Perry Threatens To Cut Into Romney's Base

National Journal ^ | 8/24/11 | Ronald Browstein

[CA Conservative]

A closer look at today's striking Gallup poll showing Texas Gov. Rick Perry rocketing to the top of the 2012 Republican presidential field captures the threat his campaign could pose to Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor who had previously been considered the front-runner.

The Gallup results show Perry displaying broad reach across the party, with appeal that, for now at least, transcends lines of income and education. Those results underscore Perry's potential, as a staunch social conservative with a strong economic story in Texas, to build a primary coalition that bridges the divide between upscale, managerial Republicans and the party's more populist and evangelical blue-collar wing.

[CA Conservative]

I know the purists don't like the idea, but no Republican candidate will win the White House without being able to win the conservatives, moderates and independents. So far, it looks like Perry is doing well with all three groups.

[CA Conservative]

For the ping list

[Patrick1]

Romney has a base? Who’d a thunk it?

[MissyMa]

I agree with you. The candidate needs strong support from its base but also needs to get those Independent and Moderates as they were the ones that got Obama elected into the White House. According to the polling data I've seen on Perry, he is the one with the potential to do that.

[MestaMachine]

So, seriously. What does it say that Perry is pulling the rinos away from romney to inflate his numbers? Think about that. romney supporters jumping to Perry. romney is nowhere near conservative. Why does HIS *base* have such an affinity for Rick Perry? What do they know that you guys won’t admit?

[Crichton]

I know the purists don't like the idea, but no Republican candidate will win the White House without being able to win the conservatives, moderates and independents.

That's a bizarre statement.

Why would purists not want a candidate to win votes from independents and moderates? Reagan did, and he's as close as we have to a gold standard.

[CA Conservative]

Why would purists not want a candidate to win votes from independents and moderates? Reagan did, and he's as close as we have to a gold standard.

I'm just going by the statements I see on this forum. Any candidate that shows strength among moderates and independents seems to be immediately tarred with the RINO label.

[Redleg Duke]

Romney’s Base consists of the MSM and Bill O’Reilly!

[CA Conservative]

See post #5...

[MestaMachine]

Cat got your keyboard? The question was serious and it was to you.

[CA Conservative]

I think it says that people are primarily concerned about the economy, and they want to vote for someone they think can do something about that. That is why they were interested in Ronmey in the first place. But presented with someone more conservative who also has an excellent record on the economy (Perry), they prefer the more conservative candidate.

[MestaMachine]

So why didn’t you just say that in the first place? It was an honest question.

[gov_bean_ counter]

Soft support. If Pataki gets in Perry goes back into the pack.

You know and I know we haven't even gotten to the dating stage of the campaign. We are still doing the introductions in what remains a very fluid environment.

[normy]

I have a question for you, a serious one. Where will Palin get her support from? Will she not need to be seen by the broad spectrum of Republicans as acceptable?

In your own argument against Perry, Palin wont get any Romeny votes, right leaning Republicans only I guess, Where is the winning strategy in that? It's almost as if Palin is the real "it's her turn" candidate here. She isn't even running as of now, are all Republicans supposed to just sit back and wait or perhaps beg her to run. Do you understand that she seems to be getting less support than ever. I guess Perry is also drawing from her support too.

We're Americans here and we want the country back on track. Truthfully Palin speaks talking points but I find her record lacking and frankly kinda incomplete.

[Crichton]

I think it says that people are primarily concerned about the economy, and they want to vote for someone they think can do something about that. That is why they were interested in Ronmey in the first place.

I believe you're right about this part, and it's the part of Perry's record that best allows him to win votes from the middle.

But his key advantages over Romney are not his stated conservatism, which is, frankly, both opportunistic & occasionally counterproductive, but his vaunted political skills and lack of RomneyCare baggage.

[Crichton]

If Pataki gets in Perry goes back into the pack.

That's almost funny, but more sick... Pataki can fight with Huntsman over their 3% or whatever.

[MestaMachine]

Pataki. Now there is name I don’t even want to hear, let alone vote for. This is getting downright scary.

[CommerceComet]

I think that overall the polling is showing that Rick Perry is drawing from the undecideds and not from Romney supporters. Contrary to what you hear alot on FR, Rick Perry is not a favorite of the establishment RINOs. They do not see Rick Perry as one of them. If Romney can’t hold off Perry (or the other outsiders), then the establishment will introduce additional candidates in the hopes that they can (Pataki, Guiliani, etc.)

[NeoCaveman]

Pataki loves taxes, debt, and the SEIU or at least he did as governor of NY.

He’d be the candidate for those who find Huntsman too conservative.

If he runs he will not be able to run away from his record, especially the last term.

[gov_bean_ counter]

People would be foolish do discount the regional and religious bias this early in the campaign. That is why a Pataki campaign could pull the previous Romney leaners away from Perry.