As an attendee of today’s Ames Straw Poll, I will periodically update this with whatever observations or insights I have. Feel free to also use this as our Straw Poll discussion thread.

Update 11:50: My first impression: My, oh my, the Ron Paul brigade has come out in full force. Everywhere you look, you see Paul signs and bumper stickers. This guy just may win this thing.

Update 12:05: From what I’ve seen, Pawlenty has a good turnout. His campaign has distributed green t-shirts to supporters, making them easy to spot.

Update 12:45: Maybe the other campaigns simply haven’t given their supporters t-shirts, but a substantial number of the people voting consisted of Pawlenty backers.

I’ve now moved inside to watch the candidate speeches. First up, Rick Santorum. He certainly appears to have dedicated supporters, with signs popping up all over the town of Ames and a vocal reception when he just took the stage.

Update 1:00: Santorum just gave an impassioned speeh, calling his effort “the little campaign that could”, highlighting his legislative record and history of defeating Democratic incisors, and placing added emphasis on his pro-life efforts. If he makes it farther in this race, MWS and other ardent pro-lifers, you might have a lot to like in this guy.

Update 1:15: I cannot believe just how many Paulites I’ve seen here. I don’t know just how many of them came from other states, and therefore cannot vote, but they’ve clearly continued their habit of crash straw polls. I expect a hero-like welcome when he takes he stage.

….And, I was right. These people LOVE him.

Update 1:30: In somewhat of a surprise, Paul began by focusing on abortion, instead of his usual bread-and-butter issues of monetary policy and foreign policy.

However, he did migrate to the latter as he moved through his remarks.

Update 2:00: If this audience contains any undecided voters, Pawlenty may have just done himself a big favor with that speech – one of the best I’ve seen from him.

Update 2:20: Bachmann’s speech so far has amounted to giving Iowans a collective pat on the back. I still remain somewhat surprised by the reports of her massive turnout, as her reception hasn’t sounded nearly as enthusiastic as many claim.

She hasn’t veered far from standard Republican boilerplate in this address.

Update 3:55: After touring the grounds for a little while, I’ve now ventured back inside to await and view the announcement of the results. The Bachmann tent did look well-populated, and Paul took up more square yardage than any other candidate. It truly wouldn’t surprise me in the least bit if Paul pulls out the W. I can tell you how many people I’ve seen sporting an “I voted for Ron Paul” shirt or wielding a Paul sign.

Update 4:20: with voting closed a four, the attention now turns to counting and awaiting the results. While I don’t dispute Bachmann’s reportedly strong turnout, if Pawlenty somehow manages to upstae her, imagine the media boost he’ll get.

Update 5:00: the word from Twitter says we had nearly 17,000 votes cast today. That impressive turnout suggests the eventual winner will need far more than 4,000 votes.

Update 5:15: Estimates have begun popping up on Twitter: over 6,000 for Bachmann, 4,500 for Paul, and 3,000 for Pawlenty.

If those prove accurate, will T-Paw have to immediately end his campaign, or can he hold out in the hopes that he will gain momentum into the Caucuses?

Update 5:45: Bachmann wins 4,823. Ron Paul comes in a close crime with 4,671, Pawlenty grabs 2,293, and Santorum and Cain respectively take fourth and fifth.

Okay, Race community: here’s your chance to amaze us with your prognosticative abilities (and no, that’s not a real word, so don’t bother checking). Tomorrow, voting will take place in Ames, Iowa from 10 AM – 4 PM central time. More than 10,000 votes will most likely be cast. Some campaigns will not make it out of Ames alive.

The question on everybody’s mind is what the final order will look like when those votes are tallied. Here’s a reminder of the ballot (bold indicates the candidate is actively competing in the straw poll):

• Bachmann
• Cain
• Gingrich
• Huntsman
• McCotter
• Paul
• Pawlenty
• Romney
• Santorum
• Write-in: _____________

So now it’s your turn: what will the results of Ames look like? And, as a bonus tie breaker question: which candidates, if any, will drop out of the race after Ames (and what date will they drop out)?

Here’s my official prediction:

1. Bachmann – 23%
2. Paul – 21%
3. Pawlenty – 20%
4. Santorum – 13%
5. Cain – 9%
6. Perry – 4%
7. Romney – 4%
8. Palin – 2%
9. Gingrich – 2%
10. Huntsman – 1%
11. McCotter – 1%

Tie Breaker: Cain will drop out on Monday, 8/15. Santorum will drop out on Wednesday, 8/17.

Leave your predictions in the comments. I will average everyone’s together and post the Race42012 average prediction later on. I will also give a front page shout out to whoever comes closest to predicting the actual result tomorrow night!

The legendary nuclear strategist and Reagan advisor, Albert Wohlstetter, once observed that people don’t love the truth as much as they love what they want to be true.  Similarly, there is the little girl fantasy of the gallant Knight in Shinning Armor riding a white horse who saves the fairy princess from the old witch and takes her off to the castle to live happily ever after.  In modern day American politics this childhood fantasy is sometimes transposed into the longing for a “White Knight” that is to come riding in and save us from all that’s evil in the world—or from a group of existing presidential candidates that some activists and opinion-makers don’t like, and thus becoming our dream candidate.  But more often, political White Knights either fail to materialize or fail to meet expectations.  In the 1980 cycle, for example, there was much angst over the Republican field as it was emerging.  Ronald Reagan was believed too old and too extreme to win a national election and the other contenders were either too weak or less than stellar.  Thus there was the clamor for a White Knight to enter the race and save us from another term of Jimmy Carter.  That sought after White Knight was none other than Gerald Ford—yes kids, you read that right–Gerald Ford was being begged to enter the race, unite all but the most extreme factions of the party and save us from Reagan.  In the 2008 cycle, the longed for White Knight, Fred Thompson, did enter the race but did not perform as hoped.  This year, Governor Rick Perry of Texas has been touted as the White Knight and is expected to enter the race this weekend.

Perry’s White Knight status results from his supposed appeal to grass-roots activists of both the libertarian-oriented Tea Party flavor and the southern Evangelical Christian social conservatives all the while having some connection to the party “establishment.”  A tall order indeed.  Governor Perry comes to the table with some attractive credentials and a track record for all to see.  Consider that,

• He has never lost an election (some which have been hard fought) and he has proven to be a wily politician with a good feel for the base of the GOP.  Throughout his multiple terms as governor he has demonstrated what many would call true grit as he has proven to be a tough battle-hardened politician.  He has also won up to 40% of the Latino vote in Texas.
• He has the ability and the connections to raise large amounts of money.
• His policy vector is positive and has been consistent with his campaign positions.  The Cato Institute gives him a grade of “B” on fiscal issues and ranks him high amongst the nations governors.
• What is most frequently talked about lately is Texas’ (and purportedly his) record of economic growth and job creation substantially exceeding that of most states.
• He is a strong advocate of “10th Amendment conservatism” (in most cases) and the ability of the states to be laboratories of policy innovation.
• Perry was one of the first prominent GOP officials to speak the truth and acknowledge that the big government spending spree did not begin with Obama, that Republicans were also responsible and should be held accountable.  [While campaigning for Rudy Guiliani for president in Iowa in 2008, Perrymade it very clear that George W. Bush was not a fiscal conservative and never had been in Texas or in Washington (watch the video here)].

Yet, Perry is likely to face some formidable hurdles to winning the nomination and especially in winning the general election should he be nominated.  Consider this,

• Perry’s record has yet to be truly vetted and discussed by the national press or by his competitors.  Once that occurs, some may conclude that it is an example of things not always being exactly as they seem.
• While the present-day Texas economic and job creation stories are notable, they are not particularly new or unusual for Texas as the state has almost always outperformed much of the country and especially the other large states in this regard due to its historical pro-business climate spanning many decades.  Texas tends to do well when oil prices are high.  It was the land of milk and honey during the 1970′s.  It’s only serious recession in 50 years occurred circa 1986-87 when oil prices dropped dramatically, precipitating a real estate and banking crisis, but within a very few years things were humming again.
• His strained relations with Karl Rove and the Bushes may result in their active (but covert) opposition.  To be blunt, Rove, like his mentor Lee Atwater, is known for his skill in creating a negative personal image, shall we say, of his adversaries—most usually through cutouts and hard to identify sources.  If I were Perry, I would watch my backside and be prepared for unflattering allegations and innuendo that would be particularly disturbing to religious social conservatives.
• More importantly may be the depth and characteristic of Perry’s support in Texas elections.  While he has never lost an election, he has not won them easily or with support throughout the range of Republican leaning demographic groups as will be required in 2012.  As political analyst Sean Trende (no stranger to Race 4 2012 readers) discussed in an article about  Perry for Real Clear Politics, he may have strong appeal in the South and in some of the plains states but is likely to be problematic in the swing states that will be critical to the GOP winning a majority in the Electoral College.  In his article, Trende pointed out some interesting characteristics of Perry’s reelection last year in Texas:

When George W. Bush beat Ann Richards for governor by eight points in 1994, Bush carried Dallas, Harris (Houston), Bexar (San Antonio) and Tarrant (Fort Worth) counties. In 2010, Perry won statewide by an even larger margin, but lost all of those counties save for Tarrant. Under Perry’s watch, the Texas GOP’s coalition became more rural and less urban/suburban, and there’s probably some risk he’d do the same thing to the national GOP.

This is a very important point.  If Perry underperformed in the suburbs of Dallas, Fort Worth, and Houston in 2010, how is he going to play in Bucks County, PA; the Wisconsin suburbs; the suburbs of Denver or Albuquerque; or in New Hampshire?

As Trende stated further:

For the GOP to win in 2012, it probably needs to swing back to suburban voters in places like Columbus, Ohio, Fairfax, Va., and Philadelphia. Culture still matters in our country, and I firmly believe that a candidate who espouses socially conservative views with a Southern drawl plays differently in these places than one who does so with a “Minnesota nice” demeanor. That is doubly true if the Southern candidate has made remarks about the possibility of his state seceding.

• The problematic nature of Perry’s culture cues and what some will see as a disquieting similarity to George W. Bush, is certain to be exacerbated by his association (perhaps recent association) with some of the most authoritarian and extreme personalities of the Christian Right, namely the Reverend John Hagee; the Family Research Council; and the American Family Association which sponsored Perry’s day of prayer and fasting on August 6 of this year.  The AFA is noted for its organized boycotts of numerous high profile American companies such as (Texas based) American Airlines; Ford Motor Co.; Home Depot; Procter and Gamble; Hallmark Cards and Walt Disney because they in some way “support the homosexual agenda.”  Governor Perry is stating that he plans to focus his campaign for president on the issues of job creation and the economy, the threat to freedom posed by big government, and the failures of the Obama presidency.  Why he would want to become closely identified with controversial figures largely identified with the issues of homosexuality and Biblical “end-times” as opposed to the issues likely to swing the election next year is a mystery.  In any case, it is sure to become a distraction and repeated point of controversy for him.

Governor Perry will be an interesting and colorful candidate.  He has a lot to offer Republicans and independent conservatives, but he can be multi-faceted and paradoxical as we saw from the dust up over his recent remarks in Aspen, Colorado, that illustrated the fracture points between his 10th Amendment sometimes western libertarianish conservatism, and the more southern and authoritarian religious conservatism of those whose support he now seeks.  Personally, I find his recent graphic conflation of religion and politics to be a little off-putting as it has been my experience that when some politician equates their relentless ambition with being mere clay in the hands of the Almighty Creator, it’s usually time for careful scrutiny and to check whether your wallet is missing.

Indeed there are no White Knights for they exist only in fantasy.  There are only mortal candidates with advantages and disadvantages—Governor Rick Perry being no different from the rest in that regard.  Candidate Perry will definitely liven up this race for the 2012 nomination.  He can be quite eloquent and captivating at times and he will influence this contest in ways that are not yet clear.  So, stay tuned and enjoy the ride, but fasten your seatbelt because this bronco is sure to buck.  As Sean Trende observed in his Real Clear Politics article, “A Perry nomination would probably be something of a gamble, and there’s no guarantee it would turn out well for the GOP.”

It’s never a good morning for your campaign to see a headline that declares a “top donor” is going “to bolt” from your campaign to join one of your competitors. It’s even worse when you go on to read that this top donor is taking one hundred of his fundraising friends with him:

A key New Hampshire fundraiser is taking his money — and his network — away from Tim Pawlenty and into Rick Perry’s new campaign.

Former Ambassador Gregory Slayton, a Bush ranger who raised for McCain in 2008, told POLITICO on Thursday that he plans to back Perry — and that he’s taking about 100 friends and allies across the country with him to support the Texas governor. The group includes several other Bush rangers, Slayton said.

A hundred fundraisers joining Camp Perry is, well, kind of a big deal. The fact that they are being led by a Pawlenty defector is just the latest in a continual string of bad news for the former Minnesota governor. When asked why he’s leaving Pawlenty, Slayton notes he was wooed by Perry’s job creation record — and then added: “I just have tremendous respect for Tim Pawlenty and Mary Pawlenty and their team but for whatever reason, it doesn’t look like Tim is going to take off.”

Tomorrow evening will tell us for sure, but Slayton’s simple analysis might just be the final word on Pawlenty’s campaign. For whatever reason, he just didn’t take off.

I held off on doing an Intrade state of the race yesterday because ever since Wednesday, the numbers on the Intrade markets have been fluctuating wildly. There’s always movement in the market, but the past three days have seen some pretty wide swings back and forth. Why? The investors are attempting to position themselves and their money for the results of the Ames straw poll tomorrow, and there’s honestly not a lot of consensus as to how things will shake out.

I think the conventional wisdom is that the top three spots will go in some order to Pawlenty, Bachmann, and Paul. Santorum is likely to come in fourth, and Cain is likely to come in fifth. But beyond that, it’s anyone’s guess as to how Ames will affect the race.

All that to say it has been incredibly difficult to get an accurate snapshot from Intrade this week as to where the race stands — but here’s where the investors are putting their money at this moment. Take a good look at the standings, because next week’s update will most likely be minus a couple candidates.

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

Dr. McCoy from Star Trek was famous for meeting requests for various tasks outside of his expertise by responding, “I’m a doctor, not a—” (whatever it was that he was being told to do.) Maybe some of our Presidential candidates could take a lesson.

It’s another cycle which means another series of debates where the media asks questions about ANYTHING other than what’s relevant to running the country.

Some potential replies for debates in recent memory.

“I”m a Presidential candidate, not a theologian.”

“I’m a statesman, not a high school science teacher.”

“I’m a candidate, not a music critic.”

Somehow candidates have got to discuss the real burning issues such as entitlement reform. Good luck if you expect that discussion to come from any of the debates without some interference by the candidates.

This is a biggie folks, as the debate occurs 48 hours before the Ames Straw Poll.

Have at it in the comments!

You read that right, our little internet home was linked to in an opinion piece by the man Lamar Alexander once called “Our nation’s conservative conscience”:

The Ames straw poll is not a very good predictor of who the ultimate nominee will be (George H.W. Bush won the poll in 1979, Ronald Reagan was the 1980 nominee; Pat Robertson won the poll in 1987, George H.W. Bush was the 1988 nominee; Mitt Romney won the poll in 2007, John McCain was the 2008 nominee). But it does have a tendency to fuel and give life to campaigns, and it has a second tendency to tell other candidates whether this year is worth their continued efforts or not. For example, Lamar Alexander and Dan Quayle both dropped out shortly after their low finishes in 1999 in Ames.

So Congrats to Kavon and Matt C. I guess this shows Race42012 is getting noticed. To paraphrase Vice President Biden, this is a big deal.

Race42012′s FOX News Iowa Debate Open Thread will go live at 8:30pm EST. Be there or be square.

PPP (D) North Carolina 2012 Presidential Survey

• Barack Obama 46% {45%} [45%] (46%) {47%} [44%] (47%) {47%} [46%] (44%)
• Mitt Romney 43% {45%} [44%] (43%) {44%} [42%] (44%) {44%} [43%] (44%)

• Barack Obama 48%
• Rick Perry 40%

• Barack Obama 50% {46%}
• Michele Bachmann 40% {43%}

• Barack Obama 50% {46%} [48%]
• Herman Cain 37% {42%} [37%]

• Barack Obama 52% {50%} [52%] (52%) {52%} [51%] (51%) {50%} [52%] (48%)
• Sarah Palin 39% {42%} [38%] (40%) {40%} [40%] (41%) {41%} [38%] (43%)

(more…)

Or, In Politics Timing is Everything.

The Washington Post describes the next three days, starting today, as the most important 72 hours in race for 2012 thus far. They are not overstating their case: the pre-Ames debate, the Iowa State Fair, the Ames Straw Poll, and Perry’s announcement will all happen over the next three days. By Sunday, the landscape of this race will have been irrevocably altered.

Conventional wisdom says Ames is do-or-die for Tim Pawlenty. Most pundits, if not all, say Tim Pawlenty needs to win or place at Ames to continue his campaign. They are correct. Conventional wisdom also says Michele Bachmann will win the straw poll. A week ago, that was an easy money bet.

Heading into this vital 72 hour stretch, though, I don’t know if it still is.

Ever since Bachmann caught fire after the New Hampshire debate, I (along with many, many others) have been saying that she would fizzle out in an equally dramatic fashion. She was highly overrated and entirely unvetted, and was simply a placeholder for an uneasy Tea Party/conservative primary electorate that were uneasy with their current options.

Well, that fizzle may have begun. And it couldn’t have come at a worse time for Bachmann.

Nationally, it’s being affirmed in poll after poll. FOX had Bachmann at 11% last month, and she’s down to 7% in their latest. CNN had her at 12, and now she’s down to 7. Marist has her pegged at 8%. She’s sunk back into the mid- to high-single digits. But it’s not just nationally, and therein lies the problem. Michele peaked at around 30% in Iowa about one month ago (29% in one poll, 32% in another). In the latest Rasmussen Iowa survey, she was back down to 22%.

Bachmann is fading. Part of it, of course, might have to do with the buzz around Rick Perry as he becomes a viable option. But part of it is regular old political wisdom: easy come, easy go. It was expected by anyone who didn’t have their heads in the sand. The Bachmann campaign has to be cursing the bad timing, however.

In politics, timing really is everything. In 2008, Mike Huckabee opened up a lead on Mitt Romney in Iowa in late November – a lead which held through December but then began narrowing as the calendar page turned. For Huckabee, the Iowa caucuses could not have come quickly enough — and of course, they did come before Romney could regain his footing in the state. Had the caucuses been held a couple weeks later, Romney may have been able to win.

This year, Bachmann has got to be wishing the straw poll was held last week. Or last month. She peaked too early and is heading into this Ames home stretch on a downward decline. Meanwhile, Ron Paul is gaining a bunch of momentum, and even Tim Pawlenty seems to be on a small upswing in the state. Those are her two closest competitors, and either one of them could potentially pass her on Saturday – spelling trouble for her sliding campaign.

The thing that could change this all is the debate tonight. Jon Huntsman will be making his debate debut, and will probably be getting a lot of attention because of it. But even more attention will be lavished on Bachmann precisely because she is seen as the frontrunner in Iowa. The question mark – and it is a big one – is how she will perform under pressure. She will no doubt get tougher questions here than she did in NH, and will have a chance to either shore up her faltering support and win Ames, or put an exclamation mark on the decline and watch her chances continue to fade out of reach.

P.S. Over at Intrade, the contract for Bachmann to win Ames has also declined – from a high of 79 down to 50.

Thad McCotter is not invited to tonight’s GOP candidate debate sponsored by Fox News. So, he’ll be live streaming his own responses to the questions discussed on his website. Here’s his press release:

Tonight from the Iowa State Fair WHO Crystal Studio, U.S Representative and Presidential candidate Thaddeus McCotter will live-stream his responses to tonight’s GOP debate. Responses will be streaming on McCotter2012.com and our Facebook page

 

TIME: 9 pm ET, (8PM CT, 6 PM, PT)
LOCATION: Iowa State Fair WHO Crystal Studio

CNN / Opinion Research Republican National Primary, General Election Matchups

• Romney – 23% (22)
• Perry – 18% (17)
• Paul – 14% (12)
• Bachmann – 9% (14)
• Gingrich – 8% (5)
• Cain – 5% (7)
• Huntsman – 5% (1)
• Pawlenty – 3% (4)
• Santorum – 3% (2)
• Johnson – * (*)
• McCotter – * (*)
• Someone Else / None / No Opinion – 11% (15)

(more…)

Below is a link to a surprise, impromptu interview with Mitt Romney in Iowa. It’s kinda fun.

The interview itself isn’t all that remarkable. It only lasted a minute or two, and they didn’t cover much more than pleasantries. So why post it? Because of the contrast to the other guy.

Mitt was totally at ease, and I suspect just about anyone of our candidates would have handled it equally well. I do, however, have difficulty imagining Barack Obama being quite so comfortable in a similar situation without a teleprompter somewhere in the vicinity. Instead, there would have been a lot of ums and ahs, and plenty of filibustering to cover up not answering any questions.

There was one piece of hard news contained in the clip. It was revealed that the rumor that Giuliani was busy hiring New Hampshire staff was not accurate. His people have denied it, saying the Mayor hasn’t decided what he was doing yet and is not looking to hire anybody.

(h/t Joe)

A terrific new resource for us 2012 news junkies was launched today – 2012Tweets.com.

2012Tweets.com allows the 2012 obsessed (such as me) to follow the unfiltered conversation – in real time – of the candidates, staff, media, and grassroots leaders in the thick of the 2012 race.

2012Tweets is a one-stop shop for the latest news and developments from the campaign trail and is brought to us by Ben Golnik of Golnik Strategies. Ben is one of the most prominent thought-leaders and innovators in Minnesota conservative politics. It is no surprise that he is behind such a useful and innovative new resource.

Be sure to head on over to 2012Tweets.com and check it out.

The Miami Herald has the story:

Rudy Giuliani is quietly working to hire political operatives in New Hampshire for a possible presidential bid.

That’s according to several people with direct knowledge of the effort. They are telling The Associated Press that representatives for the former New York City mayor have contacted veteran New Hampshire campaign strategists in recent days about joining a Giuliani campaign. These people spoke to the AP on the condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to disclose the information.

They say that Giuliani’s team worries that Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s all-but-certain campaign could scoop up the few remaining top operatives in the first-in-the-nation primary state.

Read the rest here.

Hat-tip: The Argo Journal.

PPP (D) Colorado 2012 Presidential Survey

• Barack Obama 48% (47%)
• Mitt Romney 41% (41%)

• Barack Obama 51%
• Michele Bachmann 39%

• Barack Obama 51%
• Rick Perry 38%

• Barack Obama 51%
• Herman Cain 35%

• Barack Obama 54% (55%)
• Sarah Palin 38% (36%)

(more…)

FOX News GOP Presidential Primary

(more…)

No matter who you support in the Republican primary, the Politico article about the Obama campaign’s strategy against would-be nominee Mitt Romney should have you outraged. The fact that the President of the United States is using Chicago-style tactics (no one, not even liberals were fooled by the weirdness nonsense) to try and savage the Republican nominee is beneath if not the man, than at least the office of the Presidency. However, no one on the right is really surprised by this and neither should anyone else. This President is a total, abject, complete failure, by almost every measuring stick. And this will be what the voters focus on in 2012.

In case anyone has forgotten, in January 2009, the unemployment rate was “at a 16-year high” of 7.2%. Today, after the $789,000,000,000.00 stimulus that was going to keep it under 8%, we have an unemployment rate of 9.1%. Millions of Americans are out of work or have stopped looking for work. In the meantime, the President and his party are solely responsible for passing an atrocious, complicated, government-knows-best piece of garbage known as Obamacare. Our national is over $14.5 trillion. In January 2009 it was $10.66 trillion. Our closest European ally Great Britain and our greatest Middle Eastern ally Israel have been regularly insulted. The Gulf Coast is still recovering from the greatest environmental disaster in recent memory. The Libyan intervention is a stalemate and Syria is descending into civil war. The stock market is down over 700 points in the last three days. And for the first time since it has been rated, America’s credit rating is no longer AAA.

This is the Obama record and it is awful. At least Jimmy Carter had the Camp David Accords. Whether it is Mitt Romney, Rick Perry or whoever, the Republican nominee will have numerous opportunities to stand before America without the filter of the media. That nominee will get the chance to present this record before the America people and tear it apart, showing the utter failure of leadership from the man in the White House. Let President Obama focus on character assassination and innuendos. We Republicans should focus on the incumbent’s abysmal record. It’s the one thing President Obama most fervently wants to avoid talking about.

And it’s starting in Iowa this week.

From CNN:

After a more than two-month hiatus, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is planning to crash the presidential party once again with a heartland-themed re-launch of her “One Nation” bus tour this week in Iowa, according to a Palin fundraising email obtained by CNN.

Palin is bringing her Constitution-draped bus to the Iowa State Fair, just 30 miles south of where the Republican presidential field will take the stage on Thursday for a presidential debate in Ames.

It’s not yet clear which day the tour begins, but her surprise arrival in Iowa will happen before the closely watched Ames straw poll.

While the dog days of the race for the presidency creep along here in the States, over in Merry Old England, riots have been dominating the news. British conservative and proud curmudgeon John Derbyshire weighs in on the events that are taking place in his native land:

Why does the British government not do its duty? Because it is the government of a modern Western nation, sunk like the rest of us in trembling, whimpering guilt over class and race.

Through British veins runs the poisonous fake idealism of “human rights” and “sensitivity,” of happy-clappy multicultural groveling and sick, weak, deracinated moral universalism — the rotten fruit of a debased, sentimentalized Christianity.

When not begging for forgiveness and chastisement from those who rightfully despise him, the modern Brit is lost in contemplation of his shiny new car or tweeting new gadget; or else he has given over all his attention to some vapid TV production or soccer team.

I treasure my faint, fading recollections of Britain when she was still, for a few years longer, a nation.

Today Britain is merely a place, a bazaar. Let it burn!

Derb’s usual tongue-in-cheek cynicism notwithstanding, the old Brit does make a very good point about the manner in which the Anglosphere has become decadent. And by decadent, I don’t mean that, gasp, someone, somewhere might be engaging in sexual activity in a manner which garners the disapproval of another. Quite frankly, viewing sex as the primary focus of morality is highly superficial and totally misses the point, or at least misses my point. When I refer to the decline of the Anglosphere into decadence, I am talking about the manner in which Anglosphere cultures are losing the core values that brought them to the pinnacle of the globe in the first place. These values include things like personal responsibility, recognizing that actions have consequences, thrift, strength of character and of will, and the willingness to dedicate one’s life to something greater than oneself. Another of these values is the search for truth, and the realization that, as the great Briton George Orwell put it, to see what is in front of one’s nose needs a constant struggle. It was that search for truth that made the Anglosphere the primary propagator and defender of individual liberty for a thousand years.

The great Lady Thatcher once observed, “In my lifetime, all our problems have come from mainland Europe and all the solutions have come from the English-speaking nations across the world.” Today’s politically correct world would have branded her a bigot for such a statement, but there is more than a kernel of truth that lies therein. From the Magna Carta on down, it has been the Anglosphere that has been pushing the world towards an organization of societies that leads to greater recognition of and fealty to the primacy of the individual, and the submission of the collective to the individual, not the other way about. Indeed, were it not for the Anglosphere, the 20th Century would likely have been the point at which the globe was swallowed up by the competing ideologies of Communism and Fascism, which had so enticed the peoples of Asia and Continental Europe.

It is important to remember that there is nothing “natural” about human liberty. The most natural order is the law of the jungle, where man responds only to his passions and urges and the strong enslaves, captures, and kills the weak. To recognize individual dignity and rights takes the development of morality and ethics, something that separates man from beast. And despite our many millennia of humanity, it remains true that most of human history has been a story of domination and not freedom. It has not been the norm throughout history for humans to organize their societies in a way that unleashes human freedom. That the Anglosphere has been the primary proponent of such a method of organization for the past few centuries is to its credit.

And all of that, I think, is why someone like Derbyshire sees a debased culture in one that values Snooki over stoicism. As Derb points out, the contrast between the Britons of old and the modern-day Englishman admiring the shiniest of his new gadgets is telling, and the same can be said of our own society across the pond. The reality is that we here in the States have lost much of our drive to be the pinnacle of civilization and are instead placated by objects that shine and glisten, not unlike our primate ancestors from which we descended and evolved. If Western civilization is at some point lost to the bowels of history, the decline will have come not from without, but from within.

In case you haven’t taken a look at Race42012′s RCP widget on the left-hand sidebar today, Barack Obama currently sits at 43.5% to 51.2%  in their approval/disapproval polling average. There are rumors that President Obama’s approval will head south of 40% for the first time in Gallup’s polling shortly. It brings a smile to my face that we have reached at point in the polling that not even Nate Silver can spin.

The other number to keep an eye on is Intrade’s Obama to win reelection contract, which currently sits at 50.2. I expect the contract to fall below 50.0 sometime within the next week or so.

Per The Corner:

Today we learn the Republican picks in both the House and the Senate. Boehner is sending Reps. Jeb Hensarling (R., Texas), Dave Camp (R., Mich.) and Fred Upton (R., Mich.). Mitch McConnell is sending Sens. Pat Toomey (R., Pa.), Jon Kyl (R., Ariz.), and Rob Portman (R., Ohio).

My two-bit reaction to those picks: The only real tea-party type to make it onto the committee is Toomey. Hensarling and Kyl are solid conservatives but also party leadership and Washington pros who know how the game is played. Kyl has somewhat of a deal-maker reputation and is retiring . . . . Camp and Upton are the House’s chief appropriator Ways and Means (which handles tax policy and entitlements) and Energy and Commerce chairs, respectively. The biggest wonk among the picks is Rob Portman, a former U.S. Trade Representative and OMB Director. He’s also been discussed as a future presidential candidate, so maybe he has the most to lose as well.

Read the rest here.

McClatchy-Marist 2012 Presidential Survey

Republican Nomination

• Mitt Romney 21% {19%} (18%) [20%] {25%}
• Rick Perry 18% {13%}
• Sarah Palin 10% {11%} (8%) [13%] {18%}
• Rudy Giuliani 9% {13%} (9%)
• Michele Bachmann 8% {8%} (3%)
• Herman Cain 6% {5%} (2%)
• Ron Paul 3% {5%} (7%)
• Rick Santorum 3% {1%} (2%)
• Newt Gingrich 2% {2%} (4%) [10%] {16%}
• Tim Pawlenty 2% {5%} (2%) [2%] {6%}
• Gary Johnson 2% {0%}
• Buddy Roemer 2%
• Jon Huntsman 1% {2%} (1%)
• Fred Karger 0% {0%}
• Undecided 14% {15%} (11%) [14%] {13%}

General Election

• Barack Obama 48% {48%}
• Rudy Giuliani 43% {41%}

• Barack Obama 46% {46%} (46%) [51%] (44%)
• Mitt Romney 41% {42%} (45%) [38%] (46%)

• Barack Obama 49% {47%}
• Tim Pawlenty 36% {33%}

• Barack Obama 52% {49%}
• Michele Bachmann 35% {37%}

• Barack Obama 52% {48%}
• Rick Perry 33% {39%}

• Barack Obama 56% {56%} (56%) [56%] (52%)
• Sarah Palin 35% {30%} (34%) [30%] (40%)

(more…)

Michele Bachmann had a little fun at President Obama’s expense yesterday, but she almost — but not quite — stuck her foot in her mouth doing it.

“I know you’re not used to seeing a president without teleprompters, but I’m just here to tell you President O’Bach — President Bachmann will not have teleprompters in the White House.”

Oops. Maybe she could have used one of them to help her with that speech. 

Now enjoy this slip of the tongue for the humor, but don’t take it too seriously. Gaffes by politicians are all too common, especially Presidential hopefuls who give a dozen or more speeches a week. They all slip up now and again. Few are this ironically funny, though.

(Story and video here)

Excerpts from Politico:

Obama plan: Destroy Romney

Barack Obama’s aides and advisers are preparing to center the president’s re-election campaign on a ferocious personal assault on Mitt Romney’s character and business background, a strategy grounded in the early stage expectation that the former Massachusetts governor is the likely GOP nominee.

The dramatic and unabashedly negative turn is the product of political reality. Obama remains personally popular, but pluralities in recent polling disapprove of his handling of his job and Americans fear the country is on the wrong track. His aides are increasingly resigned to running for re-election in a glum nation. And so the candidate who ran on “hope” in 2008 has little choice four years later but to run a slashing, personal campaign aimed at disqualifying his likeliest opponent.

In a move that will make some Democrats shudder, Obama’s high command has even studied President Bush’s 2004 takedown of Sen. John F. Kerry, a senior campaign adviser told POLITICO, for clues on how a president with middling approval ratings can defeat a challenger.

“Unless things change and Obama can run on accomplishments, he will have to kill Romney,” said a prominent Democratic strategist aligned with the White House.

The onslaught would have two aspects. The first is personal: Obama’s re-elect will portray the public Romney as inauthentic, unprincipled and, in a word used repeatedly by Obama’s advisers in about a dozen interviews, “weird.”

…

Romney officials shrug off the tough talk, arguing that there’s nothing Obama can do that will turn the campaign away from functioning as a referendum on his stewardship of the economy.

“There’s so many wonderful ironies here: Obama spent his whole political career perfecting the best argument against Bush 43 and now he’s going to run as 43?” said Romney strategist Stuart Stevens, who also worked for Bush. “They can try anything they want — but this race is going to be about the economy.”

…

They don’t have a choice. Even Obama’s top aides don’t expect unemployment to be below eight percent when next November rolls around.

…

Romney, currently the frontrunner for the Republican nomination, isn’t the candidate Democrats would most like to face. That honor goes to former Gov. Sarah Palin or Rep. Michele Bachmann, vocal conservatives who may not be able to reach swing voters. Romney’s moderate record as the one-term governor of a liberal state – the target of conservative rivals’ criticism – could also make him a strong general election candidate.

…

The attack on Romney is, to the Massachusetts Republican, nothing new. Senator Ted Kennedy used elements of it against him in the 1994 Senate race, and his former adviser Bob Shrum summarized the current case this way: “You don’t know what he really believes, he’s been on both sides of issues and, by the way, he didn’t create jobs he destroyed jobs while getting rich.”

So there you have it. Romney will attack the President on his record. Obama will attack Romney on his character. Hardly any surprise there. Both Romney’s supporters and detractors have been predicting that for years here on this board.

This will be an interesting fight. Romney will try to convince people that the economy is bad, and he can fix it. Obama will try to convince people that Romney is evil incarnate, and he isn’t. Romney will be trying to convince people that he isn’t so bad. Obama will be trying to convince people that the economy isn’t so bad. Romney plays upon people’s hopes. Obama plays upon people’s fears. Who will win?

One danger for Obama is that if they focus their strategy on trashing Romney, and people don’t buy it; it will weaken their already weak credibility even further.

Obama’s people claim it was Bush’s 2004 strategy. That may be true, but they are forgetting that it was also Jimmy Carter’s 1980 strategy, and while few people will think of Romney as the next Reagan, I suspect a whole lot more will equate Obama to Carter than they will to Bush W.

And what of the other GOP hopefuls in all this? With Romney focusing solely upon Obama, and Obama focusing solely upon Romney, either the two of them suck all the oxygen out of the room, or they will destroy each other leaving an opening for the other guys to exploit. I would not place a bet one way or the other.

Grab your popcorn. This will be fun to watch.

***Update***

Romney’s campaign took next to no time responding. Here is his campaign manager Matt Rhoades’ official statement:

“It is disgraceful that President Obama’s campaign has launched his re-election with the stated goal to ‘kill’ his opponent with an onslaught of negative and personal attacks. President Obama will say and do desperate things to hold onto power because he knows he has failed. Neither despicable threats, nor President Obama’s billion dollar negative campaign, will put Americans back to work, save their homes, or restore their hopes. On November 6, 2012, this will change.”

Not letting grass grow under their feet, they released the following web-ad:

Obviously they are making the most of the attention they are receiving from Obama’s minions.

One final note: Did you notice that it was Mitt’s spokesman who responded to the news of Obama’s campaign, and not Mitt himself? I just love watching these tactical maneuverings.

The Wisconsin Recall Elections for six Republican state senators were held today. Consider this your open thread to discuss the results, which can be found here.

UPDATE #1: As of 10:20 ET, two of the six races have been called in favor of the Republican incumbents. Cowles and Harsdorf have won their races to remain senators in districts 2 and 10, respectively.

UPDATE #2: As of 10:45 ET, the third race in district 14 looks like it will come down to how large of a margin the Democratic challenger can rack up in Sauk County. At the end of the day, though, with Waupaca coming through for the GOP, this seat should remain in GOP hands. However, the GOP is trailing in each of the final three districts at the moment…

UPDATE #3: As of 11:00 ET, district 14 has been officially called for the GOP, so we win the first three races of the night. Of the final three, however, it looks like districts 8 and 32 will be flipping to the Dems. District 18 is incredibly close but is also leaning Democratic based on the returns so far — more than likely, that district will determine control of the state senate. It looks like for one week until two Democratic senators go up in recall elections of their own, the Democrats will have regained that control.

UPDATE #4: As of 11:45 ET, districts 18 and 32 have been called for the Democratic challengers. This puts the record at 3-2 for the GOP tonight, and means the state senate balance of power currently sits at 17-16 in favor of the Republicans. All eyes are now on the remaining precincts in district 8 — fifteen from smaller counties and twelve from Milwaukee County.

UPDATE #5: As of 1:30 ET, local Wisconsin station News 3 is calling District 8 for the GOP — meaning that the GOP loses two seats in tonight’s elections but maintains control of the state senate! Two Democrats are up for recall election next Tuesday, and the conventional wisdom is that the GOP has a decent shot at one of the two seats. That’s all from me tonight. Congrats, GOP on a 4-2 record and maintaining control.

Michele Bachmann is landing some key and potentially powerful endorsements in the week leading up to the Ames straw poll.

Yesterday, Danny Carroll endorsed Bachmann. Carroll is a former chairman of the Family Leader, but perhaps more importantly, he was the co-chairman for Mike Huckabee’s Iowa campaign in 2008. With Ed Rollins and Danny Carroll both on board, the scales seem to be tipping toward Bachmann in the so-called “Huckabee primary” in Iowa.

Then today, Ryan Rhodes endorsed Michele. Rhodes is the “founder and chairman” of the Iowa Tea Party. The Iowa Tea Party was, until now, neutral in the primary race, so breaking that neutrality is a big move. The Des Moines Register notes in the linked article that this endorsement by Rhodes is “significant because the Iowa [Tea Party] activists could move as a bloc.”

With over a hundred evangelical leaders, Danny Carroll, and Ryan Rhodes behind her, Michele Bachmann certainly has the wind at her back and in her sails heading into Ames.

Politico reports that Mike Huckabee will, in addition to manning the Fox News booth, play some music at the Tim Pawlenty and Herman Cain tents at the Ames Straw Poll:

Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain today announced the entertainment for his booth at the Ames straw poll festivities on Saturday, August 13, 2011.
Continue Reading

Cain will join Governor Mike Huckabee at noon at the Friends of Herman Cain tent to share their musical talents with straw poll attendees.

…Huckabee’s daughter, Pawlenty adviser Sarah Huckabee Sanders, tweets that her father will also “be playing with Sonicflood and the Nadas @timpawlenty’s tent at the Ames Straw Poll on Sat! Very excited!”

Huckabee, the story of the 2008 Straw Poll, has connections to both candidates, with Pawlenty employing his daughter and Cain attracting FairTax supporters, who backed Huck the last time around.

For all we know, none of the other candidates may have asked Huckabee to stop by their tent, so perhaps prudence dictates that we not read too much into this.

Gallup 2012 Republican Favorability Survey

Name Recognition

• Sarah Palin 95% (96%) [96%] {95%}
• Rudy Giuliani 90% (89%) [87%] {86%}
• Mitt Romney 86% (84%) [85%] {86%}
• Newt Gingrich 85% (84%) [85%] {85%}
• Michele Bachmann 78% (76%) [78%] {77%}
• Ron Paul 78% (77%) [78%] {77%}
• Tim Pawlenty 56% (54%) [55%] {54%}
• Rick Perry 54% (54%) [56%] {55%}
• Rick Santorum 51% (50%) [50%] {49%}
• Herman Cain 45% (46%) [47%] {44%}
• Jon Huntsman 39% (40%) [40%] {41%}

(more…)