Posted on 09/12/2011 5:35:01 AM PDT by TexasFreeper2009
HORSE RACE WITHOUT SARAH PALIN
Sept. 9-11
Perry 32% Romney 21%
(Excerpt) Read more at i2.cdn.turner.com ...
Hopefully, Mr. President.
“OK. What name would you prefer for an open borders/pro-amnesty, big government tax hiker who will do nothing to solve this country’s critical problems?”
Neither Perry nor anyone else can please everyone on every issue. However, Perry is clearly not an “oper-borders” advocate, nor is he a “tax hiker.”
“Hopefully, Mr. President.”
That’s what I though. Hell, you’d probably vote for Fidel Castro as long as he had Republican next to his name. Anyone but Obama, right?
I predict that Sarah will endorse Rick Perry, though it now is starting to appear her supporters will not be needed to get Perry the nomination. Since that is the case, there is no good reason for her to endorse at this time.
As much as I love her and support her, Sarah is not going to run for president in 2012, and is unlikely to never throw her hat in the ring for more than a decade, if ever.
You only say that because you're not aware that Her Grizzliness is playing ten-dimensional chess and has it already figured out months in advance.
If you want to be in on what's really happening, you need to send in ten bucks and a dozen Ovaltine labels to get your Secret Sarah Decoder Ring.
Huckabee was just on with Laura Ingraham. He painted Perry as too "red meat" conservative, too extreme and attacked him on Social Security. Said Bachmann, not Perry, is competitive with Romney in FL. He said Romney may be the most electable but isn't ready to endorse.
Sounded to me like he did.
Good synopsis of Rudy and his falling out of the race. One disagreement with your post: Rudy was never a solid leader in the national polls, as for example Perry has been for a month, and Romney before that. He, or others, could take the lead in some states, but McCain held the balance (more’s the pity).
You are a disgusting troll. It's one thing to disagree with some of Perry's positions, or to prefer another candidate. But to say he is ANYTHING like Obama is just a damnable lie, and shows how low people like you will go to tear down other candidates in a desperate attempt to support your candidate.
One thing I will say for Perry is that he’s got more gumption than Palin. Perry has the grit to actually get in the race and expose himself to the ins-and-outs of a campaign, while the Magical Mrs. Palin continues to drive around on her bus playing coy.
Palin’s done that did that.
The worst of the left attatcked her day and nigght (including her family)
You must have been picking magic mushrooms when all that was happening?
Still, Gov Palin kept her cool.
CNN does want to destroy Perry, but the debate you speak of was held by MSNBC/NBC. The Reagan Library debate, right?
Tonight, there is a debate being held by CNN. In this one, they’ll have their chance at Perry like NBC had theirs.
“However, Perry is clearly not an “oper-borders” advocate, nor is he a “tax hiker.”
Perry agrees with Obama on open borders:
http://www.factoverfiction.com/article/3195
Rick Perry and the largest tax hikes in Texas:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2768671/posts
The establishment is NOT “falling behind” Romney.
“The Establishment” GOP has been pushing Romney, being as subtle as possible, for well over a year. Rove’s stealth support, for example, is finally being exposed. He has acted as anything but an honest broker.
To say they are “falling behind Romney” diminishes the dynamics that have been behind the scenes for a long time. They have been trying to convince conservatives that Romney is “the guy” for a long time. If it were not for the Tea Party conservatives, they would surely succeed.
The key is to not put too much stock into a single poll, but to look for trends. This poll is in agreement with the other recent polls we have seen from a lot of different polling companies in the last month, who collectively have polled thousands of people over a period of several weeks, with a healthy mix of registered voters and likely voters between them.
So it is highly likely that it is fairly representative of public opinion at this point in time. Unless, of course, you are one of the tin-foil brigade that belive that all of these polling companies are colluding together to slant all of the polls a certain way in order to all give an advantage to the same candidates, or to eliminate other candidates from the race.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2768671/posts
From your link:
"In 2006, the state was facing a judicial mandate to change the unconstitutional way it funded public schools, mostly through property taxes. Under Perry's leadership, a tax swap was created that cut school property taxes by up to one-third. To pay for that, Perry signed a bill that nearly tripled the amount Texas collects from businesses. The tax swap created a net tax decrease, but the new business tax coupled with one added to tobacco still counts as the largest tax increase in Texas."
So in other words, the assertion you made is actually more or less false. What Perry did was sign a bill that basically concentrated the tax base more towards business and away from property taxes (which business also pay, and which I would imagine partially mitigated the business income tax increase). Since no hard numbers are given in the article, but since the article DOES say that there was a net tax DECREASE (i.e. total overall revenue actually went down), it stands to reason that property taxes brought in a little over three times as much revenue as business income tax, and shifting a third of that revenue from property to business income taxes greated a (relative) drastic increase in the business tax rate, even if overall state tax revenues went down as tax burden was lifted from property owners.
Hardly supports the "tax hiker" claim that you've made. After all, the state was more or less required to do something along this line, so anybody in office would have basically had to do the same thing that Perry did. Further, with overall tax income going down, this hardly equates to "massive tax hikes!!1!!!eleventy11!1"
I can't comment on the open borders video since I can't (or rather won't) run streaming video at work.
“The tax swap created a net tax decrease, but the new business tax coupled with one added to tobacco still counts as the largest tax increase in Texas.”
-—<>-—<>-—<>-—<>-—<>-—<>-—
(From your “perry tax increaser” article) ... Can you explain for me that sentence? How can procedure that creates a “net tax decrease” be “the largest tax increase”? All that makes sense to me is that the editorial board of that newspaper has done everything possible to defeat Perry.
Letting MSM pollsters pick your candidate? Why is it important? You mean if it had been the opposite you would have also believed it?
I do not believe any of them, regardless, they all have an agenda, from Ras, to Fox To CNN, to Gallup, you name it.
For starters, CNN has phone numbers of Tea Party folks?
Nope, the only tin foil types are Paulies. The thing is that while this trend does continue, this side of Rasmussen, the other polls I have seen have NOT polled Likely voters. I have seen adults polled, registered adults polled, etc, but no likely voters. Interestingly, in state by state straw polls and in other liekly voter polls (including Gallups intensity) guys like Cain are doing better than polling suggests. I just don’t put much stock into one poll, but there are problems with how they are polling...after all, you can’t get an accurate sample of “adult” voters or registered voters..especially when only polling about 450 republicans.
So if the MSM/REP est want to establish a trend with their joint stable of pollster, you are all in?
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.