New York, Phily, Boston – I don’t see Perry winning those.
But there is a long long 15-month road ahead of us folks! Anything is possible.[/quote]
But winning those areas are probably not possible for any republican. The last republican to carry New York was Ronald Reagan in 1984. And it aint happening again any too soon is my bet. This race like most recent Presidential races will be determined by a handful of swing states. States like Florida, PA, Illinois, Ohio and a few others. New York and California will go to the democrats and a smart republican will not even bother to campaign there. It’s all about the electoral count as we found out in 2000 when Gore beat Bush in the popular vote, but Bush won because of electoral votes.
That’s why Governors, and former Governors have the best chance of being elected. And that’s why the race will come down to Perry and Romney barring any dirty tricks, slip ups and hidden secrets. As a Congresswoman Bachmann has no chance to become President. And the others in the race are in for the VP slot. The exception to that would be Ron Paul. No one in their right mind would put that liability on the ticket.
If Perry were the nominee he would be smart to try to balance the ticket with someone like Christie and Northern Governor. Right off the bat they win Texas, 34 electoral votes and New Jersey with 15 electoral votes. It takes 270 electoral votes to get elected to the Presidency and they begin that march with 49 in the bag!
New York, Phily, Boston – I don’t see Perry winning those.
But there is a long long 15-month road ahead of us folks! Anything is possible.[/quote]
But winning those areas are probably not possible for any republican. The last republican to carry New York was Ronald Reagan in 1984. And it aint happening again any too soon is my bet. This race like most recent Presidential races will be determined by a handful of swing states. States like Florida, PA, Illinois, Ohio and a few others. New York and California will go to the democrats and a smart republican will not even bother to campaign there. It’s all about the electoral count as we found out in 2000 when Gore beat Bush in the popular vote, but Bush won because of electoral votes.
That’s why Governors, and former Governors have the best chance of being elected. And that’s why the race will come down to Perry and Romney barring any dirty tricks, slip ups and hidden secrets. As a Congresswoman Bachmann has no chance to become President. And the others in the race are in for the VP slot. The exception to that would be Ron Paul. No one in their right mind would put that liability on the ticket.
[/quote]
I might just go out on a limb with a Perry/Bachmann ticket being how things will flesh out.[/quote]
I’d be just a bit worried that Bachmann would get the Palin treatment. Other than that it’s a good ticket with Bachmann being from MN. Would she help pull females away from Obama? That would be the hope.
…Too overtly Christian – with his prayer meeting and all. Maybe he can get away with that in Texas, but it’s a turnoff to other parts of the country. Thinking heavily populated northeast cities
Has publically stated that he’s not interested in Washington
(Sweet Revenge)[/quote]
Big deal, he won’t take the heavily populated northeast cities no matter what.[/quote]
That’s probably true, although NJ leans republican now with Gov. Christie.
The only reason Christie got elected is because he was a counter-balance to his democratic predecessor who was a fiscal disaster in bed with the unions. Not unlike Obummer.
New York, Phily, Boston – I don’t see Perry winning those.
But there is a long long 15-month road ahead of us folks! Anything is possible.[/quote]
maybe we could send some kkk members to oversee the polls in philly instead of black panthers like in 08 and see if it effects the outcome.
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
Please don’t vote for this yahoo. Just Google his voting and spending records. He is not a conservative at all and he hates education.[/quote]
most conservatives don’t believe in government run or funded education.
If I were Romney I’d be very concerned about Perry entering the race. [/quote]
If I were everyone I’d be very concerned about Perry and Romney. This is what sucks about our Govt. these 2 shitheads are hardly Republican. [/quote]
Shit heads? Wow, I’m wondering what either did to be called such names. Romney is a graduate of Stanford University. An accomplished business man (made millions). Ran the Olympics, and a former Governor. I’d hardly call him a shit head. Sheesh maybe that’s why more good people like Romney choose not to run for higher office. And as for Perry he is well accomplished too as Governor of the biggest state in the US. The guy even parachute jumps, very cool! Both have been married for decades to the same woman. They are both stable upright citizens and above that proven leaders.
Um…let’s be fair you may not agree with either man politically but they hardly deserve to be called shit heads.
[/quote]
Ok, I won’t call them shit heads if you won’t call them republicans :)[/quote]
Well, I’ll tell you I think over the past decade the republican party has lost its way and politicians do what they do to remain relevant. But now I feel that the republican party is back on track for many reasons. First, they saw how a luke warm republican faired against Obama in 08. And they also have the Tea Party pushing them in the “right” direction.
So I think whatever Romney and Perry did to incur your wrath maybe they can be forgiven and given another chance to form better policy. Because it’s a very good bet that one of them will be facing off against Obama next year and I’d hate to think that you’re going to generalize to the point where you wouldn’t support the republican candidate against the failed Obama Presidency.
Think it over huh?[/quote]
I will try to keep an open mind towards them. No way I will vote Obama so no worries there. Too much govt for me.
New York, Phily, Boston – I don’t see Perry winning those.
But there is a long long 15-month road ahead of us folks! Anything is possible.[/quote]
But winning those areas are probably not possible for any republican. The last republican to carry New York was Ronald Reagan in 1984. And it aint happening again any too soon is my bet. This race like most recent Presidential races will be determined by a handful of swing states. States like Florida, PA, Illinois, Ohio and a few others. New York and California will go to the democrats and a smart republican will not even bother to campaign there. It’s all about the electoral count as we found out in 2000 when Gore beat Bush in the popular vote, but Bush won because of electoral votes.
[/quote]
Quote from Rick Perry - last night in New Hampshire:
‘I intend to compete for every vote in every state. This isn’t just a strategy to work in a few places.’
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
ZEB wrote:… Would she help pull females away from Obama? That would be the hope…
VERY doubtful, Zeb.
You will find no more poloarized people politically that liberal and conservative women.[/quote]
I tend to agree with you, so what’s the point of having Bachmann on the ticket? So she can remind people of Palin and the ass kicking the press gave her? No thanks.
We’ve talked about this before, Zeb. (i.e. the VP).
I agree with you…
“Perry/Bachmann” makes no sense because they appeal to almost the very same base. He needs to “pull in” a constituency that could get him “over-the-hump” should there be a close race with the President.
“Romney/Bachmann” simply will not work. (And as I’ve indicated, “Romney/Anyone” will not win over the Evangelical/Religious Right vote).
“Romney/Bachmann” simply will not work. (And as I’ve indicated, “Romney/Anyone” will not win over the Evangelical/Religious Right vote).
Mufasa[/quote]
You think they’re going to vote for Obama? LOL no really Mufasa please think about your logic here/ The only place that Romney’s Mormonism hurts him is in the primaries. As I’ve said before, and polls will back me up, about 25% of American voters think that Obama is a Muslim. If that’s true (and it is) why do you think Christian voters (whom I understand quite well as I am one of them) are going to vote for Obama over Romney based on Romeny’s Mormonism.
You are going to have to answer this question as I have laid it for you before and you’ve ignored it and stuck to your Romney’s a Mormon script.
No, Zeb…the is no way that I think that they will vote for Obama…
But I also think that they will not have to worry about the choice, because I don’t think Romney will get the GOP nod.
As far as the Mormon issue…put in key words like “Evangelical/Mormon” or “Southern Baptist/Mormon” or “Religious Right/Mormon” and see what you get. Also, check out an “anti-Mormon” video or book. (There are PLENTY out there).
You will get people who view Romney as not just “different”…but Satanic and “Anti-Christ”.
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
No, Zeb…the is no way that I think that they will vote for Obama…
But I also think that they will not have to worry about the choice, because I don’t think Romney will get the GOP nod.
As far as the Mormon issue…put in key words like “Evangelical/Mormon” or “Southern Baptist/Mormon” or “Religious Right/Mormon” and see what you get. Also, check out an “anti-Mormon” video or book. (There are PLENTY out there).
You will get people who view Romney as not just “different”…but Satanic and “Anti-Christ”.
(I didn’t make this stuff up, Zeb).
Mufasa[/quote]
Yes, I understand that there is a lot of Mormon hate on the Internet. Now google “Obama is a Muslim” Or “Obama is the Anti Christ.” If Romney gets the nomination Christians will vote for him as they do not see there being any other choice, and that is one group of voters that doesn NOT stay home. If Obama was an unknown because the press failed to correctly vett him as in 08’ they may have turned to him (as some did in 08). But what YOU need to understand is that right wing Christians really, really (and I’ll throw in one more) REALLY dislike Obama. 95% of all Christians will vote for whomever the GOP nominee is. Just like 95% of African Americans will vote for Obama regardless of who the GOP nominee is. Obama could announce that he is a Muslim (which i’m not saying he is). He could dance naked in the streets and moon a the Lincoln memorial they’d still vote for him. And that is the kind of loyalty that the GOP nominee, whomever he or she is, will have from the Christian right. This country is polarized. The great uniter the master of C H A N G E failed miserably and many voters (especially the Christian right) will punish him for this. So the issue transcends religion as well.
Finally, as I’ve told you repeatedly where Romney has the problem is actually getting the nomiation as that’s were the right actually determines who will be the nominee. Just as in the democratic party the left wing makes that determination. Before Perry entered the race I would debate the possibility of Romney having locked it up. But with Perry in Romney could very well lose the nomination BECAUSE of the Christian right. As Perry is a strong Christian. But Obama is a very weak Christian, pro abortion, pro gay marriage etc. Romney’s policies are far more conservative.
So your point only holds with the nomination process.
There was some talk several months (or more) ago that suggested Perry might want the VP slot. I think that makes since. Consider how he has ruled in Texas, from the VP position he can set the groundwork and place his people for a presidency after 8 (or 4) years.
Oh, my dad (in Texas) told me on the national news last night (not sure which channel but one of the main ones) talked about how Texas has a $1 fee on each months electric bill that is to help those who are unable to afford electricity to pay their bills. Perry took half of that money to help meet the $27 billion needed to match the budget. So Perry took this money from the very poor, dooped the state’s taxpayers, instead of pulling money from the slush fund (which would have covered the budget shortfall and a practice he had done twice already) and nearly decimated the public education funding. I do not think he will look good under media spotlight.
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
Please don’t vote for this yahoo. Just Google his voting and spending records. He is not a conservative at all and he hates education.[/quote]
most conservatives don’t believe in government run or funded education.
[/quote]
Good point.
I believe the federal government should not participate at all in education.
I don’t even believe the states should fund it. It’s the biggest monolithic pile of bureaucratic bullshit there is.
Schools should be private. Period. The market and private sector could easily take of it more efficiently and with better results. Guaranteed.
That doesn’t mean minimum schooling requirements shouldn’t/couldn’t be mandated by law.[/quote]
Look at the largest economies around the world. How many of those do not have public education. An uneducated populous is a drain, not a boon, for a country’s economy.
I am not saying that private schools are a bad idea. But looking at public verse charter schools in Texas, the charters have been less successful overall that the public schools in graduation rates. That said, there are real gems of charters schools as there are really good public schools. There just happens to be plenty of bad schools, public and charter, as well.
I used charter schools because those are the ones, generally, that parents can use vouchers to pay for tuition.
Also, bear in mind my wife and I are both teachers. But I will admit I am more likely to home school my daughter than send her to the elementary school at the end of our block (which is considered the best in out city of residence). I think there needs to be some government role in schools. I think a fundamental base curriculum would be a great idea. But I also think that the overseeing of schools through the lens of standardized testing is bad. The thing is, parent involvement in the schools can do more to improve schools than government mandates. Sorry for the rant.