Perry backer bails over Bain attacks

posted at 1:20 pm on January 12, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Rick Perry has been campaigning in South Carolina since the Iowa caucuses, looking for a game-changer.  He may have found one, but not in the nature he was seeking.  As a consequence of joining Newt Gingrich’s attack on Mitt Romney over his private-equity experience, one of Perry’s big donors has quit — and switched to Romney:

One of Rick Perry’s leading financial supporters in South Carolina is defecting to Mitt Romney – and he told CNN Thursday that Perry’s sharp criticisms of Romney as a “vulture capitalist” were the main factor in his decision. …

Barry Wynn, the former chairman of the South Carolina Republican Party and a financial adviser in Spartanburg, said the escalating rhetoric about Romney’s business background is “destructive.”

“It’s just a dance I didn’t want to be a part of,” Wynn said in an interview, explaining his decision to leave Perry’s campaign.

Wynn, along with a handful of other previously neutral South Carolina moneymen, will publicly endorse Romney on Thursday.

“This latest attack, it’s so foreign to me, I couldn’t see myself being a part of that,” he explained. “I don’t think you can be on both sides of free market capitalism. A big part of me being a Republican for the last 40 years is that I think it’s the best hope to protect free market capitalism, the growth engine of our economy.”

There could be some populist cred for Perry if big donors tied to Wall Street start leaving him, but that’s a big trade-off for the funding Perry desperately needs in South Carolina.  If he can’t put ads on the air and compete with Romney, Santorum, and Gingrich, then Perry won’t go anywhere in his last-gasp effort to stay in the race. He’s already at the bottom of the pack in the latest Insider Advantage poll, at 5%.  Even Jon Huntsman scores better than Perry in South Carolina, at 7%.

The defection of Wynn looks a like a more principled version of what happened to Michele Bachmann in the last few days of the Iowa campaign. It’s likely to produce the same effect for Perry in South Carolina as it did for Bachmann in Iowa, which is to create the impression of an imploding campaign.


Related Posts:

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 3 4 5 6

Notices that she criticizes him for jobs that he “killed.” It’s as if it’s immoral to kill private sector jobs.

But, by all means, tell us all what she meant.

blink on January 12, 2012 at 6:23 PM

1. Nothing wrong at all with venture capitalism…It’s the American Way & I’m all for entrepreneurs and sensible fair and consistent regulation that doesn’t constrict growth.

2. There are political realities.

3. Romney’s record at Bain is mixed an both the company and Romney are secretive.

4. In a bad economy such as this Romney is the weakest candidate and his electability has been exposed as a media generated myth based on how telegenic he seems.

workingclass artist on January 12, 2012 at 6:38 PM

Your argument is stupid.

You should be proud of your Fallacious Argument Progressive Liberal Pin award.

You should be proud of your Lying Scumbag of the Year Award.

blink on January 12, 2012 at 6:34 PM

You seem to use that word quite frequently lately. It obviously does not mean what you think it does.

astonerii on January 12, 2012 at 6:39 PM

Wow. This is just the most blatant of lies.

Any credibility you may have had left is not completely gone.

blink on January 12, 2012 at 6:36 PM

Well that’s what Mitt said in front of God and everybody live on Tevee…

Rush responded Lord Help Us!

mitt sucks…face it.

workingclass artist on January 12, 2012 at 6:42 PM

blink on January 12, 2012 at 6:40 PM

Perry didn’t take the pundit strawman bait. He’s goin after Mitt’s record of job creation not capitalism and it’s fair cause Mitt put it on the table.

workingclass artist on January 12, 2012 at 6:43 PM

It most certainly means you. Scumbag means you, too.

blink on January 12, 2012 at 6:44 PM

I really thought the money Soros was giving Obama he could hire better guns than the likes of you. Oh well, we do with what we got, and it is a shame we got you.

astonerii on January 12, 2012 at 6:45 PM

This should give Rick some thought I think. He needs to start talking about why he should be prez and not why Romney shouldn’t.

jeanie on January 12, 2012 at 6:46 PM

No, you’re lying about what he said.

blink on January 12, 2012 at 6:44 PM

Where is your backup? they fire the other guys or are they on lunch break. I mean you cannot even defend with anything supportive of your argument? So totally sad.

astonerii on January 12, 2012 at 6:46 PM

Are you seriously sticking with trying to claim that I’m getting paid by Obama???

What is it with you dimwits?

blink on January 12, 2012 at 6:47 PM

It just kind of fits. It is either that or you live off Obama’s food stamps. I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt…

astonerii on January 12, 2012 at 6:48 PM

blink on January 12, 2012 at 6:43 PM

In this political climate Mitt is the weakest candidate.

His governing record sucks.
His persona sucks.
His plans Suck.
His private sector record bombs with the working class.
He’s alienated the Latino Base.
He’s tied to Wall St.

Yep…except for Peta that probably covers it.

Liberals will howl with delight facing Mittens

workingclass artist on January 12, 2012 at 6:48 PM

It just kind of fits. It is either that or you live off Obama’s food stamps. I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt…

astonerii on January 12, 2012 at 6:48 PM

Seriously?

CW on January 12, 2012 at 6:49 PM

Love it . There are about 4 people repeating the same arguments over and over changing no minds. Rant on people.

CW on January 12, 2012 at 6:50 PM

This should give Rick some thought I think. He needs to start talking about why he should be prez and not why Romney shouldn’t.

jeanie on January 12, 2012 at 6:46 PM

He’s been ding that. On the stump he talk about his plans,record and Obama.

The media is highlighting this because Newt and Perry have struck a nerve.

workingclass artist on January 12, 2012 at 6:51 PM

The media is highlighting this because Newt and Perry handed all liberals a gift.

blink on January 12, 2012 at 6:53 PM

No the liberals have Teddy’s ads.

Ron Paul has been playing them in SC.

workingclass artist on January 12, 2012 at 6:57 PM

Perry has lost a major donor over this,so far. Looks as if this negative message is all folks are noticing. Not very constructive I’d say. Too late to recover? Too late for Newt for sure.

jeanie on January 12, 2012 at 6:59 PM

There could be some populist cred for Perry if big donors tied to Wall Street start leaving him

Huh? The SC voters are going to hear the solid conservatives with money ripping up Perry for talking like some OWS dipsh!t and he’s going to flatline very, very quickly.

The notion of a candidate getting “populist cred” because conservatives despise his idiot MoveOn rhetoric is sort of a stretch, don’t you think, Ed? I think the OWS voters are pretty reliably left of left…

Jaibones on January 12, 2012 at 7:01 PM

Perry has lost a major donor over this…
jeanie on January 12, 2012 at 6:59 PM

I doubt he as a major donor…but so what?

“And the idea that they have the right to dictate what’s acceptable in terms of criticizing Mitt Romney is an insult to every free-thinking conservative who has the temerity to support any other candidate.

When you read all the condemnations of Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry for damaging Mitt’s chances in the general election, just take a look at this mailer and ask yourself how concerned Mitt was about hurting anyone else’s chances.

http://www.damndirtyrino.com/2012/01/12/mitt-romneys-capitalism/

workingclass artist on January 12, 2012 at 7:05 PM

“Only Rick Perry combines effective executive experience, a proven record of economic vitality, a consistently conservative set of social values, and the structure and fund-raising capacity to defeat Romney in the primary and Obama in the general. He or Santorum could blunt some of the Ron Paul mania and keep many conservatives from defecting to Paul. But Perry finished fifth in Iowa, was barely a blip in New Hampshire, and is polling at five percent in South Carolina.

The odds of Perry getting a second wind may be astronomical, but those are the odds social conservatives face. There is no other alternative.This is not an endorsement, just an observation: it’s either Rick Perry or four more years of Barack Obama.”

http://www.afa.net/Blogs/BlogPost.aspx?id=2147515807

workingclass artist on January 12, 2012 at 7:10 PM

In this political climate Mitt is the weakest candidate.

His governing record sucks.
His persona sucks.
His plans Suck.
His private sector record bombs with the working class.
He’s alienated the Latino Base.
He’s tied to Wall St.

Yep…except for Peta that probably covers it.

Liberals will howl with delight facing Mittens

workingclass artist on January 12, 2012 at 6:48 PM

I know you are a troll, so this is for everyone else:
Gallup- Today- Nationwide Poll
Romney – 34%
Santorum – 15%
Gingrich – 14%
Paul – 13%
Perry – They didn’t list a # for him, or Huntsman

Haldol on January 12, 2012 at 7:12 PM

Bite the hand that feeds you.

Philly on January 12, 2012 at 7:16 PM

Huh? The SC voters are going to hear the solid conservatives with money ripping up Perry for talking like some OWS dipsh!t and he’s going to flatline very, very quickly. Jaibones on January 12, 2012 at 7:01 PM

“”He appears looser and more confident than he has been for some time, perhaps since the days when he was considered a front-runner, which ended with his string of poor debate performances,” it continued.

This was the Rick Perry who appeared on my show on Wednesday, eager to talk about the Keystone XL pipeline, President Obama’s proposed radical downsizing of the military, and of course, Mitt Romney. The complete transcript is here.

At the end of the conversation I asked Perry about the debates. The exchange is revealing:

HH: You just mentioned the “people on the stage.” I must say, your patience with these moderators is admirable, Governor. I honestly do not know how you get through a David Gregory debate, or George Stephanopoulos debate without laughing. What’s going on in your mind when you hear their loaded questions?

RP: Well obviously, this is all about reality TV, and frankly, making money for the networks. I mean, we’ve basically become pawns of the media from the standpoint of, you know, we’re not talking about the issues in a one minute reflection, frankly, on some very, very idiotic questions. I mean, the idea about contraceptives that was asked the other night was just off the scale from the standpoint of being of any importance in this country. So you know, it is what it is, and we’re going to continue on. One of the reasons we’re involved with so much retail politics in South Carolina is that I want to talk directly to the people. We’re having open, lengthy discussions at all of these events that we’re doing, and I feel pretty confident that the South Carolina voter is paying attention, and they’re looking for an outsider, not one of these insiders either on Wall Street or Washington, D.C., to lead this country, somebody that’s got a track record of creating jobs and of cutting the tax burden and the regulatory burden. The insiders? They’ve had their chance. And it’s time to have an outsider come in and overhaul Washington, D.C.

Perry is right to condemn the wagon train of debates hosted by, for the most part, activist journalists from pro-Obama networks and often, as with Stephanopoulos and Gregory, obvious agendas that were rolled out in hope of benefiting not just ratings but also President Obama.

It is an absurd way for Republicans to pick a GOP nominee, just as is the participation of non-Republicans in the Republican caucuses and primary of Iowa and New Hampshire respectively.

The Texas governor has staked his comeback on retail politics in South Carolina, and he’s surrounded himself with some retired Navy SEALs, his loyal staff and a firm belief that his long tenure at the top in Texas will speak for him better than he has in the contrived settings of the debates.

It may work. He will need at least a strong third place to persuade donors to come back. He’s battling two other candidates asking to be named the last “real conservative” standing in Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum, and absentees are already being processed by the tens of thousands in Florida where the last of January’s contests will be held.

But one thing is for certain: Rick Perry doesn’t have a glass jaw. Texas tough is real, and it is working the small towns and out-of-the-way places of South Carolina, hoping to surprise the country on Saturday, January 21…”

http://townhall.com/columnists/hughhewitt/2012/01/12/rick_perrys_long_march/page/full/

workingclass artist on January 12, 2012 at 7:17 PM

Haldol on January 12, 2012 at 7:12 PM

That’s a lie. In that poll, Gallup lists Perry at 5% and Huntsman at 2%. It’s on Real Clear Politics for all to see here:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on January 12, 2012 at 7:20 PM

But one thing is for certain: Rick Perry doesn’t have a glass jaw. Texas tough is real, and it is working the small towns and out-of-the-way places of South Carolina, hoping to surprise the country on Saturday, January 21…”

http://townhall.com/columnists/hughhewitt/2012/01/12/rick_perrys_long_march/page/full/

workingclass artist on January 12, 2012 at 7:17 PM

he won’t surprise anybody though when he drops and goes home already…enough inanity and ‘foot-in-mouth’ coming from that man…

jimver on January 12, 2012 at 7:21 PM

Haldol on January 12, 2012 at 7:12 PM

So aside from your feeble troll insult your big news is that some media poll Perry and Huntsman were left off the poll or something?

Impressive.

NPR said Perry was the former Governor of Texas in a report today.

Funny he’s packing them in on the stump in SC.

workingclass artist on January 12, 2012 at 7:22 PM

Asia Girl- excellent catch!

good thing you are here to set the record straight, for indeed Governor Perry, the longest serving Texas Governor, is indeed at

FIVE PERCENT in a national poll today.

uh, if Romney is supposedly not well liked winning 40% in New Hampshire and 29% in Iowa, and at 32% in national polls..

what do you call being buried at FIVE PERCENT and in last place behind John Huntsman and Ron Paul?!!

Perry is a freaking ignoramus and an embarrassment to the GOP

so is fat Newt

AirForceCane on January 12, 2012 at 7:34 PM

workingclass artist on January 12, 2012 at 7:22 PM

Except of course that Haldol is lying. Perry and Hunts were most certainly included in that poll and are polling at about where they have been for weeks.

Aslans Girl on January 12, 2012 at 7:35 PM

AirForceCane on January 12, 2012 at 7:34 PM

“Asia Girl”? LOL… amazing how many people here don’t take the time to READ.

Aslans Girl on January 12, 2012 at 7:36 PM

g2825m on January 12, 2012 at 3:35 PM

Thank you. I also will say that while you support Mitt, I would never call you a “Mittbot”, you are pretty fair-minded, in my estimation.

Aslans Girl on January 12, 2012 at 7:39 PM

Its a sad day when you have people who claim to be conservative attacking democracy.

astonerii on January 12, 2012 at 1:27 PM

Here we go again:-) Up is down and down is up. Hard to win an argument when some don’t understand the argument, LOL

bluefox on January 12, 2012 at 7:40 PM

Here we go again:-) Up is down and down is up. Hard to win an argument when some don’t understand the argument, LOL

bluefox on January 12, 2012 at 7:40 PM

You just do not win the argument against THEM, but you win the argument for the silent majority of readers only.

astonerii on January 12, 2012 at 7:45 PM

3. Romney’s record at Bain is mixed an both the company and Romney are secretive.

workingclass artist on January 12, 2012 at 6:38 PM</s

Ok, I suppose my question to you is if Bain is secretive to you, what do you mean that Romney’s record at Bain is mixed ? They’re a going concern and from all signs they make more good decisions than bad ones and get to stay in biz as a result and make a sizable return as a result.

Don’t get me wrong, I could support Romney on his character but not his political record ( although if he is nominee I MAY vote for him) and a Tea party candidate to MITTigate any RINO tendencies he may make actionable.

BTW, Bain is NOT a VC firm. Yes they have $500 ( or so ) million under VC management but they are a really a private equity buy out firm with $66 billion under management in that segment.

DevilsPrinciple on January 12, 2012 at 7:47 PM

Put the champagne away.

The fat lady has not sung.

Schadenfreude on January 12, 2012 at 1:33 PM

Reason speaking, thanks

bluefox on January 12, 2012 at 7:49 PM

Gingrich and Perry’s rhetoric sound a lot closer to Chairman Mao than to Adam Smith and Milton Friedman.

“Our enemies are all those in league with imperialism – the warlords, the bureaucrats, the comprador class, the big Landlord class and the reactionary section of the intelligentsia attached to them. The leading force in our revolut!on is the industrial proletariat. Our closest friends are the entire semi-proletariat and petty bourgeoisie. As for the vacillating middle bourgeoisie, their right wing may become our enemy and their left wing may become our friend – but we must be constantly on our guard and not let them create confusion within our ranks.”
-Mao Zedong

haner on January 12, 2012 at 7:54 PM

I see all of the newbies that dislike Perry have just been waiting to post. Some need to read a lot and understand politics better in order to know how it’s played. Not by Perry, but others.

If I’ve heard the word Conservative once, I’ve heard it thousands of times. Yet, when one appears on the scene (Perry), then it’s oh, no thanks we’ll take the Lib from MA. Guess it was just talk that I was hearing.

bluefox on January 12, 2012 at 7:54 PM

I <3 armchair punditry.

I think the conservative media jumped the shark on this one, in the context the gov. put this, its a viable argument. And he's right, let's have this arguement now among friends, so we might be better prepared for the Obamabots. Look, I'm not fan of Mitt, but this Bain attack makes him better than O any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Because even if Mitt is the nominee, we can still ask the question, "are we better off than we were 4 years ago." Tripple ditto of Perry is the nominee.

Conger on January 12, 2012 at 7:55 PM

From Dr Evil’s link (thanks, Doc!!):

http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/01/is-the-bain-capital-story-peaking-too-early.php?ref=fpb

Even while they [Democrats] acknowledge that they planned to roll out the Bain angle later for a reason, they find it pretty hard to contain their grins overall.

I would have preferred to wait, yes, to keep the bottle of whup-ass fresher,” one Obama campaign strategist told TPM. “At the same time — and this is important to note — having the Republicans eat their own actually makes the Bain story more potent than we ever could because it instantly validates it as a line of attack and falls on independent ears as a matter of legitimate debate, not as a partisan line of attack.”

Told you that the Left was simply keeping their powder dry and they are pissed at Newt and Perry for bringing this up — Newt and Perry screwed up the Left’s playbook! For anyone who is naive enough to think that Newt and Perry are handing the Left ammo, think again. They’ve been sitting on this to spring on Republicans as soon as Mittster secured the nom. They’ve been sitting on this to pretend that Mitt is CLEAN and ELECTABLE — to trick the Repubs in to nominating him — all the while knowing he is anything but. I’m glad Newt and Perry are using this for themselves first. It’s the only thing that may stop the Mitt sweep because it destroys Mitt’s “electability” aura. And if it works, it will SAVE THE PARTY from nominating a sure LOSER!

Further, Teddy Kennedy already USED Bain against Mitt. It was already out there. The ads on youtube from ’94 are brutal. There’s a CNN report from ’94 about how Kennedy won because he used Bain against Mitt. Think abouut it: in 1994, Republicans SWEPT and won nearly every race, including beating Dan Rostenkowski from Chicago. Out of all those winners, who lost? MITT. Mitt couldn’t even win in a REPUBLICAN year. Mitt is a LOSER. We will lose to Obama if we are stupid enough to nominate Mitt.

Aslans Girl on January 12, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Its a sad day when you have people who claim to be conservative attacking democracy.

astonerii on January 12, 2012 at 1:27 PM

As they should attack “democracy”. Democracy is NOT a conservative principle. If you knew the difference you would understand. This country was founded on the basis of a Constitutional Republic, NOT democracy as you might believe.

DevilsPrinciple on January 12, 2012 at 8:05 PM

astonerii on January 12, 2012 at 6:39 PM

My advice would be to stop feeding him/her. In another thread he/she used words like “idiot”, war criminal” and “pedophile”<—yes, he/she went there.

Then he/she claimed innocence, that he/she was just spewing analogies and I was faking being offended.

Funny part was, we were dicussing how people could not talk rationally about this subject without name calling.

The he/she quickly proved my point.

I am trying to give Romney backers a break and am hoping he/she is not a real Romney supporter.

But instead, someone here to divide our party even further.

tonotisto on January 12, 2012 at 8:09 PM

As they should attack “democracy”. Democracy is NOT a conservative principle. If you knew the difference you would understand. This country was founded on the basis of a Constitutional Republic, NOT democracy as you might believe.

DevilsPrinciple on January 12, 2012 at 8:05 PM

The process we use to choose our representatives is democratic. It was written directly into our founding document. Do you deny this plain as fact day? I understand what you are saying, but the primary and the election cycle is run through the democratic process of voting.

astonerii on January 12, 2012 at 8:11 PM

Aslans Girl on January 12, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Aslans Girl, reference below.

tonotisto on January 12, 2012 at 8:09 PM

tonotisto on January 12, 2012 at 8:12 PM

tonotisto on January 12, 2012 at 8:09 PM

Talking about blink?

astonerii on January 12, 2012 at 8:12 PM

I have been supporting Rick Perry for Prez before he even jumping into the race. Now, I am puzzled as to why the attack on free enterprise via Romney/Bain Capital. There is so much more that would hit home with conservatives than this. I am disappointed but I still support Perry.

I will admit though….for the first time I am beginning to question his judgement.

purgatory on January 12, 2012 at 8:14 PM

Out of all those winners, who lost?
Aslans Girl on January 12, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Pardon me, but someone who is in love with and obsessed with Rick Perry (an incompetent buffoon who is the most UNELECTABLE of the bunch!) has absolutely no business saying that anyone else is unelectable.

Rick Perry is a loser, madame. Learn the facts.

Romney will defeat Obama. We all know it. You might be blinded by your Rick Perry crush, but that’s no excuse for spewing such drivel. As for 1994, he did better BY FAR than any other challenger to Ted Kennedy since the 1970′s. He gave Kennedy a huge scare… and don’t forget we are talking about the VERY blue state of Mass. where the Kennedy name was especially well-regarded.

Aslan Girl, you seem to be living in fantasyland. I hope Rick Perry’s exit from the race doesn’t cause you to go into a state of depression. Trust me when I tell you that Rick Perry would never, ever, ever be able to beat Obama. The man is a complete and utter bozo. Voters, thank GOODNESS, are making the right choice.

GO MITT!!!

bluegill on January 12, 2012 at 8:14 PM

astonerii on January 12, 2012 at 8:12 PM

Yes.

tonotisto on January 12, 2012 at 8:14 PM

Ok, I suppose my question to you is if Bain is secretive to you, what do you mean that Romney’s record at Bain is mixed ? They’re a going concern and from all signs they make more good decisions than bad ones and get to stay in biz as a result and make a sizable return as a result.
DevilsPrinciple on January 12, 2012 at 7:47 PM

In terms of Romney’s claim of being a jobs creator the record of Bain is mixed and creates political problems.

Pundits and Ideologues chant the dogma that Newt and Perry are attacking capitalism which is a false argument.

Newt and Perry are making a political argument tailored to a southern voting electorate in a bad economy.

Both McCain and Huckabee made the same argument in 2008 and the economy was better then.

I don’t recall the firestorm then over it…But then Romney wasn’t a favorite was he?

FDR and later Bill Clinton won the Independent vote by convincing voters the could feel their pain…In a bust economy ya really think Mitt Romney can do that?

workingclass artist on January 12, 2012 at 8:15 PM

We will lose to Obama if we are stupid enough to nominate Mitt.
Aslans Girl on January 12, 2012 at 7:55 PM

You’re supporting the guy whom 95% of the Republican party has rejected, right?

whatcat on January 12, 2012 at 8:16 PM

I have been supporting Rick Perry for Prez before he even jumping into the race. Now, I am puzzled as to why the attack on free enterprise via Romney/Bain Capital. There is so much more that would hit home with conservatives than this. I am disappointed but I still support Perry.

I will admit though….for the first time I am beginning to question his judgement.

purgatory on January 12, 2012 at 8:14 PM

You are one of the very few smart Perry supporters. Rick Perry is an empty suit, incompetent buffoon who is good for nothing more than repeating lines his staff feeds him.

The man is an embarrassment. I was also impressed by Perry when I first heard about his record, but over the last few months I’ve been completely dismayed by the lack of ability of Rick Perry.

bluegill on January 12, 2012 at 8:17 PM

I supported him in 2008, but this is just not who we want at the top of our ticket in November.

monalisa on January 12, 2012 at 3:28 PM

Why? If you supported him in 2008 and he has not had ONE change in his stances actually since 2005 and that one was supporting pro-life legislation that he signed as Governor why would you not support him four years later? This is why for some of you I do not know where you get this boogey-man belief on Romney? He has been consistent if you look at his record and NOT what others post or report about him. I believe that is why he is sweeping many voters up because as they TRULY look at his actual record they see conservative votes and a strong values, integrity, and family man.

g2825m on January 12, 2012 at 3:40 PM

I supported him in 2008 because he was the most conservative then. But we have had Obamacare, a tea party, 2 godawful supreme court justices, spending out the wazoo and the landscape has just changed. Politicans have a shelf life and Romney is past his. 2008 may have been his time, but he does not have the best record to go up against Obama. With Romney we have to defend Romneycare, Bain as the new Halliburton, and his experience at Bain Capital= Obama’s takeover of GM/bailouts.

I know everyone dismisses that dimbulb Perry as not ready to run for President, but he has figured it out rather quickly and he will go after Obama because he has been fighting the fight every day. Romney has been running for President for as long as I can remember and he still can’t coherently explain his work at Bain Capital without equating it to Obama’s socialist takeover of GM? Really smart there. Why is this so hard to understand?

That all being said, if he’s the nominee, I’ll vote for him.

monalisa on January 12, 2012 at 8:18 PM

I have been supporting Rick Perry for Prez before he even jumping into the race. Now, I am puzzled as to why the attack on free enterprise via Romney/Bain Capital. There is so much more that would hit home with conservatives than this. I am disappointed but I still support Perry.

I will admit though….for the first time I am beginning to question his judgement.

purgatory on January 12, 2012 at 8:14 PM

No he’s not attacking free enterprise…He’s attacking Romney’s record and his claims that he was a job creator and most importantly his electability.

Huckabee did it too so did McCain. It’s a political argument that shows Romney can’t beat Obama in this economy.

workingclass artist on January 12, 2012 at 8:19 PM

The problem with Romney is that we have spent this week talking about Bain and not talking about the economy, gas prices, military cuts, unconstitutional recession appointments.

This is what the left and MSM wants. God forbid we nominate Perry/Jindal and have to be talking about the Texas/LA economy, energy production, tort reform.

monalisa on January 12, 2012 at 8:24 PM

Sure, I hope it’s someone else trying to do it, but I think Romney can beat Obama. blink on January 12, 2012 at 8:18 PM

Well Hoover thought he had it in the bag too in 1932.

FDR won and finished the dam.

workingclass artist on January 12, 2012 at 8:24 PM

I have been supporting Rick Perry for Prez before he even jumping into the race. Now, I am puzzled as to why the attack on free enterprise via Romney/Bain Capital. There is so much more that would hit home with conservatives than this. I am disappointed but I still support Perry.

I will admit though….for the first time I am beginning to question his judgement.

purgatory on January 12, 2012 at 8:14 PM

Unfortunately, Perry has proven himself as not ready for primetime. His attack on capitalism is the last straw for me. Newt I already knew was a loaded bomb so no surprise there. huntsman’s not going to catch fire. That’s all OK, I can vote for Romney.

independentvoice on January 12, 2012 at 8:28 PM

This is what the left and MSM wants. God forbid we nominate Perry/Jindal and have to be talking about the Texas/LA economy, energy production, tort reform.

monalisa on January 12, 2012 at 8:24 PM

I find your analysis to be rather pathetic. No offense.

The truth is that, if Perry were to be the nominee, we would be talking about what an idiot he is. He would be a laughingstock. The man can’t even string two sentences together. We would talk about his pension double-dipping, his crony capitalism and his positions that many independents would consider extreme. Rick Perry would be = Dumber than both GW Bush and Sarah Palin.

With Newt we would be talking any of his million pieces of baggage. Newt Gingrich provides new material for anti-Newt negative ads every day.

The truth is that Romney has NOTHING to apologize for with regard to his business experience. That’s the whole point of this whole backlash against Newt! Romney’s experience is a PLUS, or haven’t you been paying attention.

Romney has created jobs and is a very strong campaigner. He is extremely effective at criticizing Obama’s economic failures.

All Obama has to offer is class warfare. This is his ONLY card to play.

bluegill on January 12, 2012 at 8:34 PM

The problem with Romney is that we have spent this week talking about Bain and not talking about the economy, gas prices, military cuts, unconstitutional recession appointments.

monalisa on January 12, 2012 at 8:24 PM

Um, we’re talking about Romney because….. HE IS THE FRONTRUNNER!!

You don’t see many stories about Rick Perry now, do you? That’s because no one takes him seriously. Perry is a non-entity. Perry is a joke.

bluegill on January 12, 2012 at 8:37 PM

I have been supporting Rick Perry for Prez before he even jumping into the race. Now, I am puzzled as to why the attack on free enterprise via Romney/Bain Capital. There is so much more that would hit home with conservatives than this. I am disappointed but I still support Perry.

I will admit though….for the first time I am beginning to question his judgement.

purgatory on January 12, 2012 at 8:14 PM

The important question is, with the Bain Capital issue, are you beginning to question Romney’s claim to be the most electable candidate?

This is how I see it: Perry and Newt have probably been getting focus group data full of variations on, “Gee, I like him, but goshdarnit, Romney’s so electable, we can just coast to November of we nominate him, and I really want to win this year…” and this has been rooster-blocking all the other candidates.

If anybody else is going to get a look this election cycle, it’s going to involve puncturing the myth that Romney has some inside track on winning the general election, which has been giving him strength in a primary where electability is key. They needed to show that Romney can be attacked rather easily and effectively in the general election, and there will be no coasting to November.

Sekhmet on January 12, 2012 at 8:40 PM

Perry is not and never was a conservative contrary to what most of you think!

Perry.

Raised.

Taxes!

Mcguyver on January 12, 2012 at 8:44 PM

Better way of saying it:

Not everything that’s legal is morally good.

But I understood what you’re point is.

In the case of George Soros, not everything he has done is legal, either.

listens2glenn on January 12, 2012 at 1:38 PM

LOL, I said this on another HA thread:

Just because something is legal doesn’t mean it’s moral. The end does not justify the means, so motive is more important than legal as far as I’m concerned. Then some things are illegal and immoral, LOL

bluefox on January 12, 2012 at 8:47 PM

All Obama has to offer is class warfare. This is his ONLY card to play.

bluegill on January 12, 2012 at 8:34 PM

Don’t forget the race card, you racist!

profitsbeard on January 12, 2012 at 8:47 PM

And those are some ugly, ugly details.

ZGMF_Freedom on January 12, 2012 at 2:01 PM

No, they aren’t. You just haven’t heard the other side of the story yet.

blink on January 12, 2012 at 2:04 PM

Why haven’t we heard the other side of the story? If he is as pure as the driven snow like everybody here says, then he should defend himself- Newt had to when Mittens ran a dirty campaign against him. Oh, but I guess we’re not supposed to talk about that. I keep forgetting I’m supposed to shut up and do what I’m told so we can “get this over with”.

Disgusted.

kg598301 on January 12, 2012 at 8:48 PM

You just do not win the argument against THEM, but you win the argument for the silent majority of readers only.

astonerii on January 12, 2012 at 7:45 PM

I think you are right. Many read HA, but aren’t registered to post.

One person at a time:-) I’m the one in my Family that keeps them focused and abreast of what is going on:-)

bluefox on January 12, 2012 at 8:51 PM

I keep forgetting I’m supposed to shut up and do what I’m told so we can “get this over with”.

Disgusted.

kg598301 on January 12, 2012 at 8:48 PM

That is how the progressives run things. It is their primary argument. Shut up or we will shame you with titles such as Racist, Denier, Anti-Science bible thumping witch burners, and now those who want to shut people up about the progressive Mitt Romney have put it into their repertoire of attacks. Anti-capitalist who wants to destroy our way of life, shut the hell up! I see some of their less than dogmatists are finally arguing with facts. Who knows, maybe they are right and there is no there there. I want every bit of evidence available.

astonerii on January 12, 2012 at 8:54 PM

Aslans Girl on January 12, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Great info and research Aslans Girl!!

Go Perry!!!

bluefox on January 12, 2012 at 9:00 PM

I keep forgetting I’m supposed to shut up and do what I’m told so we can “get this over with”.

Disgusted.

kg598301 on January 12, 2012 at 8:48 PM

That is how the progressives run things. It is their primary argument. Shut up or we will shame you with titles such as Racist, Denier, Anti-Science bible thumping witch burners, and now those who want to shut people up about the progressive Mitt Romney have put it into their repertoire of attacks. Anti-capitalist who wants to destroy our way of life, shut the hell up! I see some of their less than dogmatists are finally arguing with facts. Who knows, maybe they are right and there is no there there. I want every bit of evidence available.

astonerii on January 12, 2012 at 8:54 PM

I want to hear the story from Romney, he already has most of the media and most of HotAir defending him. He is no angel, he runs a dirty campaign- always has.

kg598301 on January 12, 2012 at 9:02 PM

The U.S. Cannot Have A Private Equity President, Mitt Romney

“I can give you several gritty reasons why former Bain private equity czar Mitt Romney is not the person to become President of the U.S. in November….

Second, Gov. Romney goes about blaring that only he and he alone knows how to create jobs. What utter malarkey, as political pros have evidence prepared some time ago in 1994 for the late Sen Edward Kennedy by a very close relative of mine that nails Romney squarely for firing more people than he hired. You will see these tv ads come the fall, I guess.This is the fundamental nature of the way Private Equity works. It is a nicer polite way of describing company stripping, the classical ruthless way for a raider to exploit a weakened prey for its own profit. Period.

Third, the number of deals by Bain under Romney were slightly more than a handful of the dozens that ultimately went bankrupt…

I say you don’t want a Private Equity bigwig in the White House. It will appear to the world that Wall Street owns the White House and dictates the tax advantages for a small exclusive group of fatcats. And dear readers David Rubinstein, el numero uno at Carlyle, is quoted in the FT yesterday urging the White House and Congress to “quickly cobble a credible debt-reducing package.” Otherwise, Rubinstein warns in stentorian tones; “the markets’ harsh solutions will be borne disproportionately by the low income and disadvantaged. This is not acceptable, nor is it good for capitalism.”

I say Dave; it’s not good for capitalism that you and the other two Musketeers are each getting $134 million and paying a 15% tax ain’t too helpful for capitalism either…”

http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertlenzner/2012/01/10/the-u-s-cannot-have-a-private-equity-president-mitt-romney/

workingclass artist on January 12, 2012 at 9:06 PM

blink on January 12, 2012 at 6:34 PM

What’s happened to you blink? You never used to be this way.

bluefox on January 12, 2012 at 9:07 PM

Just a suggestion, but if blink continues on every thread as he/she has been, then use the “ignore” key. No one is going to convince this person of anything truthful or logical. Every thread on HA it’s the same thing. Pointless conversations in my opinion.

bluefox on January 12, 2012 at 9:14 PM

Mcguyver on January 12, 2012 at 8:44 PM

Texas Comptroller Susan Combs announced today that state sales tax revenue in December was $1.98 billion, up 9.5 percent compared to December 2010. “Sales tax revenue continues to grow in almost all major economic categories and revenue has now increased for 21 consecutive months,” Combs said.
http://www.window.state.tx.us/news2012/120111-allocations.html

But for Texas’ next fiscal year, which we’re already more than a quarter of the way into, state revenue growth is two and a half times faster than the Comptroller’s Certification Revenue Estimate (CRE), according to a new analysis by Texas political observer Stuart Greenfield. In plain terms, it means the recovery is outpacing projections, which means surpluses and a growing Rainy Day Fund.
http://www.quorumreport.com/

workingclass artist on January 12, 2012 at 9:14 PM

workingclass artist on January 12, 2012 at 9:06 PM

Workingconartist is at it again, copying and pasting huge chunks of text… this time from some opinion piece from a Romney hater.

Hey, workingconartist, why don’t you try staying on topic and quit posting whole articles in this section. If you want to trade that stuff among your small circle of fellow Perry worshipers, then please do it on your own time or through private email messaging.

bluegill on January 12, 2012 at 9:14 PM

Sekhmet on January 12, 2012 at 8:40 PM

Ding, ding, ding! There’s a reason that three out of five candidates thought this was a good tactic (Newt, Hunts, and Perry). The only two who didn’t are a big government lover (Santorum) and a crazy person (Paul).

And yes, McCain AND Huck went after Romney on BAIN in ’08. There was NO shrieking that they were “attacking capitlism/the free market/the very core of our nation!!eleventy!!11″

This is four years later when Bain looks potentially even worse to the voter.

Mitt campaigns on his BAIN record, so it is FAIR GAME.

The Establishment is a bunch of wusses who can’t take the heat of a REAL primary.

Aslans Girl on January 12, 2012 at 9:15 PM

bluegill on January 12, 2012 at 8:14 PM

My candidate, Perry, has won EVERY single election he ever ran for in Texas. Your guy won ONE. Your guy is so weak, he even lost in an otherwise stunning Republican year. LOL.

Aslans Girl on January 12, 2012 at 9:17 PM

Hey, workingconartist, why don’t you try staying on topic and quit posting whole articles in this section. If you want to trade that stuff among your small circle of fellow Perry worshipers, then please do it on your own time or through private email messaging.

bluegill on January 12, 2012 at 9:14 PM

You have a lot of room to talk. I’ve read your constant babble/insulting comments, but have used my ignore key until now.

This is on topic as the thread is about Gov. Perry. If you don’t want to read it, use your ignore key.

…”on your own time or through private email messaging” ROFL

Ed & AP can give orders, not you missy.

bluefox on January 12, 2012 at 9:19 PM

I told him that just because a Constitutional Republic has democratic aspects doesn’t mean that it’s a democracy. He didn’t respond to that.

blink on January 12, 2012 at 8:10 PM

Thank ( insert favorite deity, Hollywood star here ), you did. Blink as you know his lack of response indicated argument abdication.( I’ll avoid the you “must have been “home schooled “invectives to him/her).

It is important to keep in mind the difference between a Democracy and a Republic, as dissimilar forms of government. Understanding the difference is essential to comprehension of the fundamentals involved. It should be noted, in passing, that use of the word Democracy as meaning merely the popular type of government–that is, featuring genuinely free elections by the people periodically–is not helpful in discussing, as here, the difference between alternative and dissimilar forms of a popular government: a Democracy versus a Republic. This double meaning of Democracy–a popular-type government in general, as well as a specific form of popular government–needs to be made clear in any discussion, or writing, regarding this subject, for the sake of sound understanding.

To wit:

These two forms of government: Democracy and Republic, are not only dissimilar but antithetical, reflecting the sharp contrast between (a) The Majority Unlimited, in a Democracy, lacking any legal safeguard of the rights of The Individual and The Minority, and (b) The Majority Limited, in a Republic under a written Constitution safeguarding the rights of The Individual and The Minority.

The chief characteristic and distinguishing feature of a Democracy is: Rule by Omnipotent Majority. In a Democracy, The Individual, and any group of Individuals composing any Minority, have no protection against the unlimited power of The Majority. It is a case of Majority-over-Man.

I.e A guy you DIDN’T vote for becomes President and then proceeds to dismantle various Constitutional rights against your better judgement.

A Republic, on the other hand, has a very different purpose and an entirely different form, or system, of government. Its purpose is to control The Majority strictly, as well as all others among the people, primarily to protect The Individual’s God-given, unalienable rights and therefore for the protection of the rights of The Minority, of all minorities, and the liberties of people in general. The definition of a Republic is: a constitutionally limited government of the representative type, created by a written Constitution–adopted by the people and changeable (from its original meaning) by them only by its amendment–with its powers divided between three separate Branches: Executive, Legislative and Judicial. Here the term “the people” means, of course, the electorate.
It is the Constitutional Convention, for either framing or ratification, that is one of America’s greatest contributions, if not her greatest contribution, to the mechanics of government–of self-government through constitutionally limited government, comparable in importance to America’s greatest contribution to the science of government: the formation and adoption by the sovereign people of a written Constitution as the basis for self-government.

I could on but his should provide for clarification for the un~under~educated leftist lurkers who remain ( by choice or lack of information) in ranks of the elite ignorati.

DevilsPrinciple on January 12, 2012 at 9:20 PM

All Obama has to offer is class warfare. This is his ONLY card to play.

bluegill on January 12, 2012 at 8:34 PM

No. Obama will fold the jobs number of growing states like Texas into his national numbers and claim credit.

Texas created 200.000 jobs in 2010 and is the only state in the union to add jobs every month for the last 9 months becomes:

Obama- “Folks we are turning things around…we added over 200,000 jobs in 2010 and have been adding jobs every month for the last 9 months. We are turining the corner of the economic crisis created by the Bush administration and made worse by Republicans in congress…I just need more time”

workingclass artist on January 12, 2012 at 9:22 PM

I could go on but his should provide for clarification for the un~under~educated leftist lurkers who remain ( by choice or lack of information) in the ranks of the elite ignorati ( aka the Left ).

DevilsPrinciple on January 12, 2012 at 9:20 PM

DevilsPrinciple on January 12, 2012 at 9:25 PM

bluegill on January 12, 2012 at 9:14 PM

name calling…effective defense of your candidate…truly.

workingclass artist on January 12, 2012 at 9:27 PM

I want to hear the story from Romney, he already has most of the media and most of HotAir defending him. He is no angel, he runs a dirty campaign- always has.

kg598301 on January 12, 2012 at 9:02 PM

Yep.
America is waiting to hear from Mr. Inevitable Electability

workingclass artist on January 12, 2012 at 9:30 PM

The problem with Romney is that we have spent this week talking about Bain and not talking about the economy, gas prices, military cuts, unconstitutional recession appointments.

This is what the left and MSM wants. God forbid we nominate Perry/Jindal and have to be talking about the Texas/LA economy, energy production, tort reform.

monalisa on January 12, 2012 at 8:24 PM

True, but even before this we were talking about Iowa and then N.H.
The debates were worthless for the most part, since the questions all came from the left wing media/admin. Why the Candidates even went along with that fiasco is beyond me. Hard to talk of the issues when the topics are contraceptives and other such nonsense. Of course that was the point:-)

Actually, this was a lesson on how to lose an election imo!

bluefox on January 12, 2012 at 9:56 PM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5 6