In a comment on my own post Aug. 9, I wrote:
There have been a few little things . . . that lead me to think Perry is a lot less certain ultimately to win the nomination than some people seem to think. What I fear will happen is that Perry will spend several months sucking up media oxygen and burning through GOP donor cash, only to collapse early next year. This will have the effect of suffocating other conservative candidates, and thereby lead to … Romney 2012.
And now we learn that, after Rick Perry’s first two debates, polls show his early popularity waning:
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely GOP Primary voters shows Perry with 28% support and Romney capturing 24%. Before Perry entered his first debate, the Texan held an eleven point advantage over Romney, 29% to 18%.
That’s a seven-point shift in Romney’s favor in the span of five weeks, and I know: It’s just one poll and it’s still early. But six of the first eight polls taken after Rick Perry’s Aug. 13 announcement showed Perry with a double-digit lead over Romney, whereas the past five polls show Romney within single digits. If Perry doesn’t shine in tomorrow night’s debate . . .
Well, don’t say you weren’t warned. And if Perry can’t go the distance as the “Anybody But Romney” candidate, what then?
What will the bandwagon jumpers do, if the bandwagon on which they’ve jumped ends up in the ditch? I sincerely wish conservatives would take a second (or perhaps third) look at Herman Cain, who keeps chugging along. I also feel that more attention is due for Rick Santorum, whose fourth-place finish in the Ames Straw Poll would have been heralded as a newsworthy miracle, but was overshadowed by Perry’s entrance into the 2012 field and Tim Pawlenty’s exit the next day.
Whenever I mention Cain or Santorum, the response is always the same circular “can’t win” arguments, but if Perry can’t put Romney away, why not take a chance on a long shot? Because I think whoever gets the GOP nomination is going to get a huge boost next summer in Tampa when the Republican ticket becomes “[BLANK]-RUBIO.” With Marco Rubio as a running mate, I’d say any Republican would be at least an even bet against Obama.
And now it’s time to take notice of another fact: Last night on Sean Hannity’s show, Sarah Palin — having previously specified September as the deadline for her to enter the 2012 field — appeared to extend her timeline to November. That alone is enough to make all the pundits groan at the prospect of another two months of will-she-or-won’t-she drama, but what do you make of this?
“This is going to be such an unconventional election cycle. … Mark my word, it is going to be an unconventional type of election process.”
Is Palin hinting at a possible third-party campaign? I strongly doubt it, but neither would I rule it out, and I’m also thinking about the possibility that the changes to the delegate apportionment rules — no “winner-take-all” primaries in March — could lead to a brokered convention at Tampa. Whatever the tea-leaf readers see in Palin’s comments, I think she’s absolutely right: 2012 has already been an unconventional election cycle, and people should be skeptical about bandwagon organizers who think they can predict events many months in advance.
UPDATE: On Twitter, Jerry Wilson reacted to this story by saying “@AceOfSpadesHQ hardest hit,” which is perhaps a bit unfair. Yes, Ace jumped on the Perry bandwagon, but he’s honest enough to admit: “The Perry erosion I believe a little more — it’s been a not-terrific two weeks for him.”
Ace keeps bashing Bachmann over the Gardasil thing (and more) as if destroying Bachmann will help Perry, which I think is mistaken. Perhaps this is the best place to point out something I think has been under-appreciated: Bachmann’s claims last week about Gardasil have exposed her to much criticism, but she had less to lose than Perry did.
Bachmann’s highest national poll rating — by Rasmussen, in the immediate wake of Bachmann’s strong performance in the June debate in New Hampshire — was 19 percent. Her highest RCP average was 14% on July 20, and as soon as Perry got in, Bachmann’s support dropped rapidly, so that her current RCP number is 7.7 percent. And here’s the lead of my American Spectator column last week about the Tampa debate:
Rick Perry came into last night’s debate here with a target on his back, leading in the polls only a month after his late entry into the Republican presidential campaign. His fellow GOP candidates fired at the Texas governor all night, but it wasn’t until Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann said the phrase “innocent little 12-year-old girls” that he suffered any serious wound. . . .
Without regard to whether Bachmann helped herself, she hurt Perry with that phrase. It hurt him with the Traditionalist Mom (and Grandma) Vote, who are an important segment of GOP primary voters. You can say Bachmann hurt Perry unfairly, and suffered damage herself as a consequence, but you cannot deny that she hurt him. So if Ace wants to get some payback on Bachmann, that’s his choice, but I don’t think hurting Bachmann will help Perry.
Those poll results are surprising. Sarah is so crazy she’s run in a fourth party…. (crazy in a good way)
Dare I say Paul?
Although I currently favor Perry, I’ll vote for the republican nominee no matter who he or she is. Even Romney, although I’d prefer just about any of them over him.
Paul will make his usual attempt to be the kingmaker, giving us Huntsman-Daniels ’12. Preibus is on trial here with Paul, and like Steele, won’t be invited back.
Palin’s will likely have the TEA Party behind her, and there are enough Dems who will support her over SCOAMF, and any person the GOP machine puts forward to give her a majority in a 3 or 4-way race.
LOL it is over a year out. Get used to President Perry.
dream on
Well, of course you can say Paul. I think the rules changes mean that Paul will arrive at Tampa with far more delegates than the 29 he won in 2008. And if no candidate has a majority on the first ballot, Paul could be in a very important position in the wheeler-dealer bargaining of a brokered convention. Of course, the odds are overwhelmingly against it actually getting to that point, but it’s one of those scenarios that can’t be ruled out.
She said it’s the GOP that’s going to be bringing the positive change this time – so I doubt she’ll go third party.
I like Perry’s new ad. But if he is serious he will take Ladd on and really go crazy with an ad a week against Obama!
And Sarah is within five of Obama and she is not even running yet.
I held my nose and voted for McCain last time even though he was my LAST POSSIBLE CHOICE.
I will NOT do that again. I will NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES vote for Romney.
If he is the nominee, I will vote every other slot BUT president.
I like Herman Cain. I would like to see him win. I am doubtful he can do it. But I still like him and wish him the best.
Santorum? Rick Santorum needs to win me over. If he was the nominee I would take him over Obama in a heart beat. But I do not see him getting there. Plus Rick lost his own state as a Senator, not a good sign given the advantages incumbnants have. I recall him focusing too much on socon issues and not enough on fiscal conservative things.
Right now I am really into someone touting fiscal conservatism, cutting out of control spending, and restoring the economic health of this country. Someone with effective executive leadership credentials. Now Cain has that (from his business experience). Santorum? Not as much.
I’ve met Santorum and heard him speak. He’s MUCH better than the debates would lead you to believe. (I’ll be posting video) He makes one good point we need to keep in mind. He’s the ONLY one of the current candidates who’s EVER beaten a Democratic opponent (in fact, three). That’s got to be worth considering.
Palin’s in all right. She has committed to at least confirming the decision by the end of this month, although the formal announcement could come in October.
Patience.
Huntsman-Daniels! That is like having Tab Hunter and…well….Mitch Daniels on the same ticket.
A cure for insomina has been found!
I don’t see a third party run. Not enough time, not enough support for it. Besides, the Republican establishment is weak, and primed for being pushed aside.
Cain could do it. Why would Palin miss that opportunity?
I am for any GOP candidate who can show they can take the fight to Obama. Palin and Perry can do that. Mitt needs to show me he is up for it. I know Cain can do it. Satorum can do it (but I am not sure he can be effective doing it).
Huntsman? Obama laughs with glee at the thought of taking on Huntsman.
If Romney is the nominee, and the choice is Obama or Romney, you need to vote Romney (especially if the ticket is Romney and say Marc Rubio). Yes, Romney would be better than Obama. But we are not there yet. Not by a long shot. So support the candidates you think are best and not worry about Mitt.
I am trying to give him a fair shot. Persuade me Rick.
Off topic, but in regards to the photograph, the nerdy redhead in the back ground behind the Perry girls…any relation of yours Stacy?
Don’t worry the Paulistinians will remind us about Paul.
“He’s the ONLY one of the current candidates who’s EVER beaten a Democratic opponent (in fact, three).”
That is incorrect. When Perry switched to the GOP he defeated a highly skilled and incumbent Democrat politician for Ag Commissioner (Jim Hightower). This was despite the GOP gubernatorial candidate dragging down the ticket (Clayton Williams). He then got over 60% of the vote for re-election against a Democrat challenger.
In 98 Perry then beat a Democrat to succeed Bob Bullock for LT Governor to be the first GOP LT Governor to hold that post since reconstruction.
Perry has won three gubernatorial elections since succeeding GW Bush.
By my count that is SIX Democrats Perry has beaten, twice what you cite for Santorum.
You mean “beaten a Democratic incumbent.” And you’re right: Santorum in person is much better than Santorum on TV, but that’s also true of Herman Cain and Mitt Romney.
Having twice seen Romney in person, I can attest that he gives a very feisty stump speech, sounding much more conservative than his RINO reputation would suggest.
A speech by Herman Cain, of course, can set a roomful of conservatives on fire. The reaction to Cain live and in person is something you can’t really understand if you haven’t been there.
The problem is that the TV moderators in the past three debates have been focused on ginning up controversies with the perceived front-runners: Bachmann-Pawlenty at Ames, and then Perry-Romney in California, and the gang-up on Perry in Tampa. So if all you know is what you see on the debates, then Cain and Santorum are after-thoughts. And with Huntsman sucking up a ridiculous amount of debate time, it’s hard for either Cain or Santorum to make a difference.
If Bachmann has hurt Perry, it is only because she has resorted to lies to do so. I doubt you think that is a good thing RSM.
She has hurt herself far more than Perry. She has revealed her true colors, and they are not pretty.
Santorum lost his senate seat. He was beaten by a challenger. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2006/nov/08/20061108-012745-6097r/?feat=article_related_stories By twenty points.
We all have bad nights, but that is pretty bad.
Bachmann is definitely not going to be the nominee.
“You mean “beaten a Democratic incumbent.””
No, still not correct. Perry defeated Jim Hightower for Texas Ag Commissioner in 1990 in Perry’s debut in the GOP.
Anyone familiar with Texas politics understands the significance of that in a year where Clayton Williams self-destructed against Ann Richards.
Hightower was a powerful figure at that time in Texas, as well, although he was dealing with some ethics investigations in which he was later not charged.
Perry has defeated and succeeded significant heavyweight politicians in his career. Whether he is the answer in 2012 or not, his political accomplishments are second to none in this race.
RSM said: ‘Sarah Palin — having previously specified September as the deadline for her to enter the 2012 field — appeared to extend her timeline to November. That alone is enough to make all the pundits groan at the prospect of another two months of will-she-or-won’t-she drama…”
She can’t wait that long. The filing deadline for the Michigan primary is Oct 14. For SC it is Oct 31.
Bachmann scored against Perry then squandered her gains, and more by continuously jumping back and forth over the same shark. This cemented her reputation as gaffe prone. I have been a big fan of hers ever since health care but I think she needs to get out and go back to what she does best which is throwing bricks at zero. The thought of Romney being the nominee is simply depressing.
This is a big opportunity for Perry to move ahead or fail. I think he declined to debate in many of his races in Texas and obviously could use some practice at debating and more importantly preparation before. He didn’t have much time before the last two. He has some forewarning of the tact Mitt is coming at him with and if Bachmann is going to keep hammering him on the vaccine she’ll not get much mileage out of that. Every one on that stage has something on their record that can be categorized as cronyism except Cain. It’s a powerful weapon but requires some skill and finesse. Perry’s line about making government inconsequential is probably the most powerful any of the candidates has come up with. He needs to find a way to use but not force that line.
I disagree with this article is so many ways.
#1 Bachmann hurt herself with the Gardasil issue. It caused people to examine her own record on vaccines only to learn that Minnesota has a mandate for the Hepititus B vaccine (that is generally transmitted sexually) that she did nothing while a state representative to offer parents an opt out. And today, her PAC came out with an ad that smears Rick Perry’s wife, Anita, actually lying about Anita Perry’s connection to Merck. It also caused voters to check out her campaign contributions that came from drug companies (some who make the Hepitutis B vaccines) that was 4 1/2 times greater than what Perry got from Merck over a period of 12 years.
#2 When Perry last debated, he had major problems in his own state with one of the largest wildfires ever in our nation. I am sure the loss of over 1,500 homes, displacing over 6,000 people in just one county, was first on his mind. He also had been in the air at dawn to examine the burned area in Bastrop, Texas and met with the people of that county later in the morning. Think about how long, and how stressful that day must have been for him.
Perry is learning the ropes of campaigning nationally. Remember, Romney has been doing this for five years, and Bachmann is losing ground with people that once supported her because she can’t let the Gardasil thing go. Even Ed Rollins said she should drop it now and move on.
Perry needs to fend off the others while whittling down Romney. All the other candidates are competing with Perry for some element of their own natural constituencies. Surely Bachmann’s strategists know that she has to knock out Perry before she can take on Romney. This holds true for all the others. If Bachmann can be goaded or led into saying something on stage similar to what she said after the last debate she’s done.
Watch for my links; I’ll announce them here.
I’d be happy with Cain. I’d be fine with Santorum or Perry or Bachmann. I’d love for Palin to run.
BUT I WILL NOT VOTE FOR ROMNEY…. well, maybe Romney/Palin. But I would still have to shower afterwards.
With a wire brush.
On the other hand it will be easy to tell who just voted for zero. They’ll be the ones retching in the parking lot at the polling station, as they realize what they’ve just done.
Yes, I will shower too. But we have to end this reign of spending-entitlement expansion. And with all of Mitt’s problems, he will not veto the house and senate overturning Obamacare.
But we do not even have to contemplate that, the primaries are wide open.
Sure it can be ruled out.
This is precisely why you don’t feed the seagulls at the beach, too!
Romney, Gingrich, and Perry, at least, beat Democrats . . . was Bachmann unopposed in all her races? I would assume there was some opposition to Huntsman and Johnson in their races, too, even if the former’s was token.
Yet, after Santorum’s great record, his constituents threw him out on his ear by 13% against a pathetic bum like Bob Casey Jr. Impressive!
Bachmann has ruled herself out by joining the anti-vaccine crazies. There is no room for that in responsible circles: it represents a threat to public health.
It is absolutely fair to call Perry out on his method of mandating, the wisdom of doing it before a national consensus emerged, and details of the opt-out process. Insinuating Gardisil is not safe and effective is NOT. It’s just a lie.
Worse, she brought in the “retardation” lie, which ties in with the general anti-vaccine hysteria. That’s where she becomes a threat to public health. She is an irresponsible nut case and probably shouldn’t be in Congress (although that applies to a couple hundred currently there, at least).
Palin won’t run third party. I still doubt she will run for the GOP nomination, but she definitely won’t do anything that will reelect Obama by force.
I do have to laugh at her supporters who lectured everyone only a couple weeks ago that the end of September was Palin’s self-imposed deadline now that she’s mentioned November.
But starting in November is going to miss some ballots for the primaries, so I took it as another sign she’s just teasing the media and has no intention of running.
Not to attack you, or blindly follow Palin, or do any of those other typical things that Palinistas tend to do, but did you watch the clip? Palin never mentioned November, Hannity did. Trying to read the tea leaves regarding Palin is hard in the first place, I don’t imagine it gets any easier when one of the leaves is something that she did not say.
As I’ve been saying ever since she got in the race: Mrs. Bachmann should drop out, get back to the House, join with Allen West and other like-minded members, and overthrow the Boehner Regime.
STAGE THE COUP!
You’re wrong there, Bachman should focus on Romney. It would be a brilliant tactical move, and it would make sense because Romney is gaining in the polls. Perry, by contrast, is on the way down. Everybody is expecting her to focus on Perry, including Perry, who is going to be prepared for her. Romney would not be.
I think one of the reason’s she’s held off is because of Bachmann. If you go back and watch the interview she had with Hannity, she mentioned her, but not by name, just that, to paraphrase “its going to take more than just saying I’ve been a fighter, I want to see a record of results”. That was obviously aimed at Bachmann because it doesn’t apply to anybody else, except maybe Paul. She probably also wants to make sure she doesn’t do anything to throw the nomination to Romney. If she gets in it at all, she’s going to make sure she isn’t wasting her time.
Why would he let facts get in the way, of a meme, if one actually reads up on the way she ran for Governor, it’s all perfectly clear
what she is doing,
If Romney is the nominee, I vote straight Copperhead. Because that will prove to me that the American electorate hasn’t “gotten it good and hard” enough, and I wouldn’t want them left feeling un-fucked and unsatisfied.
It’s amazing how you “journalists” can discern a trend from a single point of data.
Depends on the state, Joe. If Mitzi Romneycare needs my one vote to win Georgia, winning Georgia won’t help him.
This is an honest question to other posters (and this McCain too). Through what mechanisms can Paul successfully influence the eventual nominee? I admire his stands on most issues, and above all his honesty. Yet he has been and would be, if nominated, such a target by the progressive/liberals that he would have a lesser chance of winning than a compromise such as Perry or Romney. Any suggestions on how to instill Paul’s standards and ideas in the minds of those two?
Well, it’s probably too late into the process for a lobotomy to be effective for either one of them, but there might be a more practical solution. Judging by some of Paul’s positions, and that of a good many of his supporters, they might consider a crash course in “Mein Kampf” cliff notes version.
Romney’s loss isn’t Bachmann’s gain with Perry still in the picture. Bachmann and Perry are mostly competing for the same voters. Bachmann moved ahead of Pawlenty because she seemed to be the best conservative alternative to Romney. Bachmann didn’t slip when Perry stepped in because he squashed her news cycle she slipped because Perry appeared to be a better conservative alternative to Romney. Romney isn’t getting knocked out in a debate, he won’t drop out until he loses primaries. Bachmann isn’t going to poach anyone who is supporting Romney because they think he’s more electable. IMHO Bachmann is basically done. If she’s going to hammer Perry on the gardasil thing again she’s done. There just isn’t enough there, there on that issue.