Poll: Perry 27, Romney 14, Palin 10, Bachmann 9

posted at 4:45 pm on August 29, 2011 by Allahpundit

The bottom half of this poll is more interesting than the top half, but we’ll get to that in a second. The headline: For the fourth time in two weeks, a national survey shows Perry with a double-digit lead over Romney. The worst Perry does in any of those four polls is 25 percent; the best Romney does is 18. In three of the four, Perry’s in the high 20s while Romney’s stuck in the mid-teens. Mitt’s first chance to stop the bleeding will come next week at the Reagan Library debate; if Perry rocks that and his lead increases, Romney will have to start attacking — unless of course Palin jumps in and starts siphoning off some of Perry’s base. At this point, without her, Romney’s in trouble.

Two interesting data points from the crosstabs that don’t fit the “intellectual Romney vs. populist Perry” media narrative:


Don’t read too much into those — the margin of error for these sub-samples is enormous — but for what it’s worth, Perry leads Romney not only among his own ostensible base but among Romney’s too, crushing him among college-educated voters and leading narrowly among non-tea-partiers. In Gallup’s recent poll, Perry trailed Romney within that latter group by just three points; here he has an outright lead. Lay down a marker on that now because if Perry stays strong among that group after another month or two of media vetting, Mitt will be desperate.

But like I said, the interesting stuff’s at the bottom half of the poll. Behold:

Besides Perry, the only candidate in the field who’s improved steadily over all three polls is, er, Newt Gingrich, who’s stuck in single digits and has gained a grand total of two percent since last month. Herman Cain and, surprisingly, Ron Paul have both seen their support cut in half since Perry jumped in and started soaking up the tea-party/small-government vote, and despite (or because of?) the endless flattering media coverage, Huntsman’s bled three points to settle in at … one percent. He’s actually polling worse than Gary Johnson now. In fact, according to another set of crosstabs, if neither Palin nor Giuliani gets in then Huntsman still polls at just one percent — which would tie him with Thad McCotter. Huntsman’s potentially an asset to Perry the same way Palin is to Romney, as someone who can hurt his chief competition by weakening him in his stronghold. If Huntsman was at, say, eight percent here, the combo of Perry’s lead and Hunts’s uptick would birth a huge round of “Romney underperforming, in danger in New Hampshire” stories. Instead, thanks to Huntsman’s weakness, Mitt’s still a prohibitive frontrunner in NH unless Perry himself decides to go for broke there, which is risky in case he flames out badly and ends up limping into South Carolina. What Perry needs is his old buddy Rudy to jump in and go after Romney in New Hampshire on his behalf. Who knows? Maybe there’ll be an attorney general job in it for him down the line.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 5 6 7

k thanks…

unseen on August 29, 2011 at 10:43 PM

I’m listening to a replay out of N.Y. He just said Perry is coming up. So, maybe I’ll hear if he says the time for Tues., LOL

bluefox on August 29, 2011 at 11:31 PM

Replay just ended. No time mentioned for tomorrow. Whether it will be 4pm EDT or not, hard to tell.

bluefox on August 30, 2011 at 1:02 AM

So says the brain trust who posted an INTERNET poll the other day that supposedly proved Perry is unelectable, while somehow missing that it showed Palin doing even worse, lol.

xblade on August 30, 2011 at 12:45 AM

Clearly the deliberate (heavy-handed, even) irony of that post was lost on you.

steebo77 on August 30, 2011 at 1:02 AM

I don’t know about that, but I’m skeptical of this juggernaut stuff when the guy has actually had minimal media exposure. Relatively few know anything about him, other than he’s the governor of Texas and maybe a couple of his one-liners.

ddrintn on August 30, 2011 at 12:48 AM

if only Perry had quit during his first term, and then committed himself to a hard hitting reality TV show and facebook posts, then we could take him more seriously

windansea on August 30, 2011 at 1:08 AM

if only Perry had quit during his first term, and then committed himself to a hard hitting reality TV show and facebook posts, then we could take him more seriously

windansea on August 30, 2011 at 1:08 AM

Why doesn’t he give any interviews? Is he afraid of the media? Or do you always have to defend him by using Palin as a club? He’s the frontrunner, Palin isn’t even a candidate.

ddrintn on August 30, 2011 at 1:14 AM

Read the effin thread. Good grief. I’m not going through the whole list again. In the meantime, why don’t you ask one of the more rabid Perry fans to give us a little criticism of their guy? Of course you can’t do that. One-track mind and all.

ddrintn on August 30, 2011 at 12:46 AM

OK. I read the effin thread. Six pages of messages, put your screen moniker into the find bar at the top of my browser and hit next about fifty times on each page.

This was the closest thing I saw to criticism:

Has he ever been on Hannity’s TV show? I’ve seen Palin knocked for going ONLY on Hannity or Great, but hell, Perry won’t even go on THOSE shows.

ddrintn on August 29, 2011 at 9:06 PM

That was the only thing remotely resembling criticism, but it’s not really criticism of Palin on your part, at all. It’s just you acknowledging other people’s criticism exists without agreeing with it yourself, then it’s you saying the other guy is worse.

Whatever, man. Obviously you are happy in your worship. Don’t worry, I don’t think even the harshest of acolytes will judge the above quote of yours as blasphemy.

The fact that somehow you saw yourself as criticizing Palin with any of the stuff you wrote in this thread pretty much says it all.

As far as Perry goes, if you think any of the Perry supporters on this board have come anywhere near the fanaticism of the most devoted Palin supporters…..well I’m sure you think that, but no one with an iota of objectivity would.

Dreadnought on August 30, 2011 at 1:15 AM

Rick Skerry wrote, passed and signed the Texas DREAM Act,

carbon_footprint on August 30, 2011 at 1:02 AM

Of course he didn’t. He just personally created something like 48 million jobs.

ddrintn on August 30, 2011 at 1:17 AM

OK. I read the effin thread.

Dreadnought on August 30, 2011 at 1:15 AM

Page 3:

I cease to take you serious since you have demonstrated that you know next to nothing about what Palin stands and fights for.

TheRightMan on August 29, 2011 at 7:25 PM

You could be right.

I don’t like her flip-flopping in the past on AGW/cap and trade. I don’t like her dithering over whether or not to get into the race. I still think she needs work on interviews and public speaking. I think she’s too sensitive to media criticism and she shouldn’t take them on directly. I think she shouldn’t have resigned. Shall I go on? Your turn.

ddrintn on August 27, 2011 at 2:11 PM

^ And while we’re at it, I think she should’ve challenged Murkowski for the Senate in 2010 instead of hanging out on Fox and issuing Facebook posts. That’s about, what, 7 or 8 different things. Come on, can you manage just two?

ddrintn on August 27, 2011 at 2:16 PM

Knucklehead on August 29, 2011 at 7:35 PM

Now why don’t you go sniffing for some Perry idolatry?

ddrintn on August 30, 2011 at 1:24 AM

As far as Perry goes, if you think any of the Perry supporters on this board have come anywhere near the fanaticism of the most devoted Palin supporters…..well I’m sure you think that, but no one with an iota of objectivity would.

Dreadnought on August 30, 2011 at 1:15 AM

Prove it.

ddrintn on August 30, 2011 at 1:26 AM

Prove it.

ddrintn on August 30, 2011 at 1:26 AM

You’re a kook.

Man, you Palin clowns have constructed a massive fantasy. Watching you clowns lash out and slowly but surely climb down that ladder of worship you’ve constructed is a hoot.

rickyricardo on August 30, 2011 at 2:53 AM

Remember that thread where Lourdes had that meltdown and everyone thought she was bonkers? Well everyone thought so except rickyricardo. Look what he said:

Lourdes: a voice of sanity among Hot Air’s resident Palin kooks.

rickyricardo on June 21, 2011 at 3:45 AM

LINK

Geochelone on August 30, 2011 at 3:38 AM

The tancrazy, shrill, shrill extremist and other sundry comments directed towards Michelle Malkin didn’t come from Palin supporters…

Gohawgs on August 30, 2011 at 3:54 AM

Beware the RP QOTD thread…

Gohawgs on August 30, 2011 at 4:01 AM

Um, no, Rick Skerry personally created 48 BILLION jobs.

carbon_footprint on August 30, 2011 at 4:15 AM

My take.

kingsjester on August 30, 2011 at 7:14 AM

What Perry needs is his old buddy Rudy to jump in and go after Romney in New Hampshire on his behalf. Who knows? Maybe there’ll be an attorney general job in it for him down the line.

Yep.

Marcus on August 30, 2011 at 7:15 AM

kingsjester on August 30, 2011 at 7:14 AM

thanks KJ :)

cmsinaz on August 30, 2011 at 7:32 AM

agree KJ, we do NOT want to settle this go around…

cmsinaz on August 30, 2011 at 7:33 AM

cmsinaz on August 30, 2011 at 7:33 AM

No, ma’am. We do not.

kingsjester on August 30, 2011 at 7:36 AM

Another eyeball scratching cat fight.

This is going to be a long campaign season folks.

Brian1972 on August 30, 2011 at 8:33 AM

I cease to take you serious since you have demonstrated that you know next to nothing about what Palin stands and fights for.

TheRightMan on August 29, 2011 at 7:25 PM

You could be right.

I don’t like her flip-flopping in the past on AGW/cap and trade. I don’t like her dithering over whether or not to get into the race. I still think she needs work on interviews and public speaking. I think she’s too sensitive to media criticism and she shouldn’t take them on directly. I think she shouldn’t have resigned. Shall I go on? Your turn.

ddrintn on August 27, 2011 at 2:11 PM

^ And while we’re at it, I think she should’ve challenged Murkowski for the Senate in 2010 instead of hanging out on Fox and issuing Facebook posts. That’s about, what, 7 or 8 different things. Come on, can you manage just two?

ddrintn on August 27, 2011 at 2:16 PM

Knucklehead on August 29, 2011 at 7:35 PM

Now why don’t you go sniffing for some Perry idolatry?

ddrintn on August 30, 2011 at 1:24 AM

My sincere apologies.

Seriously.

I thought you meant this thread. That was the one I searched.

I will give you a lot of credit.

But those are basically the same criticisms I make.

If you think she shouldn’t have resigned, why did you give me such a hard time when I criticized her decision to resign?

Dreadnought on August 30, 2011 at 8:34 AM

notice it comes straight from the govenors desk…..

unseen on August 29, 2011 at 8:52 PM

You forgot to highlight the most important part, the part where he states about overcoming obstacles.
He has been quite clear, he sees nothing wrong with allowing legal entry into the U.S.
As usual, you pick and choose what part of a speech you want to use to misguide.
Here is his quote regarding the border:

If you show up illegally, without your card or you’re here as a criminal element, I’m for throwing the book at those folks, but the issue of people who want to legally, thoughtfully and appropriately come to America to work and help us build our economy — we should quickly come up with a program and an identification card to do that…

We know how to deal with border security, and you don’t do it by building a fence.”

Can’t get any clearer than that, and it matches what Palin wants, and what Reagan attempted to do.
His problem is the fence…and as I stated, the Berlin Wall wasn’t such a great success…
You should be ashamed of yourself, taking points out of context, just to try to make your candidate look better…well your candidate has the same agenda.
Two immigrants…illegal and legal…two policies, illegal and legal..
Here is Sarah’s answers to immigration:

Q: Should undocumented immigrants all should be deported?

A: There is no way that in the US we would roundup every illegal immigrant – there are about 12 million of the illegal immigrants – not only economically is that just an impossibility but that’s not a humane way anyway to deal with the issue.

Q: Do you then favor an amnesty for the 12 million undocumented immigrants?

A: No, I do not. Not total amnesty. You know, people have got to follow the rules. We have got to make sure that there is equal opportunity and those who are here legally should be first in line for services being provided and those opportunities that this great country provides.

Q: So you support a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants?

A: I do because I understand why people would want to be in America. To seek the safety and prosperity, the opportunities, the health that is here. It is so important that yes, people follow the rules so that people can be treated equally and fairly in this country.

Source: Univision Interview with Sarah Palin, by Jorge Ramos Oct 26, 2008

The difference between the two is simple, Sarah would build a fence from Brownsville to San Diego, and Perry thinks that their are better solutions.
A fair distinction between the two…any more is just you trying to put words and distort the facts.
They both want what Reagan wanted, a path to legal immigration, and a system that allows that…neither one wants to round up all the illegals and ship them out.
They are on the same page, same goal, just one wants a fence and the other doesn’t.
Keep it simple, keep it honest…hard for you to do, but try.

right2bright on August 30, 2011 at 8:42 AM

Another eyeball scratching cat fight.

This is going to be a long campaign season folks.

Brian1972 on August 30, 2011 at 8:33 AM

No kidding. I think some of them fail to see the logic of ABO. Obamacare, SCOTUS, runaway regulation, the list of things that need to be changed is long and the odds of that go down by trying to destroy any candidate that doesn’t appeal to them.

Go figure.

cozmo on August 30, 2011 at 8:43 AM

The tancrazy, shrill, shrill extremist and other sundry comments directed towards Michelle Malkin didn’t come from Palin supporters…

Gohawgs on August 30, 2011 at 3:54 AM

That comment was written by me-and I stand by it.
I used to be a huge fan of my fellow soon-to-be 41 year old(she’s a day older than I am) but Mrs. Malkin’s blog has started to read like WND.

WND isn’t reasoned…it’s shrill and extreme.

annoyinglittletwerp on August 30, 2011 at 8:45 AM

Keep it simple, keep it honest…hard for you to do, but try.

right2bright on August 30, 2011 at 8:42 AM

Heck, that stuff was pointed out last night. They intentionally overlook what does not fit their narrative. It doesn’t help them in their quest to destroy a candidate that has a chance overturning what this administration has wrought.

Kinda’ makes you think they are secretly in the Obama camp…

cozmo on August 30, 2011 at 8:46 AM

That comment was written by me-and I stand by it.
I used to be a huge fan of my fellow soon-to-be 41 year old(she’s a day older than I am) but Mrs. Malkin’s blog has started to read like WND.

WND isn’t reasoned…it’s shrill and extreme.

annoyinglittletwerp on August 30, 2011 at 8:45 AM

Yet you provide not a single example. Way to not show your work. It must be so easy for you to jump from thread to thread, hurling insults, impugning characters, and never have to back up your statements.

steebo77 on August 30, 2011 at 8:49 AM

They intentionally overlook what does not fit their narrative. It doesn’t help them in their quest to destroy a candidate that has a chance overturning what this administration has wrought.

Kinda’ makes you think they are secretly in the Obama camp…

cozmo on August 30, 2011 at 8:46 AM

To be fair, welcome to the world of a Palin defender.

It has been that way for three years, and counting.

Brian1972 on August 30, 2011 at 8:50 AM

To be fair, welcome to the world of a Palin defender.

It has been that way for three years, and counting.

Brian1972 on August 30, 2011 at 8:50 AM

Sorry, I mostly stayed out of those threads. I’m not as familiar with her record as I am of Perry’s.

Is it the same few posters? Or, is there another set?

cozmo on August 30, 2011 at 9:00 AM

Morning!

Haven’t read through the comments but Giuliani said he won’t go in ’till Palin declares. He’s waiting for her. Gotta get the video clip for that comment because I was “gladly” surprised by it.

ProudPalinFan on August 30, 2011 at 9:13 AM

Kinda’ makes you think they are secretly in the Obama camp…

cozmo on August 30, 2011 at 8:46 AM

No just cultist/zealots in the Palin camp. I get it, just not understanding the hatred for the other candidates.
You would think that Palin’s record can stand on its own, without trying to distort and impugn the other candidates.
It just shows that they do not have as much faith in Sarah as they are trying to convince us of.

right2bright on August 30, 2011 at 9:55 AM

right2bright on August 30, 2011 at 9:55 AM

Ron Paul supporters have been trashing Perry, and so have Romney supporters. It looks to me like it is Bachman supporters who make up the majority Perry bashers.

There are plenty of Palin supporters who have not trashed Perry (heck, I like Palin), so I don’t include all Palin supports with the few that are rabidly anti-Perry. She will either decide to run, or not. That is still to be seen. The Palin supporters who are rabidly trashing Perry make me scratch my head though. Perry is closest to Palin on the issues and in temperment. They know each other and all the reports I have seen show that they like each other. It may turn out that these Palin supporting Perry bashers may have a problem with their own candidate if things turn out the way I think they will.

cozmo on August 30, 2011 at 10:07 AM

They are on the same page, same goal, just one wants a fence and the other doesn’t.

right2bright on August 30, 2011 at 8:42 AM

Perry doesn’t just oppose the fence, he opposes E-Verify too.

Jon0815 on August 30, 2011 at 10:07 AM

Perry doesn’t just oppose the fence, he opposes E-Verify too.

Jon0815 on August 30, 2011 at 10:07 AM

And he championed in-state tuition for illegal immigrants in Texas.

steebo77 on August 30, 2011 at 10:08 AM

And he championed in-state tuition for illegal immigrants in Texas.

steebo77 on August 30, 2011 at 10:08 AM

You betcha’. He ran over the legislature and people of Texas to personally ram that through into law. Texans are chasing him all over the state with pitchforks and tar soaked feathers. It is the

only

thing we rant about here in Texas.

cozmo on August 30, 2011 at 10:21 AM

And he championed in-state tuition for illegal immigrants in Texas.

steebo77 on August 30, 2011 at 10:08 AM

With the exception of 1 nay vote on the initial bill, 2 nay votes on the amended bill, and 2 present votes on both versions, the House did as well:

I certify that H.B. No. 1403 was passed by the House on April
23, 2001, by the following vote: Yeas 142, Nays 1, 2 present, not
voting; and that the House concurred in Senate amendments to H.B.
No. 1403 on May 24, 2001, by the following vote: Yeas 130, Nays 2,
2 present, not voting
.

With the exception of 1 present vote, the Senate was unanimous:

I certify that H.B. No. 1403 was passed by the Senate, with amendments, on May 21, 2001, by the following vote: Yeas 30, Nays 0, 1 present, not voting.

rukiddingme on August 30, 2011 at 10:43 AM

No just cultist/zealots in the Palin camp. I get it, just not understanding the hatred for the other candidates.
You would think that Palin’s record can stand on its own, without trying to distort and impugn the other candidates.
It just shows that they do not have as much faith in Sarah as they are trying to convince us of.

right2bright on August 30, 2011 at 9:55 AM

I don’t hate ‘em, I just want them to…go away. Yes Sarah’s record does stand on its own; I am glad you’re almost there but you’re not. Vetted since ’08.

I got lots of faith but America needs to have a lot of faith in themselves so they don’t make the mistake of helping a dope ruin the country they and their ancestors worked their butts off to make it to what it was (or what is according to each POV’s).

ProudPalinFan on August 30, 2011 at 10:46 AM

rukiddingme on August 30, 2011 at 10:43 AM

It won’t help this one. The Texas DREAM act is his single issue. He brings it up in every Perry thread. It is his only reason for being (just look back on the pages of this thread). Though he does occasionally harp on building a wall along the entire border. Regardless of what that will do to the breadbasket that is the valley and what it would do to Big Bend. Or tunnels…or going around…

cozmo on August 30, 2011 at 10:48 AM

It won’t help this one. The Texas DREAM act is his single issue. He brings it up in every Perry thread. It is his only reason for being (just look back on the pages of this thread). Though he does occasionally harp on building a wall along the entire border. Regardless of what that will do to the breadbasket that is the valley and what it would do to Big Bend. Or tunnels…or going around…

cozmo on August 30, 2011 at 10:48 AM

That is not my only issue. Usually, I focus on fiscal issues, comparing the records of the various candidates. And I have never posted a single comment about building a a wall along the border. You are either misinformed or are a liar.

steebo77 on August 30, 2011 at 10:56 AM

steebo77 on August 30, 2011 at 10:56 AM

Then my apologies about the fence, I most likely confused you with unseen during y’alls overnight love fest of Perry hating.

But you do bring up the Texas DREAM act every chance you get, and you do ignore everything that detracts from your argument.

cozmo on August 30, 2011 at 11:06 AM

I’ve noticed something recently about a lot of the hardcore Perry cultists:

They systematically lie about the positions and past comments of those who have the temerity to voice even slight objections to their cult leader and his less than conservative record.

I wonder why they feel the need to resort these tactics. Interesting…

steebo77 on August 30, 2011 at 11:07 AM

But you do bring up the Texas DREAM act every chance you get, and you do ignore everything that detracts from your argument.

cozmo on August 30, 2011 at 11:06 AM

I discuss it when it’s being discussed. And as for “everything that detracts from [my] argument,” who cares how much support the bill had in either chamber of the Texas Legislature. That doesn’t change one thing about its merits, and it doesn’t change the fact that Rick Perry was one of its biggest supporters.

steebo77 on August 30, 2011 at 11:08 AM

They systematically lie about the positions and past comments of those who have the temerity to voice even slight objections to their cult leader and his less than conservative record.

I wonder why they feel the need to resort these tactics. Interesting…

steebo77 on August 30, 2011 at 11:07 AM

Bless your little heart. Let someone pat you on the head and give you a cookie.

cozmo on August 30, 2011 at 11:10 AM

Bless your little heart. Let someone pat you on the head and give you a cookie.

cozmo on August 30, 2011 at 11:10 AM

My, what vigorous, high-minded political debate you engage in!

steebo77 on August 30, 2011 at 11:19 AM

They systematically lie about the positions and past comments of those who have the temerity to voice even slight objections to their cult leader and his less than conservative record.

I wonder why they feel the need to resort these tactics. Interesting…

steebo77 on August 30, 2011 at 11:07 AM

Steebo77 systematically lies about the positions and past comments of those who have the temerity to voice even slight objections to their cult leader and less than conservative record.

I wonder why they feel the need to resort these tactics. Interesting…

See how easy it is too make generalizations about someone without facts?
Here is another:

Steebo77 systematically lies about the positions and past comments of those who have the temerity to voice even slight objections to his love of little children and goats.

I wonder why they feel the need to resort these tactics. Interesting…

See how easy it is?

right2bright on August 30, 2011 at 11:30 AM

Vetted since ’08.

ProudPalinFan on August 30, 2011 at 10:46 AM

Yes, she has been vetted rather thoroughly but not quite marginalized into the cartoon character the media desires. Hate to say it but the vetting won’t rank when the sound bites, innuendo and full-on frontal attacks start. They started the mission in ’08 and if she jumps in, they will be all too happy to complete it.

sherry on August 30, 2011 at 11:31 AM

rukiddingme on August 30, 2011 at 10:43 AM

So you are stating that that bill was going to pass no matter what he did?
Did you read the bill?
It says nothing about giving illegal immigrants privileges…

And he championed in-state tuition for illegal immigrants in Texas.

steebo77 on August 30, 2011 at 10:08 AM

It is very similar to what Reagan has proposed…

right2bright on August 30, 2011 at 11:36 AM

It is very similar to what Reagan has proposed…

right2bright on August 30, 2011 at 11:36 AM

As I recall, Reagan proposed the amnesty to end all amnesties. Sounds like we’re still barking up the same tree, though. I wonder why?

littleguy on August 30, 2011 at 11:43 AM

It is very similar to what Reagan has proposed…

right2bright on August 30, 2011 at 11:36 AM

And how as that worked out?

idesign on August 30, 2011 at 11:45 AM

My, what vigorous, high-minded political debate you engage in!

steebo77 on August 30, 2011 at 11:19 AM

Nah, you don’t want debate, you just want to bash a candidate, obfuscate the issue and engage in leftist tactics to marginalize your opponents. Several have tried to make the issues less hard for you to understand, all have failed. Its not their fault, its yours. Kinda’ like your president.

cozmo on August 30, 2011 at 11:54 AM

See how easy it is too make generalizations about someone without facts?

See how easy it is?

right2bright on August 30, 2011 at 11:30 AM

I’m not sure if you’re criticizing me or not, but in case you are, note that I limited my “generalizations” to “a lot of the hardcore Perry cultists.” I didn’t say “all Perry supporters” or “most Perry supporters.”

As for not having facts, I made that generalization right after one of the “hardcore Perry cultists” lied about my past comments on this very thread. This isn’t the first time this has happened to me this week. It probably won’t be the last.

steebo77 on August 30, 2011 at 11:55 AM

Perry cultists” lied about my past comments on this very thread. This isn’t the first time this has happened to me this week. It probably won’t be the last.

steebo77 on August 30, 2011 at 11:55 AM

Well there you go, you accused me of lying now? And a Perry cultist? After supporting his primary opponents the last two gubernatorial elections? You have no shame in your hatred.

cozmo on August 30, 2011 at 11:59 AM

Nah, you don’t want debate, you just want to bash a candidate, obfuscate the issue and engage in leftist tactics to marginalize your opponents. Several have tried to make the issues less hard for you to understand, all have failed. Its not their fault, its yours. Kinda’ like your president.

cozmo on August 30, 2011 at 11:54 AM

You’re kooky. Whenever I bring up relevant facts, I am labeled a liar or a cultist by you and your merry band of Perry supporters.

No one wants to actually look into his record. Instead, they throw out all kinds of outrageous charges to deflect attention (“leftist tactics!!!11!1″ “Perry bashing!!!11!1″ “Alinsky!!!11!1″).

Name one example of actual obfuscation or Perry-bashing on my part. I dare you.

(I’m not sure what you mean by “[my] president.” Are you suggesting I’m a liberal Obama backer? If so, that’s just another example of your camp’s tactics to deflect from the issues.)

steebo77 on August 30, 2011 at 11:59 AM

So you are stating that that bill was going to pass no matter what he did?

My point to Mr. steebo77 is the bill passed veto proof. Perry’s support for the bill is actually validated by the votes of the State Legislature.

That he supported and signed the bill is fine by me.

Mr. steebo77 seems to think the State Legislature has no say in the matter:

who cares how much support the bill had in either chamber of the Texas Legislature. That doesn’t change one thing about its merits, and it doesn’t change the fact that Rick Perry was one of its biggest supporters.

steebo77 on August 30, 2011 at 11:08 AM

Amusing.

Did you read the bill?

Yes.

It says nothing about giving illegal immigrants privileges…

Agreed. It simply states they will be charged in state resident tuition rates.

It is very similar to what Reagan has proposed…

right2bright on August 30, 2011 at 11:36 AM

By today’s standards of some on the right, Reagan is a RINO needing to be purged from the party.

rukiddingme on August 30, 2011 at 12:02 PM

My point to Mr. steebo77 is the bill passed veto proof. Perry’s support for the bill is actually validated by the votes of the State Legislature.

That he supported and signed the bill is fine by me.

Mr. steebo77 seems to think the State Legislature has no say in the matter:

rukiddingme on August 30, 2011 at 12:02 PM

Even after the bill’s passage, Perry has frequently and unabashedly defended its provision of in-state tuition to illegal immigrants. That kind of negates the whole “veto-proof” argument.

I never said or implied that the Texas Legislature had no say in the matter. I was just pointing out that the bill should be judged on its contents, its merits, rather than on who supported it.

The bottom line for me is that Rick Perry championed, signed, and continues to defend a bill that provides in-state tuition to illegal immigrants (which amounts to a taxpayer-funded subsidy to the colleges and universities to make up for the tuition discount, never mind the fact that implicit in the bill is a form of amnesty for a certain subset of the illegal immigrant population).

steebo77 on August 30, 2011 at 12:09 PM

By today’s standards of some on the right, Reagan is a RINO needing to be purged from the party.

rukiddingme on August 30, 2011 at 12:02 PM

They will be sorely disappointed when their candidate of choice either doesn’t become the nominee, or has views similar to the other candidates.

You’re kooky. Whenever I bring up relevant facts, I am labeled a liar or a cultist by you and your merry band of Perry supporters.

No one wants to actually look into his record. Instead, they throw out all kinds of outrageous charges to deflect attention (“leftist tactics!!!11!1″ “Perry bashing!!!11!1″ “Alinsky!!!11!1″).

Name one example of actual obfuscation or Perry-bashing on my part. I dare you.

(I’m not sure what you mean by “[my] president.” Are you suggesting I’m a liberal Obama backer? If so, that’s just another example of your camp’s tactics to deflect from the issues.)

steebo77 on August 30, 2011 at 11:59 AM

Heh, you are funny. You (or one of your clones, y’alls rants are so similar its hard to tell y’all apart) intentionally left out relevant parts of Perry’s statement about immigration then cry about how persecuted you are by cultists in a thread where y’all change the subject.

cozmo on August 30, 2011 at 12:10 PM

Heh, you are funny. You (or one of your clones, y’alls rants are so similar its hard to tell y’all apart) intentionally left out relevant parts of Perry’s statement about immigration then cry about how persecuted you are by cultists in a thread where y’all change the subject.

cozmo on August 30, 2011 at 12:10 PM

Nice try. I wasn’t discussing “immigration” writ large. I was focusing specifically on Perry’s support of in-state tuition for illegal immigrants. I didn’t deliberately leave anything out (not that the sum total of Perry’s record and statements on illegal immigration are anything to be proud of).

steebo77 on August 30, 2011 at 12:16 PM

cozmo on August 30, 2011 at 10:48 AM

Yeah, I saw his comments over the weekend asserting the state is subsidizing the cost for illegal immigrants as they would not be paying out of state tuition rates.

I’m not sure Mr. steebo77 has said anything about building a wall, but your point is valid about others saying it.

rukiddingme on August 30, 2011 at 12:16 PM

Even after the bill’s passage, Perry has frequently and unabashedly defended its provision of in-state tuition to illegal immigrants. That kind of negates the whole “veto-proof” argument.

No it doesn’t.

This year the State Legislature had a veto proof majority of Republicans. Yet neither the House or Senate made an attempt to overturn this bill.

I never said or implied that the Texas Legislature had no say in the matter.

You most definitely implied it when you said this:

who cares how much support the bill had in either chamber of the Texas Legislature

The bottom line for me is that Rick Perry championed, signed, and continues to defend a bill that provides in-state tuition to illegal immigrants (which amounts to a taxpayer-funded subsidy to the colleges and universities to make up for the tuition discount, never mind the fact that implicit in the bill is a form of amnesty for a certain subset of the illegal immigrant population).
steebo77 on August 30, 2011 at 12:09 PM

It is not a tax payer subsidy.
The state makes no reimbursement to the school for the illegal immigrant paying in state tuition rates.

rukiddingme on August 30, 2011 at 12:45 PM

It is not a tax payer subsidy.
The state makes no reimbursement to the school for the illegal immigrant paying in state tuition rates.

rukiddingme on August 30, 2011 at 12:45 PM

Yes, it is. The schools are ultimately part of the corporate entity “The State of Texas.” When illegal immigrants pay at an in-state rate, rather than at full price, the schools receive less revenue but incur the same expense. This eats into their bottom lines, decreasing their profitability even further and increasing their reliance on the State. Whether the State directly reimburses them or not, the schools are ultimately part of the “State of Texas,” and the negative fiscal impacts of in-state tuition for illegal immigrants are borne by the taxpayers.

steebo77 on August 30, 2011 at 12:50 PM

It is not a tax payer subsidy.
The state makes no reimbursement to the school for the illegal immigrant paying in state tuition rates.

rukiddingme on August 30, 2011 at 12:45 PM

I presume you mean no additional payment other than the amount the state provides in support. If there is no additional support to offset the potential loss of tuition revenue, then the out-of-state citizens who are attending will likely bear the brunt of increased tuition because someone will certainly have to pay for it.

littleguy on August 30, 2011 at 12:53 PM

“Mexico and the United States have a shared history, and a common future.”

This is only true if the United States annexes Mexico.

Which, BTW, as outrageous as it sounds, I would like very much to see happen, starting with our making a fair-market offer to buy Baja California. (Unfortunately, a second Mexican-American War is a more likely outcome. We would doubtless win such a war, but it would be a Pyrrhic victory.)

Right now Mexico uses the U.S.A. as a safety valve so that it does not have to address its own problems. One way or another, this must stop. I will gladly support a candidate who has a viable plan to make it stop.

Mary in LA on August 30, 2011 at 1:01 PM

A new PPP survey shows Rick Perry jumping out to a huge lead in South Carolina — that state which has often served as a tiebreaker in primary elections.

1. Rick Perry 36%

2. Mitt Romney 13%

3. Sarah Palin 10%

4. Herman Cain 9%

5. Michele Bachmann and Newt Gingrich 5%

favorables:

a. Rick Perry 65%/15% for +50%.

b. Herman Cain 46%/11% for +35%.

c. Sarah Palin 59%/33% for +26%.

d. Mitt Romney 52%/32% for +20%.

e. Newt Gingrich 42%/40% for +2%.

1. Head-to-heads.

If Rick Perry were matched straight up against Mitt Romney, the Texas gov would win by 31%. That’s impressive. More impressive? Even with a bunch of tea party candidates (e.g. Cain, Palin, Bachmann, Paul) in the mix, Perry holds a 23% lead over Romney.

Meanwhile, Romney would edge Bachmann by 5% in a head-to-head, which means this isn’t just an anyone-but-Romney phenomenon. Perry performs 36% better against Romney in a head-to-head than Bachmann.

For his part, Perry also crushes Bachmann by 43%, which shows, yet again, that Bachmann’s best day (straw poll in Iowa) was probably her worst (Perry officially gets in).

4. Palin’s Fade. Not only has she dropped from 16% to 10%, but there’s also a more troubling phenomenon at work.

Perry is killing her in favorability numbers. That’s always been Palin’s strong suit. Republican voters have always liked her, even though many haven’t wanted to vote for her. But check it out: her unfavorables are twice as big as Perry’s, and Perry’s favorables run higher than hers, even though she has better name ID.

http://gop12.thehill.com/

windansea on August 30, 2011 at 1:47 PM

windansea on August 30, 2011 at 1:47 PM

That’s a fake poll and PPP is a hack operation.

This clearly shows that Rick Perry is unqualified, a distraction and needs to drop out of the race.

The usual suspects.

Knucklehead on August 30, 2011 at 1:56 PM

The usual suspects.

Knucklehead on August 30, 2011 at 1:56 PM

You mean Knucklehead?

steebo77 on August 30, 2011 at 2:09 PM

And how as that worked out?

idesign on August 30, 2011 at 11:45 AM

Actually it would have worked out fine…except for the democrats lying to him.

Agreed. It simply states they will be charged in state resident tuition rates.

rukiddingme on August 30, 2011 at 12:02 PM

No, it does not, they have to have legal residence to apply…it has a litany of standards they have to meet.
It does not state that illegal immigrants are charged the same as in state resident tuition rates.

right2bright on August 30, 2011 at 3:26 PM

No, it does not, they have to have legal residence to apply…it has a litany of standards they have to meet.

Section 54.052 Subsection (j) of the bill has specific criteria to meet to be classified as a Texas resident. Legal residence is not one of them

It does not state that illegal immigrants are charged the same as in state resident tuition rates.
right2bright on August 30, 2011 at 3:26 PM

Yes, you are right. It does not state illegal immigrants. I was hasty in my response. I should have said it classifies them as Texas residents, provided the criteria of 54.052 Subsection (j) are met.

rukiddingme on August 30, 2011 at 9:47 PM

annoyinglittletwerp on August 30, 2011 at 8:45 AM

Yep, you wrote some — but not all — those adjectives. You were joined by a few others, Perry supporters all…

Gohawgs on August 31, 2011 at 1:59 AM

right2bright on August 30, 2011 at 9:55 AM

Still watching for the microwave to boil your cup of water, eh?…

Gohawgs on August 31, 2011 at 2:07 AM

Comment pages: 1 5 6 7