Hucks Army - Faith. Family. Freedom. [Grassroots] JOIN HUCKS ARMY | GET INVOLVED | FUNDRAISING | LINKS | LEADERSHIP | ABOUT
It is currently Wed Jun 19, 2019 7:14 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 54 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Aug 13, 2011 5:23 pm 
Offline
** General
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 6:42 pm
Posts: 1265
Location: McAlester, Ok
Likes: 173
Liked: 107
QuoVadisAnima wrote:
I honestly can't see supporting Bachmann after Obama. Pawlenty's point is valid - she hasn't actually accomplished anything yet other than saying what people want to hear. And she has proven that she is willing to tailor her principles to what her supporters want to hear. We don't need another pandering chameleon with no executive experience (or more partisan rancor in DC).


My husband, who doesn't pay much attention to politics, was watching some of the speeches with me today and when Bachmann was speaking he asked me if she had just gotten into politics. I told him she was elected to the House in 2007 and he said, "Isn't that pretty much what Obama did?". Maybe he pays more attention than I thought.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 14, 2011 4:27 am 
Offline
Lieutenant General
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 7:19 pm
Posts: 1044
Likes: 8
Liked: 208
As I've said I have felt that overall Pawlenty was the one person who had the most substance and would be the best President. I do think though that you guys are giving him way too much of a pass on some things. Yes it was the media that asked Pawlenty the question about Bachman at the debate, but it was clear that he had his answer ready and rehearsed. His other attacks have not been media driven. It was clear that they were choreographed and designed to try and propel him up in the polls by taking away votes from her. It didn't work, and a good political adviser could have told him in advance it wouldn't work. Romney should have been his target all along, and he should have tried to stand out and distinguish himself and his leadership by contrasting himself with Romney and not Bachman.

As far as the back and forth between Bachman and Pawlenty at the debate, it doesn't matter if he happened to be more technically correct on the substance and facts. Most people go by perception and intuition. The majority of voters are not going to go and google the various debating points to see who was more right. They're going to look at the exchange and make a judgment based on what they perceive.

It's not impossible for Pawlenty to make a comeback, but I see it as being highly unlikely. I don't think Bachman is ready to be President, but when it comes time for me to vote in SC, and it were to be down to three; Romney, Perry, and Bachman, then I'm going to vote for Bachman. Romney and Perry would be disasters.



Post by WalterCan Liked by: maryjthom
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 14, 2011 7:50 am 
Offline
Captain

Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 12:27 am
Posts: 200
Location: New Ulm, MN
Likes: 40
Liked: 29
TheValuesVoter wrote:
QuoVadisAnima wrote:
I honestly can't see supporting Bachmann after Obama. Pawlenty's point is valid - she hasn't actually accomplished anything yet other than saying what people want to hear. And she has proven that she is willing to tailor her principles to what her supporters want to hear. We don't need another pandering chameleon with no executive experience (or more partisan rancor in DC).

Pawlenty, for all his blandness, still has the best all around qualifications for POTUS of all the declared (& about to be declared) candidates. What does it say about us that he is sinking like a rock?


I respect the fact that Rep. Bachman has raised five children and fosters many others, run a school and earned a law degree. Although I cannot support her, I think she certainly has some positive attributes and life accomplishments.

But she has no executive experience at all and only has five years of national legislative experience. More than all of that, I just can't agree with her decision making in lobbying against the extension of the debt ceiling. It's fine to clamp down on future spending - in fact, we really need to do this. But we can't refuse to write checks to the people we owe for the money that we've already spent. Senator Santorum, in my opinion, displayed the most common sense of any of the candidates during the debate. Most of the candidates, in my opinion, prefer honoring the letter of the law of certain political pledges they've made and avoiding angering their constituents than in doing the things that are in the immediate and long-term interests of the country. I see very little political courage in most of the candidates. Fortunately, there are a couple of exceptions.

What it all means, though, in response to your question, is that, with or without Perry and with or without Palin, the GOP field is failing to excite its base and may have an even greater challenge in exciting the general public. I hope it means that Governor Huckabee will think it over and possibly reconsider. This country and his party need him.


During the debt ceiling debate I heard and believe a couple of experts who know much more than I do regarding national economics. (I wish I could remember who it was, but I do remember I thought the source was dependable.) They were frustrated because the media kept saying that we would default if the debt ceiling was not raised. (FOX also was guilty of not challenging that idea enough.) I heard and believe that there is plenty of money to pay our foreign debts.

Once those debts would be payed though, the ax would have to come to other spending, and that is where Democrats have a real problem. They played up the looming specter of "default, default, default" rather than the real problem of "spending, spending, spending!". I'm with Bachmann on this one--except that one does have to deal with the reality of working with people who feel raising taxes is the only way to go, so it may be necessary to give in a little--if the outcome gets us well on the way to fiscal sanity.

_________________
"Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and lean not on your own understanding; in all your ways acknowledge Him, and He shall direct your paths." (Proverbs 3:5)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 14, 2011 9:35 am 
Offline
***** General
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:46 pm
Posts: 1563
Location: Texas
Likes: 178
Liked: 374
Farewell Tim Pawlenty, I would've voted for you.

_________________
THE TIMES are nightfall, look, their light grows less;
The times are winter, watch, a world undone:
They waste, they wither worse; they as they run
Or bring more or more blazon man’s distress.
And I not help. Nor word now of success:
All is from wreck, here, there, to rescue one—
Work which to see scarce so much as begun
Makes welcome death, does dear forgetfulness.
Or what is else? There is your world within.
There rid the dragons, root out there the sin.
Your will is law in that small commonweal…
G.M. Hopkins.



Post by Miserere Liked by: mxnwilson
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 14, 2011 6:23 pm 
Offline
Brigadier Geneal

Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 10:37 pm
Posts: 552
Likes: 462
Liked: 84
I for one am disappointed that Gov. Pawlenty has chosen to end his race, but can understand his reasons. I hope the remaining male candidates learn how to walk on eggs since competing against sympathy and victomhood is almost impossible.



Post by mxnwilson has received Likes: 3 IowaforHuckabee, Miserere, QuoVadisAnima
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 14, 2011 7:30 pm 
Offline
***** General
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 11:31 pm
Posts: 3475
Likes: 0
Liked: 6
With Pawlenty out, what do you think Sarah Huckabee does?

Huckabee won't back Romney or Perry in a primary. Paul and Cain have no shot. Bachmann doesn't have the experience to win over the general election public. Santorum is a good guy but lost his last Federal race by 18 points. People see Newt as damaged good no matter how well he does.

If Huckabee doesn't want to back Romney or Perry then another candidate is going to need to get into this race. Huckabee? Paul Ryan? Who?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 14, 2011 7:37 pm 
Offline
***** General
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:46 pm
Posts: 1563
Location: Texas
Likes: 178
Liked: 374
PrinciplesMatter wrote:
With Pawlenty out, what do you think Sarah Huckabee does?

Huckabee won't back Romney or Perry in a primary. Paul and Cain have no shot. Bachmann doesn't have the experience to win over the general election public. Santorum is a good guy but lost his last Federal race by 18 points. People see Newt as damaged good no matter how well he does.

If Huckabee doesn't want to back Romney or Perry then another candidate is going to need to get into this race. Huckabee? Paul Ryan? Who?


It's not necessary that he endorse anyone, right? He could just move through the election like us and vote privately for a candidate and leave us to figure it out ourselves.

_________________
THE TIMES are nightfall, look, their light grows less;
The times are winter, watch, a world undone:
They waste, they wither worse; they as they run
Or bring more or more blazon man’s distress.
And I not help. Nor word now of success:
All is from wreck, here, there, to rescue one—
Work which to see scarce so much as begun
Makes welcome death, does dear forgetfulness.
Or what is else? There is your world within.
There rid the dragons, root out there the sin.
Your will is law in that small commonweal…
G.M. Hopkins.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 14, 2011 8:01 pm 
Offline
Lieutenant General

Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2010 10:56 pm
Posts: 960
Likes: 3
Liked: 58
Yeah, though personally I think he'd become less significant (not to us, but overall) if he didn't endorse anyone.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 14, 2011 8:26 pm 
Offline
Lieutenant General
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 8:28 pm
Posts: 875
Likes: 150
Liked: 48
I don't know much about Pawlenty (since I've not been very enthused with the whole election, I haven't looked into candidates much--bad I know!), but I am sad to see that he dropped out as it seemed like he was one of the better candidates. Plus, he had executive experience which always helps.

_________________
~*Roanna

http://twitter.com/raspberrygirl12
http://roannaj.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 14, 2011 9:06 pm 
Offline
Brigadier Geneal

Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 10:37 pm
Posts: 552
Likes: 462
Liked: 84
I don't have a problem with M. Bachmann's objection to raising the debt celling, but she keeps avoiding even discussing the Cut, Cap, and Balance bill which she voted against after she signed a pledge that she would support it. It is my understanding this bill would be an amendment to assure the debt ceiling could not be raised without a balanced budget. Of course it probably would have raised it a little at first, but the final compromise ended that way anyway. Of course the compromise made it possible to vote on this bill again, and makes me wonder how she will vote on it the next time.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 14, 2011 10:48 pm 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 11:21 am
Posts: 2747
Location: Arkansas
Likes: 200
Liked: 653
PrinciplesMatter wrote:
With Pawlenty out, what do you think Sarah Huckabee does?

Huckabee won't back Romney or Perry in a primary. Paul and Cain have no shot. Bachmann doesn't have the experience to win over the general election public. Santorum is a good guy but lost his last Federal race by 18 points. People see Newt as damaged good no matter how well he does.

If Huckabee doesn't want to back Romney or Perry then another candidate is going to need to get into this race. Huckabee? Paul Ryan? Who?



Clearly Mike still has a "path," as they say, to the nomination.

Equally clear is that he does not have the stomach for the gore that will be both the primary and general election. This is rational. Why would anyone seek out the mayhem and violence of political warfare as we have it today (except, of course, for the radio-blog industrial complex "merchants of death" who sell the weapons and bathe in the blood of the soldiers on the field while remaining safely in their mansions).

So the only question is whether ANYTHING can provoke him to arms. Why do good men go back to the battle?

Normally because they either love something or hate something more than their own peace, safety, and peace of mind.

For Mike that could be hate as easily as love. I think he genuinely would hate to see Perry get the nomination more than Romney (which I'm sure is kind of like Kissenger's famous quip about the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq War, "the only regretable part is that only one can lose.")

If Perry begins to gain real momentum watch Mike close for signs "HE" is trying to take him out. If Perry implodes (which some have told me is a real possibility) that would leave it between Romney and Bachmann.

Such a match up might actually favor Bachmann in what would be considerd by media then a two-person race. (meanwhile Paul continues to hover with 10-15% support) That friends would send a line of GOP old gaurd to Mike's door begging him to enter the race.

The problem (OK... there's more than one problem with this scenario) with this dream/nightmare is that the following must play out in the next eight weeks maximum:

1.) Perry surges. Leads the field and Romney by more than 10 pts showing Mitt's chronic weakness remains.

2.) Perry implodes. Opp Research and/or bad campaigning bust the bubble of Perry's surge and he is awarded the Fred Thompson Award for 2011.

3.) Bachmann surges. Bachmann moves into the lead over Romney further showing Mitt's chronic weakness.

4.) Bachmann proves resilient to attacks that would take the legs out from under a more conventional candidate as occured with other "tea party" favorites (especially those who lost in the general) in the 2010 cycle.

5.) Old gaurd knows only Huckabee can stop Bachmann wich they hate more than the the prospect of his own success.

6.) Huck enters citing National events (like unemployment going up further; GDP going negative) involving the economy and jobs as the reason.

7.) Happy Halloween!

_________________
"As for us, our days of combat are over. Our swords are rust. Our guns will thunder no more. The vultures that once wheeled over our heads must be buried with their prey. Whatever of glory must be won in the council or the closet, never again in the field. I do not repine. We have shared the incommunicable experience of war; we have felt, we still feel, the passion of life to its top."

Oliver Wendell Holmes



Post by Southern Doc Liked by: Grant
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 14, 2011 10:52 pm 
Offline
***** General
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 11:48 pm
Posts: 2617
Location: Indiana
Likes: 77
Liked: 183
Southern Doc wrote:
PrinciplesMatter wrote:
With Pawlenty out, what do you think Sarah Huckabee does?

Huckabee won't back Romney or Perry in a primary. Paul and Cain have no shot. Bachmann doesn't have the experience to win over the general election public. Santorum is a good guy but lost his last Federal race by 18 points. People see Newt as damaged good no matter how well he does.

If Huckabee doesn't want to back Romney or Perry then another candidate is going to need to get into this race. Huckabee? Paul Ryan? Who?



Clearly Mike still has a "path," as they say, to the nomination.

Equally clear is that he does not have the stomach for the gore that will be both the primary and general election. This is rational. Why would anyone seek out the mayhem and violence of political warfare as we have it today (except, of course, for the radio-blog industrial complex "merchants of death" who sell the weapons and bathe in the blood of the soldiers on the field while remaining safely in their mansions).

So the only question is whether ANYTHING can provoke him to arms. Why do good men go back to the battle?

Normally because they either love something or hate something more than their own peace, safety, and peace of mind.

For Mike that could be hate as easily as love. I think he genuinely would hate to see Perry get the nomination more than Romney (which I'm sure is kind of like Kissenger's famous quip about the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq War, "the only regretable part is that only one can lose.")

If Perry begins to gain real momentum watch Mike close for signs "HE" is trying to take him out. If Perry implodes (which some have told me is a real possibility) that would leave it between Romney and Bachmann.

Such a match up might actually favor Bachmann in what would be considerd by media then a two-person race. (meanwhile Paul continues to hover with 10-15% support) That friends would send a line of GOP old gaurd to Mike's door begging him to enter the race.

The problem (OK... there's more than one problem with this scenario) with this dream/nightmare is that the following must play out in the next eight weeks maximum:

1.) Perry surges. Leads the field and Romney by more than 10 pts showing Mitt's chronic weakness remains.

2.) Perry implodes. Opp Research and/or bad campaigning bust the bubble of Perry's surge and he is awarded the Fred Thompson Award for 2011.

3.) Bachmann surges. Bachmann moves into the lead over Romney further showing Mitt's chronic weakness.

4.) Bachmann proves resilient to attacks that would take the legs out from under a more conventional candidate as occured with other "tea party" favorites (especially those who lost in the general) in the 2010 cycle.

5.) Huck enters citing National events (like unemployment going up further GDP going negative) involving the economy and jobs as the reason.

6.) Happy Halloween!


I really needed to read this after returning from a bittersweet Iowa straw poll trip....I always appreciate your perspective SD!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 15, 2011 4:46 am 
Offline
Lieutenant General

Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 9:23 pm
Posts: 1049
Location: California
Likes: 151
Liked: 36
Incredibly disappointed. Pawlenty was the only candidate in the race who I could vote for. More than ever, I hope that Huckabee jumps in.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 16, 2011 6:35 pm 
Offline
Major General

Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 4:01 pm
Posts: 736
Location: Lakewood, CO
Likes: 118
Liked: 147
Grant wrote:
Incredibly disappointed. Pawlenty was the only candidate in the race who I could vote for. More than ever, I hope that Huckabee jumps in.

Exactly where my 19 year old daughter is. At least a dozen times through Sunday and Monday she popped up with a disgusted comment at some random moment. It was slightly amusing and sad at the same time.

_________________
Judith Martinez
"It is true poverty for a child to die so that we may live as we wish."


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 54 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
POWERED_BY