New Perry ad: “Creating jobs”

posted at 10:05 am on October 26, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

Rick Perry has decided to focus on job creation in his new ad, a 30-second TV spot that will get hefty play in Iowa, where polling shows him deep in the second tier at the moment. Matt Lewis has the script for the ad, which highlights Perry’s best narrative as a public-sector executive that knows how to shape a political environment for explosive job creation:

It’s an effective ad, concise while covering the broad strokes of Perry’s economic platform. In fact, it’s so good that it prompts the question of why Perry didn’t start off his campaign running ads like these and sticking to this narrative, rather than go negative so early against Mitt Romney.

One ad on its own won’t turn things around for Perry, but a comprehensive economic plan may well do so. So far, Perry’s plan has won praise from the Wall Street Journal, although not unqualified support:

The Texas Governor would address the inevitable political attack that this would be “regressive” by allowing a $12,500 standard deduction per individual. This means that a family of four would pay no federal income tax until it earns $50,000 a year. This is a very generous exemption, and the Perry campaign couldn’t say what share of taxpayers would pay nothing at all. But it would be tens of millions, which reduces the tax base.

The standard deduction would also begin to phase out at $500,000 of income, which guarantees a higher effective tax rate for higher income taxpayers. This won’t be enough to satisfy the liberals at the Tax Policy Center that is portrayed by the media as “nonpartisan,” but Mr. Perry is sure trying.

Less defensible on equity grounds is Mr. Perry’s proposal to include deductions for mortgage interest, charitable contributions and state and local taxes even in his optional flat tax. This is intended to blunt political criticism from powerful lobbies that like their current breaks. …

All of this is bold enough that it will require an informed and articulate promoter, and the question about Mr. Perry is whether he can make that case better than he has so far been able to defend his Texas record. He’ll be helped by Steve Forbes, the original flat-tax proponent, who is now advising Mr. Perry and knows the attacks to come.

The good news is that Mr. Perry and most of his competitors are thinking big, with proposals that will reverse the U.S. slide to high-debt, slow-growth stagnation. President Obama wants to portray the economic debate as pro-growth government spenders vs. the austerity of budget cutting. But the real debate is over whether government or the private economy is the main engine of prosperity. The flat tax puts Republicans on the side of private growth and government reform, a potent combination. Perhaps Mr. Perry and his comrades can even coax Mitt Romney to join the party.

The WSJ notes that the proposal probably won’t raise as much money in static analysis as the current system, but also points out that Perry wants to cut spending back to 18% of GDP, which this tax system should be able to raise.  In two posts for AEI, economist Jim Pethokoukis runs the numbers both statically and dynamically, and comes to the conclusion that Perry’s plan could unlock explosive economic growth — which would solve the problem anyway:

2.  Under dynamic scoring, the Perry tax Plan (call it PTP-DS) would raise $1.7 trillion less than the unrealistic CBO baseline. But revenue would move above 19 percent — a historically high number — of GDP in 2019 and 2020.

3.  Under PTP-DS, the U.S. economy would be $3.5 trillion bigger in 2020 than under the CBO baseline forecast. And this gap would widen since CBO has some pretty sluggish growth forecasting moving forward. …

Bottom line: If a President Perry could balance the federal budget by 2020 and cap spending at 18 percent of GDP — and if you buy the JDA analysis — the result would be a more financially stable America and a richer America than the current economic and budgetary trajectory would indicate.

The WSJ’s point on the ability of Perry to sell this coherently still remains, however.  This is a comprehensive plan with lots of moving parts and complications, one that will have to stand up to a series of models, not all of which will be entirely favorable.  Perry’s earlier debate failures and his strange decision to spend time talking about Mitt Romney’s book rather than his own record doesn’t build a lot of confidence in his ability to defend this plan in detail, but we’ll see in the next few debates if Perry can turn that around.  If Perry can’t sell this plan himself, perhaps another Republican can pick up the standard and sell it in his stead in a general election, or something similar to it — like Newt Gingrich’s plan.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Isn’t it past your nap time, child?

Buy Danish on October 26, 2011 at 1:00 PM

You live alone, don’t you? I’m not surprised.

fossten on October 26, 2011 at 1:03 PM

In the tank as usual…nothing new here.

Chudi on October 26, 2011 at 1:04 PM

And like it or not, the indies WILL decide this elction and I j=know it galls you to no end, the GOP, even the TEA Party, will vote for the GOP nominee. Yes, even if it is Romney.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 1:03 PM

Sorry, but that is a weak analysis. Obama has ALREADY lost the indies. Pandering to them will only weaken the GOP candidate.

fossten on October 26, 2011 at 1:04 PM

fossten on October 26, 2011 at 12:59 PM

I thought all you obsessives were gone. I should have figured there would be one or two of you left that are so obsessed that you collect hundreds upon hundreds of the comments of your fellow HA members.

Criticizing the ad hominem attacks used by others is not an ad hominem attack. I expect them to leave the hater accusations out of it and deal with the merits of the comment.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 1:07 PM

Isn’t it past your nap time, child?

Buy Danish on October 26, 2011 at 1:00 PM

Not until you give me my firecracker honey.

Chicken?

cozmo on October 26, 2011 at 1:08 PM

Obama could, I think, make Perry look really bad in debates.
It would be a nightmare.
lorettawm on October 26, 2011 at 12:18 PM

This isn’t the finished product, he’s learning on the job. You have to remember Romney has had 6 years to perfect his campaigning for President schtick. There is a reason Perry is doing better (On the National stage) He’s picked up some new campaign advisers, that means he’s going to be getting more grooming to improve his performance. Would they have joined his team if they didn’t think he could carry the ball over the goal post?

Dr Evil on October 26, 2011 at 1:08 PM

I thought all you obsessives were gone. I should have figured there would be one or two of you left that are so obsessed that you collect hundreds upon hundreds of the comments of your fellow HA members.

Criticizing the ad hominem attacks used by others is not an ad hominem attack. I expect them to leave the hater accusations out of it and deal with the merits of the comment.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 1:07 PM

Name calling is ad hominem. You got caught in your own hypocrisy. Deal with it.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAH!

ABDICATE!!!!

GRAMMY!!!

OBSESS!!

fossten on October 26, 2011 at 1:11 PM

Good ad.

I doubt it will make up for those debate performances.

JohnGalt23 on October 26, 2011 at 1:11 PM

You comment is another example of your inability to grasp the finer points of a discussion.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 1:03 PM

Ah, I’m not edumacated in the art of nuance enough to understand all that is csdeven.

You are not actually a nutball. You just dress in nutball cloak in order to share your wisdom.

Sorry, I still don’t get it.

It must be the redneck in me. We don’t get get y’all big city intellectuals.

cozmo on October 26, 2011 at 1:13 PM

I criticize worshipers of any stripe….especially when they say really dumb things. Like you with you “hater” accusations. It is just plain dumb. I have never imagined hating a candidate, but you are very comfortable with the idea. You clearly have hated a candidate and are projecting that motive onto others who disagree with your candidate.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 12:54 PM

I think there is room for criticizm for each of them, for one reason or the other. Nothing wrong with that, so I agree with you.
There is no point in expressing hatred toward any Candidate nor to those that happen to support their choice. I’d rather discuss the pros & cons of the issues, the strengths & weaknessess of the Candidates. This is what the Primary season is for.

bluefox on October 26, 2011 at 1:15 PM

Not until you give me my firecracker honey.
cozmo on October 26, 2011 at 1:08 PM

Maybe you should be reading Hillbuzz.

Buy Danish on October 26, 2011 at 1:20 PM

Buy Danish on October 26, 2011 at 1:20 PM

Does that make you a tease then?

cozmo on October 26, 2011 at 1:22 PM

You live alone, don’t you? I’m not surprised.
fossten on October 26, 2011 at 1:03 PM

No dear, I don’t. Is there an actual, you know, point to anything you have said today or are you just bound and determined to tag team in the playpen with juvenile moron’s like Cozmo ?

Buy Danish on October 26, 2011 at 1:23 PM

fossten on October 26, 2011 at 1:11 PM

You’re one strange dude.

Andrew D on October 26, 2011 at 1:25 PM

cozmo on October 26, 2011 at 1:22 PM

Sorry that your sado-masochistic fantasies are about to be summarily crushed, but…Do you know what a “metaphor” is? Ask your mommy to explain it after you open the link. Maybe she can explain how the firecracker remark was a metaphor for you being jackass who belonged in a Looney Tune toon, and was not to be taken literally by you.

Buy Danish on October 26, 2011 at 1:28 PM

Obama has ALREADY lost the indies. Pandering to them will only weaken the GOP candidate.

fossten on October 26, 2011 at 1:04 PM

He has lost the indies to Romney. You nominate a dolt like Perry or Palin and they go running back to him in a heartbeat because his class warfare message will look pretty good in comparison.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 1:28 PM

He has lost the indies to Romney. You nominate a dolt like Perry or Palin and they go running back to him in a heartbeat because his class warfare message will look pretty good in comparison.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 1:28 PM

No, he’s lost the indies PERIOD. I guess you were asleep during the 2010 elections. Dolt, indeed.

And Palin isn’t running.

And Perry isn’t my first choice.

fossten on October 26, 2011 at 1:31 PM

Buy Danish on October 26, 2011 at 1:28 PM

It wasn’t my fantasy, it was yours. I’m just giving you the chance to make good on it.

I’m ready, c’mon honey.

It might be more fun than fluffing for Romney like you have been.

cozmo on October 26, 2011 at 1:31 PM

You’re one strange dude.

Andrew D on October 26, 2011 at 1:25 PM

I guess you’re either a) new here, or b) never clicked on a Palin thread before she said she wasn’t running.

fossten on October 26, 2011 at 1:32 PM

fossten on October 26, 2011 at 1:11 PM

Ad hominem attack is the attempt to defeat a persons argument by making hyperbolic accusations that have zero to do with the discussion. I attempt to silence no one….especially those who has a legitimate argument.

For instance, when the delusional wing of the St Palin the victimized congregation were in full meltdown mode all summer long, we rational folk tried to reason with them by explaining the reasons why she had no intention of running. They would respond by demanding who we supported, how old we were, what gender we were, calling us haters, etc. These were their attempts to shift away from the rational discussion that showed them to be in error by using hyperbolic accusations as a way to weaken the facts we were presenting. Those accusations etc had zero affect on what was factual.

That person who is using the word “hater” to describe someone who disagrees with their candidate is using the ad hominem attack to bolster their specious argument.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 1:39 PM

cozmo on October 26, 2011 at 1:13 PM

Those traits have nothing to do with ones ability to grasp the finer points of a discussion. What it requires is a desire to be intellectually honest. And I have seen my share of intellectual dishonesty from every stripe of person.

You have no desire to have an intellectually honest discussion with that person. That is a reflection on you and not on whatever part of this great country you are hailing from. Sorry if that disappoints you.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 1:42 PM

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 1:42 PM

Then your work is done here. Besides, its your turn to fluff Romney.

cozmo on October 26, 2011 at 1:45 PM

While I like both Perry’s and Newt’s tax reform plans, I want to see more focus on Perry’s economic plan. Opening up drilling, which should have been done years ago, can’t help but put millions back to work, and stimulate trickle down job growth with supporting industries. Since we are the world leader in refining crude, how nice would it be to lower pump prices to affordable levels without any influence from OPEC. Seems like a no-brainer to me…

stacman on October 26, 2011 at 1:49 PM

Ad hominem attack is the attempt to defeat a persons argument by making hyperbolic accusations that have zero to do with the discussion. I attempt to silence no one….especially those who has a legitimate argument.

For instance, when the delusional wing of the St Palin the victimized congregation

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 1:39 PM

There you go again. And by your own definition.

Ad hominem.

You can’t help yourself. And worse, you don’t even realize you’re doing it.

Hilarious.

fossten on October 26, 2011 at 1:52 PM

fossten on October 26, 2011 at 1:31 PM

Your first choice isn’t the issue I was referring to. Certainly Perry, or Plain, or Huntsman, or Bachmann, or Paul, et al are not appealing to the indies. Cain does have the potential to, but they haven’t crossed over long enough to give him front runner status. New Hampshire is the key.

As far as 2010 is concerned, I understand the indies helped, but the biggest factor was an energized base. We will have that in 2012, but the indies as always will be key. They just wont go for whomever the GOP nominee is. Especially after Obama decimates him in a debate.

Don’t forget that our opponent will not remain static. Whatever move the GOP makes he will counter. There will be good days and bad days. Days when we are sure we will win and days when we fear he will pull this out. A person who can debate him effectively will win.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 1:53 PM

Those traits have nothing to do with ones ability to grasp the finer points of a discussion. What it requires is a desire to be intellectually honest. And I have seen my share of intellectual dishonesty from every stripe of person.

You have no desire to have an intellectually honest discussion with that person. That is a reflection on you and not on whatever part of this great country you are hailing from. Sorry if that disappoints you.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 1:42 PM

This is ironic considering the way you treated the Palin/Paul Revere controversy.

Old and busted: Abdicate!1!!!

New hotness: Intellectually honest!!!!!1!11!

fossten on October 26, 2011 at 1:54 PM

fossten on October 26, 2011 at 1:52 PM

Explain how that is an attempt to bolster my argument that Palin was never going to run. That was a description of how they behaved and had nothing to do with their argument as to why she would run.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 1:55 PM

Your first choice isn’t the issue I was referring to. Certainly Perry, or Plain, or Huntsman, or Bachmann, or Paul, et al are not appealing to the indies. Cain does have the potential to, but they haven’t crossed over long enough to give him front runner status. New Hampshire is the key.

As far as 2010 is concerned, I understand the indies helped, but the biggest factor was an energized base. We will have that in 2012, but the indies as always will be key. They just wont go for whomever the GOP nominee is. Especially after Obama decimates him in a debate.

Don’t forget that our opponent will not remain static. Whatever move the GOP makes he will counter. There will be good days and bad days. Days when we are sure we will win and days when we fear he will pull this out. A person who can debate him effectively will win.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 1:53 PM

Sorry, but you’re wrong AGAIN.

Moving to the center to attract the indies is what a candidate thinks he must to do win the GENERAL.

Romney is moving to the left NOW.

You have yet to establish that the indies aren’t going to go for any of the candidates. You’re just guessing. The true polls won’t reveal anything until a candidate is chosen. Until then, you have split factions, most of which DON’T want Romney.

Your continual inability to recognize Obama as a weakened, extremely vulnerable candidate is what’s blinding you into the perception that Romney is the only one who can beat him.

Don’t just make wild assertions. Show your work.

fossten on October 26, 2011 at 1:57 PM

Explain how that is an attempt to bolster my argument that Palin was never going to run. That was a description of how they behaved and had nothing to do with their argument as to why she would run.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 1:55 PM

No, it was hyperbole. Your insulting, irrelevant, and OPINIONATED characterization of your opponents is what undercuts the credibility of your argument.

fossten on October 26, 2011 at 1:59 PM

fossten on October 26, 2011 at 1:57 PM

Look at Ohio, where Obama is leading all of our candidates. This is not going to be a cake walk and Romney does the best against him state by state and nationally. Those are just facts.

nswider on October 26, 2011 at 2:00 PM

With Perry’s record of primarily creating low-wage jobs for immigrants, are we going to have to import more illegals for the jobs he creates if he becomes President?

bw222 on October 26, 2011 at 2:05 PM

Look at Ohio, where Obama is leading all of our candidates. This is not going to be a cake walk and Romney does the best against him state by state and nationally. Those are just facts.

nswider on October 26, 2011 at 2:00 PM

No, they aren’t ‘just facts.’

Polls are a snapshot of real time responses to a pollster’s question. These particular polls are relatively meaningless because there isn’t a GOP candidate to coalesce around yet.

You need to go back and look at where Reagan was polling at this time or even right after his nomination.

And your ‘cake walk’ comment is a straw man because nobody is saying that. But you can’t predict who is more ‘electable’ now anyway. You’re just trusting the media to pick your candidate for you.

fossten on October 26, 2011 at 2:07 PM

I’d rather discuss the pros & cons of the issues, the strengths & weaknessess of the Candidates. This is what the Primary season is for.

bluefox on October 26, 2011 at 1:15 PM

We try, but inevitably it devolves into name calling and personal insults when one person can’t defend their side of the issue. I think some people get too personally invested in a candidate and take any criticism of that candidate as a personal criticism of themselves. We saw that demonstrated over the entire with certain supporters of a candidate that shall not be named.

I prefer Romney because I think he will beat Obama because the indies like him. I do not prefer Perry because he simply cannot hold up in a debate. Bachmann is too ideological. Newt’s personal baggage is scary, but I could still go with him. Cain looks real good. He connects with regular folks and his gaffes don’t seem to hurt him. I question his commitment because he hasn’t focused on his ground organization and he doesn’t seem to have a firm following of indies.

But as always, things could change and I could be supporting Perry et al in the primary.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 2:07 PM

Look at Ohio, where Obama is leading all of our candidates. This is not going to be a cake walk and Romney does the best against him state by state and nationally. Those are just facts.

nswider on October 26, 2011 at 2:00 PM

I agree with half your premise. With the universally positive coverage (some might say cheerleading) Obama receives from MSM, it won’t be a cakewalk.

Romney, on the other hand …. We don’t need Romney (Obama Lite) or Perry (George W. Bush, Jr.).

bw222 on October 26, 2011 at 2:08 PM

We try, but inevitably it devolves into name calling and personal insults when one person can’t defend their side of the issue. I think some people get too personally invested in a candidate and take any criticism of that candidate as a personal criticism of themselves. We saw that demonstrated over the entire with certain supporters of a candidate that shall not be named.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 2:07 PM

Hypocrite. You’re the first person to call people ‘loons’ and ‘freaks’ when they disagree with you.

fossten on October 26, 2011 at 2:10 PM

bw222 on October 26, 2011 at 2:08 PM

Ok so you like Cain Im guessing? I like him too, I just dont think hes serious.

fossten on October 26, 2011 at 2:07 PM

Not true, I like Romney for business and practical reasons. I know polls are snap shots, but the reality right now is, most people dont like Perry and hes the other choice. As much as I like Cain, its a Romney/Perry race. The ads Cain runs the lack of instate infrastructure, hes not serious.

nswider on October 26, 2011 at 2:12 PM

No, it was hyperbole. Your insulting, irrelevant, and OPINIONATED characterization of your opponents is what undercuts the credibility of your argument.

fossten on October 26, 2011 at 1:59 PM

Hyperbole isn’t necessarily ad hominem. And calling the loons what they are NEVER weakened or strengthened the FACT that Palin was NEVER going to run. Those comments were basically tweaking the nose of the Palin loons because they couldn’t be reached with rational discussion and watching them go apoplectic did help some realize that they were being irrational. For many it didn’t wise them up and they are behaving the same way now.

Additionally, I am opinionated, as are you. The difference is that I make sense and you are a reactionary crybaby.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 2:12 PM

Additionally, I am opinionated, as are you. The difference is that I make sense and you are a reactionary crybaby.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 2:12 PM

And there it is, again.

And I’m not crying – I’m laughing.

At you.

Bye now, wasteoftime.

fossten on October 26, 2011 at 2:15 PM

Not true, I like Romney for business and practical reasons. I know polls are snap shots, but the reality right now is, most people dont like Perry and hes the other choice. As much as I like Cain, its a Romney/Perry race. The ads Cain runs the lack of instate infrastructure, hes not serious.

nswider on October 26, 2011 at 2:12 PM

All polls are propaganda designed to lead the masses opinion rather than gauge them
Some pollsters are worst than others. Quinny is one of them.
Gfk is about the worse…actually started after Hilter came into power to convince the Germans that all other Germans support him completely. This insured no one would rise up against the Nazis’
All pollsters lie, even Rasmussen. They only produce polls against their partisan bent when the issue at hand is not at the forefront. This is how they develop the illusion of “independent and non-partisan”
Gallup , as they have done in the past, will produce polls where their man is “low” in approval , then as the election nears, ones that make it seem he is “gaining’
Only the few weeks before the election (and only poll that matters -the one in the election booth)do pollsters start to be honest with their results as a matter of survial…they don’t want to be the one thats far off the election results.
Pollsters claim this is the last minute deciders , as if people who are going to end up voting decide what they think right at the end.
Stop promoting polls you agree with, they are often only produced to get you to accept their later polls
Instead , demand demographics and methods and ALL RAW DATA , including the names of the people physically conducting the polls.
Only then can their data be verified with any degree of certainty
LeeSeneca on October 26, 2011 at 1:59 PM

fossten on October 26, 2011 at 2:16 PM

Hypocrite. You’re the first person to call people ‘loons’ and ‘freaks’ when they disagree with you.

fossten on October 26, 2011 at 2:10 PM

Rational people have rational disagreements. Ergo they are not called loons and freaks.

Do you not understand the difference between a rational discussion and the irrational rantings of someone who cannot admit the truth about their candidates weaknesses? That was a common trait among the delusional wing of the St Palin the victimized congregation.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 2:17 PM

fossten on October 26, 2011 at 2:16 PM

I agree its the votes that matter, but Im not promoting the ones “I agree with” its just the most recent poll.

nswider on October 26, 2011 at 2:18 PM

Bye now, wasteoftime.

fossten on October 26, 2011 at 2:15 PM

Awwwww….did the wittle baby get his fweelings hurt? Go ask your grammy to change your diaper and make you some warm milk and cookies.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 2:18 PM

or Perry (George W. Bush, Jr.).

bw222 on October 26, 2011 at 2:08 PM

I did not want to make the argument that Perry would remind too many people of Bush. The first time I heard him speak, I thought it was GW. I don’t make the argument that we shouldn’t nominate him for that reason although I admit it was my first reaction when first I heard him. And I had no clue what his platform was.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 2:21 PM

When Palin was the stick stirring the drink, we were told that we could not accept her because she was way down in the polls.

Now that Herman is way up in the polls, we are being told that we cannot accept him because he is not intellectually sharp like Hossy Rick and Fox News Newt.

Well, yesterday’s ad by Cain’s campaign Manager Block was as smart an ad as I have seen in 30 years.

Cain is out winning new GOP voters from blue collar whites and middle class blacks while the Perry Machine and Newt, Inc. play slow catch up. Both of those intellects are suddenly touting a Bold Tax Reform that appeared under their pillow from Tooth Fairy Forbes right after Herman knocked their teeth in with his 9-9-9 Plan.

jimw on October 26, 2011 at 2:22 PM

Then your work is done here. Besides, its your turn to fluff Romney.

cozmo on October 26, 2011 at 1:45 PM

I had to look that up. I have seen that used several times and I assume it is always you. Your fascination with that is out of place here, but I’m sure there are websites out there where you can get your jollies with others who are like minded.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 2:25 PM

Awwwww….did the wittle baby get his fweelings hurt? Go ask your grammy to change your diaper and make you some warm milk and cookies.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 2:18 PM

Nope. I just have more important things to do than continue to demonstrate what an absolute dimwit you are…like clean the grease off my oven blower.

fossten on October 26, 2011 at 2:26 PM

Rational people have rational disagreements. Ergo they are not called loons and freaks.

Do you not understand the difference between a rational discussion and the irrational rantings of someone who cannot admit the truth about their candidates weaknesses? That was a common trait among the delusional wing of the St Palin the victimized congregation.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 2:17 PM

This will be my last comment on the matter.

Until you can demonstrate that you are clinically qualified to diagnose a ‘loon’ or ‘freak’ on the internet, you are using ad hominem. And as long as you continue to call names and ridicule, you are using an irrational argument. That is beyond dispute.

Bye.

fossten on October 26, 2011 at 2:28 PM

Cain is out winning new GOP voters from blue collar whites and middle class blacks while the Perry Machine and Newt, Inc. play slow catch up. Both of those intellects are suddenly touting a Bold Tax Reform that appeared under their pillow from Tooth Fairy Forbes right after Herman knocked their teeth in with his 9-9-9 Plan.

jimw on October 26, 2011 at 2:22 PM

Yeah, I have to agree with most of that. And Cain is keeping it on the issue whereas Perry says he wants to discuss the issues one minute and in the next he announces that our TV’s are going to bleed from the negative attacks he is going to engage in. Going negative will never make up for his dismal debate performances and inability to articulate his positions.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 2:28 PM

Bye.

fossten on October 26, 2011 at 2:28 PM

I’m glad a new diaper and warm milk and cookies have caused you to rethink your threat to go bye-bye.

Of course the loon and freak comments add nothing to rational discussion. But it is all you deserve when you start behaving like a loon and a freak.

Buh-bye.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 2:31 PM

When is Herman Cain going to release similar ads?

Punchenko on October 26, 2011 at 2:33 PM

I had to look that up.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 2:25 PM

And here I go and find something easy…and you still have to look it up. Lapdog doesn’t have to anything. I gave y’all a little credit by fluffing his pillows.

cozmo on October 26, 2011 at 2:35 PM

Can someone explain what “dynamic” and “static” scoring mean?

nukemhill on October 26, 2011 at 10:58 AM

Static scoring means assuming that people’s business, work, and spending habits will not change due to changes in the tax system–that GDP and unemployment and corporate profits will be the same regardless of the tax system, and re-calculate tax revenues based on the status quo.

Dynamic scoring tries to account for people’s reaction to a new tax code. For example, if the corporate tax rate is reduced from 35% to 20%, in the first year after-tax profits increase from 65% to 80% of pre-tax profits, or 23% over the previous year’s after-tax profits. If the price/earnings ratio in the stock market remains constant, then the stock market rises by 23%, causing a huge influx of money into mutual funds, away from banks paying ridiculously low interest rates on savings. Even if the capital-gains tax rate remains the same, Federal revenues from the capital-gains tax will increase due to more money invested in the stock market. Dynamic scoring attempts to quantify changes in tax revenues due to changes in economic behavior. It’s an inexact science, but the predictions are closer to reality than assuming that people don’t react to changes in the tax code.

Steve Z on October 26, 2011 at 2:45 PM

I like Newt performance in this primary so far, but he’s got baggage, that can’t be ignored or rationalized or dismissed out of hand. No doubt in the General election it would be used against him.

Dr Evil on October 26, 2011 at 11:14 AM

The problem I have with Newt’s baggage is not so much the baggage itself, but how he handles it when it comes up. Not well. He never addresses anything he has done directly, acknowledges it was wrong or even expresses any personal regret about it- just tries to slough it off by saying he has “grown up” and such, then seems offended that anyone would bring it up. And that’s during softball interviews like one the other night I saw on Hannity, where Sean didn’t even refer specifically to his baggage but called them “issues” or something- he was really dancing around the way he worded it.

When confronted directly, even about the Tiffany’s thing a while back (which definitely was stupid), Newt gets visibly angry. I can’t imagine how he’d react if asked by a liberal media jerk about cheating on his wife, and you know he would. I just don’t think he could handle it. That’s only my opinion. But thought I’d throw it in for consideration since I haven’t seen any mention of it.

kg598301 on October 26, 2011 at 2:49 PM

kg598301 on October 26, 2011 at 2:49 PM

His current wife is also a big albatross around his neck too. 500,000 dollar Tiffany credit lines and the fact many members of his staff left months ago citing her specifically is not good for Newt.

nswider on October 26, 2011 at 2:51 PM

cozmo on October 26, 2011 at 2:35 PM

Uh huh. Anyone who read what you wrote understood the context if they knew what fluffing was. But it’s okay for you to flip-flop on it now. We all understand that NOW when you say fluffing, you mean fluffing his pillows. Certainly a analogy you made up right?

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 2:55 PM

Obama could, I think, make Perry look really bad in debates.
It would be a nightmare.
lorettawm on October 26, 2011 at 12:18 PM

I’m not so sure of that. By the end of his term he’ll have so little to stand on that I thing darn near anyone will be able to shoot him up. Plus, he can’t really speak worth a squat without a teleprompter, in reality he screws up quite a bit when speaking extemporaneously.

kg598301 on October 26, 2011 at 2:59 PM

Certainly a analogy you made up right?

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 2:55 PM

Huh, you would prefer lapdog to fluffer?

cozmo on October 26, 2011 at 3:05 PM

Obama could, I think, make Perry look really bad in debates.
It would be a nightmare.
lorettawm on October 26, 2011 at 12:18 PM

Just wanted to add to those thoughts, that BO is in no way used to getting torn up the way our nominee will be when the primaries are over. He’s had the media kissing his butt for almost 3 years, so when he’s attacked in the debates he’ll be at that disadvantage for sure. Glad our side is sharpening its teeth right now, what they are doing to each other will be tame compared to what the media will do to our candidate in the general.

kg598301 on October 26, 2011 at 3:11 PM

Huh, you would prefer lapdog to fluffer?

cozmo on October 26, 2011 at 3:05 PM

If you’re going to use hyperbole in place of debate, lapdog would be more appropriate for this site don’t you think?

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 3:18 PM

His current wife is also a big albatross around his neck too. 500,000 dollar Tiffany credit lines and the fact many members of his staff left months ago citing her specifically is not good for Newt.

nswider on October 26, 2011 at 2:51 PM

Jewelry is a good thing. lol.

I think she’s mostly an albatross because he is oversensitive about her, and she seems to call the shots when he should be calling them (being diplomatic).

kg598301 on October 26, 2011 at 3:26 PM

If you’re going to use hyperbole in place of debate, lapdog would be more appropriate for this site don’t you think?

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 3:18 PM

You Perryhatin’ nutballs abandoned debate a long time ago. I would think y’all would prefer fluffer to lapdog. That’s why I use it, dogs can’t type. Neither can y’all sometimes, but we can get the gist of the rant most of the time.

cozmo on October 26, 2011 at 3:30 PM

cozmo on October 26, 2011 at 3:30 PM

I haven’t seen anyone hate on Perry. I have seen legitimate criticisms of Perry as an inarticulate 2 dimensional candidate that supports magnets for illegals and making parents jump through hoops to assert their rights. I have also heard him call the base heartless and make ridiculous attacks that have no basis in fact. I have heard him get involved in the birther issue and whine about the candidates fighting and in the next breath level attacks at other candidates.

And in response to all those legitimate criticisms, you call people haters. Considering that fact, it isn’t so surprising that you are fixated on the practice of fluffing.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 3:49 PM

Man this was a good ad. Good work team Perry. Keep it up.

kerrhome on October 26, 2011 at 3:50 PM

I haven’t seen anyone hate on Perry.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 3:49 PM

Bless your heart. Of course you haven’t.

Now go fluff something.

cozmo on October 26, 2011 at 3:55 PM

cozmo on October 26, 2011 at 3:55 PM

You are more than welcome to provide the link. That is if you aren’t too distracted with your bizarre fantasies. Did you find a website where you can exorcise those demons yet? You really should before you say something you can’t take back.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 4:05 PM

cozmo on October 26, 2011 at 1:31 PM

All I want you to do is STFU.

Buy Danish on October 26, 2011 at 4:06 PM

All I want you to do is STFU.

Buy Danish on October 26, 2011 at 4:06 PM

Aw, where’s the love. Kissie kissie. Now go fluff something.

cozmo on October 26, 2011 at 4:08 PM

All I want you to do is STFU.

Buy Danish on October 26, 2011 at 4:06 PM

He really isn’t serious ya know. His focus seems to be on being a fluffer and not really concerned with intelligent debate. I’m pretty sure he just picks random websites to comment in so he can talk about being a fluffer. It’s a political website today, and a cooking website the next, etc, etc, etc.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 4:10 PM

I watched Perry on Cavuto yesterday, he made the dumb statement that the UN doesnt have the best interest of the USA at heart. WHAT? Ya think? its not supposed to. Didn’t sound like he knows his foreign policy.

ColdWarrior57 on October 26, 2011 at 4:12 PM

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 4:10 PM

That’s nice, y’all can fluff together and then hold hands in the moonlight.

cozmo on October 26, 2011 at 4:13 PM

That’s nice, y’all can fluff together and then hold hands in the moonlight.

cozmo on October 26, 2011 at 4:13 PM

Why exactly would you create THAT fantasy in your head about your fellow HA members that you will never meet? And additionally, why embarrass yourself by admitting it on a public forum? Seriously dude, none of us comment at Hot Air for that kind of discussion. You certainly cannot think you’ll get a date out of it.

I think perhaps you are the type of person who wants to force yourself and your fantasies on unwilling decent folks. Your advances are not wanted and you should cease doing so.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 4:20 PM

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 4:20 PM

But, but, but…buydansihstuff wanted to bring her fantasies to life.

Ya’ say it isn’t real? P-shaw. Y’all Perryhaters are real teases. never follow through. Never finish the job. Just a little fluffing and away y’all go to the next round of Perryhatin’.

cozmo on October 26, 2011 at 4:24 PM

New polls out. Cain peaked and is on his way back down. Who’s up next? Newt or is Perry coming back?

kerrhome on October 26, 2011 at 4:31 PM

New polls out. Cain peaked and is on his way back down. Who’s up next? Newt or is Perry coming back?

kerrhome on October 26, 2011 at 4:31 PM

Link?

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 4:37 PM

New polls out. Cain peaked and is on his way back down. Who’s up next? Newt or is Perry coming back?

kerrhome on October 26, 2011 at 4:31 PM

Saw that on Drudge – Romney up in first four states.

gophergirl on October 26, 2011 at 4:42 PM

Okay, here is the link……

Those [email protected] RINO scum in Iowa, SC, and Florida!!!!

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 4:44 PM

Good ad. Short and Sweet.

Perry’s numbers in IA are on the upswing again: he’s gained 3 pts from 7% to 10%. I’m so glad to see any upward movement. Not to mention Cain’s implosion which is in earnest this week (there were signs of it last week, too). Cain’s down 11 pts in NH.

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on October 26, 2011 at 5:16 PM

He really isn’t serious ya know. His focus seems to be on being a fluffer and not really concerned with intelligent debate.
csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 4:10 PM

The fact that he contributes nothing but pre-K commentary is precisely why I want him to STFU. Honestly, it takes a child to make endless references to fluffers. Only children eat Marshmallow Fluff and fluffernutters and make jokes on this level. It wasn’t funny the first time and it’s not any funnier after he/she/it repeated the “joke” for the gazillionth time. And now the poor child is having a tantrum because I compared him to a cartoon character who gets blown up by dynamite.

Buy Danish on October 26, 2011 at 5:19 PM

tantrum because I compared him to a cartoon character who gets blown up by dynamite.

Buy Danish on October 26, 2011 at 5:19 PM

Tantrum is another one of those words that doesn’t mean what you think it means. I am having a blast, figuratively since you won’t come do what you want to do, with you Romney nutballs. Now that y’all have each other for mutual support your puffiness has increased in direct correlation to the decline in y’all’s coherence.

Bless your heart, now go fluff some more.

cozmo on October 26, 2011 at 5:34 PM

But as always, things could change and I could be supporting Perry et al in the primary.

csdeven on October 26, 2011 at 2:07 PM

Thanks. You’ve explained nicely why you are supporting Romney and the issues with the others. I think we each perhaps through researching about the various Candidates may see something that others may not see. Romney, Perry & Cain and possibly Newt seem to be in the running. I support Perry because I think he is more Conservative than the rest of the field. Had he entered the race earlier he would have done better. I like Cain, but I think he speaks before thinking. He handled that “rock” issue badly & saying he would not support Gov. Perry if he was the Nominee was not good. Newt is sharp and knows so much, but don’t know if his past can be overcome. Romney concerns me by changing his opinions too much and that Health Care Issue, but everyone says he would be best in the debates with B.O. I didn’t like how he allowed his Advisers to make statements that twisted Gov. Perry’s policy on S.S. I didn’t like Rollins comment about Palin and Bachmann not saying a word either.

One thing about the Primary season, we’re learning a lot about the various Candidates and that’s a good thing:-)

I’m voting for whoever is the R Nominee, no matter who it is. Staying home and not voting is what elected B.O. I held my nose for McCain, like many I’m sure:-)

Frankly I don’t like the way the Primaries are set up. Each State wants to be first and all of this changing the dates is a mess. I’d prefer to have a National Primary and all States vote on the same day!!

bluefox on October 26, 2011 at 5:50 PM

Perry’s numbers in IA are on the upswing again: he’s gained 3 pts from 7% to 10%. I’m so glad to see any upward movement. Not to mention Cain’s implosion which is in earnest this week (there were signs of it last week, too). Cain’s down 11 pts in NH.

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on October 26, 2011 at 5:16 PM

Glad to see Perry making some headway in IA:-) I thot that new ad by Perry was awesome with those videos!!

I’ve seen a couple of polls today and some are conflicting with each other. Saw one that said Cain was leading in Ohio, another said B.O. was beating Romney, Perry & Cain in Ohio, LOL

Former Secretary of State Ken Blackwell endorsed Perry. He was one of the backers of a SuperPac for Bachmann. Also one of Bachmann’s N.H. Staff signed on to the Perry Campaign. Hope Perry is careful, since Bachmann attacks Perry all of the time.

bluefox on October 26, 2011 at 6:00 PM

Former Secretary of State Ken Blackwell endorsed Perry. He was one of the backers of a SuperPac for Bachmann. Also one of Bachmann’s N.H. Staff signed on to the Perry Campaign. Hope Perry is careful, since Bachmann attacks Perry all of the time.

bluefox on October 26, 2011 at 6:00 PM

Thanks for the info about Blackwell endorsing Perry, I hadn’t read that! I’ve always liked Blackwell. Woohoo :)

Aslans Girl on October 26, 2011 at 9:52 PM

Perry must be a Texas thang…I don’t get him and I’m obviously not alone. Weak tea.

DanaSmiles on October 26, 2011 at 10:13 PM

DanaSmiles on October 26, 2011 at 10:13 PM

I’m in Illinois, born and bred, and I love Perry.

Aslans Girl on October 26, 2011 at 10:36 PM

Sorry, but that is a weak analysis. Obama has ALREADY lost the indies. Pandering to them will only weaken the GOP candidate.

fossten on October 26, 2011 at 1:04 PM

Clinton got whipped by the indies in 1994, yet he won enough back to get reelected.

Most of the independents aren’t people of strong conviction, they are just swing voters with no particularly strong party allegiance. Many make up their minds late, and Obama is planning on raising $1 billion and using the full power of the federal government to damage our nominee.

We’re going to nominate one of three guys: Romney, Perry, or Cain. Gingrich just isn’t likable enough to win a general election, and lacks serious administrative experience.

The thought of Romney brings me no joy as a conservative, but unless Perry and/or Cain get their acts together by the time South Carolina votes, I’ll go with Romney, because right now neither one of them stand a snowball’s chance in Al Gore’s hot tub of withstanding the Obama smear machine. Overconfidence is suicidally stupid at this point.

Our nominee is going to have to be able to speak clearly about the problems we face, in general terms the necessity of cuts and entitlement reform to address those problems, and not make a lot of mistakes during the campaign. So far . . . no one has shown they can do that credibly. None of them.

Adjoran on October 27, 2011 at 1:27 AM

We definitely need to massively increase oil and gas exploration and remove cumbersome regulations holding us back from acheiving drastic reductions in the price of energy and particularly gasoline in this country. That one thing will provide a huge jolt of life to this economy, maybe even more than revoking Obamacare would do. I’m wondering if only a guy from Texas can set us on a track to energy independence.

Dollayo on October 27, 2011 at 2:51 AM

cAIN 12

And yes.. Cain has had some gaffs.. but they were amateur politician kind of mispeaks .. like going in front of tv cameras w/o makeup kind of mistakes .. or wearing a hat on tv.. or throwing a punch at a reporter because he asked your wife’s cup size..

NOT HUGE idealogical State legislative decisions that Perry and Romney have made.

I bought my first Cain grass roots package yesterday.. some bumper stickers, some yard signs and some other goodies..

amend2 on October 27, 2011 at 10:39 PM

Comment pages: 1 2