So says Stephen Hayes of The Weekly Standard (a publication which has, admittedly, been screeching for a Ryan run since April):

Wisconsin congressman Paul Ryan is strongly considering a run for president. Ryan, who has been quietly meeting with political strategists to discuss a bid over the past three months, is on vacation in Colorado discussing a prospective run with his family. Ryan’s concerns about the effects of a presidential campaign – and perhaps a presidency – on his family have been his primary focus as he thinks through his political future.

“He’s coming around,” says a Republican source close to Ryan, who has been urging the 41-year-old to run.

“With Paul, it’s more about obligation than opportunity,” says another Wisconsin Republican. “He is determined to have the 2012 election be about the big things. If that means he has to run, he’s open to it.”

Ryan hinted at his thinking during a candid interview Friday with Charlie Sykes, an influential talk radio host in Milwaukee, telling Sykes that he was unsatisfied with the current crop of Republican candidates…

Ryan has been talking to friends and advisers about a run since last spring. Those familiar with his thinking say that he expected that Indiana governor Mitch Daniels would run. Hours before Daniels released a letter he’d sent to supporters informing them of his decision not to run, he called Ryan to give him a heads up. That phone call profoundly changed Ryan’s thinking…

But in private meetings with conservatives urging him to run, Ryan was more open to a bid and that serious consideration started shortly thereafter. Early this summer, Ryan met with two different Republican strategists to game out what a late-starting run would require, making clear that he was truly just asking questions and not yet planning. He continued to take calls from top Republican fundraisers, neither committing to a bid nor ruling one out. And he asked his staff to look at whether he would have to give up his seat in the House if he were to jump into the Republican primary…Perhaps more telling was Ryan’s request not to serve on the debt supercommittee created by the recent deal on the debt ceiling. Ryan has become driver of policy in the Republican Party, with a focus on debt and deficits. And virtually everyone assumed he would have a seat on the committee. But Ryan went to House speaker John Boehner and specifically requested to be left off of the panel. In his public statements, Ryan said he needed time to work on budget reform in the House. While there’s little doubt that Ryan is keen to work on reforming a badly broken budget process, a source close to the Wisconsin congressman says he asked to remain off the supercommittee in order to preserve the option of a presidential run. The same source says that Boehner encouraged Ryan to run.

Needless to say, I’d be a Ryan supporter from Day 1, having written a number of pieces urging him to run.  Perry’s rollout has done much to convince me he could win the Republican nomination, while only deepening my doubts about him as a candidate and a President.  Stuck between a center-right Northerner who, I suspect, may have trouble convincing the right, and two personifications of the Conservative Id, conservatives who want to confront generational challenges and actually succeed don’t have a whole lot of options: Ryan may well be our last (and best) hope.

Not according to the media.

Political analyst Sean Trende is out with a fascinating new analysis of the GOP primary contest in this morning’s edition of Real Clear Politics.  I find myself pretty much in agreement with Sean, but there are some nuances and more intangible aspects to this contest as it is currently developing that I will discuss in a future writing.  So, rather than comment further, read Sean’s analysis here.

Clintonista Ed Rendell says it will be so:

Gov. Cuomo can for get running for pres ident in 2016 be cause Hillary Rodham Clinton is going to beat him — and everyone else — in the race for the Democratic Party’s nomination, predicts one of the nation’s best-known Democrats.

Cuomo’s presidential prospect are “dim” because “it’s going to be Hillary Clinton in 2016,” said former Pennsylvania Gov. and Democratic National Committee Chairman Ed Rendell.

Democrats rarely nominate their losing candidates from a previous presidential year, so Hillary would be sailing against the tide of history. That said, the fact remains that the Clintons’ ability to communicate with mainstream America is second to none among Democrats, and a populist Democrat like Hillary would prove an interesting challenger to a GOP president like Mitt Romney.

PPP (D) Colorado 2012 GOP Primary Survey

• Rick Perry 20%
• Mitt Romney 20%
• Michele Bachmann 12%
• Sarah Palin 11%
• Ron Paul 8%
• Herman Cain 7%
• Newt Gingrich 6%
• Tim Pawlenty 3%
• Jon Huntsman 2%
• Someone else/Undecided 11%

(more…)

PPP (D) North Carolina 2012 GOP Primary Survey

• Sarah Palin 17%
• Rick Perry 17%
• Mitt Romney 17%
• Herman Cain 11%
• Newt Gingrich 10%
• Michele Bachmann 9%
• Ron Paul 7%
• Tim Pawlenty 2%
• Jon Huntsman 1%
• Someone else/Undecided 9%

(more…)

Refreshing:

His third question from the crowd was about an issue that his critics have touched on — his 2007 mandate for girls to get vaccinated against the cervical cancer-causing HPV virus.

“I signed an executive order that allowed for an opt-out, but the fact of the matter is I didn’t do my research well enough to understand that we needed to have a substantial conversation with our citizenry,” he said. “I hate cancer. Let me tell you, as a son who has a mother and father who are both cancer survivors.”

Perry said he’d invested government resources in cancer cures, adding, “I hate cancer. And this HPV, we were seeing young ladies die at the early age. What we should have done was a program that frankly should have allowed them to opt in, or some type of program like that, but here’s what I learned — when you get too far out in front of the parade they will let you know. And that’s exactly what our legislature did…

Perry’s admission came during a campaign stop in New Hampshire. You can read more about the event here.

Hat-tip: The Argo Journal.

(AMES, IA) This was my fourth Iowa Straw Poll in Ames, Iowa, and, as always, I had a very good time. As my readers know, I take presidential politics very seriously, but I have learned that this Republican quadrennial event in central Iowa is not really a serious political moment in the long campaign. It is, instead, a ritual that raises substantial cash for the state party, and serves as a celebration of contemporary Midwestern conservative politics. (For those who collect political buttons, bumper stickers, hats, t-shirts, brochures and other political memorabilia, it is also the true opening of the presidential campaign on the Republican side.)

When there is an incumbent GOP president running for re-election, they don’t even hold the straw poll. When they do, about 15,000 or so active Republicans show up on the Iowa State University campus, pay $30 for a ticket, picnic on burgers, pulled Iowa pork, hot dogs, ice cream and other summer food, and then vote for their favorite candidate. In many cases, the ticket was paid for, and their transportation provided by, their favorite candidate. This year, as has happened in past years, the most serious GOP candidates didn’t even participate.

The results are often not a surprise. On the drive down from Minneapolis, both the driver of the car and myself correctly predicted the 1-2-3 order of the voting results. I suspect most close watchers of the campaign got it right also.

So why did former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty withdraw from the race only hours after the voting (even though he came in third)? Ostensibly, it was that candidates allow the media to portray the Straw Vote as a real contest in which “expectations” are exceeded or fall short. The results of the Straw Poll do not even necessarily reflect the results of the meaningful Iowa Caucus in February. Thus, GOP frontrunner Mitt Romney (who won the Poll in 2007, but lost the nomination) did not participate. Nor did Texas Governor Rick Perry who used the date to announce formally in another state that he is entering the presidential race.

The media openly predicted that Pawlenty would withdraw if he failed to meet “expectations” in the Straw Poll, and reported it when he did in due course. Now many in the media will complain that such a “quality” candidate should not have been “forced out” so soon. (Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle has certainly come to U.S. presidential politics……)

In only two months, Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann came out of nowhere to win the Poll. She defeated perennial libertarian Ron Paul by a narrow margin. Paul, who has a devoted and noisy (but tiny) following usually fares well in unrepresentative polls such as the Iowa Straw Poll, but his weird combination of libertarian and isolationist politics will have him forgotten soon after the time the real voting takes place. Mrs. Bachmann, it should be noted, was born and raised in Iowa, and she made much of being a native daughter before the voting. It was no small advantage, as was her prominence in the contemporary Tea Party which includes many Iowa activists. Once she was in, Mr. Pawlenty did not have a chance. His brief rise to becoming the major challenger to Mr Romney was damaged weeks earlier when he attacked Mr. Romney and then backed off. Lacking Mrs. Bachmann’s instinct for successful attention-getting controversy, and burdened by an expensive over-staffed campaign, he faced bleak fundraising after Ames.

This is the same dilemma faced by former Speaker Newt Gingrich a few months ago when his campaign faltered after he blundered into an unnecessary confrontation with fellow Republican Congressman Paul Ryan. Gingrich’s expensive and overstaffed campaign came to a crisis when his fundraising dried up and many of his staff resigned. But Mr. Gingrich did not withdraw. With a much smaller staff, he has campaigned on, knowing that the actual voting was months away, and that he had something to say. Mr. Gingrich did very poorly in Ames, but it was no surprise. He has continued to do well in the presidential debates, receiving high marks even from observers who had written him off. Mr. Gingrich is not likely going to make an historic comeback here, but his decision to proceed without a large paid staff, expensive advertisements, and other hoop-la is an interesting one, and in strong contrast to Mr. Pawlenty’s.

The media has been beside itself with anticipation of Governor Perry’s entry in the race, assuming that before-his-announcement polls accurately reflect his strength, and that he might clean Mr. Romney’s political clock. I think everyone needs to be careful about this kind of so-far unsupported enthusiasm. Now that he is in the race, he will be much more carefully examined by voters and the media, and we will know just what kind of candidate Governor Perry is, and how strong he is, for example, outside the Bible Belt and the South.

We now have about four months before the real primary/caucus campaigning begins in earnest. Mitt Romney remains the man to beat, and although the Iowa Straw Poll has put forward Mrs. Bachmann (who now with Mr. Perry become his major challengers), the Ames event did eliminate the person who might have given him the most difficulty in nominating campaign. Mr. Romney is showing a lot of self-discipline. He has notable obstacles ahead, but I need to repeat one more time that the November election between the two major parties is always decided by the political center and by independent voters, and there is no sign that either Mrs. Bachmann or Mr. Perry will appeal to those voters who will make the difference.

The presidential election of 2012 inevitably will be a plebiscite about whether or not to retain President Obama in office. The current state of the economy, and the Obama administration’s inept handling of it and foreign affairs, indicates that almost any credible Republican nominee could win next year, but that would be, in my opinion, a premature conclusion. It also assumes that Barack Obama will choose to run for a second term. A Republican nominee who did not appeal to the political center might have a very difficult time winning the 2012 presidential election if the Democratic nominee were now-New York Governor Andrew Cuomo. Even if Mr Obama runs again, new events and circumstances could alter the present political consciousness, particularly if the GOP selects a nominee who could not build broad appeal in November.

________________________________________________________________________________

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

Ramesh Ponnuru sensibly argues that Tim Pawlenty shouldn’t run for Senate in Minnesota.  He writes:

It would look like he was looking at the Senate as a consolation prize. Voters wouldn’t like it. Klobuchar is going to be hard enough to beat as it is. In 2014 he has a shot at running either for Franken’s seat or trying for governor again.

In January of this year, Klobuchar had a 59% approval rating and only a 29% disapproval rating.  At Tim’s peak, he never matched that.  He was the guy who played for 51%- governing and running as far right as he could manage while remaining above water.  Since then, he has gone underwater, his presidential bid pushing him to the right and alienating some more moderate Minnesotans.  In May, even Survey USA had him at -3.  Tim Pawlenty could not beat Amy Klobuchar.  And if he tried and failed, his career would be over.  Fortunately, Tim’s only the second most natural politician in his household.  Mary Pawlenty has all of Pawlenty’s strengths without any of his weaknesses.  She’s warm and seems perfectly authentic, but while warmth can be (as we’ve seen) turned into a weakness in a male politician, it’s an absolute necessity for female politicians who are often accused of being shrill.  She gives a great speech.  She’s more obviously evangelical than Tim, without any of the hard edges of Michele Bachmann.  And she has a resume and an interesting one.  She spent 13 years as the District Court judge of Minnesota’s biggest Republican County and she’s since worked for non-profits.  Back when Tim still had a chance, I used to lament to MWS that a Pawlenty Presidency would leave Mary a smiling first lady, when she had the potential to do a great deal of good on her own.  Well, with Tim retreating to the sidelines, and with Minnesota’s Republican heavyweights likely to decline a challenge to Klobuchar, Mary has something of an opportunity.  She should take it.  Tim Pawlenty’s luster may have faded in Minnesota, but it’s a good bet Mary still benefits from the modest popularity all first lady’s enjoy.  Here are a few videos of her.

In Ames

With Tim, talking about faith.

Welcoming the Red Bulls home.

A CNN/ORC poll shows the number of Democrats favoring renomination of Obama has hit a low with only 70% favoring renomination down 7 points from a month ago with 28% saying Democrats should choose someone else. An interesting factor here is that 88% of Non-White Democrats favor renominating Obama compared to only 58% of White Democrats. Similarly, those earning less than $50,000 a  year and without a college degree were more likely to think someone else needed to be nominated. This could indicate serious problems for Obama’s re-election in states like Michigan and Pennsylvania where working class whites are going to be key to his chances.

Debbie Wasserman Schultz was at the Iowa State Fair Thursday stumping for President Obama. It didn’t go over as well as she had hoped. She was heckled pretty bad. That in and of itself is newsworthy. The heckler was apparently a lefty disgruntled by cuts in Medicare and “selling out to Wall Street”.

How often does the Left have their own tactics turned against them. Obama apparently is not going to have as a smooth ride to re-election as he had to election in 2008.

Now, what makes this video most interesting is the Freudian slip she apparently drops at the 0:40 second mark. She is referring to the economy, but she seems to call it something else.

A moment of truth, perhaps?

Well, Michele Bachmann did her full Ginsburg today, appearing on Fox News, CNN, NBC, CBS, and ABC and I watched all the interviews.

As a matter of observation, as much as people complain about politicians sticking to their talking points, the reason for talking points is that the media asks the same questions over and over again. Bachmann was asked to respond to the same quote from S&P on each every show. And several other questions were asked on three or four shows. Politicians are providing unoriginality in response to the unoriginality of journalists.

This Sunday morning, the competion was fierce. In this current bout of Bachmania, who could be the most hostile and snarky. There were many competitors, but their could be only one:

Out of the running:

Chris Wallace (Fox): Wallace was still somewhat chastened as a result of his prior interview in which he asked the Congresswoman if she were a flake. He began with an apology and made sure everything was all good. And then went ahead with a tough interview that was still pretty fair.

Jake Tapper (ABC):  Tapper had less time to go at Bachmann at 8 minutes and delivered a usual fair interview, although he wasted one of these questions on Bachmann’s past quotes about homosexuality.

The winners:

Bronze Medal: Candy Crowley (CNN): Give Crowley credit for asking some original questions, she even made the obligatory gay rights question about an actual policy issue. The overall thrust of the interview was that Bachmann was out of the mainstream and Crowley kept pressing Bachmann to analyze a CBS poll which Crowley had only verbally described showing the tea party losing favor among Republicans. Also, a couple of Crowley’s questions were too inside baseball (such as one about Bachmann’s staff turnover) and showed why CNN has declined.

Silver Medal: Norah O’Donnell (CBS): Throughout the interview, O’Donnell maintained a sneering contempt for Bachmann that became even more obvious once they hit the “submission” issue. I thought no one could beat the unprofessional contempt shown by O’Donnell. However, the winner is no doubt…

Gold Medal: Chief Secular Inquisition Officer David Gregory spent a whole one third of the interview interrogating Bachmann about her religious views and trying to uncover whether Bachmann would hire gays or atheists for high government office. (Yes, this is what America cares about.) When Bachmann explained her religious views, he told her she was wrong. Submission didn’t mean what she said it meant. The secular inquisition has a clear position on this apparently and Gregory knows better how to interpret Bachmann’s religious convictions better than she does. One commenter at the Corner suggested a likely explanation for how this happened:

I would bet any amount of money that (a) Dr. Bachmann came up with the suggestion and then persuaded his wife that it was a good idea, and (b) in reporting the event as an instance of “submission,” Mrs. Bachmann was speaking lightly and humorously. I don’t mean that she doesn’t take the concept of reciprocal marital duties seriously, just that she can joke about them. Her point was that her husband’s suggestion surprised her, but that she listened to him and he turned out to be right.

I’m betting it happened approximately like this: Mrs. Bachmann had not considered going into tax law and was at first taken aback by Dr. Bachmann’s suggestion. But she respects his opinion and listens to his ideas accordingly. After she had heard him out, they jointly decided that a tax law practice would be good for their family, in that the hours are better than in general litigation and she could also help set up their family business. In no way would he have insisted if she hadn’t been persuaded that his judgment was good and that it was at least worth a try.

Pfui to likelihood! Gregory had his talking point and he was sticking to it. He came after Bachmann with relish on several religious issues.  But at the end of the day, Bachmann more than held her own.

Gallup’s daily tracking pegs Obama’s approval rating at under 40% for this first time:

Full results here.

From the official release:

“Tim Pawlenty is a good friend and colleague who I have worked closely with over the years, including visiting our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. As a governor, Tim stuck to conservative principles despite leading a blue state like Minnesota. He and Mary are true patriots who are committed to our country, and ran an honorable campaign that reflected their integrity. Gov. Pawlenty’s common-sense conservative voice will remain prominent and influential as we work to beat President Obama in 2012 and get America working again.”

From the official release:

“Tim Pawlenty and his entire team ran an honorable campaign. I admire his accomplishments as a two term Governor with a record of results for his state. I consider him a friend and I know he has a bright future ahead of him as a leader in the Republican Party.”

Sarah Palin gave an interview to Sam Brody that is causing a bit of a stir in Cyberspace. Here is the relative passage along with its context:

“There is still a lot of contemplation that goes on within a family, deciding whether to engage in such a life-changing venture, putting yourself forward in the name of service, in such a position as President of the United States.  So, we’re still thinking about it, and the impact on family. Family comes first in my life, and I just don’t want to adversely affect the family. So, we’re still talking about it, thinking about it.  And that’s what I want supporters to understand.

At the same time, I want to be very fair to supporters and not keep them hanging on in perpetuity. It’s fair to them to give them an answer here, in short order, so that they can jump on board with someone else.  And/or to decide for themselves what they want to do.

So, still haven’t made up my mind, haven’t decided when that announcement would be yet.”

(emphasis with formatting added)

Some people are claiming that is Sarah signaling that she isn’t going to run. I don’t think so. In my opinion the words and context don’t support such a strong conclusion. Instead, I read that passage to mean that she is very seriously considering NOT running.

Her indecision is no ploy. She truly doesn’t know her mind.

As predicted by nearly everyone, Tim Pawlenty has dropped out of the race.

Former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty dropped out of the race for the GOP presidential nomination on Sunday, hours after finishing a disappointing third in the Iowa straw poll.

“I wish it would have been different, but obviously the pathway forward for me doesn’t exist so we are going to end the campaign,” Pawlenty said on ABC’s “This Week” from Iowa.

The low-key Midwesterner, who had struggled to gain traction in a state he had said he must win, had told supporters on a conference call shortly before the broadcast interview that he was ending his White House bid.

2012 Republican Presidential Nomination

Rick Perry’s decision definitely puts a dent in Michelle Bachmann’s claim to the Tea Party constituency, and in Tim Pawlenty’s endeavor to make himself into the compromise candidate between the principle and pragmatism camps.  I wouldn’t count Bachmann out just yet.  A lot of Palin supporters who are perhaps holding out for the former Alaska Governor to get into the race might be shaken loose by Bachmann’s victory in the Ames Straw Poll, and Bachmann’s numbers could boom if Palin were to announce that she is not running (and even moreso if Palin were to endorse her fellow Mama Grizzly).  Paul’s strong finish in the Straw Poll where he placed fifth last time will also help him to be taken more seriously.  At this point in the season, this is mainly a four-person race: Romney, Perry, Bachmann, and Paul.

There is little keeping Cain, Gingrich, Pawlenty and Santorum in the race at this point.  These candidates are well-known, they’ve all had their 15 minutes in the spotlight, and yet they’re just not taking off.  Furthermore, none of them seem to have any ideological crusade pressing enough to keep them in the race.  Underdogs like Johnson, Roemer and Karger all have a raison d’être that keeps them in the race despite low poll numbers (Goldwater libertarianism, the corrupting influence of money in politics, and gay rights, respectively).  Santorum might claim social conservatism as the issue that demands his candidacy, but Bachmann and Perry seem to be giving sufficient voice to that interest group.

As always, I must remind the reader of the folly of counting anyone out this early in the race (and it is still early).  While unlikely, it is still well within the realm of possibility for anyone from Cain or Gingrich down to Johnson or McCotter to ignite (or re-ignite), given the right opportunity.  (At this point in 2007, McCain was “dead in the water” and “anathema to the conservative base,” and Huckabee was “doomed to low single digits nationally” and had “no appeal outside of the hardcore evangelical vote”.)

This video is a couple of days old, but I just found it. Here we have Governor Huckabee giving his opinion last Thursday, the day of the Iowa Debate, on Rick Perry’s announcement today.

There is no way, no how that a year ago I would have ever predicted that before this year’s Ames Straw Poll, Mike Huckabee would be dissing the 2012 hopeful who is going after the Evangelical vote, and would instead be offering unsolicited praise of Mitt Romney. Yet this is precisely what he did in the above video.

Now don’t get me wrong. Mike didn’t exactly gush about Mitt in the video above. The praise was fairly weak, to be sure, but it was praise nonetheless. How remarkable was this? Well, since about January of 2008, I cannot think of a single good thing Mike has ever said concerning Mitt Romney. That is until a few months ago when Mike announced that he would not be seeking the nomination. At that point, things seemed to have changed. When talking about his decision, he went out of his way to complement Mitt on a “gracious” (Mike’s description) voice mail Mitt had left for Mike.

It is an interesting turnaround. I wonder what it might portend.

In the wake of this year’s straw poll at Ames, there are no more than four viable candidates remaining for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination.

One such candidate is the winner of the poll, Rep. Michele Bachmann. By besting all other comers by double-digits, excepting perennial niche candidate Ron Paul, Congresswoman Bachmann set herself apart from the gaggle of declared candidates not named Mitt Romney. She is now officially the socially conservative choice for the nomination and will be a force to be reckoned with during next year’s Iowa Caucus.

Another remaining viable candidate is Gov. Mitt Romney. The former Bay State governor remains the frontrunner for the nomination, and is pretty much the only viable choice left for “Regular Republicans” who generally select the nominee, despite the mythology that surrounds the power of “The Base.” Romney’s standing will not be harmed by today’s events due to his decision to skip Ames, and Romney now has a shot at consolidating the types of Republicans who nominated Nixon, Dole, Ford, McCain, and two Bushes.

A third viable candidate is Texas Gov. Rick Perry. Despite a rollout that leaves some questioning whether Perry would have been better off positioning himself as the Tea Party candidate in the race instead of yet another evangelical candidate, the fact remains that Perry is doing better in the polls than most of his Republican opponents, and his presidential announcement this weekend ensures that he will deny Bachmann a monopoly on the current news cycle when it comes to the GOP race. Perry’s candidacy will at the very least be a novelty that will take the race into the fall.

Finally, Sarah Palin continues to give mixed signals as to whether or not she plans to enter the race. If Palin does enter, she will become yet another candidate vying for the votes of “The Base” while Romney continues to dominate among the “Regular Republicans.”

Pretty much everyone else is done as of tonight. Ron Paul will remain in the race for good measure, but will continue to occupy a very specific space in the GOP field, one that leaves little room for growth. Gov. Tim Pawlenty, who came in a distant third, is done. Once viewed as the compromise choice for the nomination, Pawlenty has proven to be half a loaf to all wings of the party. He was a jack of all trades, and thus a master of none.

Michelle Bachmann did two segments on Huckabee:

As usual, Huckabee was very warm towards Bachmann and his highlighting and praising her answer on submission is an indication of the strong respect he has for her and her campaign. Bachmann is talking a very strong game about building a 50-state campaign. Tomorrow, she’s scheduled for a Full Ginsburg on the morning talk shows.

First, the results:

1. Bachmann – 28.6%
2. Paul – 27.7%
3. Pawlenty – 13.6%
4. Santorum – 9.8%
5. Cain – 8.6%
6. Perry – 4.2%
7. Romney – 3.3%
8. Gingrich – 2.3%
9. Huntsman – 0.4%
10. McCotter – 0.2%

My quick take: goodbye, Pawlenty and Cain. Hello, Romney vs. Perry smackdown.

And now, the moment you’ve all been waiting for: the winner of the prediction contest! Out of the three dozen entries we had, fifteen predicted Bachmann winning the day. Out of those 15, only ten predicted Ron Paul coming in second and just seven had the top three in the correct order.

Out of those seven entries, then, my editorial judgment leads me to give the R4’12 bragging rights to: Craig for… [whoever Craig is for today]! Craig correctly predicted the top three and pegged Pawlenty at 13%, a ways back from Bachmann and Paul. Additionally, he had the bottom of the pack well squared away. UPDATE: And, yes, Craig also pegged Bachmann’s percentage exactly at 29% as well. Nice work!!

Two runners up ribbons go to Adam Graham (if he had flipped Santorum and Cain, and had predicted a percentage for Perry, he very well could have taken home the gold) and to Some0ne You Know (who just had a little too much space between Paul and Bachmann, had Santorum and Cain flipped, and McCotter a little high). Congratulations to all three of you!

Finally, my own prediction was surprisingly accurate as well: outside of giving Palin 2%, I nailed the correct order of finishing for the entire list. Awesome.

For those who did not know, Rick Perry has announced today at the Red State gathering. Below is his introductory video:

Winners:

Michele Bachmann: Winning here was probably more important than a lot of folks let on.  This campaign has been filled with flavor of the month candidacies that have attracted conservative support for a while and then fizzled.  There was Gingrich, and there was Cain. Would Michele Bachmann be just another flash in the pan?  The answer appears to be, “no.” She’s going to be in this race and has built substantial foundation in the early primary caucus states. She managed to hold off the supporters of Ron Paul who have been very adroit at winning straw polls recently. This result was something that no on expected at the start of the year.

Ron Paul: Paul managed to deliver a speech that didn’t ramble too much, and even made an appeal to social conservative voters who may not care too much for the seemingly dismissive way in which he addresses social issues. Paul keeps his name in the news and improves massively over his 2007 performance. I would not be surprised to find Paul in the top 3 finishers in Iowa come caucus time.

The Iowa Republican Party: No Mitt Romney, no Rick Perry. No problem. The Iowa Straw Poll saw more attendees with more votes cast which means more money for the Iowa GOP.

Losers:

Tim Pawlenty and Rick Santorum: Stick a fork in both of these gentlemen, they’re done. 

For Tim Pawlenty, his third was not a close third. He finished with less than half of the votes Bachmann did. So much has been placed on Iowa, there’s no way he’s going to be able to stay in this for the long haul.

The same thing can be said for Rick Santorum, who delivered the best speech of the afternoon, but ended up in 4th place with 10%. While certainly better than might be expected based on the polls, it’s unlikely to inspire donors, just as Tom Tancredo’s 13% 4th place finish didn’t keep him in the race even to be under consideration for the Iowa Caucuses.

On paper, both Pawlenty and Santorum have strong cases for the presidency. Pawlenty, as a two-term Governor of a blue state, and Santorum as a former leader in the Senate with a record of accomplishment. But they both lack a certain something that people look for in a President. What today’s results show is that they’ve not connected with the voters in Iowa, and they can campaign for six more months, and they’re unlikely to ever do so.

The campaigns won’t stop immediately, but I feel confident in saying they will stop and before Caucus time. The candidates are close to the last people to realize that the campaign is going nowhere.

Herman Cain:  Cain’s 9% performance showed that he’s a fading star in this race. His rhetorical gifts, charisma, and principle created a lot of buzz around him early. But his willingness to step on political land mines and get into irrelevant sidebars has cost him along with his failure to organize well in Iowa. Cain may stick around and be able to live off the land, but he’s going nowhere in this race.

Mitt Romney: Romney tried some non-participation participation in the Iowa Strawpoll with his visit to the state fair. Romney ended up with 3% of the vote which wasn’t horrible compared to what some of the other non-participatory campaigns did in 2008. However, Rick Perry beat Romney’s total. This is troubling news for the Romney Campaign because: 1) Perry’s name wasn’t on the ballot while Romney’s was, 2) Perry was attacked for committing an affront against the Strawpoll. That Perry received more votes than Romney says more about the lack of intensity of Romney supporters than it does Perry. At this point, Perry is a more concept than candidate to those giving the campaign a thumbs up. The Iowa Straw Poll serves as a reminder that Romney is perhaps the weakest presidential frontrunner in GOP history.

Here’s the average of all of your predictions from a couple threads down:

• Bachmann – 22.4%
• Paul – 21.6%
• Pawlenty – 16.8%
• Santorum – 10.1%
• Cain – 9.4%
• Romney – 5.3%
• Gingrich – 4.1%
• Perry – 3.3%
• Palin – 2.9%
• McCotter – 1.4%
• Huntsman – 0.9%

And there was one person who predicted Huckabee at 5% with write-in votes.

We’ll find out how close we were in a few hours! I won’t be around to post the results, but I’ll check back in later tonight and do a front page shout out to the commenter who came the closest with their prediction.

From his just launched presidential campaign website:

What I learned in my 20’s traveling the globe as an Air Force pilot, our current president has yet to acknowledge in his 50’s – that we are the most exceptional nation on the face of the earth.

As Americans, we believe freedom is a gift from God, and government’s prime function is to defend it. We don’t see the role of government as a nanny state, and we recognize there is no government money that wasn’t once earned through the sweat and toil of private citizens.

That’s why we object to an Administration that sees its role as spending our children’s inheritance on failed economic theories that have given us record debt and left far too many unemployed, threatening not only our economy, but our security. Our reliance on foreign creditors and sources of energy not only compromises our national sovereignty, but jeopardizes our national future.

America’s place in the world is in peril, not only because of disastrous economic policies, but from the incoherent muddle known as our foreign policy. Our president has thumbed his nose at traditional allies such as Israel and Great Britain.

We will not sit back and accept our current misery…because a great country requires a better direction…because a renewed nation requires a new president. That’s why, with faith in God, the support of my family, and an unwavering belief in the goodness of America, I am a candidate for President of the United States.

And I will work every day to make Washington, D.C. as inconsequential in your lives as I can.

As governor of Texas I have led based on a few guiding principles. One, don’t spend all the money. Two, keep taxes low and under control. Three, keep regulations fair and predictable. And four, reform the legal system so frivolous lawsuits don’t paralyze employers that are trying to create jobs.

Over ten years, we have followed this recipe of fiscal restraint to produce the strongest economy in the nation. While millions of jobs have been lost over the last decade nationwide, hundreds of thousands of jobs have been added in Texas. Texas is home to one in 12 Americans, and yet since June of 2009, we have created more than four in ten American jobs.

The change we seek will never emanate out of Washington…it must come from the windswept prairies of Middle America…the farms and factories across this great land…the hearts and minds of God-fearing Americans who will not accept a future that is less than our past…who will not be consigned a fate of less freedom in exchange for more government.

It is up to us…to this present generation of Americans…to take a stand for freedom…to send a signal to Washington that we are taking the country back from the grips of central planners who would control our healthcare, spend our treasure and micro-manage our businesses.

My mission as your president will be to get America working again!

With God’s help, and your courage, we will take our country back. I hope you will take a moment to join the team and consider a donation to the campaign.

Thank you, and God bless America.

Rick Perry