Thursday, January 05, 2012

 

Red State Update: Iowa Caucus Report

Well, who could have foreseen those results from Iowa a couple of weeks back? Despite average to below average debate performances and having done nothing of real note except for participate in Iowa evangelical leader Bob Vander Plaats' pay-for-pay scheme that "earned" Santorum the endorsement of several Iowa Christian religious leaders, Rick Santorum rolls out of Iowa with the most personal political relevance since he turned his back on Pennsylvania conservatives and worked for Arlen Specter's re-election.

Meanwhile, Bachmann does something that I can't remember ever happening - going from Ames Straw Poll winner to last amongst the active Iowa campaigns at the caucuses. Sure, her debate performances were uneven, but they weren't significantly worse than Santorum's - surely not worth twenty-points worse.

Perry comes out of Iowa not only disappointed, but significantly confused. Why on earth did he seem to signal his exit from the field Tuesday night, saying that he was returning to Texas instead of continuing on to South Carolina? Maybe it's just this experienced guy's opinion, but if it had been my call, I would have put a contrite but strong Rick Perry out in front of the cameras, shown that my candidate was a fighter and that he was going to carry the fight to South Carolina. Go all-in in the Palmetto State. Fight for Bachmann's supporters while courting Gingrich's unorganized crowd in the hopes that he straps on a figurative suicide bomb in his anger and tries to destroy Romney in a quixotic charge in New Hampshire. Stem Santorum's rise in South Carolina, where Santorum has no organization and has not campaigned with regularity. Come out of South Carolina in the top-two, marginalize Paul, and say that you are the candidate for the Anti-Romney movement. But what do I know...

I'll let Jackie and Dunlap from Red State Update take it from here on the Iowa wrap-up:


Labels: , , , , , , , , ,


Sunday, December 11, 2011

 

If You Missed the ABC Debate from December 10th...

Stephen Green drunkblogged it over at PJ Media. Even as his blood alcohol level increased, his analysis remained pretty much on point.

Personally, I thought that there were several shots that landed against frontrunner Newt, but that he handled himself relatively well. It was Rick Perry's strongest debate by far, and Santorum likely had his strongest night, as well.

Romney needed to come on strong, which I don't believe that he did. He looked desperate at times, and tonight might be the beginning of the end of his campaign. The proposed bet of $10,000 towards Perry was awful and made him look out of touch with the average American. (If Mitt felt that he needed to bet someone during the debate, he should have tried to get Newt to put up that $300,000+ that he scored from Fannie and Freddie Mac. That ain't chump change - ask the taxpayers who picked up the tab.)

The real surprise might be Ron Paul, who kept his crazy positions and statements to a minimum tonight and actually scored on a variety of points. I've heard from more than one wonk "in the know" that has mentioned the possibility of a Paul win in Iowa without meaning it as a punchline.

All in all, a good debate for everyone - except Mitt. I can't believe that I'm going to have to vote for one of these folks in under three months. Given that I'm not seeing any bumper stickers, yard signs, etc., here in East Tennessee, I don't think that I'm alone in that camp.

Labels: , , , ,


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?