
From a Texan:
Not a Perry fan at all, but I’m convinced he’s our best option now.
I screamed as loud as anyone during his Gardasil fiasco. I differ with him on other major issues. But there is this:
He will back down, but only when forced to. He sees the light when his base yells in his face. You have to watch him. However, that same tenacity and stubbornness may be just exactly what we need right now.
The tough-guy persona is not an act.
Seems a lot of people are scared to let the voters decide.
Once again the media is doing the choosing. Not buying it her. She did well...but, like Herman Cain, Rick Santorum, and Ron Paul—she did not get as many questions, ie., face time, as Perry or Myth.
And who decided that? Why...the media moderators of course. It was preordained to be Romney/Perry. Last time “they” propped up McCain, this time they are pulling the rug out from under Bachmann.
NO!!!
Sarah's operation is generally widely misunderstood. Most of these pundits have never been in a real campaign.
There is a distinction between "running" and a statutory "declared candidate". Sarah has been running for some time. She can't direct an organization effort as a candidate and she can't directly raise money as a candidate who is not a declared candidate. She could have done some things with an "Exploratory Committee" but she hasn't needed one of those to be effective doing what she has been doing so she doesn't have one.
In the current effort, most money is going to be raised by Super PAC's. They can't be an arm of the campaign by the declared candidate because they don't comply with the candidate contribution limits.
Romney and Perry and perhaps others of the active declared candidate list are running with Super PAC money also.
I think it is pretty likely that Sarah has shadow supporters running at least one Super PAC.
She has organizational people commuting from Texas to Iowa and from and to other locations who have never even met her. But when the ball drops, she will step to the plate with the best organization and the most money as well as the best thought out approach to running her campaign.
I think that she actually blew through what money she had to win Aames, and could not afford to keep Rollins on full time, and had to let the deputy go outright.
Jackass remark Hemingway.
If you or your wife look as good as she does at her age then you should be very grateful
I assume you have accomplished more than she has with her life.
You just prefer we not know you are actually a brain surgeon or head of a Fortune 500 company right?
However, that same tenacity and stubbornness may be just exactly what we need right now.”
This does cut both ways, doesn’t it? Anyone who watched Perry during 2003 tort reform knows that he can be very, very “stubborn”. The key is to make sure he is stubborn about the right things. When that happens, he is very effective....He seems to have drawn a line in the sand on a few things: spending, federalism, and now Social Security. If (when he wins, and he will I think) he takes strong action on these items, he will be a very good President (not to mention the benefit of getting rid of obama).
Let's be fair here. He did not support mandatory vaccinations. He allowed for an opt out for parents who chose not to subject their daughters to the vaccine. That is not mandatory that is voluntary. Maybe he believed the hype about the vaccine and wanted to give girls a chance to protect themselves, at taxpayers expense of course, but there was no forcing of the vaccine on anyone in his bill.
Being misguided is not the same as being a dictator. OTH, you want to be careful of leaders who don't check things out a carefully as they should.
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.