Cain tied with Romney for lead in new CBS poll

It's looking more and more like the same thing can be said about Perry. His best day was when he announced. He's now behind Romney and Cain in the RCP average.

I still think he's the best guy to take out Obama of the rather pathetic selection we have, but he'd better get his act together. Because right now, he's looking like Fred Thompson.
We have yet to run the first primary. Perry will run very strong in the South.

but what about Iowa and New hampshire?

We'll see. Iowa is a mess. It is not a predictor at all. New Hampshire is more crucial. If he really screws up in NH it will be hard to get momentum going. If he finishes 2nd he'll be OK.
 
Christie was like the Wesley Clark of the GOP. Clark's best day in the race was teh day before he announced. Once he announced it was downhill from there. Christie would have been the same. While he is doing a great job in the PRNJ no one wants his statist views in otherwise free states in this union.

It's looking more and more like the same thing can be said about Perry. His best day was when he announced. He's now behind Romney and Cain in the RCP average.

I still think he's the best guy to take out Obama of the rather pathetic selection we have, but he'd better get his act together. Because right now, he's looking like Fred Thompson.
We have yet to run the first primary. Perry will run very strong in the South.

But again, that doesn't help him much. The Southern Primaries are going to be after the Super Tuesday and Early States. If Romney gets momentum out of Super Tuesday (and he might) then it's all over but the crying for Perry.

Perry needs to get control of this thing, now. He's already lost valuable momentum, which is why we are seeing Cain rise. ("Raising Cain". Sorry. Couldn't resist.) The fact that they are going to Cain tells me they still aren't sold on the Android from Kolob, but he has to reassert himself, soon.
 
We have yet to run the first primary. Perry will run very strong in the South.

but what about Iowa and New hampshire?

We'll see. Iowa is a mess. It is not a predictor at all. New Hampshire is more crucial. If he really screws up in NH it will be hard to get momentum going. If he finishes 2nd he'll be OK.

No, Iowa isn't a predictor, but it gives a candidate momentum. It looks like Bachmann is sinking beneath the waves there, and Romney is avoiding it because he doesn't want another "Are Jesus and Satan Brothers" moment like Huckabee gave him in 2008.

As for New Hampshire. Sorry, they pick more losers than winners.

Hillary in 2008
McCain in 2000
Buchanan in 1996
Tsongas in 1992

The problem with NH is that they pay TOO much attention to these fools, so they like to take headers and go off the reservation, just to screw with things. The good news for Perry is that if he wins Iowa, and the trouble makers in NH decide to stir things up, they might go for someone like Cain or Paul, just to mess with Romney. That would effectively put Romney out of the running, he doesn't have a backup plan.
 
Remember that FL pushed its primary up to early January. Perry will run very strong in that state. If it pre-empts NH then NH will be largely irrelevant.
 
Back when NH first became important in 68, they did their primary in March. That was too darn early. We should find some way to move things back to rationality by making the first primary day april 2nd. And I think that is way too early.

Perry shot himself in the foot, but almost every candidate by Romney who has shot to the top has had a "What were they thinking?" moment right afterwards. Trump looked like he was going to walk away with it until he jumped in with the troofers.
 
Back when NH first became important in 68, they did their primary in March. That was too darn early. We should find some way to move things back to rationality by making the first primary day april 2nd. And I think that is way too early.

Perry shot himself in the foot, but almost every candidate by Romney who has shot to the top has had a "What were they thinking?" moment right afterwards. Trump looked like he was going to walk away with it until he jumped in with the troofers.

Exactly. The problem with the primaries is ONLY people like us, the junkies who live and breathe this stuff, actually bother to vote in them. Then we get to the general election, and the people who didn't participate in the primaries look at the evil of two lessers we stick them with and say, "Really?"

It's why we need to dump the electoral college, dump the two party system, and do something like what France does. Have an election with all parties, if no one gets 50%+1, go to a run-off election with the top two vote getters.
 
Cain is the flavour of the month, which seems to be occurring with alarming regularity in the Republican party.

I'd be surprised if he has any staying power.

And licorice is not a popular flavor of people on the right.
 
Last edited:
Good to see Rick and Mitt knocked out of the way. I'm happy to see newt and Ron Paul have a legit shot and yes even Cain. All 3 of these guys are much better than Mitt/Perry imo.

I still have many issues with Cain and at this point wouldn't vote for him but he has a year to change my mind.
 
Cain is the flavour of the month, which seems to be occurring with alarming regularity in the Republican party.

I'd be surprised if he has any staying power.

And licorice is not a popular flavor of the right.

Coming from the historical racist side of the isle. Where the race card is the only card.

Should we be impressed?
 
Excellent news.... that makes my day. I was a huge Romney fan in 2008 elections. Was so mad at GOP when McCain got the knod.
 
I remember when John Edwards was tied with Obama. WHen Howard Dean was the front runner.
None of this is meaningful.

Agreed.

The problem with the primaries is ONLY people like us, the junkies who live and breathe this stuff, actually bother to vote in them. Then we get to the general election, and the people who didn't participate in the primaries look at the evil of two lessers we stick them with and say, "Really?"

It's why we need to dump the electoral college, dump the two party system, and do something like what France does. Have an election with all parties, if no one gets 50%+1, go to a run-off election with the top two vote getters.

The problem here is the primaries are part of state election laws, I don’t see how all 50 can be compelled to abandon the process or to conform to any ‘reform.’

You have a similar issue with the two-party system, where the respective state parties are deeply entrenched.

‘Top down’ proposals like getting rid of the EC are unlikely to work; reform and change can come only at the very local level, where citizens get involved and create a new political structure and party system.
 
First, Republicans would never elect a black guy. Second. This guy lied about being "too young" during the civil rights marches. Turns out he was 22 and going to the SAME college MLK graduated from. And he was in Atlanta, Georgia. He also was proud to sit at the back of the bus. Americans don't elect cowards who benefited on the blood and sweat of those they didn't support.
 

Forum List

Back
Top