I don't hear anyone claiming they are definitive, but if someone did say that this article would disprove that, also.
What I think that we did see, in retrospect, by this time is that the none of the single digit candidates had a path to victory.
Santorum held on long enough to win a few states (For instance, by the time Washington State voted if you wanted to object to Romney you had either Santorum or Ron Paul as your vehicles). But he never really got close to winning the nomination (20% of the total popular vote).
It also shows leaders can crash and burn. Perry and Bachmann both did.
Romney had led four previous months to this poll, Perry entered and flashed to a seemingly big lead, only to fall to earth.
Following this model Jeb Bush is sitting in a good place. Some from the first tier will crash and burn, but probably someone from that tier is going to ultimately prevail.
That's my analysis at least.
“Oops.”
Whether or not it’s what I want to hear — you raise a good point.
Thanks.
What a ruse, “as rank-and-file Republicans’ “
So this excludes others as the qual ques was “rank and File” if not thanks for talking have a wonderful day.
2011 geeeeez
this is a misleading post, it is 6 months old, even before Trump announced.
These days, Perry doesn’t zoom, he looms on the outside looking in.
In 2011/2012 the base was looking for someone to champion conservatism as Romney wasn't a favorite from our point of view. The rumblings of a good conservative candidate, a Texas governor were all around for months as Perry decided whether or not to run. He gained support with few pronouncements and no official campaign, and became the front runner before he announced.
Once he announced and campaigned, he bit by bit destroyed his own candidacy all by himself, culminating in gaffe after gaffe in the debates.
This race that Trump is dominating has been as a result of his campaign, AND his pronouncements, AND the things he has done since the campaign started.
I'm not saying he won't flame out, just pointing out the major difference, that last time Perry destroyed his own early poll numbers, and this time Trump has earned what he has (so far).
Not a very relevant comparison. The debates started in May of 2011, so there had been several by August 11. Perry got into the race late and surged to the top of he polls before he even joined the debates. As soon as he joined the debates, he began to tank.
Perry in 2011 was like Fred in 2007. Both were mostly popular and in the lead before they even entered the race. The voters have seen quite a bit of Trump and most all of the candidates this year.
He was a has been in ‘11 and even more so today.
The 2012 primaries were odd in that the conservative base, in such opposition to Romney, did this weird flavor of the month fickle candidate hopping thing. Everyone was on top at one point, and lost that position for the dumbest of reasons. It’ll be intersting to see if that history repeats itself or if the anti-establishment conservatives coalesce around one candidate early to prevent a Bush ascension.
“Past results are no guarantee of future performance”
Very difficult concept for many...
wasn’t Rudy dominating the polls at this point last time
Santorum didn’t the money, either
Zoomed?
Last I heard, he is still at the kiddie table.
Did someone at the big table trip and fall and lose their place?
Save a pretzel for the gas jets!
A waste of bandwidth.
This is 2015 and Rick Perry blew his opportunity back in November of 2011.