Writerbuckeye;862785 wrote:Oh please, please, please let the Democrats try and make comparisons to Bush with Perry.

Writerbuckeye;862785 wrote:Oh please, please, please let the Democrats try and make comparisons to Bush with Perry. That would be such a losing effort that Perry might end up carrying more than 40 states on the way to victory.

BGFalcons82;862764 wrote:Why I like Rick Perry (from - http://www.boston.com/Boston/politicalintelligence/2011/08/ponzis-and-predators-perry-outlines-policies/GocJEtJGv5iKloBLrLTbmK/index.html):

Like most in the GOP, Perry espoused a muscular support for Israel amid a turbulent Mideast, saying, “Israel is not ever gonna have to worry, if I’m the president to the United States, where we’re gonna be.”
Like most Republicans, he also labeled himself a fiscal conservative bent on reining in government spending. “We’re going to stop spending the money, unless I run out of ink in a veto pen,” the governor pledged.
Asked about how the country copes with the growing cost of Social Security and other entitlement programs, Perry said political leaders had to show “courage” especially in dealing with Social Security, which he labeled a “Ponzi scheme.” He said: “I can promise you, my 27-year-old son, Social Security, under the program that we have today, will not be there.”
Perry said that before deciding how to deal with immigrants already illegally in the country, United States needed to secure its border with Mexico both to block new illegals and also to tamp down on drug-related violence.
On budget issues, Perry said he supported a balanced-budget amendment “to clearly say, if it’s not coming in, we’re not going to spend it.”
More immediately, he pledged a series of executive orders to reduce government spending and regulation, as well as to halt implementation of the federal universal health care law enacted by President Obama. “Stopping that is one of the first things we have to do as a country and as a people, because it will bankrupt this country,” he said.
Finally, on energy policy, Perry exuded a confidence in discussing the issue that is common from those hailing from such an oil-producing state. He branded himself as “all-of-the-above” supporter of all types of energy, except for the subsidies paid for ethanol production.

These statements are manna for conservatives and he speaks like he means what he says.

BGFalcons82;862797 wrote:I dunno, writer. People acquire labels, earned or unearned, and they're hard to break.

The press is already on board. For example, did you see 60 Minutes last night? Their first story was about companies relocating their business' headquarters to Zug, Switzerland and Ireland. Apparently, there are thousands of large corporations doing this to escape the 35% corporate income tax bracket, which was stated to be the 2nd highest on the planet. By doing so, these companies are saving up to $60,000,000,000 in yearly federal income taxes they don't have to pay. I suppose the logical answer would be to drop the rate from 35% to say 15% and they'd likely move back home, but that's wayyyy too much common sense. Hell, there are posters on here that would like to see it raised to 50% or more. But I digress.

My point about the press is that the 1st two companies that 60 Minutes tracked were oil companies from Texas. Coincidence???? Yeah, right.

derek bomar;862909 wrote:if someone like GE can pay no corp taxes in the US, why would they pay 15%?

derek bomar;862909 wrote:if someone like GE can pay no corp taxes in the US, why would they pay 15%?

derek bomar;862909 wrote:if someone like GE can pay no corp taxes in the US, why would they pay 15%?

BGFalcons82;862983 wrote:My point is that of the thousands of American-based companies with European HQs, they chose to go after 2 Texas-based oil companies. I'm 100% certain they weren't chosen at random.

QuakerOats;863169 wrote:I stopped watching 60 Minutes years ago ---- it is so biased and contrived it is hard to stomach.

QuakerOats;863169 wrote:I stopped watching 60 Minutes years ago ---- it is so biased and contrived it is hard to stomach.

jmog;861091 wrote:What has Obama done to keep your vote?

Writerbuckeye;861255 wrote:P-town is blind where foreign policy is concerned. He has a set view and I don't believe any Republican has ever conformed to it. However, apparently a policy of appeasement is something he does like, since Obama is keeping his vote.

Honestly, P-town, I don't know how anyone can be worried about foreign policy over domestic policy in the next election. If the economy keeps going to hell and we default, it won't matter what our foreign policy is. We'll be dead in the water.

I'd say the first step toward having a strong defense is having a healthy system at home. If that's falling apart, all the rest is going to follow pretty soon after.

ptown_trojans_1;863335 wrote:It's not that. I have a lot of issues with how he has governed. But, it is more what have the others done to sway my vote? The answer is nothing yet. That said, Romney and Perry could sway my vote with more specifics and policy over the next year.

jmog;863819 wrote:What has Obama done to "sway" your vote, shouldn't each election be open minded not stuck on whoever you voted for last time? Why should your vote be stuck with Obama unless someone else can "sway" it? Shouldn't you be looking with an open mind and the candidate's record and pick who you believe to be the best person for the job?

Looking at Obama's record, there are quite a few in the republican race who should easily get a vote over Obama from anyone who isn't WAY left of center.

BoatShoes;863833 wrote:No. No. No. No. Can we all agree, that at least when it comes to the demographics on this board, that I tend to be to the left of most of the people who regularly post? Can we all agree on that? And I'm sitting here, from my vantage point, looking at choosing between a President who has governed moderately (he passed Newt Gingrich and the boy's 90's health care plan after all) and very hardcore conservatives. The only candidates on their face who look appealing to me might be John Huntsman or Mitt Romney and Ptown has noted how Romney has, at the very least, been trumping up the hardcore conservative rhetoric.

Even Karl Rove has said the GOP is going way far right in this primary. Why would a moderate be interested in that?

BGFalcons82;861381 wrote:Barring a last-minute Chris Christie change of heart, Mr. Perry has my vote. Prepare for the assault on him because he's from Texas. We're about to find out how being from one of the 58 states can be a negative.

Devils Advocate;863884 wrote:Y'all know that Perry was Al Gore's Campaign manager right

Devils Advocate;863884 wrote:Y'all know that Perry was Al Gore's Campaign manager right

BoatShoes;863833 wrote:Even Karl Rove has said the GOP is going way far right in this primary. Why would a moderate be interested in that?

BoatShoes;863833 wrote:No. No. No. No. Can we all agree, that at least when it comes to the demographics on this board, that I tend to be to the left of most of the people who regularly post? Can we all agree on that? And I'm sitting here, from my vantage point, looking at choosing between a President who has governed moderately (he passed Newt Gingrich and the boy's 90's health care plan after all) and very hardcore conservatives. The only candidates on their face who look appealing to me might be John Huntsman or Mitt Romney and Ptown has noted how Romney has, at the very least, been trumping up the hardcore conservative rhetoric.

Even Karl Rove has said the GOP is going way far right in this primary. Why would a moderate be interested in that?

jmog;863927 wrote:If you truly believe Obama is a moderate then you are really far left.

Devils Advocate;863884 wrote:Y'all know that Perry was Al Gore's Campaign manager right