Paul and Perry Are Poised to Punk Romney and Gingrich in Iowa

Yahoo News ^ | Dec. 21, 2011 | Sherry Tomfeld

[stillafreemind]

Besides Paul's top position, Perry is now third or fourth in most of the polling. Pundits say Iowa is irrelevant if Paul wins, as he is a one-trick pony. Could a win in Iowa ignite the Paul ground teams in other states? Paul is a force to be reckoned with because of his staunch supporters. Maybe candidates should be reaching towards Paul instead of running away from him.

Perry, on the other hand, could be the dark horse in this race. If not nationally, at least he appears to be set to come from behind in Iowa. Why are people giving Perry a second look? His supporters do not mind that he is not the best debater.

[Norseman]

>>No matter who is President, the House and Senate (hopefully both in GOP hands), will control the agenda of either Administration.<<

Yet another assertion. You’re right, I’m not “disproving” your assertions; just pointing out that that is all they are, and that there are valid reasons why you could be wrong.

Obama let Congress set the agenda, but neither Gingrich nor Perry are likely to do so. If the President wants the reins (Obama clearly didn’t, preferring to do his work behind the scenes using his many “czars”), then the President will have the reins. The veto power, willingly used, is immense.

That’s my biggest concern, among many, about Romney. No matter how much the House and Senate want to repeal Obamacare, if Romney decides to tweak it instead, it will most likely end up just being tweaked, and we’ll be stuck with nationalized medicine forever. And I’m not all that confident that Gingrich wouldn’t try to do the same.

My tagline is “Defund the Left-Completely” because I firmly believe that is the only hope for turning this country around and getting back to first principles of the Constitution. Perry, backed by a Tea-Party heavy Congress, is the only hope I see of that happening, and even then I’m not all that optimistic of it happening. But Gingrich and Romney would never do it, in my opinion.

>>Ergo, pick the candidate who can win an election in this media age. That’s Newt.<<

Another assertion, and a strange one given that Perry is the one candidate running that, I believe, has never lost an election.

[Servant of the Cross]

... decriminalization is a step that cannot be walked back.

So true. That is a slippery slope I can't even imagine the negative consequences of. Be careful what you ask for ... and all.

[af_vet_rr]

No, you don’t mean “guest workers”; you don’t even mean “illegal immigrants”; you mean “criminals” as you so clearly state.

I do mean criminals because they are criminals. I just like to poke fun at those folks who pretend that they are "guest workers".

While granting that a lot of these “criminals,” as you describe them, are causing huge social problems in the States, the vast majority are here working to help their families succeed, whether here (illegally) or back in their home countries.

You can continue to be a hard-ass the rest of your life if you want, but if the Republican Party adopts your position, it will be a permanent minority party within 20 years, without a chance of recovery. Perry, and even Gingrich and Romney, and frankly, any humane person, understands that, so I’m comfortable that yours will not be the prevailing view of our party going forward.

You honestly think these people and their kids are going to become Republicans?

[Stat-boy]

“If you’re going to state something like this, back it up with at least one example, if one exists.”

Very fair request.

Here is one: Perry’s 2001 speech:

http://governor.state.tx.us/news/speech/10688/

It’s hard for me to pick a limited selection of quotes from it, as I find the overall tone repulsive and the entire thing is pandering, in my opinion. Specific examples include praise of (1) Senator Lucio [big-time liberal Hispanic], (2) Pat Haggerty [“moderate” Republican, who I am happy to say was defeated by a conservative R, who in 2010 defeated the D!], and [3] a bunch of zingers along the lines of this: “President Fox’s vision for an open border is a vision I embrace, as long as we demonstrate the will to address the obstacles to it.”

[Servant of the Cross]

Another assertion, and a strange one given that Perry is the one candidate running that, I believe, has never lost an election.

IMHO, a conservative forum is all about making "assertions" and defending them.

It is a fact that Governor Perry 'has never lost an election'. It is a fact that there is a first time for everything. It is a fact that LRon Paul is viewed by the polls as having a better chance of winning the GOP nomination than the never defeated Governor Perry.

At some point, you have to give up the ghost on the almost imperceptible chance that Perry can win this election.

[af_vet_rr]

Where is the news article link for that?

I went to your link taking me to a freepers thread but could not find a link to the original Washington Post article.

Cincinatus' Wife posted the original thread about Perry wanting a visa program for the illegals to cross back and forth across the borders, and you are right that WaPo seems to be having issues, so here's the original transcript from the interview Perry gave to CNN where he talked about a visa program:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1111/03/jkusa.01.html

PERRY: No. We've already had that conversation in this country. The idea that somehow we're going to round up 12 or however million people and ship them back to the country of origin is not reality.

KING: As you know, a lot of conservatives say that's the way do it, they don't want them to get any path to status, they say that's amnesty.

PERRY: And we're not talking about path to status here. We're talking about you're not going to pick up these folks.

But here what you do have to do, I think, is you have to identify them, you have to be able to give them some type of identification. Here's how they pay their taxes and they become a contributing part of the society instead of, as some people see them, just as a leech on society. That you can put a program into place of what these individuals can be identified and work visas and where they can move back and forth between countries, but not become United States citizens.

And I think that's where both McCain, that's where Romney, that's where even Bush went wrong when they talked about the issue of we're going to give amnesty to these individuals and people just said, no we're not.

KING: If you let them stay at all, though, and let them have those visas, some conservatives will say that's a form of amnesty. Because they came in illegally, they should not be able to get any benefits.

PERRY: Well, I disagree with the concept that somehow or other we're going to pack up 10 to 12 to 15 million people and ship them back to the country of origin. That's not going to happen. So we need to have -- reality has to be part of our conversation, and then you need to have a strategy to deal with it.

[PSYCHO-FREEP]

Good grief, where do you get off posting this drivel?

“Besides Paul’s top position, Perry is now third or fourth in most of the polling.”

Right, Perry and Bachmann are both tied at 6% nationwide and the leaders are ahead of them averaging over 20 points.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html

[Freedom_Is_Not_Free]

I can’t say I’m a big Perry fan with some of his baggage, but I’ll take him over Mitt & Newt in a heartbeat. Perry is the best of the long shots at this point. I’m still convinced we get a RINO and fear that Romney takes the nomination in the end. I THINK the GOP still takes the White House due to the economic depression, but Romney will cause a good chunk of the base to stay home or vote 3rd party.

[ZULU]

I like Perry’s stand on the issues - most of them. But I’m afraid he is too inarticulate to combat Obama effectively in a debate, and that is the gist of it.

Gingrich can.

[Norseman]

>>I am not in favor of the war on illegal drugs, but decriminalization is a step that cannot be walked back.<<

It sounds like what you’re saying is that you recognize that the war on drugs has had tremendous unintended consequences, but so might decriminalization. So, better the devil you know...?

I think decriminalization could be “walked back” if the consequences were too severe. And I honestly don’t view marijuana (which nearly everyone in my elderly generation tried in the 60’s and 70’s at one point or another) as the same problem as meth, heroin, cocaine, or whatever concoction they come up with next.

Cigarettes didn’t drive pot usage, and I doubt legalized pot usage would drive usage of harder drugs. In fact, decoupling of the two markets (pot vs. harder drugs) would probably work to keep people from coming into contact with those harder drugs.

Couple legalization with laws severely punishing any harder drug usage, and with laws strictly specifying penalties for being under the influence of marijuana when working, and see what happens. It’s hard to believe we’d have more of a mess than we have right now.

And, as I said when I brought this up, the Republican candidate (other than Ron Paul) who manages to broach this issue in a reasonable way might just find an unexpected amount of support from young people who voted for Obama in 2008. The risk will be how much support he loses from the base if he tries venturing into that area. I suspect no one will be willing to take that risk, unless Ron Paul continues to build support for his candidacy.

[PSYCHO-FREEP]

[a $20 million dollar super pac just started operation for Gingrich.

watch and wait :)]

Really! Where and when did you hear that? If true, maybe Newt has the last laugh over Romney after all. Payback is coming soon........

Mitt Romney; One of the most target rich political environments known to the modern world! Let the smartest candidate in recent history, get the last word and I believe the best laugh!

[Cincinatus' Wife]

That should either help the uninformed on this thread or shut them up.

Yes. It's for the ones who the OP are targeting to unfairly discredit Perry.

[Norseman]

>>I like Perry’s stand on the issues - most of them. But I’m afraid he is too inarticulate to combat Obama effectively in a debate, and that is the gist of it.

Gingrich can.<<

Debates are risky bets for any candidate, but in the end its where they stand on the issues that is likely to matter the most, especially when the contrast is as stark as it should be this time around.

Sure, Kennedy benefited from the debate with Nixon, but the difference between Kennedy and Nixon on issues was probably about the same as the difference between Romney and Gingrich today.

This election is going to be national socialism versus constitution government and individual liberty. Whether our candidate wins or loses a couple of debates on style points isn’t likely to be the tiebreaker. After all, as good a debater as Gingrich turned out to be, things aren’t going all that well for him once the real campaigning got going in Iowa.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Gingrich will be spending all his time defending HIS record.

Perry is VERY good at attacking Obama’s (he’s been fighting his administration and the Left in the courts for years — and has wins in his column).

Who do you think Perry is going to be reaching out to — Americans or the LIBERAL elite (who think 90% of Americans aren’t fit to come to dinner at their house)?

[PSYCHO-FREEP]

[PSYCHO-FREEP]

Just think of the fun the MSM is going to have if Perry wins!

[ZULU]

Hope you are right. Perry still could pull it out.

Anybody could be it. Its still in flux.

Its important WHOEVER gets it, BEATS OBAMA.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Hold tight to that if it gives you hope Perry won’t win.

Personally, I don’t ride the MSM Quyaling wave.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Exactly! AND THEN govern to beat the band to roll back regulations and get power back to the states.

Which is PERRY.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

I seriously doubt that sign was done by a homeschooler.....students who have consistently won spelling bees and geography contests, etc.

It’s just too convenient and nicely placed for a photo.