As far as I know, Governor Huntsman has the first statement out on deal reached between the White House and Congress. Here’s his statement from his website:

“While this framework is not my preferred outcome, it is a positive step toward cutting our nation’s crippling debt.

“Because the legislation promises cuts commensurate with the debt ceiling increase, forces a vote on a much-needed federal balanced budget amendment and provides the only avenue to avoid default, I encourage members of Congress to vote for this legislation.

“While some of my opponents ducked the debate entirely, others would have allowed the nation to slide into default and President Obama refused to offer any plan, I have been proud to stand with congressional Republicans working for these needed and historic cuts. A debt crisis like this is a time for leadership, not a time for waiting to see which way the political winds blow.

“Going forward, I will aggressively advocate for a plan from the congressional committee that includes real cuts, entitlement reform, and revenue-neutral tax reforms — without any tax hikes.

“The Republican members of Congress deserve tremendous credit for moving this debate to the forefront and at long last beginning to get Washington in line.”

Sources have told the Iowa Republican the speaking order before Ames Straw Poll. Here’s the order:

Rick Santorum
Ron Paul
Tim Pawlenty
Michele Bachmann
Thad McCotter
Herman Cain

Feel free to mention your thoughts on the order in the comments.

As always, we can take two different photographs of the same political crisis. The first photo is of the immediate circumstance; the second is the big picture over time and consequences.

The debt default crisis has obvious immediate consequences, that is, at some point in the next few weeks (not necessarily the Tuesday deadline stated by the president and his secretary of the treasury), a technical condition of default on the debt of the government of the United States will exist. Contrary to the Cassandra-like warnings of the Obama administration, this will not mean that our government will not pay its obligations, particularly to bond holders of U.S. government securities. Nor will it mean that Social Security checks will not go out to elderly recipients. Nor will the security of the nation be placed in jeopardy. To raise the debt limit previously set by law will enable the administration to try to pursue its long-term policies of increasing federal spending. To refuse to raise the debt limit makes that pursuit impossible. That is the nub of the whole crisis.

The liberal government establishment, and even some in the conservative government establishment, see the raising of the debt limit, and its consequent increase in federal spending as not only inevitable, but the right thing to do. It has been done routinely for decades.

Living in the most prosperous nation on earth for many decades now, these establishment figures see the role of government as a supplier of aid, welfare and entitlements. They believe this. No one should doubt that, in most cases, they are well-meaning and sincere.

The movement which opposes this view is not, by any means, monolithic. Much media attention is given to the recent “Tea Party” as the sole engine behind this view, and the Obama administration has predictaby attempted to demonize this movement in the hope of diminishing its influence. In fact, the Tea Party phenomenon arose almost solely as an economic protest, and while it is conservative, it is not just Republicans, but also includes many independents and fiscally-minded grass roots Democrats who had become alarmed by establishment government economic policy, including growing deficits, unfunded liabilities, as well as the weakening justifications for whom and where public money was being spent. The Tea Party has been demonized by the left as a radical right wing movement which holds unpopular social views, but that is wholly a political contrivance and a slander. (There may be a relatively few who call themselves Tea Partiers who hold unacceptable or radical social views, but it has nothing to do with the economic movement.)

The grass roots uprising against government as usual, however, is not at all limited to those in the Tea Party. There is a much broader composition of this movement which includes traditional conservatives, independents, libertarians and Democrats. That is why the national elections of 2010 produced such a clear and powerful result, and why the consequences of that election have led to the debt limit crisis of 2011.

Perhaps much more important a factor hanging over this crisis is not the technical detail of default, but the clear warnings from those non-governmental agencies which rate the quality of all bonds and securities, e.g. Standard & Poor’s and Moody’s. They have stated and warned that if the debt and deficit circumstances of the federal government are not repaired in short order, they will lower the credit rating of the Untied States government from its current AAA rating. Why will they do this? Because our government budget deficits are too great, and because our government spending is too much. What are the consequences of a lower rating in real terms? It means that investors who are required to buy only AAA-rated financial instruments will not be able to purchase and invest in U.S. government bonds. This would cause a massive dislocation of national and international financial markets, and possibly result in a worldwide economic calamity as investors desperately seek out acceptable investments which may or may not be available. Lowering our rating also would mean that government borrowing would become more expensive. It is the individual taxpayers who would have to pay for that increased cost. In short, we should be much more concerned about losing our invaluable AAA bond rating than with perpetuating the increased debt which has put our rating at risk.

The ugly little secret of the U.S. debt limit crisis is that if President Obama and Senator Harry Reid were to succeed to raise the debt limit without ironclad cuts in spending, Standard & Poor’s and Moody’s would be MUCH MORE LIKELY to lower their credit ratings of U.S. bonds. I am not guessing about this. The agencies have specifically and unambiguously stated that if U.S. deficits are not immediately a drastically reduced, they will lower their ratings. The Obama-Reid outcome of the current crisis virtually guarantees that the U.S. will lose its AAA rating. Even the Boehner plan, now passed by the U.S. house of representatives, falls short of the financial agencies expectations. But at least it is a step in the right direction. It is, in fact, a long-needed brake of federal spending (something, it is important to note, was done by both Republicans and Democrats over decades).

Yes, there is a lot at stake in the debt limit crisis, and in the larger crisis of U.S. domestic economic policy. But it is only when we look at the big picture that we can see what that stake really is. The little picture presented to us by President Obama and his political allies is a sham, a lie, a misrepresentation of our economic circumstances, our choices and our future. The big picture is that we Americans are living at the financial edge of unsustainable economic policies and programs, and that the time is running out during which we might repair these circumstances.

Speaker Boehner and Majority Leader Cantor are establishment conservative figures. Unlike Congressman Paul Ryan and several of the new Republican governors (and New York Democratic Governor Andrew Cuomo), Mr. Boehner and Mr. Cantor perhaps came later to the understanding that the Congress had to respond radically and decisively to economic conditions and to their freshman members, i.e., cap and trade and the balanced budget amendment. Their instincts perhaps were to negotiate and compromise. But two circumstances have transformed them as political leaders. First, President Obama and Majority Leader Reid, desperately holding on to a drowning economic philosophy, have not been willing to truly negotiate. They call for compromise, but what they really mean is surrender. Second, the freshman GOP members of the U.S. house, backed by millions of grass roots voters, have stood their ground. The majority of voters in 2010 were promised transformation, and this House of Representatives is delivering as best it can the fulfillment of those promises.

This is the nub of where we are, and hopefully, where we are going. It is very clear that the whole liberal philosophy of government is collapsing around us. But, as is true in this case, it will take another election to complete the economic and political transformation.

Meanwhile, Speaker Boehner’s job is not just to avoid being blamed for not raising the debt limit. His historic opportunity is to bring the era of increasing public debt to a close.

With ironclad cuts in equivalent spending, the debt limit might be raised. But the real danger, as I have pointed out, is not default, but the credit rating. All solutions lead from that stubborn and unpleasant reality.

__________________________________________________________________________

-Please visit Mr. Casselman’s personal site, The Prairie Editor Blog.

Pottawattamie County Iowa’s GOP Chair said he will endorse Herman Cain today. He said that he won’t be endorsing in his capacity as GOP Chair, but as a private citizen and that he will be voting for him in the Ames Straw Poll. Here’s a link and an excerpt from the article:

Pottawattamie County Republican Jeff Jorgensen intends to endorse Herman Cain for president, he said today.

“And as I study the current field of Republican presidential candidates, there is only one candidate who is not a politician and is not encumbered with political concerns,” Jorgensen said in an e-mail. “This candidate has offered true capitalist, free market, common sense solutions to our problems, not political solutions. His name is Herman Cain.” … Jorgensen said watching the current debt limit debate going on in Washington D.C. made him realize the nation’s fiscal problems can’t be solved by Washington politicians. “Granted, they are working hard to find solutions, but we need capitalist, free market, common sense solutions to our fiscal problems, not political solutions,” Jorgensen said.

When Cain’s bus stops at Bayliss Park in Council Bluffs on Aug. 9, Jorgensen as “a concerned citizen of this great country, not as chairman of the Pottawattamie County Republican Party” will announce his endorsement. “And I will be voting for him in the Iowa Straw Poll,” said Jorgensen, who repairs locomotive communications and telemetry systems.

It’s an interesting choice considering the recent moves by the Cain campaign that some believed to be winding down.

_______________________________________________________

-Matt Newman is a conservative blogger from Maryland who blogs at Old Line Elephant and Tweets far too often.

The Game-Changer

Remember a few weeks back, the Palindrones were telling us that the release of The Undefeated, the Palin documentary, was going to be a ‘game-changer’? It seemed a bit unlikely, even after we were told that the early screenings were met by standing ovations. My reaction to that was that the early screenings were no doubt seen almost exclusively by Palin fanatics, whose standing ovations were pretty much to be expected.

To be anything approaching a game- (or mind-) changer, the movie would need to be seen by large numbers of people who either don’t like Palin (a large group, the polls tell us)  or don’t care about her one way or the other (there are a few such). Which leads to the question: “Why would such people pay to see a documentary about her?”

At this point, I hear you asking, “So how’s it been doing, Bob?” The answer is that it ain’t no game-changer – it is, in fact, a flop. It may not be at the level of Heaven’s Gate, Ishtar, or Mars Needs Moms, but only because those movies had expectations, while nobody beyond the Palin crowd ever took this thing seriously in the first place.

The movie has now been out two weeks, and here are its box office results:

The movie had a very limited opening, in only ten theaters in what were presumed to be Palin-friendly locales like Orange County and Phoenix.  The first week’s numbers were so-so, with maybe ten thousand people seeing it (assuming a ticket price of seven or eight bucks). Not bad, you might have said, if they can roll it out broadly and keep up that rate.

So the second week they roll it out to, er, four more theaters. Well, not a big roll-out. But how were the numbers? Don’t look, Palindrones, it’s too painful. $2163 per theater means that about 275-300 people paid to see the film at each theater. Assuming three screenings per day, that means about thirteen people per screening. Presumably not the sort of turnout that will convince more theater owners to book it, nor those who have done so to keep it going.  Which may explain why the producers are talking about pay-per-view.

About thirteen to fifteen thousand people have seen it thus far, most of them presumably committed Palindrones. Not much of a game-changer.

A Few Words about Name ID

One of our regular commenters, Matt/MWS, has made the point several times that much of Mitt Romney’s lead, and Sarah Palin’s residual support (especially her bounce after Mike Huckabee’s withdrawal), can be attributed to name ID – the logic being that relatively few people are deeply involved in following the 2012 campaign thus far, and that they are therefore familiar with only a few candidates’ names, and will pick from one of those names when queried by a pollster.

Plausible, though unproveable. I came across an item in the most recent Pew Research poll, though, that offers some support for the idea.

Looking at the top six candidates (those who polled more than 5%) we see an interesting split. Three of them (Romney, Palin, and Paul) played significant roles in the 2008 election cycle and are therefore well-known to the public. Each of those three poll better among the voters who say they are paying less attention, or none at all, to the campaign than among those who are paying a lot of attention, with the difference being substantial for Romney (he does half-again better among less-engaged voters), but smaller for Palin and Paul. Meanwhile, the three less-familiar names (Perry, Bachmann, Cain) all do better among the more-engaged voters, with Cain doubling his support and Perry tripling his.

Among those who identify with the Tea Party, the differences are even more, er, extreme for all the candidates except Bachmann. Perry finishes sixth among the less-engaged, but first (by a lot) among more-engaged. Romney, meanwhile, leads the less-engaged, but drops to fourth among those paying a lot of attention.

So what does this mean for the coming primaries, especially for Romney? It may mean little, because those less-engaged voters who choose him now obviously are at least somewhat positively disposed toward him, know him to some degree from ’08, and may very well stick with him as they become more involved in following things.

On the other hand, ‘more-engaged’ is often a proxy for ‘more likely to vote’ – which could be a danger signal for Romney if he can’t, as the campaign moves along, convert more of the engaged voters to his side.

The Really Miscellaneous Stuff

Visualizing the US Debt – Mind-boggling images.

Things that make you go, “Hmmmm …” – When Swift Boat Veterans for Truth attacked John Kerry’s service record in 2004, one of the people who defended him (and introduced him at the convention) was another Swift Boat veteran, Wade Sanders, a Silver Star winner. Sanders is now in jail on child pornography charges, and his Silver Star has been revoked (though not for that); the Navy says:

“Had the subsequently determined facts and evidence surrounding both the incident for which the award was made and the processing of the award itself been known to the Secretary of the Navy in 1992, those facts would have prevented the award of the Silver Star.”

So the guy who vouched for Kerry’s service record lied about his own? Hmmmm ,,,

Impeach Her! – Democrats in South Carolina are outraged because Nikki Haley once checked ‘White’ as her race on a form.

Please add your comments and/or your own miscellany.

Politico reports that Democrats have begun to use Mitt Romney’s refusal to stake out a clear position on the debt ceiling debate as part of a larger critique of the nominal Republican frontrunner:

Ben [Smith, also of Politico] wrote earlier this week about the emerging Democratic attack line against Mitt Romney for being “too weak and calculating to lead.”

The article continues by citing an example of the Dems’ attack, this one coming from White House spokesman Bill Burton:

Mitt Romney won’t show any leadership on the debt ceiling because he is more concerned with avoiding the ire of the Tea Party than preventing the first ever default on America’s obligations. While Romney has always been a political opportunist, this week demonstrates that even when America’s economy is at stake he doesn’t have the courage to stand up to the Tea Party.

Our own Jonathan wrote about this matter just a few days ago. I agree that Romney risks allowing an unfavorable narrative about him to develop. While he began his campaign with optimistic speeches and web videos, lately he has fallen into a habit of only going public when it involves blasting the Obama administration and highlighting the plight of individuals burdened by the economy.

All of the above supports the characterization of Romney as a “political opportunist”, in Burton’s words, who adapts his positions, priorities, and concerns to follow the public mood. And as we know, Mitt has had trouble with charges like this in the past.

Fortunately for Gov. Romney, plenty of time remains for him to get out ahead of these attacks and refute them, by leading with bold policy proposals and campaign initiatives. Time will tell if he rises to the challenge.

By TwitterButtons.com

My favorite political columnist, George Will, discusses a new book by Reason magazine writers Nick Gillespie and Matt Welch entitled The Declaration of Independents who, as Will states, believe that not even government, try as it will, can prevent onrushing social improvement.  A few highlights are as follows:

The authors say that the most ossified, sclerotic sectors of American life — politics and government — are about to be blown up by new capabilities, especially the Internet, and the public’s wholesome impatience that is encouraged by them.

Since 1970, per pupil real, inflation-adjusted spending has doubled and the teacher-pupil ratio has declined substantially. But math and reading scores are essentially unchanged, so we are spending much more to achieve the same results. America has the shortest school year in the industrial world, an academic calendar — speaking of nostalgia — suited to an America when children were needed on the farms and ranches in the late spring and early autumn. “No other industry,” Gillespie and Welch write, “still adheres to a calendar based on 19th-century agricultural cycles — even agriculture has given up that schedule.”

In the 1950s, A&P supermarkets (remember them? You probably don’t) had a 75 percent market share. What used to be the General Motors Building near Central Park South has an Apple store where the automobile showroom once was. When Kodak loses customers, it withers.

And here’s the kicker—

But when government fails, it expands even faster. This is, Gillespie and Welch say, because “politics is a lagging indicator of change,” a sector of top-down traditions increasingly out of step with today’s “bottom-up business and culture” of: “You want soy with that decaf mocha frappuccino?”

A generation that has grown up with the Internet “has essentially been raised libertarian,” swimming in markets, which are choices among competing alternatives.

And the left weeps. Preaching what has been called nostalgianomics, liberals mourn the passing of the days when there was one phone company, three car companies, three television networks, and an airline cartel, and big labor and big business were cozy with big government.

A nice Sunday read.  Enjoy.

2012 Republican Presidential Nomination

Poll	Average	Pew	Gallup	CNN/ORC	FOX News	ABC/WaPo	NBC/WSJ	PPP	Quinnipiac
Date	7/5 – 7/24	7/20 – 7/24	7/20 – 7/24	7/18 – 7/20	7/15 – 7/19	7/14 – 7/17	7/14 – 7/17	7/15 – 7/17	7/5 – 7/11
Romney	22.63	21	17	16	26	26	30	20	25
Bachmann	13.50	11	11	12	15	13	16	16	14
Palin	12.67	11	12	13		16		12	12
Giuliani	12.00		11	13
Perry	11.57	12	15	14		8	11	11	10
Paul	8.13	9	8	8	10	7	9	9	5
Cain	6.75	8	3	6	9	7	5	10	6
Gingrich	5.25	3	3	4	9	4	8	6	5
Pawlenty	2.88	3	2	3	3	2	2	5	3
Santorum	2.14	1	2	2	4	2	3		1
Huntsman	1.88	2	2	1	2	3	2	2	1
Johnson	0.75			0.5	1
McCotter	0.50			0.5					0.5

The other day, I came across a fascinating Politico piece, which told of the extensive (and under-the-radar) groundwork the Tim Pawlenty campaign has begun laying in Florida:

The former Minnesota governor announced Friday that he’ll be taking time off from an all-out effort in Iowa ahead of next month’s straw poll for a two-day swing through Florida next week…

…Pawlenty will arrive in Florida on Monday. He’ll start his multi-city series fundraisers and huddles with potential endorsers in Orlando, where he’ll be joined by the three Florida state representatives who’ve already been chosen by their conference as the next three House speakers. The group will then head to Tampa on Tuesday, where the candidate will host a meet-and-greet at Buddy Brew Coffee, his first big public event in the state. Then Pawlenty heads south to Miami, for more donor and supporter meetings.

He’s not copying Rudy Giuliani’s 2008 Florida-or-die strategy, but Pawlenty’s campaign has identified a so far largely uncontested donor- and delegate-heavy state as a major resource for campaign cash and support. And while he’s been struggling to gain traction elsewhere, he’s found a growing number of people so attracted to his personality, education positions, immigration enforcement stance and strong Second Amendment rights record that they’ve been willing to go out on a limb and publicly back his campaign. If there’s an extended primary fight next year, Pawlenty’s set up the second-round Florida primary to be his campaign firewall.

…Pawlenty made the state’s importance clear from the start. He was the only presidential candidate to accept an invitation to the January conference of the newly-formed Hispanic Leadership Network — a group that includes former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush.

…Pawlenty’s Florida state chair, Phil Handy, who led Bush’s gubernatorial campaigns and education agenda as chair of the state Board of Education, said those connections to the popular former governor haven’t gone unnoticed.

…The investment has paid off. In addition to the succession of state House speakers, 11 state House legislators have endorsed Pawlenty. Of those, eight are freshman, many wooed by Pawlenty himself, who’s ‘s been regularly setting aside time on his schedule to make the appeals directly, either on the phone or in person.

…Picking up state lawmakers’ endorsements could help him surge in the Florida GOP’s “Presidency 5” straw poll in September, where delegates will likely fall in line with the state’s leadership, especially state House speaker Will Weatherford, the Florida GOP’s rising star, said Tampa-based GOP strategist Anthony Pedicini.

This marked the first time that I had heard Pawlenty has placed so much emphasis on the Sunshine State. As noted in the article, this strategy carries some risk, as the Governor still needs to prove he can garner enough enthusiasm to receive consideration as a true top-tier candidate. However, if T-Paw manages to pull off a victory (or a strong runner-up finish to Ron Paul) in the Ames Straw Poll and then translate his early Sunshine State support into a Florida Presidency 5 Straw Poll win, he would place himself firmly in that category.

And for a campaign that certainly looks to spend a large amount of resources in early states, the fundraising pool in Florida will certainly come in handy. Perhaps Team Pawlenty also hopes to ride the momentum from an impressive showing in Florida to success on Super Tuesday, a la John McCain in 2008. Of course, that assumes that T-Paw will perform well enough in Iowa to remain so long in the race.

By TwitterButtons.com

Tonight was the annual Lincoln Day Dinner in my home county of Orange here in Florida and the guest speaker was Governor Jon Huntsman. Since I was there, and got a chance to meet him (only to say hi and get a photo, but still cool), I thought I’d give you all a first-hand account.

First, the turnout was pretty good. Roughly 400 tickets were sold and there were only a couple of open seats. That’s about what we got when Rudy Giuliani spoke in 2008 before the Florida Primary but less than Sarah Palin last year. As always there was an auction to raise funds for the Party. Quite a few of the items were 2012-themed: a hockey puck and picture signed by Mitt Romney, a signed picture of Rick Perry and a Texas flag, a picture of Michele Bachmann with a signed Minnesota flag, and finally a Harley-Davidson jacket signed by Governor Huntsman. They along with 3 trips and a piece of the Berlin Wall all raised $20,000 for the Orange County GOP.

As for Governor Huntsman, he received a polite, though not overwhelming response. The event itself was not for feet-stomping or raucous cheering, and the Governor isn’t that kind of speaker anyways. It was curious but while he did discuss the debt, calling it a “cancer”, he didn’t say anything about the current debt-ceiling debate. What he did talk about were three main things. First he talked about his record as Governor of Utah and said how he was “running on my record, not from my record”. Secondly he discussed the economy and jobs which he said were the two most important issues in the campaign. He talked about having a new Industrial Revolution and how “we need to start making things again in this country”. This seemed very clever to me; our own Dave G. always talks about having a free-trader who uses protectionist rhetoric and this seemed to me to be going in that direction. The Governor also said that there were two things that needed to be changed about our nation’s fiscal policy: first, cut the corporate tax, and we need to increase revenue (although he wasn’t specific). After that, he moved to energy independence, calling it the low-hanging fruit and he promoted natural gas. The final main theme of his speech was what he called “skepticism of foreign entanglements”. He reiterated his opposition to intervention in Libya and talked dovishly about Afghanistan, saying “only Afghanistan can save Afghanistan. Only Pakistan can save Pakistan, and America needs to be strong enough to save America (that last part got a strong applause line)”.

Other issues Huntsman touched on included the space program (very important in Central Florida), the need for a Balanced-Budget Amendment, and the need for Republican unity. After he was done, the Governor invited Mrs. Huntsman (an Orlando native) up to the microphone. Mrs. Huntsman talked about her husband as a father and how he instilled the value of service in their children. It must be said that Mrs. Huntsman received a bigger applause than the Governor.

Overall, the Governor used this as an opportunity to better introduce himself to Republican activists. It’s probably not a coincidence that on the same day, delegates to the Florida Presidency 5 Straw Poll received literature from the Huntsman campaign. Many of the people I talked to still seemed to be undecided and shopping around for a candidate. These are the type of activists that a candidate needs to start building a campaign. I’m not sure how many people Huntsman recruited to his cause, but he did get the chance to sell himself and his candidacy to Republican activists, and that’s worth something.

WorldNetDaily confirms the reports that Republican, gay equality group GOProud has been banned from the 2012 Conservative Political Action Conference.  Some conservative groups and leaders, including most notably Andrew Breitbart, are planning on boycotting the conference in response.  The American Conservative Union (host of CPAC) definitely reserves the right to do as they wish with their own conference, though the damage this will do to the conservative movement in the eyes of the average American will be untold.  Affording gay Americans equal rights and protection under the law is a cause that is just as important as civil rights for black Americans, or women’s suffrage, and it is appalling and shameful that such a large fraction of the conservative movement is on the absolute wrong side of this historic legal evolution.  This is not the way to put a Republican in the White House (or in any government seat for that matter), nor is it the way to build a legacy that will be remembered favorably by future generations.

Mitt Romney has retained his top spot throughout the month of July, though his inevitability as the nominee is now garnering it’s most serious challenge.  Gov. Romney out-raised the entire field of candidates combined, not including the additional $12 million raisied by Romney’s allied super PAC, Restore Our Future.  However, Romney’s position as the frontrunner may be contested shortly by the emergence of Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who is all but certain to jump into the race.

Rick Perry has been the buzz of the GOP race for the past month.  It began following the implosion of the Gingrich campaign, which saw a number of former Perry staffers resign.  Not long after, those staffers quickly made their way back to Perry’s side and the presidential buzz began.  With the conservative base still seeking a “white knight” after other political stars like Chris Christie and Paul Ryan decided against a run, Perry has become the next potential conservative hope.  Evangelical leaders and Tea Party groups combined with Texas’ vast donor base gives the governor the best shot at catching Gov. Romney, should he enter the race. But just as with Gov. Mitch Daniels, don’t be surprised at a last minute decision against a run.

Tim Pawlenty and Jon Huntsman have seen their campaigns continue to sputter. Niether candidate posted impressive fundraising numbers in the second quarter and both have seen their poll numbers mired in low single digits.   Team Pawlenty is desperately trying to lower expectations for the Ames Straw Poll, laughably claiming that something better than 5th or 6th would be a considered a victory, and Gov. Huntsman, who originally boasted about campaign civility, has launched a barrage of desperate attacks against Mitt Romney.  With the emergence of Michele Bachmann and now possibly Rick Perry, Gov. Pawlenty and Gov. Huntsman could both find themselves on the way out sooner rather than later.

Rep. Michelle Bachmann’s momentum was stunted somewhat when news reports revealed that the congresswomen suffers from dibilitating migrains.  The issue could still have potential to damage the already volitile Bachmann’s chances to become the Tea Party alternative to Mitt Romney.  Still, the Minnesota Representative finds herself near the top of a number of polls, especially in Iowa. Her recent dustup with Gov. Tim Pawlenty showed that her team is ready to punch back, and hard, when attacks come her way.

Sarah Palin and Rudy Giuliani continue to remain on the sidelines despite posting solid polling numbers.  With no indication of ramping up organization by either candidate, it is becoming safe to assume that niether will jump in the race. Were they to do so, however, it would compound the problems of Pawlenty and Huntsman, as well as give both Rick Perry and Mitt Romney reasons to worry.

Ron Paul continues to talk like the frontrunner in the Ames Straw Poll, and it wouldn’t be shocking if the congressman pulled off another straw poll victory.  Newt Gingrich’s campaign continues it’s slow death march, posting big debt numbers at the end of the second quarter.  Hermain Cain’s momentum has evaporated along with his poll numbers after his series of confusing and embarrassing anti-Muslim rants. Michigan Rep. Thaddeus McCotter officially kicked off his campaign for president, though most of us still can’t figure out why.

On to the rankings:

1. Mitt Romney
2. Rick Perry
3. Michele Bachmann
   
4. Sarah Palin
   
5. Tim Pawlenty
6. Rudy Giuliani
   
7. Ron Paul
   
8. Herman Cain
   
9. Jon Huntsman
10. Rick Santorum
    

Honorable Mention: Newt Gingrich, Gary Johnson, Thaddeus McCotter, George Pataki

 

This is an excerpt from a report put out by CNNMoney:

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) — Consumers all but shut their wallets in the second quarter, causing the U.S. economy to grow at a tepid pace.

To make matters worse, growth in the first quarter was much slower than initially thought, according to new government figures released Friday.

“It’s quite worrisome as the economy remains at stall speed in the second quarter,” said Sal Guatieri, senior economist with BMO Capital Markets. “If that continues, then it would raise the risks of a double dip.”

Gross domestic product, the broadest measure of the nation’s economic health, rose at an annual rate of 1.3% in the second quarter, the Commerce Department said.

One thing that is quite scary is the Q1 number was originally reported at 1.9%. The Commerce Department just “revised” it to 0.4%. OUCH! What will be the fate of the already anemic 1.3% number for Q2, I wonder.

The Mitt Romney campaign immediately pounced:

In Recent Days, President Obama And His Team Have Insisted We Are Headed In The Right Direction On The Economy:

President Obama, On The Economy: “I Think The Trajectory Is A Good One.”

OBAMA: “What people want to know is that we’re moving in the right direction, even if they’re frustrated with how fast we’re moving, we need to speed it up, but I think the trajectory is a good one.”

Treasury Secretary Geithner: America Is “Undeniably” In A Stronger Economic Position Today Than “Three Or Four Months” Ago. FOX’s CHRIS WALLACE: “You think you’re in a stronger position on the economy today than you were…” GEITHNER: “Oh, undeniably.” WALLACE: “…three or four months ago when you were growing hundreds of thousands of jobs a month?” GEITHNER: “Absolutely … The economy is growing. American businesses are investing again. Exports are getting stronger. That is all going well.”

Today’s Dismal GDP Report Confirms That President Obama’s Policies Aren’t Working:

Growth Estimates For The Second Quarter Badly Underperformed Economists’ Projections. “The U.S. economy grew less than forecast in the second quarter, after almost coming to a halt at the start of the year, as consumers retrenched. Gross domestic product rose at a 1.3 percent annual rate following a 0.4 percent gain in the prior quarter that was less than previously estimated, Commerce Department figures showed today in Washington. The median forecast of economists surveyed by Bloomberg News called for a 1.8 percent increase.”

• “Consumer Spending From April Through June Showed The Smallest Gain Since The Second Quarter Of 2009, When The Economy Was In Recession.”

The Government Also Issued Major Downward Growth Revisions For The Previous Two Quarters, Suggesting A “Troubling And Fundamental Slowdown Might Be Underway.” “The Commerce Department data on Friday also showed the current lull in the economy began earlier than had been thought, with the growth losing steam late last year. … First-quarter output was sharply revised down to a 0.4 percent pace from a 1.9 percent increase. … Fourth-quarter growth was revised to a 2.3 percent rate from 3.1 percent. … The sharp downward revisions to the prior quarters [suggests] a more troubling and fundamental slowdown might be underway.”

• “The U.S. Economy Came Perilously Close To Flat-Lining In The First Quarter…”

GDP Estimates Were Not This Morning’s Only Disappointing News:

A Key Index Of Consumer Confidence “Fell More Than Expected” In July, Reflecting Americans’ Unease With The Economy. “Consumer sentiment fell more than expected in July, according to a report released Friday, depressed by higher gas prices and worries about the U.S. debt crisis. The Thomson Reuters/University of Michigan Surveys of Consumers’ final July consumer sentiment index fell to 63.7 from 63.8 in the preliminary July reading, according to a report released on Friday. Economists in a Reuters survey had expected a final July sentiment reading of 64.”

• “Economists Surveyed By MarketWatch [Expected] The Gauge To Rise To 64.3 From 63.8 Earlier In The Month.”

Business Activity In July Failed To Meet Market Observers’ Expectations, According To A Report From The Institute Of Supply Management–Chicago. “Business activity in the U.S. expanded at a slower pace in July, a sign manufacturing may be moderating after leading the economy recovery. The Institute for Supply Management-Chicago Inc. said today its business barometer fell to 58.8 in July, lower than forecast, from 61.1 the prior month. … The median forecast of 54 economists surveyed by Bloomberg News projected the measure would drop to 60.”

Some Of This Week’s Headlines Illustrate President Obama’s Failed Economic Stewardship:

• The Wall Street Journal: “What’s Wrong With America’s Job Engine?”

• The Washington Post: “Reports Confirm Decelerating Economy”

• The Wall Street Journal: “Home Sales, Prices Reflect Malaise”

• Reuters: “Demand For Factory Goods Slips”

• CNBC: “US Is At The Start Of 500-Day Retail Recession: Analyst”

• The Wall Street Journal: “CEOs in Their Own Words: Don’t Plan on Much Hiring”

What would Romney do different? Well, for starters, here is what he calls “The Seven Habits of Successful Economies” (quoted from Business Insider):

1. Make employer tax rates competitive, to attract businesses. He argues that U.S. corporate tax rates are now the second-highest in the world after Japan and must come down. (This does not include the state tax burden, which puts the U.S. over the top in most states.)
2. Streamline regulations and create a bureaucracy geared to cooperating with the private sector
3. Embrace fair trade policies, and work to eliminate unacceptable infractions, such as China’s persistently undervalued currency and theft of intellectual property.
4. Energy policy must be practical; no country should be spending money needlessly on energy imports.
5. Any successful country must have an unquestioned rule of law.
6. Immigration and education policies must ensure the availability of extraordinary human capital.
7. A government should not be spending more than it takes in.

Gallup reports that Obama has hit an all-time low in job approval:

President Obama’s job approval rating is at a new low, averaging 40% in July 26-28 Gallup Daily tracking. His prior low rating of 41% occurred several times, the last of which was in April. As recently as June 7, Obama had 50% job approval.

His disapproval, however, is only at 50%. His worst mark there was 52% back in August of 2010.

Obama’s job approval rating among Democrats is 72%, compared with 34% among independents and 13% among Republicans. In the prior three weeks, his average approval rating was 79% among Democrats, 41% among independents, and 12% among Republicans.

So in the past three weeks, he has slipped 7% among both Democrats and Independents.

It would appear that Americans have been less than impressed with the President’s “leading by haranguing”. They are beginning to say collectively, “either lead, follow, or get out of the way.” And Barry appears to be choosing the later.

 

Mitt was in Newport, RI, last Tuesday for a fund raiser. There he did what he is wont to do; he opened the floor to any and all questions.

An amateur video has surfaced of that Q&A session. The quality of the video is not too good.  He is in silhouette nearly the whole time. The content, on the other hand, is excellent. One can clearly hear all the questions and all of his answers.

He took questions on five topics:

• Energy: He’s for more drilling, exploring, and tapping carbon based energy resources. As he says, he loves windmills, but you can’t power your car with a windmill. He took the opportunity to segue into what he would do to strengthen the economy and make it more effective.
• Repeal of ObamaCare: He will work with Congress to get it repealed, but that would likely take months and months. In the meantime he would direct his Sec. of Human Services on his first day as President to grant a waiver to all fifty states.
• Tax Code: He supports lowing taxes and eliminating loop holes.
• Audit the Fed: The Fed should be audited, but it should remain an independent agency. You want to keep  politicians from controlling the money supply.
• And perhaps the most important question of all: New England clam chowder or Manhattan clam chowder? His reply, “Do they make clam chowder in Manhattan?”

It’s good to see Mitt paying attention to little ol’ Rhode Island. He said he would run a national campaign, and that is precisely what he is doing.

(h/t to Bosman @ RightSpeak)

Having earlier stated that he was fine with New York’s decision to end marriage discrimination against gay couples, and having stated that he thought the definition of marriage should be a states issue, Gov. Rick Perry has back-pedaled on the issue in response to an attack from Rick Santorum, who compared legal gay marriage to legal polygamy or illegal heterosexual marriage.  Perry now says he supports a federal amendment to the Constitution as well as amendments to state constitutions, defining marriage as strictly one-man, one-woman.

Throwing this up here so we don’t have to thread jack posts about Rick Perry or Tim Pawlenty in order to discuss this incredibly important issue…

As Jim Geraghty notes in his excellent daily Morning Jolt (if you aren’t signed up to receive it, go do it now) today, the debt ceiling debate is causing a remarkable Republican Civil War — even a Conservative Civil War. He likens it, amusingly and appropriately, to a comic book civil war:

No, this is messy, with lots of longtime allies and friends surprised to find themselves in opposition. This is the conservative version of the Marvel Civil War, a comic-book storyline in which all of the publisher’s most prominent heroes took sides on the institution of a “Super Hero Registration Act,” in which any person in the United States with superhuman abilities had to register with the federal government as a “human weapon of mass destruction,” reveal his true identity to the authorities, and undergo proper training. Those who signed also had the option of working for a government agency, earning a salary and benefits such as those earned by other American civil servants.

Iron Man and Mr. Fantastic of the Fantastic Four supported the act. Captain America and Daredevil opposed it. And the storyline tossed away the familiar story of heroes’ fighting villains to the surprising, unpredictable, and incongruous sight of popular, noble heroes’ fighting other popular, noble heroes — each convinced that his view is the right one and the best way to protect his values.

Geraghty points out that this issue has pitted Rush Limbaugh vs. Thomas Sowell; Sean Hannity vs. Ann Coulter; and Pat Caddell vs. Hugh Hewitt. Count this blogger as surprised that I would ever see the day that Ann Coulter is trying to talk sense into Sean Hannity. I would also add to the list of brothers against brothers the Grover Norquist vs. Club For Growth showdown. This issue is dividing us like nothing I’ve seen in my lifetime, especially not in my 13 years of following politics.

My general thoughts (and they are mine – in no way representative of this site or any other front page posters, who are welcome to post their own thoughts) are this: the Tea Party – and candidates like Tim Pawlenty and Michele Bachmann – are on the verge of costing us every opportunity to win in 2012. After already defeating our chances at taking over the Senate in 2010 with self-inflicted wounds like Angle, O’Donnell, Miller, and Buck, the Tea Partiers seem hellbent on relegating our chances to retake the White House next year to the trash heap as well.

If these negotiations (whatever level they still exist) in the House and Senate fall apart, Obama will point to the Republican Party and say, “They did nothing. All I wanted was a balanced approach. A compromise. And all they wanted was to lift up their unrealistic extremist principles. And the horrible economy that resulted is their fault.”

The American people will buy it hook, line, and sinker, and Obama will be re-elected overwhelmingly in 2012. We will squander the number one line of attack we have against Obama going into 2012: the economy.

All because of… what, exactly? What is so horrid about the Boehner plan, which was crafted in the face of intense Democratic opposition in the Senate and the White House? It gives conservatives $1.2 trillion in spending cuts. That is huge. It also gives conservatives a vote on a balances budget amendment. Also huge. In return, it raises the debt ceiling by $1 trillion. Of particular note is what is not included in the bill: tax increases. Gone. Something that was unthinkable a few weeks ago.

And so this plan appears to me to be a fantastic compromise. But there are those, sadly, for whom “compromise” is a dirty word.

Refusing to back the Boehner plan because it doesn’t include a balanced budget amendment in the actual bill (like Tim Pawlenty) – is a ridiculous reason to hold the process hostage. You’ll get your BBA vote; the legislation requires it. Personally, I think holding a vote at a later date would be more beneficial anyhow, because it gives the American people time to work their Congressmen and women and express our desire for a BBA.

On the other hand, refusing to back the Boehner plan because it raises the debt ceiling at all (like Michele Bachmann) is pure, childish foolishness. The debt ceiling is going to be raised because the debt ceiling has to be raised. The adults in the room entered this debate understanding that, and determined to get what we could in return for raising the ceiling. The Boehner plan would most likely pass and be signed by Obama — yes, I realize that Obama said he would veto it, but let’s be honest: it’s the only serious plan being considered that could pass before August 2. Obama will be pressured into signing it, all the while declaring that he didn’t really like it but it was all Congress could give him. And when America hears about the Boehner plan being passed by Reid and signed by Obama, guess what they will hear? A Republican came up with a plan to end the stalemate. The Republicans saved the day with their plan, when the President never had one.

The fact that non-candidates like Sarah Palin threaten the new members of Congress over this, and that candidates such as Tim Pawlenty and Michele Bachmann give them cover to oppose the Boehner plan, is simply despicable to me.

Reports are that many Republican Congressmen weren’t actually opposed to the bill last night, but that they simply requested a night to sleep on it and mull it over. I’m hoping against hope that they wake up this morning and realize there are two paths before them now: one, pass the Boehner plan and become the saviors of the debt talks; two, defeat the Boehner plan and essentially give Obama the White House for four more years. If the Boehner bill goes down in defeat, this Civil War may be one that the GOP does not recover from for a very long time.

Last night, I had the pleasure of attending a town hall event held by the Tim Pawlenty campaign in Ankeny, IA (a suburb, more or less, of Des Moines). I figured our wonderful Race community would enjoy my take on the proceedings.

The night began with the deputy state campaign director, Erik Helland, introducing Pawlenty’s wife Mary, who spoke at length about the Governor’s character before turning over the mic to him.

T-Paw, clad in jeans and a simple button-down shirt, started by describing the integral role Mary played in his decision to run for governor and how she helped him through the difficult moments of his two terms. He then used that to segue into an attack on the lack of executive experience President Obama had before taking office. This seemed like a clear attempt to distinguish himself from Michele Bachmann, who has very publicly become his sparring mate in Iowa.

Later in his remarks, as he discussed his “Truth Tour”, he came right out and advocated phasing out ethanol subsidies (he also made sure to note that he wants to see all other energy subsidies eliminated, of course).

After that, he turned to President Obama’s economic policies and delivered a fairly powerful line: “Obama wants to take the money out of the private sector and put it in government. I want to take it out of government and put in the private sector.” While that may appear simplistic and unoriginal at first glance, it has the potential to leave a lasting effect on the listener for that very reason: it contrasts Pawlenty’s favored economic philosophy with Obama’s in a clear and easily comprehensible manner.

He continued to flash his fabled retail political skills by posing a challenge to the audience: if someone could find a specific, detailed plan the President has offered for entitlement reform, Pawlenty would a.) mow that person’s lawn (up to a maximum of one acre, he comically jabbed), b.) cook them dinner from a menu of his choice, or c.) organize a hockey game with them and ensure that they would score a goal. Now, to someone reading, this may come off as an ordinary attempt by a politician to appear personable and down-to-earth. However, the manner in which Pawlenty delivered it truly made it feel like your neighbor said it.

He then closed his stump speech by arguing that while all the Republican candidates will mostly agree on the issues, he actually has a record of concrete achievement on them. He also highlighted his ability to unite all the wings of the party and win swing states.

After this, he took questions from the audience. Nothing overly noteworthy came out during this.

Pawlenty hung around after the questions to meet individually with a few attendees. Your humble author managed to briefly meet and talk with the Governor. He came across as an entirely genuine individual with a sincere concern for the citizens of this great country. Of course, authenticity and relatability have not caused issues for T-Paw in this race; his lack of traction has largely stemmed from an inability to sufficiently differentiate himself from his competitors and inspire enthusiasm among voters. And in the interest of fair journalism, I must say that he missed an opportunity in this area.

As I have written in the past, Pawlenty has not used his greatest strength as a candidate – his unique background – enough. During the town hall, only his wife touched upon his upbringing – he didn’t even make a passing reference to it. And when you don’t have the rhetorical flourish of a Rick Perry, Sarah Palin, or Michele Bachmann, the impressive business background of a Mitt Romney, or the steadfast principle of a Ron Paul, you need something else to convince voters to choose you.

In these unprecedented economic times, with voters quite literally scared for their financial future, Pawlenty, an individual who grew up in an urban blue collar neighborhood, lost his mother to cancer at the age of 16, saw his father lose his job that same year, joined a private-sector union at a young age (remember, private-sector unions markedly differ from the public-sector variety in influence and appropriateness), and became the first member of his family to attend college, can make the case that he understands the gravity and pain of these circumstances (and the policies necessary to right America’s fiscal ship) better than anyone else in the field. It disappointed me to see him pass up on yet another opportunity to showcase this.

Still, in a day that featured him making multiple other campaign stops in the Hawkeye State, Pawlenty made one thing patently clear: he’s willing to outwork all of his fellow candidates. He wants the nomination, badly, and he knows it won’t come easily.

Gary Johnson, third tier candidate extraordinaire, becomes the first of the field to attack candidate-to-be Rick Perry, saying he is a “parody of George Bush”:

The former New Mexico governor and extreme presidential long-shot puts on the record what a fair number of Republicans in Washington are saying privately:

For all the speculation about Rick Perry’s presidential potential, Gary Johnson feels certain the campaign would fall flat — if only because America isn’t ready to put another Texas governor in the White House.

“Have you ever heard Rick Perry talk? I thought when I listened to him talk, I thought he was doing a parody of George Bush. And I was looking around to see if anyone else saw the humor in that. And it wasn’t. It was just the way that he talked,” said Johnson, the former New Mexico governor who’s running his own long shot campaign.

That’s not Perry’s only problem: he’s another in a long list of “status quo,” politicians focused more on “fluff” than specifics, Johnson said in a conversation with POLITICO on Thursday, explaining why he’s running his own long shot presidential campaign against them.

Welcome to the game, Governor.

ABC News has the story:

Despite holding personal pro-life beliefs, Texas Gov. Rick Perry categorized abortion as a states’ rights issue today, saying that if Roe v. Wade was overturned, it should be up to the states to decide the legality of the procedure.

“You either have to believe in the 10th Amendment or you don’t,” Perry told reporters after a bill signing in Houston. “You can’t believe in the 10th Amendment for a few issues and then [for] something that doesn’t suit you say, ‘We’d rather not have states decide that.’”

Perry is not shy about touting his pro-10th Amendment beliefs, despite being a staunch social conservative who opposes same sex marriage and promotes pro-life initiatives. Late last week, he labeled same-sex marriage as a states’ rights issue, a position shared by Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn.

“Our friends in New York six weeks ago passed a statute that said marriage can be between two people of the same sex. And you know what? That’s New York, and that’s their business, and that’s fine with me,” Perry said Friday at a speech in Aspen, Colo. “That is their call. If you believe in the 10th Amendment, stay out of their business.”

Hat-tip: Hot Air.

Getting back on track with our normal Thursday state of the race updates… movement is from the last update Monday morning:

Name	Value	Change
Perry	32.1	-0.6
Romney	28.0	-1.9
Bachmann	8.1	-2.0
Huntsman	7.7	+0.9
Palin	7.0	+1.7
Pawlenty	5.9	-0.1
Paul	1.9	-0.1
Gingrich	0.7	-1.3
Cain	0.5	-0.2
Johnson	0.5	-0.1
Santorum	0.4	-0.1
McCotter	0.1	-0.1
Roemer	0.1	E

Only candidates who have announced an official candidacy or who have greater than a 3% chance at the nomination are included.

Today, Gallup released some really interesting crosstabs to their national primary poll they put out yesterday (click here for a reminder of those numbers.). They broke the country down into four regions and revealed the top five candidates in each region. The results show a Romney candidacy which is strongest in the west and weakest in the south, and a Perry candidacy that relies a lot on southern-based strength:

EAST

• Romney – 19%
• Giuliani – 18%
• Palin – 13%
• Perry – 13%
• Bachmann – 12%

MIDWEST

• Romney – 17%
• Bachmann – 11%
• Palin – 10%
• Perry – 10%
• Giuliani – 9%

SOUTH

• Perry – 22%
• Palin – 13%
• Romney – 12%
• Bachmann – 10%
• Paul – 9%

WEST

• Romney – 24%
• Bachmann – 12%
• Giuliani – 11%
• Palin – 11%
• Paul – 10%

As you can see, Romney is strongest in the West, but has support spread throughout the Midwest and East as well, coming in first place in all three regions. The South is obviously his biggest area of weakness.

Conversely, Rick Perry collects a majority of his national support from the South, putting in underwhelming totals from the other three regions.

So we have a white knight candidate whose strength mirrors the weakness of the current frontrunner. And thus, a battle royale is begun. If Perry hopes to win the nomination in a primary system which is not national, however, he’s going to have to find a way to expand his southern support base to include midwestern states like Iowa, northeastern states like New Hampshire and New York, and western states like Nevada and California.

For anyone who’s interest: in the cross tabs for only the announced candidates we see that if Perry, Palin, and Giuliani do not run, Romney has anywhere from a 7-15% lead in every region of the country.

Real Clear Politics is reporting that Sarah Palin will be the keynote speaker at a September 3rd Tea Party rally being held in Waukee, Iowa.

In the latest indication that her sights are still set on a presidential run, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has accepted an invitation to keynote a Tea Party rally in Waukee, Iowa, on Sept. 3, RealClearPolitics has learned.

The Labor Day weekend visit to the nation’s first voting state comes after Palin indicated during an appearance on Fox News earlier this month that she would make her decision about whether to launch a campaign in August or September.

Well, if she is going to toss her hat into the ring, this would probably be her last chance to do it. Much later and the logistical problems of mounting a nomination run will become next to impossible to overcome. For example there are several deadlines looming for getting her name on the ballot of the early primary states. Miss those and she would be stuck running a write-in campaign.

Well, if Lisa Murkowski could do it…

Pew Research Republican National Primary

• Romney – 21% (21)
• Perry – 12% (-)
• Bachmann – 11% (-)
• Palin – 11% (13)
• Paul – 9% (8)
• Cain – 8% (-)
• Gingrich – 3% (11)
• Pawlenty – 3% (3)
• Huntsman – 2% (-)
• Santorum – 1% (2)
• None / Undecided – 20%

General Election Matchup:

• Obama – 41% (48)
• Generic Republican – 40% (37)

Survey of 546 registered Republican voters was conducted July 20-24 and has a margin of error of +/-5.5%. Numbers from their poll in March are in parentheses.

PPP (D) North Carolina 2012 GOP Primary Survey

• Mitt Romney 18% {20%} [18%] (11%) {18%} [10%] (14%) {27%} [25%] (25%)
• Michele Bachmann 17% {5%}
• Rick Perry 14%
• Sarah Palin 12% {17%} [16%] (16%) {21%} [21%] (19%) {30%} [27%] (27%)
• Herman Cain 8% {18%}
• Newt Gingrich 8% {12%} [18%] (18%) {21%} [17%] (23%)
• Ron Paul 7% {8%} [6%] (6%) {7%} [7%]
• Tim Pawlenty 4% {8%} [5%] (7%) {3%} [4%] (4%)
• Jon Huntsman 1% {1%}
• Someone else/Undecided 9% {10%} [11%] (10%) {12%} [12%] (16%)

(more…)

PPP (D) New Jersey 2012 GOP Primary Survey

• Mitt Romney 21% (18%)
• Michele Bachmann 18%
• Sarah Palin 16% (14%)
• Ron Paul 10% (8%)
• Rick Perry 10%
• Newt Gingrich 6% (15%)
• Tim Pawlenty 6% (4%)
• Herman Cain 5%
• Jon Huntsman 2%
• Someone else/Undecided 5% (19%)

(more…)

Thoughts and prayers for Gov. Christie please:

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie was taken to a hospital Thursday for tests after having difficulty breathing.

Christie was being driven to a farm in central New Jersey when the governor had difficulty breathing and was taken to Somerset Medical Center out of an “abundance of caution,” Christie spokesman Michael Drewniak said.

Yesterday, Herman Cain had a quiet meeting with Muslim leaders after his many public statements he’s made lately on Islam. He met them at the All Dulles Area Muslim Society (ADAMS) Center in Sterling, VA. ADAMS Board Member Robert Marro thinks that this visit helped Cain quite a bit in understanding Islam. Here’s an excerpt from the article from Politico:

Cain’s been under fire for his comments, but Marro said he believed they’d been able to open his eyes to the idea that he’s been “getting information from people that maybe had some other agendas in mind.” They discussed the supposed danger of the incursion of Sharia law, which have been referenced by many candidates campaigning for the Republican presidential nomination, as well as the contributions of Muslims to American society, Marro said.

“I think he left the meeting with an entirely different view of what Muslims are and what mosques do,” Marro said. “If he was expecting to see secret nooks and crannies where people are plotting nefarious things, he would have been highly surprised to find there is nothing like that in ours — or other mosques across the country.”

Marro said he believed that they had achieved a complete turnaround in Cain’s positions. “I would be flabbergasted if he ever repeated those statements and said that communities should be allowed to ban mosques,” He said. “I think that the meeting today has changed his mind 100 percent. From the tenor of the conversation, I can’t see him repeating such things.”

In a statement sent to reporters following the meeting, Cain apologized for causing offense to Muslims, but didn’t renounce his earlier comments. “While I stand by my opposition to the interference of shariah law into the American legal system, I remain humble and contrite for any statements I have made that might have caused offense to Muslim Americans and their friends,” Cain said. “I am truly sorry for any comments that may have betrayed my commitment to the U.S. Constitution and the freedom of religion guaranteed by it. Muslims, like all Americans, have the right to practice their faith freely and peacefully.”

Marro said Cain’s statement was “as close to a heartfelt and sincere apology that I’ve seen from any politician anywhere.” ADAMS, one of the largest mosques in the country, frequently hosts politicians and other public figures. Imam Mohamed Magid, the executive director, invited Cain to attend a Friday prayer service and be introduced to the congregation.

Will this repair all the damage caused to his campaign from some of his statements on Islam? Probably not all the damage, but it’s a step in the right direction by Cain displaying a willingness to listen and to admit when he made a mistake. Will it be enough to add him back onto people’s potential VP short list? Maybe – time will tell.

_______________________________________________________

-Matt Newman is a conservative blogger from Maryland who blogs at Old Line Elephant and Tweets far too often.

Governor Rick Perry of Texas just got a gift horse.

Push polling is when a pollsters deliberately includes information in a polling question so as to get the result they want.  For example, I call you up and ask you if whether you have a favorable opinion of Governor so-and-so who “has lowered taxes every year in office, and whose record is outstanding in every possible area”.    So, do you have a favorable opinion, or not?

Human Events has taken this to a whole new low.  I call this jam (as in they are going to “jam-this-guy-down-our-throats.”) polling.  They have decided to give Perry a little free advertising.  The ad is in the form of a poll question, but framed in a promotion of his supposed attributes:

Should Rick Perry Run?

An ally of the Tea Party, successful 3-term Governor, and a strong fiscal conservative… (emphasis mine)

Does Rick have what it takes to win the Republican Presidential candidacy? Vote Now!

Of course, as a strong believer in the First Amendment and an opponent of almost all “campaign finance laws”, I have no problem with the legality of this dishonest ad, in and of itself.  But any other candidate would have to include the standard “I paid for this ad” disclaimer.   Not so, with this one.  That seems a little unfair to the other guys. I do have a question for Human Events, though.   When you require email addresses and ZIP codes in order to take the poll, will you pass these on to Governor Perry, or will you simply use them to send more free Perry ads to my email box (or both!)?

Establishment Republicans believe they have finally found their man in Rick Perry.  Include National Review Online (NRO), among those getting on the Perry bandwagon.   Never mind his support of Rudy Giuliani last time around or the intrusive law he tried to pass that would have tried to vaccinate every little girl in Texas against STDs.  In the latter case, he only relented when conservatives found out about it and expressed their outrage.

Below is the video of Perry’s endorsement of Giuliani in October, 2007.

 

PPP (D) Virginia 2012 Senatorial Survey

• Tim Kaine 46% {46%} [47%] (50%)
• George Allen 43% {44%} [47%] (44%)

Favorable / Unfavorable {Net}

• Tim Kaine 42% {42%} [46%] (43%) / 40% {41%} [38%] (40%) {+2%}
• George Allen 34% {36%} [39%] (40%) / 44% {42%} [40%] (41%) {-10%}

Survey of 500 Virginia voters was conducted July 21-24, 2011. The margin of error is +/- 4.4 percentage points. Party ID breakdown: 36% {34%} [34%] (35%) Republican; 35% {37%} [39%] (36%) Democrat; 30% {29%} [27%] (30%) Independent/Other. Political ideology: 30% {31%} [32%] Moderate; 21% {22%} [25%] Somewhat conservative; 20% {21%} [16%] Very conservative; 18% {18%} [16%] Somewhat liberal; 11% {8%} [11%] Very liberal. Results from the poll conducted May 5-8, 2011 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted February 24-27, 2011 are in square brackets.  Results from the poll conducted November 10-13, 2010 are in parentheses.

–Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal.