Hot Air exclusive: Perry raises $17.1 million in Q3

posted at 8:00 am on October 5, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

A source on the Rick Perry campaign tells Hot Air that the Texas governor conducted some Texas-size fundraising in the third quarter.  Coming in just a little over halfway through, Perry raised $17.1 million.  That number would put Perry somewhere between $4-6 million ahead of Mitt Romney’s rumored total for Q3, according to this report last week from the Boston Globe. It’s also likely to far outpace Herman Cain’s fundraising or that of the other Republicans currently in the race.

The pace is even more impressive.  Perry had 49 days in which to raise funds, rather than the full 92 days of the quarter, a rate of about $349,000 a day.  The final debate in September didn’t hurt Perry’s fundraising rate, either.  In the 42 days prior to the Orlando debate, their rate was $323K per day; in the eight days following the Orlando debate, that escalated to $478K per day. Perry’s on-line operation did well, too, drawing in $1.1 million — despite, as my source says, not driving contributions with their on-line ads.

Best of all for the Perry campaign, the burn rate in the first seven weeks was negligible.  The campaign has $15 million cash on hand from its $17.1 million haul.  Team Perry wanted 18,000 contributors in this quarter, and finished with over 22,000.  More than 60% of their contributors donated $250 or less, which means that they can keep going back to them for more money.

The message that Perry’s campaign wants this report to send is that Perry isn’t going away — and that he can out-raise and out-organize the rest of the field.  With Perry taking a big hit in polling, that message can’t come at a better time.  However, Perry will need a good debate performance next week in order to truly right the ship and regain some of the momentum lost in the polls.

Update: I see Drudge has a source, too!

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 2

Fundraising up (good) poll numbers down (bad)

Sorta like hitting a big curve in the road, dramatically oversteering and now the car is up on two wheels high.

Can he hold it, control it and get all four wheels back on the ground, or will he flop over on his side or worse. . . turn turtle.

Good luck Gov. Perry.

Jason Coleman on October 5, 2011 at 10:16 AM

I knew it was bad but man that’s really bad.

gophergirl on October 5, 2011 at 10:07 AM

Yeah, it’s disgusting. Correction on the study: it was Texas Public Policy Foundation (they do great work, btw) who did the study.

juliesa on October 5, 2011 at 10:22 AM

Everyone stop arguing this scary lady has made our decision.

http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/culture/2011/10/3609389/romney-time-christie-holdout-gop-bundlers-finally-ready-settle-mitt

Cindy Munford on October 5, 2011 at 9:59 AM

This belongs here as well. Looks like DC insiders are gearing up to throw their weight and money around now that Christie is out.

.
.
.

(Yeah, there’s a pun in there just waiting to be hit out of the ballpark. Have at it.)

Fallon on October 5, 2011 at 10:29 AM

Well done. Now take this good news and turn your campaign around. If you can’t, give your money to Palin, Gingrich or Cain and get out of the way.

kerrhome on October 5, 2011 at 10:34 AM

Interesting Ed, Drudge now has this as his main story but without a link.

carbon_footprint on October 5, 2011 at 10:35 AM

It is Perry’s to lose…but Cain is moving up, but won’t get the financial support that Perry gets.

right2bright on October 5, 2011 at 10:41 AM

Fundraising up (good) poll numbers down (bad)

Jason Coleman on October 5, 2011 at 10:16 AM

I guess it all depends on what is driving the poll numbers now.

Like it or not, polls have become an instantaneous measure of media-driven sentiment. It used not to be so in an age where we didn’t have the 24-hour news cycle.

The current polls are a reflection of the public’s opinion on who they think is performing best in the debates. It also does not help that 9 out of 10 of every Perry article is negative, while I would daresay 9 out of 10 is positive for Romney.

The polls will flip instantly if Perry wins a primary ala McCain, whose campaign was proclaimed dead until he shocked Romney by winning New Hampshire. So the ground game is more important.

This explains why Bachmann is banking her all on Iowa. If she wins, she shoots to top tier again and Cain goes down.

TheRightMan on October 5, 2011 at 10:42 AM

Everyone stop arguing this scary lady has made our decision.

http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/culture/2011/10/3609389/romney-time-christie-holdout-gop-bundlers-finally-ready-settle-mitt

Cindy Munford on October 5, 2011 at 9:59 AM

“She’s a man, baby! Yeah”

Danny on October 5, 2011 at 10:43 AM

TheRightMan on October 5, 2011 at 9:54 AM

One word, TORT. That is the hidden cost which has driven more business OUT of the U.S. than ANY other.

Even attorneys on the side of defendants make money in defending all the lawsuits. It isn’t just ambulance chasers who cash in. Most regulations only enable lawsuits rather than actually regulate anything.

Reform of Tort Law, and the subsequent passage of Loser Pays, means that Perry actually listens to large and SMALL manufacturers. While all others are merely paying lip service.

Kermit on October 5, 2011 at 10:44 AM

It is Perry’s to lose…but Cain is moving up, but won’t get the financial support that Perry gets.

right2bright on October 5, 2011 at 10:41 AM

And that is what some of us have been saying on this forum for the past few weeks.

It is time for conservatives to wise up. Cain talks good but he is going nowhere in this primary. I also have a problem with a supposed conservative who obviously prefers Romney to Perry. One can’t help thinking that Bachmann/Santorum/Cain are all angling for a position on Romney’s team.

Hence the choice is clear: Perry (warts and all) vs. Romney (warts and all). Make your pick.

TheRightMan on October 5, 2011 at 10:46 AM

TheRightMan on October 5, 2011 at 10:42 AM

IF she makes it that far. She has NO money. She blew it all on buying tickets (ballots) for the Ames Straw Poll.

Cancelling a Tea Party speaking engagement (which generally draws 1000+) and a $40,000 fundraiser because it did not sell enough tickets, speaks volumes of her woes in anyone willing to back her with more than posts on websites.

Kermit on October 5, 2011 at 10:47 AM

Did this money come in dollars or Pesos?
IlikedAUH2O on October 5, 2011 at 9:01 AM

heh

He’s a open borders, big gov loving, Trans Texas Corridor pushing, immigration flood from Mexico bankrupting American entitlement programs for actual Americans. And can’t furget that BI-National health insurance proposal.
PappyD61 on October 5, 2011 at 9:02 AM

Theres a source (of money). Bet Slim loves Perry

Most of this was raised before his pitiful debate performance and demonstration that he’s just not up to the drill.
CatoRenasci on October 5, 2011 at 9:04 AM

but with Christie out, and Palin not yet out, some may hedge their bets because …

Perry also received approximately $1.5 million in campaign
contributions from 8 contributors during his governorship;
Perry then turned around and authorized the Texas Emerging
Technology Fund that he controlled to “AWARD” (not loan)
$17 million to these same 8 contributors.
Amjean on October 5, 2011 at 8:14 AM

Perry is a constructive politician.

A source on the Rick Perry campaign tells Hot Air that the Texas governor conducted some Texas-size fundraising in the third quarter

Update: I see Drudge has a source, too!

Heh you’ve been sourced

I don’t know, they might have been wasting their sourcing chips. I would have held such cards for later

entagor on October 5, 2011 at 10:50 AM

The MSM is the enemy. And occasionally that even includes Fox.

juliesa on October 5, 2011 at 10:06 AM

You got that right, babe.

What we call the “Texas Model” of low taxes, small government is really what the American Model used to be before the collectivists got their claws into it.

The media does not want this election to be a referendum on their agenda which it will be if a true free market capitalist is the Republican nominee.

They’re going to hit hard on Perry’s pro-business decisions, calling most of them “cronyism,” while totally ignoring the corrupt statism their guy has dragged us under.

All the Republican nominees need to learn no conservative wins when the media directs the discussion.

itsacookbook on October 5, 2011 at 10:53 AM

All the Republican nominees candidates need to learn no conservative wins when the media directs the discussion.

itsacookbook on October 5, 2011 at 10:53 AM

itsacookbook on October 5, 2011 at 10:57 AM

As anyone who worked at Solyndra will attest to, a flood of money into an operation doesn’t mean a thing if you don’t have a good viable product.

sheryl on October 5, 2011 at 11:04 AM

I doubt this news is going to help Perry, especially since Romney wasn’t far behind. Romney raised the same amount of money in his first quarter in the same amount of time (a month and a half).

sheryl on October 5, 2011 at 11:10 AM

caption for thread pic: “I crush your leeetle head…crush you, crush you up small…like leetle bug!“//

ted c on October 5, 2011 at 8:09 AM

LOL.

Kim Priestap on October 5, 2011 at 11:15 AM

PappyD61 on October 5, 2011 at 9:02 AM

Ahhhh, I see that we have an Alex Jones devotee here.

Kermit on October 5, 2011 at 11:15 AM

What we call the “Texas Model” of low taxes, small government is really what the American Model used to be before the collectivists got their claws into it.

The media does not want this election to be a referendum on their agenda which it will be if a true free market capitalist is the Republican nominee.

They’re going to hit hard on Perry’s pro-business decisions, calling most of them “cronyism,” while totally ignoring the corrupt statism their guy has dragged us under.

All the Republican nominees need to learn no conservative wins when the media directs the discussion.

itsacookbook on October 5, 2011 at 10:53 AM

Hear! Hear!

Kim Priestap on October 5, 2011 at 11:16 AM

‘Glad to see this. I was one of the small donors in the last few days of the quarter. I plan on giving again.

Romney raises a lot of money, but he can’t seem to expand his support beyond the ~25-30% that he’s had since this all started. He’s a known quantity, so on one level all the money in the world apparently won’t help him.

Support from Perry shifted to Cain, not Romney — that’s a bad sign for Romney… and for all of us who desperately want to unseat Obama. There’s a core of folks who will not vote for Mitt and, after his recent behavior, I guess I understand why.

Cain has already made a major unforced error biting on the rock story, so I really don’t see him going anywhere. I’d vote for Newt before I’d consider voting for Cain.

Y-not on October 5, 2011 at 11:23 AM

gophergirl on October 5, 2011 at 10:07 AM

Aslans Girl on October 5, 2011 at 8:53 AM

I’m doing a happy dance along with you.

Kim Priestap on October 5, 2011 at 11:28 AM

Well, no one say that Perry’s a quitter.

He should spend time & money clarifying his rationale… Perhaps it should go something like this:

* After the Plyer v Doe case in 1982, all states, including Texas, were adapting to being required to educate illegal immigrants & children of illegal immigrants from grades K-12, without reimbursement of fees to the state.

Then I get stuck….

I am not a lawyer, so forgive my ignorance, and am open to correction, but Plyer v Doe prohibits the state from charging additional fees of such students to help cover losses… It seems like the typical ‘slippery slope’ after which many states, not only Texas, have passed additional laws to enable educating this population’s children, at taxpayer expense. This includes extending access to colleges, universities, and, I imagine, to higher education as well (graduate, law, medical, etc.). But, do not colleges & universities also receive funding via federal grants. Additionally, as few American citizens could afford college tuition, needing Federal education loans, aren’t Federal taxpayer $$ also subsidizing not only the cost of in-state tuition, but also the difference between in-state & out-of-state tuition?

Some Perry advocates state that in state tuition is covered by Texas state taxes. Since illegal immigrants pay taxes, that they have a right to attend state-funded educational institutions. ‘The Right Hand Man’ (if memory still serves me) provided a link to support the fact illegals pay taxes. I reviewed that, went to the CBO document (Pete Orzag ed.), and found that it was a “review” of 29 previously published studies on the topic, while also stating that it made no attempt to review/validate the methods – which is a ‘soft’ argument for the point, at best. This CBO document also claims that the IRS “estimates” a certain % of illegal immigrants pay Federal income taxes, and that Social Security Agency “assumes” they pay into Soc Sec as well. Again, there is no way to validate any of these assertions. (Didn’t a certain federal gov’t agency also ‘estimate’ that Obamacare would result in a net savings.)

Another poster had suggested that illegals pay into Social Security, citing as fact that illegal aliens receive an ITIN (number) as proof. However, application to SocSec in this capacity is only if the applicant is applying for a Federal Income Tax refund, and doesn’t only apply to illegal immigrants, but also foreign expats, those here on visa, etc. Again, no clear way to validate the actual contribution to SocSec.

Regardless of Pyler v Doe, this doesn’t excuse why many states, including Texas, have continued such policies, and extended them to provide extensive benefits, including subsidizing health care for illegal immigrants, largely at a loss for medical centers, particularly for obstetric & peri-natal care. This is not even addressed.

Nor is the intangible cost of having interpreters, goods, & services catering to Spanish-speaking folks, enabling the problem being addressed…

The argument that illegal immigrants who are of age to be educated from kindergarten through college receive in-state tuition, yet for an out-of-state resident to attend a very good institution such as Baylor, they should move to Texas for a few years to obtain residency? I know that in several other states, not only in Texas, this policy is active… But to the average American, how does an illegal immigrant become a state citizen, but not a US citizen?

AL & AZ, in addition to other states, are at least trying to deal with the problem by passing their own immigration laws. It doesn’t help that Perry criticized Brewer after the AZ bill was passed…

Perry needs to turn it around if he makes immigration the problem due to lack of federal law enforcement. Many of his statements to date have been tugging on heartstrings, but notes ing with the problem. Perhaps he can take this flap & attack it by forcing the immigration debate into the forefront, for reform. But to do this, he needs to start re-evaluating his tone, start supporting the building of a manned, guarded border barrier, and provide clarification as to what he would do to correct the problem since the other candidates have largely ignored it (e.g. work visas for those in country, payment of taxes & subsidies received retroactively, expulsion of felons, elimination of the ‘anchor baby’ policy towards citizenship, felonies for those who continue to employ illegal immigrants under the table, and extended probationary period prior to becoming a US citizen).

Only if he says how he would fix immigration as President, will he have a chance. (Frankly, I still can’t quite get my head around Romney, but he has turned the argument vs Romneycare into a ‘state experiment’ and his kooky belief in AGW into something that shouldn’t be subsidized by gov’t funds.) However, if Perry continues to spit out emotional arguments, he’s done, no matter how much money he raises and spends (e.g. Obama).

Danny on October 5, 2011 at 11:42 AM

You can see big monry lining up behind Perry. If there were 20,000 donors and each donated $100 (probably higher than average from normal donors via a single donation), the total would be $2 million.

Where did the other $15 million come from? Big business and special interests who are looking for favors that Rick Perry has a history of providing to his mega donors.

bw222 on October 5, 2011 at 11:56 AM

Support from Perry shifted to Cain, not Romney — that’s a bad sign for Romney… and for all of us who desperately want to unseat Obama. There’s a core of folks who will not vote for Mitt and, after his recent behavior, I guess I understand why.

Cain has already made a major unforced error biting on the rock story, so I really don’t see him going anywhere. I’d vote for Newt before I’d consider voting for Cain.

Y-not on October 5, 2011 at 11:23 AM

Cain may well collect Perry votes because he has a more conservative, more anti establishment agenda. A shift away from Perry hurts Perry.

Cain slipped up on the Perry-Rock episode. However, he recovered fairly well on Hannity. If Cain is able to stick to ‘end of discussion’ mode he will recover. I assume the MSM will let the dog lie, in case they need to take Cain down later. Right now, Cain is a vote collector so they need him.

Rule: Never reveal your weaknesses to the enemy

Unless I see Cain go over the hill on PC, I’d vote Cain before Newt.

Newt, while smart, has a weakness for celebrity or something. He melted when he was around Clinton. Newt seems to be a moth to the flame when the right person stokes the Newt ego. The Newt Pelosi ad is one example. Its a free country, but I question Newt on this ad, more than I fear Cain will turn into a PC inquisitor. Cain had too many executive corporate positions where he could have swung the PC hammer and there is no record of abuse

Newt has a trail of weak decisions. If Cain has such a rcord folk are keeping it close to chest. Now that would be a good one. A former Cain employee waiting to surface just before the big moment. If such a person exists, they may already be getting cleaned up for a performance. Cain survived the corporate gauntlet, so I assume he has already evaluated the possibilities

entagor on October 5, 2011 at 12:03 PM

Perry used to be a Democrat and campaigned for Al Gore – so it’s no wonder that he can get 20,000 people to donate an average of $850 each. The Democrats want an old friend running against Obama and the liberal media is going to help him get there.

popularpeoplesfront on October 5, 2011 at 12:07 PM

bw222 on October 5, 2011 at 11:56 AM

By what measurement do you come to your “realization” Most donors were $250 and below. That means small business owners.

If you knew ANYTHING about Texas AT ALL, you’d realize that small business has been behind him, much more than billionaires.

The Tort Reform and Loser Pays legislative pieces he pushed through were a real boost to small manufacturing.

In short, your logic is extremely flawed.

Kermit on October 5, 2011 at 12:09 PM

The Christie holdout millio-billionaires will donate to Romney, hopefully wasting it. This is the season for the masses…some of the rich and lots of the not-so-rich donations.

Populism with help from the rich will win it, not the reverse. It’s the times. The masses are sick of the elites.

Schadenfreude on October 5, 2011 at 12:38 PM

Perry used to be a Democrat and campaigned for Al Gore – so it’s no wonder that he can get 20,000 people to donate an average of $850 each. The Democrats want an old friend running against Obama and the liberal media is going to help him get there.

popularpeoplesfront on October 5, 2011 at 12:07 PM

Mark this as farthest-from-the-truth comment.

Schadenfreude on October 5, 2011 at 12:39 PM

Cain may well collect Perry votes because he has a more conservative, more anti establishment agenda. A shift away from Perry hurts Perry.

He’s not getting mine. I can’t vote for someone who would take advantage of a racism smear. Forget it.

I’m a Republican who always votes a straight ticket. I’m ashamed of the way they all handled this – most especially Cain.

When an innocent man is left relying on Texas Democrats to defend him, and can’t count on his own party, that about does it for me. I don’t believe I’ll ever get the bitter taste out of my mouth.

capitalist piglet on October 5, 2011 at 1:18 PM

He raised that from roughly 20,000 people? So that’s supposed to mean he has “broad support”??

Ron Paul received campaign contributions from five times as many people as Perry during the same quarter.

Perry just can’t expand beyond the tiny core of rich supporters that he has despite the media pumping him as a “front runner” for weeks and weeks.

popularpeoplesfront on October 5, 2011 at 1:28 PM

Perry used to be a Democrat and campaigned for Al Gore – so it’s no wonder that he can get 20,000 people to donate an average of $850 each. The Democrats want an old friend running against Obama and the liberal media is going to help him get there.

popularpeoplesfront on October 5, 2011 at 12:07 PM

Heh what color is the sky in your world LOL!

Dr Evil on October 5, 2011 at 1:33 PM

Mark this as farthest-from-the-truth comment.

Schadenfreude on October 5, 2011 at 12:39 PM

Oh? Really? So you didn’t know that Perry was a Democrat who campaigned for Al Gore? It’s kind of important to know that a candidate for President running as a Republican made such a major flip-flop isn’t it? So why didn’t CNN and FOX tell you about it?

He though Al Gore was “more Conservative”?? And you want him in the White House? lol..

popularpeoplesfront on October 5, 2011 at 1:34 PM

right2bright on October 5, 2011 at 10:41 AM

I read Romney’s book. If any of you Perry purcoats can read, i recommend it. Maybe have someone read it to you.

I am getting Perry’s book next. I hope he doesn’t call me any more names or assail my character in it. A candidate calling his own party heartless is a real hoot.

What a goof.

IlikedAUH2O on October 5, 2011 at 2:40 PM

popularpeoplesfront on October 5, 2011 at 1:34 PM

Ron Boy is a RINO, and just goes to show you how prepaid credit cards for unknown sources can go.

With a commie type nic, it appears that you qualify to classed just as Ayn Rand classed Libertarians.

Kermit on October 5, 2011 at 2:45 PM

The message that Perry’s campaign wants this report to send is that Perry isn’t going away — and that he can out-raise and out-organize the rest of the field. With Perry taking a big hit in polling, that message can’t come at a better time. However, Perry will need a good debate performance next week in order to truly right the ship and regain some of the momentum lost in the polls.

Yes, Ed and as we all know money talks. That is all that matters..Free speech=money and the guy with the deepest pockets will win.

Right?

In fact, this does not surprise me. Perry has been famous for crony capitalism and my guess is they are lining up to get their names on the short list.

I wonder if he will be able to keep this up if he stays at about 20% on intrade.

Terrye on October 5, 2011 at 3:21 PM

Oh? Really? So you didn’t know that Perry was a Democrat who campaigned for Al Gore? It’s kind of important to know that a candidate for President running as a Republican made such a major flip-flop isn’t it? So why didn’t CNN and FOX tell you about it?

Ronald Reagan, quite famously, was once a Democrat.

David Horowitz, quite famously, was once a Marxist.

Are you suggesting people don’t get to change now?

capitalist piglet on October 5, 2011 at 3:24 PM

He’s not getting mine. I can’t vote for someone who would take advantage of a racism smear. Forget it.

I’m a Republican who always votes a straight ticket. I’m ashamed of the way they all handled this – most especially Cain.

When an innocent man is left relying on Texas Democrats to defend him, and can’t count on his own party, that about does it for me. I don’t believe I’ll ever get the bitter taste out of my mouth.

capitalist piglet on October 5, 2011 at 1:18 PM

Oh please. That is so lame. Cain did not take advantage of anything. In fact, he came out a day later and said the matter is closed…how long did it take Perry to say that maybe he was wrong when he called people who did not like his immigration policy “hearltess”.

I mean come on..exactly how did people expect any of these people, including Cain to react to a word like Niggerhead? I know Perry did not name the camp that or anything like that..but he was not smart enough to either get rid of that damn rock or stay away from the place either..and now it is in the news whether Cain or anyone else likes it or not.

To say that Cain took advantage of a racial smear because he had an immediate and negative response to that word is unfair.

Terrye on October 5, 2011 at 3:26 PM

When an innocent man is left relying on Texas Democrats to defend him, and can’t count on his own party, that about does it for me. I don’t believe I’ll ever get the bitter taste out of my mouth.

capitalist piglet on October 5, 2011 at 1:18 PM

It took Cain a hell of a lot less time to let Perry off the hook on this than it took for Perry to get around to saying he should not have said people who did not agree with him were heartless.

Terrye on October 5, 2011 at 3:31 PM

capitalist piglet:

I am sorry for the double post on that issue. My first one did not show up and so I did another..and then they were both there.

Terrye on October 5, 2011 at 3:33 PM

popularpeoplesfront on October 5, 2011 at 1:34 PM

What an insufferable naive you are. Ronald Reagan was longer a D than a R. You’re not worth a dialog.

Schadenfreude on October 5, 2011 at 3:34 PM

popularpeoplesfront on October 5, 2011 at 1:34 PM

What an insufferable naive you are. Ronald Reagan was longer a D than a R. You’re not worth a dialog.

Schadenfreude on October 5, 2011 at 3:34 PM

That is true..but then again times were different then. Today people call someone a RINO because they might actually vote with a Democrat every now and then. When Reagan was President a man could change parties without people looking at him funny.

My problem with Perry is not that he used to be a Democrat..my problem with him is that I wonder if he just changed parties because he thought it would make it easier to win elections in Texas. I always felt that Reagan changed parties out of an honest conviction.

Terrye on October 5, 2011 at 3:44 PM

Fools all deserve Obama to be re-elected. I wish him on you and progeny.

Schadenfreude on October 5, 2011 at 3:57 PM

My problem with Perry is not that he used to be a Democrat..my problem with him is that I wonder if he just changed parties because he thought it would make it easier to win elections in Texas. I always felt that Reagan changed parties out of an honest conviction.

Terrye on October 5, 2011 at 3:44 PM

Don’t be mislead by Obama’s re-write of history. Texas has not been “historically Republican.” For instance, 39 of our governors have been Democrats, only 6 Republicans.

The governor’s office was held by a Democrat from 1874 to 1979, the year Perry switched parties. Then we swapped parties each election until 2000.

And the leg didn’t lean R until this last go ’round.

So, I’m gonna rate Perry’s switching parties as an honest conversion.

itsacookbook on October 5, 2011 at 4:05 PM

Terrye on October 5, 2011 at 3:44 PM

And when he was in the state leg as a Democrat, he was known for his fiscal conservancy.

itsacookbook on October 5, 2011 at 4:09 PM

Fools all deserve Obama to be re-elected. I wish him on you and progeny.

Schadenfreude on October 5, 2011 at 3:57 PM

Ditto

Madison Conservative made a profound observation. paraphrasing: If you aren’t going to nominate a conservative, and we are given the choice of a liberal republican or democrat, make it democrat they can own the mess the country is in for the next four years. Perhaps after four more years of Obama failure, the republican party will figure out that the base doesn’t Mr 25% in any form or capacity.

Washington warned not to put party in front of country. Getting any republican elected, because the person wears the R brand is not good enough.

Washington continues to advance his idea of the dangers of sectionalism and expands his warning to include the dangers of political parties to the government, and country as a whole.

People get the government they deserve, Thomas Jefferson.

Dr Evil on October 5, 2011 at 4:15 PM

There are a lot of asses commenting here today, myself excluded.

Perry is a conservative who can get elected and won’t stab you in the back once he gets in power.

eaglesdontflock on October 5, 2011 at 4:18 PM

Ronald Reagan, quite famously, was once a Democrat.

David Horowitz, quite famously, was once a Marxist.

Are you suggesting people don’t get to change now?

capitalist piglet on October 5, 2011 at 3:24 PM

Don’t forget Jeane Kirkpatrick. She started out life as a socialist, and ended life as a commie-hating Republican.

itsacookbook on October 5, 2011 at 4:20 PM

The debates appear to have weight only for political junkies like you and I. Gov. Perry’s supporters don’t appear to think so and are backing him with their wallets.

SO worth repeating.

What junkies hear:

“You don’t have a heart!”

What the rest of America hears:

“Jobs jobs jobs jobs jobs………..”

kg598301 on October 5, 2011 at 4:41 PM

People get the government they deserve, Thomas Jefferson.

Dr Evil on October 5, 2011 at 4:15 PM

Relatively free people do, every time, and they deserve what they elect.

Beware, though, the U.S. might not be free forever, or for long, for that matter.

Schadenfreude on October 5, 2011 at 4:43 PM

Beware, though, the U.S. might not be free forever, or for long, for that matter.

Schadenfreude on October 5, 2011 at 4:43 PM

I’m not all that sure we are still “free.” I remember being free, and it sure didn’t feel like what we are now.

itsacookbook on October 5, 2011 at 4:54 PM

I’m not all that sure we are still “free.” I remember being free, and it sure didn’t feel like what we are now.

itsacookbook on October 5, 2011 at 4:54 PM

Sadly so true.

Schadenfreude on October 5, 2011 at 4:58 PM

I am sorry for the double post on that issue. My first one did not show up and so I did another..and then they were both there.

Terrye on October 5, 2011 at 3:33 PM

Don’t worry about it.

As for what I think about Cain, it’s not just this (though that was the real deal-breaker…I heard the Amanpour interview, so I completely disagree with your benign characterization of his remarks) – it’s that I see him as a gimmicky, sloganeering person who can barely keep some of his own positions straight…but a lot of people appear to be sucked in by it, so maybe this will resonate:

Where’s the beef?

capitalist piglet on October 5, 2011 at 5:03 PM

Don’t forget Jeane Kirkpatrick. She started out life as a socialist, and ended life as a commie-hating Republican.

itsacookbook on October 5, 2011 at 4:20 PM

I actually wasn’t aware of that.

capitalist piglet on October 5, 2011 at 5:05 PM

Perry is a conservative who can get elected and won’t stab you in the back once he gets in power.

eaglesdontflock on October 5, 2011 at 4:18 PM

That’s what I see. I think – though he has to date been a fairly lousy campaigner/debater – he would definitely make the best president of the field.

capitalist piglet on October 5, 2011 at 5:07 PM

Maybe Perry can buy a good debate performance now.

ddrintn on October 5, 2011 at 5:19 PM

As for what I think about Cain, it’s not just this (though that was the real deal-breaker…I heard the Amanpour interview, so I completely disagree with your benign characterization of his remarks) – it’s that I see him as a gimmicky, sloganeering person who can barely keep some of his own positions straight…but a lot of people appear to be sucked in by it, so maybe this will resonate:

Where’s the beef?

capitalist piglet on October 5, 2011 at 5:03 PM

Well, Cain did talk about his 999 plan. But Perry has not had any specific policy initiatives to talk about. He is very vague about all of that..

And I think a lot of his money was raised with the help of contacts he had as head of the Republicans Governor’s Association. That is not a bad thing, I don’t mean it that way..but it does demonstrate that Perry is a career politician with contacts with high rollers. Not exactly an outsider kind of guy.

Terrye on October 5, 2011 at 5:23 PM

My problem with Perry is not that he used to be a Democrat..my problem with him is that I wonder if he just changed parties because he thought it would make it easier to win elections in Texas. I always felt that Reagan changed parties out of an honest conviction.

Terrye on October 5, 2011 at 3:44 PM

Perry switched parties when most Conservative “Reagan Democrats” were switching parties. He switched parties when the Democrats were still the dominant force in Texas.

Romney on the other hand ran to Ted Kennedy’s left in the 90s, claimed to be an independent during Reagan/Bush and insisted he had no interest in every going back to Reagan/Bush. Massachusetts voted for Reagan/Bush.

The two men passed each on the ideological during the 90s, Perry was headed Right and Romney was headed left.

Of course, you have no such concerns over Romney.

Daemonocracy on October 5, 2011 at 5:25 PM

Terrye on October 5, 2011 at 3:44 PM

And when he was in the state leg as a Democrat, he was known for his fiscal conservancy.

itsacookbook on October 5, 2011 at 4:09 PM

I think that is true of a lot of blue dog Democrats..but as politics changed in Texas, I think Perry realized {with the help of some high profile Republicans} that he would have more of a future as a Republican. I am not saying the man is a crook or anything, I just think he is driven by self interest as much as philosophy. Kind of like Bill Clinton.

Terrye on October 5, 2011 at 5:26 PM

The two men passed each on the ideological during the 90s, Perry was headed Right and Romney was headed left.

Of course, you have no such concerns over Romney.

Daemonocracy on October 5, 2011 at 5:25 PM

I don’t think Romney headed left. I think he is center right on most issues.

I have concerns about all the candidates. I just look at Perry’s past…the cronyism, the pandering on immigration, the crappy debate performances, the book that he seems bound and determined to disavow and I have more doubts about him.

That does not mean I will sit home come election time and not vote if he gets the nomination however.

Terrye on October 5, 2011 at 5:29 PM

Fools all deserve Obama to be re-elected. I wish him on you and progeny.

Schadenfreude on October 5, 2011 at 3:57 PM

What is that all about?

Terrye on October 5, 2011 at 5:31 PM

Well, Cain did talk about his 999 plan. But Perry has not had any specific policy initiatives to talk about. He is very vague about all of that..

Terrye on October 5, 2011 at 5:23 PM

The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board comes down hard on Mitt Romney’s new jobs proposal in a Wednesday column that criticizes the 2012 presidential candidate’s economic plan as “surprisingly timid and tactical considering our economic predicament.”

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/wsj-slams-romney-for-lackluster-jobs-plan-2011-9#ixzz1Zwf8s0SV

The Perry campaign needs to get their act together and start releasing a platform, but what exactly does Romney stand for? What solutions does he offer? Who is he and what makes him tick?

I don’t understand how some people can criticize other candidates, including Perry, when Romney has argued for nothing other than electability.

Daemonocracy on October 5, 2011 at 5:34 PM

I don’t think Romney headed left. I think he is center right on most issues.

I have concerns about all the candidates. I just look at Perry’s past…the cronyism, the pandering on immigration, the crappy debate performances, the book that he seems bound and determined to disavow and I have more doubts about him.

That does not mean I will sit home come election time and not vote if he gets the nomination however.

Terrye on October 5, 2011 at 5:29 PM

Cronyism is a charge, you have no actual proof. It is a concern of mine, but it is no coincidence the health insurance industry gives the most to both Obama and Romney. Individual mandates are a good pay to play policy for them.

Pandering on illegal immigration? He certainly wasn’t pandering to the conservative base and he stuck to his position. I strongly oppose his position on in state tuition and found his heartless comment insulting, but I know where he stands.

You have not been paying attention if you think he has disavowed his book. He has stood his ground on every single one of his positions, including the Ponzi Scheme rhetoric. Romney lies about Perry wanting to end SS for seniors and was a hypocrite in criticizing the use of the term Ponzi scheme when he himself compared SS to a criminal enterprise were it not a government program in his own book.

Perry’s debates were crap, but Romney’s were not good either. He gives heavily worded non-answers to most questions, he is a sketchy individual who has made plenty of mistakes in the debates such as insisting Social Security should be a Federal controlled pension plan. There is a reason he has a cap in the polls and is currently tied with an under funded political no name in the current polls – Conservatives smell a rat.

I’ve beaten up on Perry since that last debate, but at least I know where he stands and he absolutely is more a Conservative than Romney who has given me no evidence he is Conservative at all.

Daemonocracy on October 5, 2011 at 5:50 PM

Sarah is not running, re: Mark Levin

bluefox on October 5, 2011 at 6:08 PM

Daemonocracy on October 5, 2011 at 5:50 PM

I am sorry, but you are the one who is not paying attention if you think that Perry has not been guilty of crony capitalism. He even had his own state sponsored, tax payer funded wind farm…not to mention the fact that the best way to get appointed to office in that state was to give Perry money…there is ample evidence of this. Go check it out.

As for disavowing his book…well he seems to be backing off his comments about social security in that book.

I don’t much like the guy, if he gets the nomination..I will vote for him. But I don’t think he really is a conservative. I just think he is a career politician wanting to win the big one.

Terrye on October 5, 2011 at 6:18 PM

I am sorry, but you are the one who is not paying attention if you think that Perry has not been guilty of crony capitalism. He even had his own state sponsored, tax payer funded wind farm…not to mention the fact that the best way to get appointed to office in that state was to give Perry money…there is ample evidence of this. Go check it out.

Terrye on October 5, 2011 at 6:18 PM

Crony capitalism is corruption: it is the government giving tax dollars to a private entity as part of a quid pro quo. You are alleging he is corrupt, which requires proof.

Private/public investment wrong on principle, but it’s different than crony capitalism.

You’re wrong about him backing off his comments on social security, I’ve read the book and he hasn’t moved an inch.

You not liking him and what you “think” about him are excuse to accuse the man of corruption or distort the facts.

The thing that gets me about those who support Romney is that every time you attack another candidate, it can easily be flipped right back in Romney’s face. Every single attack regarding every single issue. If you support Romney because of electability, then just say that as it is a legitimate stance. Otherwise, Romney has nothing else going for him.

Daemonocracy on October 5, 2011 at 6:28 PM

You not liking him and what you “think” about him are no excuse to accuse the man of corruption or distort the facts.

fixed*

Daemonocracy on October 5, 2011 at 6:29 PM

Comment pages: 1 2