Rick Perry, the GOP’s new BMOC; Mitt Romney, not so much
Mitt Romney is playing the long game in his bid for the GOP presidential nomination, which is pretty smart for a couple of reasons:
1.) His top two challengers, Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry, both have high probability of doing and saying stupid things that would cause their self-destruction.
2.) He really has no other choice. He knows he’s not the hot date that Republican primary voters dream about as their escort to the big dance. He just hopes to be the steady, nerdish, boring guy — the one who shows up driving his mother’s Audi — that they’ll settle for once other options are no longer available.
Two new polls demonstrate the wisdom and necessity of that approach. Gallup, for example, reports that 29 percent of Republicans now favor Perry as their party’s nominee. Romney, who drew 27 percent as recently as June, has fallen back to 17 percent. Ron Paul, at 13 percent, and Bachmann, at 10 percent, are the only other two in double digits. (Herman Cain, a previous flavor of the month, has declined to 4 percent.)
A poll by Public Policy Polling produces a parallel prognostication, putting Perry at 33 percent. Romney draws 20 percent and Bachmann 16 percent. You have to think that as Bachmann fades, most of her hard-core tea-party support will gravitate to the man from Texas, not the man from Massachusetts.
So patience, Mitt, patience. Be the Audi-driving tortoise, not the Texas jackrabbit.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
838 comments Add your comment
WOODSTOCK MIKE
August 25th, 2011
10:47 am
“I know you’re not that naive and/or immature to believe that everything that politicians say on the campaign trail is some kind of truth cemented in stone.”
Maybe you should tell this to Jay because all I’ve seen lately are clips from the past about things Rick Perry said…
md
August 25th, 2011
10:48 am
Adam…….yes, our reaction is the choice………..
And our choices are why we are where we are……………….if one chose to study how to make dialing telephones, that individual best be thinking about making some more choices, because that choice is no longer viable………………..
Adam
August 25th, 2011
10:48 am
WOODSTOCK MIKE: My point is that new regulations will have an effect and typically the effect is that it’s harder to do business. If there are more regulations one can only assume that it will make the process more difficult. Yes??
And this is always a bad thing? I could maximize my profits through slave labor if it were legal, but those darn “regulations” just make it harder to do things that way.
Jay
August 25th, 2011
10:49 am
Woodstock, don’t you think the fact that we have tens of thousands, probably hundreds of thousands, of houses in foreclosure and large tracts of half-built developments and plummeting values for existing housing — don’t you think those things have vastly more importance than allegedly tighter regulations?
Brosephus
August 25th, 2011
10:51 am
Maybe you should tell this to Jay because all I’ve seen lately are clips from the past about things Rick Perry said…
Maybe Jay’s trying to warn you of the folly in electing Perry. Seems that you’re not fond of Obama after the fact. Jay’s giving you a heads up on Perry BEFORE you put him into office.
WOODSTOCK MIKE
August 25th, 2011
10:53 am
“Woodstock, don’t you think the fact that we have tens of thousands, probably hundreds of thousands, of houses in foreclosure and large tracts of half-built developments and plummeting values for existing housing — don’t you think those things have vastly more importance than allegedly tighter regulations?”
Yes Jay, I certainly do. And I also think that the governments response to crashing prices has been ineffective. Would you agree? I happen to work in real estate so I am fully aware of housing prices and I believe this is likely the most important issue right now in America. Not saying I know the answer or a Republican has any better ideas to approach the problem, but I know this administration has been ineffective. The government assistance programs to help people have been a complete joke no matter how the media tries to spin it.
Adam
August 25th, 2011
10:53 am
md: And our choices are why we are where we are
No they’re not. I didn’t choose to be white, but I am! I didn’t choose to be male, BUT I AM! I didn’t choose to be born to the mother I was born to, but I was! And I didn’t choose for my parents to help me in any monetary way, but they did. I didn’t choose to have to have corrective lenses, but I do! Those things chose ME.
WOODSTOCK MIKE
August 25th, 2011
10:54 am
“And this is always a bad thing? I could maximize my profits through slave labor if it were legal, but those darn “regulations” just make it harder to do things that way.”
In other words you agree with me, regs hamper a business.
md
August 25th, 2011
10:55 am
Adam………choices do have a starting point…………no, we don’t choose where that starting point is……..but from there, it is choices………….
Jay
August 25th, 2011
10:56 am
“And I also think that the governments response to crashing prices has been ineffective. Would you agree? I happen to work in real estate so I am fully aware of housing prices and I believe this is likely the most important issue right now in America. Not saying I know the answer or a Republican has any better ideas to approach the problem, but I know this administration has been ineffective. The government assistance programs to help people have been a complete joke no matter how the media tries to spin it.”
Yes, I do think the government’s response has been ineffective, Woodstock.
But your own response is interesting. You apparently believe that it is proper for government to try to intervene in some way in private industry to try to artificially raise housing prices, and are disappointed that its limited efforts to date have been unsuccessful. Is there any other way to read that?
WOODSTOCK MIKE
August 25th, 2011
10:56 am
“Maybe Jay’s trying to warn you of the folly in electing Perry. Seems that you’re not fond of Obama after the fact. Jay’s giving you a heads up on Perry BEFORE you put him into office.”
I vote for the best man to get the job done. If you think that Obama’s performance has earned him another term, whether it’s his fault or George Bush’s so be it…
md
August 25th, 2011
10:57 am
Knowing regs have costs associated with them…….and knowing that demand and price have a corresponding relationship……….what IS the effect?
WOODSTOCK MIKE
August 25th, 2011
10:58 am
“That’s an interesting response, Woodstock. You apparently believe that it is proper for government to try to intervene in some way in private industry to try to artificially raise housing prices, and are disappointed that its limited efforts to date have been unsuccessful.”
The housing industry is hardly private, come on Jay… If the housing industry is becoming a matter of national security I say the government should intervene.
Adam
August 25th, 2011
10:59 am
md: The starting point is where the availability of choices is. No one has even close to an equal starting point. And no choice is without effects and choices made by others to potentially increase or counteract any net positive effect.
Brosephus
August 25th, 2011
11:01 am
If you think that Obama’s performance has earned him another term, whether it’s his fault or George Bush’s so be it…
Never stated such a thing. I love it how the “conservative” mind switches to deflection mode without a bat of the eyelashes.
Adam
August 25th, 2011
11:01 am
WOODSTOCK MIKE: In other words you agree with me, regs hamper a business.
If all you care about is maximizing profit at the expense of any morality, sure, businesses are hampered by moral regulations.
Jay
August 25th, 2011
11:03 am
Woodstock, did you support the auto bailout? TARP?
md
August 25th, 2011
11:03 am
Adam……….where we are does not equate to being in the same place………………….
And those choices made by others don’t come into play until we’ve made the choice to be in that position…………………once we’ve left the starting point.
md
August 25th, 2011
11:08 am
And just for kicks and giggles, all that money sitting off-shore isn’t there because of regulations…..right??
WOODSTOCK MIKE
August 25th, 2011
11:09 am
“Woodstock, did you support the auto bailout? TARP?”
If I knew the details of each I could give you a better answer. I still can’t figure out where all the money went? But, if the government KNEW the banking system could fail I support TARP. Auto bail out seemed to me like those companies took advantage of the situation and possibly made their financial positions look worse than they really were…
Jay, I gotta get back to work but I want you to know (even though you won’t really care) you’re becoming my favorite Democrat. Have a good day sir and I will talk to you later…
Adam
August 25th, 2011
11:09 am
md: And those choices made by others don’t come into play until we’ve made the choice to be in that position
And any choice we make, no matter what it is, even supposedly NOT making a choice, puts us in that position. So your argument there is nullified.
where we are does not equate to being in the same place
This is acrobatics. What do you mean by “where we are” if you’re not talking about the starting point. A starting point that is not the same for everyone?
Jay
August 25th, 2011
11:15 am
md, that point about off-shore profits would be relevant except for two very important things:
1.) Our economic problems are NOT caused by a shortage of capital to invest. With interest rates at record lows and corporations sitting on huge stockpiles of money, we’re swimming in capital. So bringing in even more capital from offshore would accomplish nothing.
2.) The last time the tax laws were changed to allow offshore profits to be brought home with little taxation, companies promised to use it to invest here and create new jobs here. They did not. They used that capital to close factories and move industries to China and elsewhere.
md
August 25th, 2011
11:17 am
“even supposedly NOT making a choice”
No such thing……………everything we do is a choice……….that is fact Adam.
Parents choose starting points……and much of childhood……..
“we do” seems to be what you are not comprehending…………..
md
August 25th, 2011
11:22 am
Jay,
per your #1…………small busineeses are NOT getting access to capital………regardless of rates……their ratios don’t support getting more loans………………and some corps are sitting on piles of capital does not equate to all……………
As for #2……….fine………leave it there……….then we are assured that 0% is used here.
I’d say it makes more sense to bring it back tax free on the chance of at least some of it circulating vs the 0% circulating now………………
Jay
August 25th, 2011
11:26 am
“per your #1…………small busineeses are NOT getting access to capital………regardless of rates……their ratios don’t support getting more loans………………and some corps are sitting on piles of capital does not equate to all……………”
md, your implication that allowing big corporations to repatriate profits would somehow result in small business getting loans … sorry, I know of no mechanism by which that could happen.
And I have never implied that ALL corporations are swimming in cash. That would be foolish. But in general, across the board, corporate profits are higher today than ever in American history.
md
August 25th, 2011
11:27 am
And Jay……just bringing that money back in will put it in OUR banks…….which will be working for us……vs working for some bank/country on the other side of the planet.
md
August 25th, 2011
11:29 am
“And I have never implied that ALL corporations are swimming in cash. That would be foolish. But in general, across the board, corporate profits are higher today than ever in American history.”
Across what board?? The majority of corps in this country are small businesses…….without them, we will not grow…………….and they are not sitting on piles of cash………..
Adam
August 25th, 2011
11:29 am
md: No such thing……………everything we do is a choice
Hence my use of the word “supposedly.”
Parents choose starting points……and much of childhood……..
And their friends and neighbors and people who hire them and people who run the companies that hire them and their parents and their parents before them…..
Adam
August 25th, 2011
11:31 am
And anyway, choosing everything “we do” has very little to do with the end outcome of borrowing or getting a job. In the end, it depends on what job you were ALLOWED to get, and what borrowing you were ALLOWED to do, and how much you were able to pay back because of that job you were ALLOWED to have.
Jay
August 25th, 2011
11:31 am
“Across what board?? The majority of corps in this country are small businesses…….without them, we will not grow…………….and they are not sitting on piles of cash……….”.
So small businesses have overseas profits they’d like to bring home? Is that your argument?
md
August 25th, 2011
11:32 am
“And their friends and neighbors and people who hire them and people who run the companies that hire them and their parents and their parents before them…..”
And who chose their friends? neighbors? people who hire them?
Adam
August 25th, 2011
11:33 am
md: And who chose their friends? neighbors? people who hire them?
So am I correct in determining that the “friends” part is the part that you think is all about choice, and the rest of it you agree with?
md
August 25th, 2011
11:37 am
“So small businesses have overseas profits they’d like to bring home? Is that your argument?”
No……..
Two separate but intertwined aspects of the equation.
That money sitting off shore does us no good at all………bringing it here changes the dynamic……and who knows how it would be put to work.
If banks have more money sitting on the books, and have met their obligations of required capital, how aggressive do they get after that?? Or are many still in trouble just trying to meet the new required capital?
The point is, it has a better chance of helping being over here than it does over there……..unless we want to drive capital offshore…………..
md
August 25th, 2011
11:48 am
“In the end, it depends on what job you were ALLOWED to get, and what borrowing you were ALLOWED to do, and how much you were able to pay back because of that job you were ALLOWED to have.”
You seem to always want to put the cart in front of the horse…………allowed to get job? what skills did one choose to have/not have? where did one apply? etc……choices.
How many choices do you make in any given day Adam??
Are they compounding?
Adam
August 25th, 2011
11:55 am
md: The choice to apply doesn’t mean you’ll get the job. At the point you are hired, you were ALLOWED to have that job. Especially if you consider the current point of view of most businesses (”just be happy to have a job, you whiner”).
md
August 25th, 2011
12:00 pm
“At the point you are hired, you were ALLOWED to have that job.”
And one did nothing prior to that point……like being well groomed……or acquiring the needed skillset…….or not wearing one’s pants past their butt………….
Right?
Adam
August 25th, 2011
12:06 pm
md: Still, how much you can borrow depends on the job. And you could lose that job in an eco-bubble-burst. At that point, how much you borrowed, even if you were paying it back up till that point, is now something you can’t afford. You could afford it when you made the choice to borrow it. But your contention is that choosing to borrow at all is a poor decision, because you never have any guarantee you’ll be able to pay it back.
md
August 25th, 2011
12:28 pm
Has the “potential” to be a poor decision Adam……..that is the difference.
There are many that operate strictly on cash……their choice……if they don’t have it, then they save until they get it……….novel concept I know…………..
Houses are a bit different, but even then there are other options…………one does not have to buy a house to have shelter…………………(choices)