What Happens in Vegas....
My personal Nevada Poll
On Oct. 15 I volunteered for Mitt Romney’s campaign, making survey phone calls for 3 hours to GOP voters in the Las Vegas area (N. Las Vegas, Boulder City, Henderson, Pahrump, Alamo, Searchlight (Harry Reid country), Beatty, Tonopah, Overton, Panaca, Pioche & Round Mountain) just days before the CNN debate there. Questions included: what’s the next most important issue besides the economy & jobs, which candidate do you support, whether they planned on participating in the Nevada caucuses, and if they support Romney, whether they’d be willing to help and/or receive emails.
I made 93 calls, and got 18 to go thru the survey. Of those 18, 5 ½ for Romney (halves were split w. another candidate), 3 + two halves for Cain, 1 for Newt & ½ for Ron Paul. 7 undecided. A small sample, but seems consistent w. national polls, except Perry. I also left 39 voice messages (expected on a Sat. afternoon), 12 were unavailable (someone else answered), 10 not interested, 3 hung up on me, 3 said they’d already been surveyed, etc.
Debate #9 (& 12 to go, not even counting the Obama debates?!! Time to start voting people off the island!)
Tempers & the temperature of the debate got hotter this time. I missed the first part (saw clips), but understand the first 15 minutes focused on Cain’s 9-9-9 plan where he took flak, but didn’t give in.
Romney Care ad Nauseum
Apparently Santorum & Perry ganged up on Romney regarding Romneycare, and say that he said he endorsed it for the nation, and now says he wouldn’t – of course assuming it is a Siamese twin of Obamacare. He & I’ve dealt with it before, but ... As he’s pointed out, there are significant differences between the two – beyond the state vs Federal aspect (hardly insignificant, either), and even so, the Democrat Mass. legislature modified what he’d proposed. But most people get lost in those details and equate the two, having been so informed by the liberal mainstream media.
Still, at one point years before Obamacare he did say it was a good program, and I think said that it would be good elsewhere in the nation. I think some take that to mean a national program (like Obamacare), but I’m fairly sure he never endorsed that, and he clearly understands (& I believe understood) the constitutional issues & states having that latitude (only states can do mandates like car insurance, etc. – of course it hasn’t made it to the Supreme Court yet, but lower courts have seemed to agree). I believe he meant other states in the nation, and the other candidates in an earlier debate pretty universally agreed the states should have the right to experiment w. health care options. So I think between that and the other differences from Obamacare, and Romney’s crystal clear promise to grant Obamacare waivers to all states his first day in office, and push for repeal, he’s on good ground.
Even if he (or someone else) did remove a statement in his book that seemed to imply it would be good for the rest of the nation, that could easily be misconstrued now in the Obamacare era to mean a Federal program, and the other distinctions missed. And so I wouldn’t even fault Mitt (if he did it) if he wanted to distance himself even more explicitly and clearly from Obamacare by simply dropping the statement, rather than adding a post-Obamacare long postscript of explanation. And even if, worst case, he was thinking national program, he may well have not thought that through (with no need at the time), but have had realizations through the Obamacare debates and evolved (and as Pelosi said even then, “we’ll have to pass it to see what’s in it”). Even as he admits to have evolved somewhat on abortion (also discussed earlier – as governor his decisions were always on the side of life). Gov. Perry as well as Ronald Reagan both evolved from Democrat to Republican, and others have on various issues.
As I’ve said before, that’s not flip-flopping – it’s a one-way growth, not wishy-washiness, as Mitt’s been accused of. Perry’s clearly dragging a lot of liberalism with him still. Most Christians welcome and embrace converts & penitent souls, but apparently they don’t do so with Romney. I sometimes wonder if Romney’s bringing up Perry’s earlier working w. Gore isn’t a jab reminder of what he’s doing by accusing Romney, and that before pointing out the mote in another’s eye, one needs to remove the beam in one’s own eye.
Illegal Immigration
Later Perry accused Romney of showing the “height of hypocrisy” in supposedly hiring an illegal alien, and not firing them for a year after he learned of it. It turned into a real shouting match when Mitt tried to explain the facts, and Perry would have none of it, steadily interrupting him. Mitt didn’t tolerate his interruptions, saying if he wants to run for president, he needs to learn to listen, and that he’s understandably testy after his performance in the last 2 debates (& clearly sore over his being beaten up by several candidates over his immigration stands in Texas). Perry finally quieted down but if looks could kill....
Romney had already explained all this adequately in the last election (just as he’d addressed the religious issue), but these idiots just can’t seem to learn, or are so desperate that they’re willing to risk dredging up trivial non-issues for some possible short-term gain before they’re inevitably exposed. His lawn care contractor apparently did hire an illegal, and when Romney learned of it, immediately said he can’t have that, especially running for office, and made the contractor promise to get rid of the illegal, which I understand he did. But then a year later he hired another illegal, and when Romney learned of that, he fired the contractor.
What more could be expected? Is everyone supposed to hire private detectives to check on the legal status of the employees of the contractors they hire? On top of that, as Romney pointed out, he’s been a strong proponent of e-verify to verify legal resident status for employers, whereas Perry has been opposed. And then there’s Perry’s opposition to a border fence, in-state tuition breaks for illegals, etc., and accusing those who disagree of not having a heart.
Dennis Prager said Perry disgraced himself with this attack & showed innanity. Dick Morris said Romney clearly won the debate, and that Perry fought dirty and looked terrible talking over Romney (the audience seemed to agree). Reminds me of the Meg Whitman debacle that helped torpedo her governorship campaign in California – thanks to Gloria Allred. Same thing there – she believed her housekeeper’s forged documents when hiring her, then let her go when learning the truth. But the damage was done in the teary-eyed press conference of the poor “victim” illegal. What’s the saying about a lie going around the world many times before the truth even starts out? Maybe Gloria’s on Perry’s consulting staff.
I liked Cain’s statement that the Wall Street protesters should be protesting the White House (& Democrats in Congress?).
The Role of Faith
The Jeffress statement (about Mormons being a cult, non-Christian) came up, with candidates being asked whether faith should shape the debate. Santorum & Newt agreed only values and not theological points of doctrine are relevant. Perry said he didn’t agree w. Jeffress’ statement, but Jeffress had also said people should choose based on religion, and so it was unclear which statement(s) he didn’t agree with -- time will tell whether he & his supporters continue w. the subtle anti-Mormon card. Just seems to be another desperate, irrelevant tactic, like the accusation of hiring an illegal. Mitt said regarding the disparaging comments about his faith, he’s heard worse, and wasn’t so concerned with that. Rather what concerned him was the suggestion that people should be elected based on the church they go to, and that’s just basically un-American (e.g., Article VI of the Constitution).
Dennis Prager today seemed to think Romney was being petty, assuming he was concerned over the characterization of Mormonism, and I think he missed Mitt’s real concern, which I think is not petty. If we devolve into religious tribalism (rather than values) as the Shia & Sunni in Iraq, then we’re going down the wrong road. Rick Perry’s wife complains her husband is being persecuted because he’s a Christian – welcome to the club, and Mormons even moreso – by other “Christians.”
Misc. & Spin
Mitt made some good clarifications of nuances and types of foreign aid to counter those who simply want to stop all of it. I’d read much of that in Mitt’s book, No Apologies. Some good points.
The moderator pointed out that 41% of those surveyed thought Romney had the best chance of beating Obama – and of course each candidate took issue, citing their unique qualifications.
Perry once again boasted that Texas outdid Massachusetts in jobs creation. Mitt didn’t use the poker analogy this time, nor point out the resource, environment & population differences, but that MA did better in unemployment, and that Mitt’s created jobs personally – not just watched them created by others. Cain did acknowledge Mitt’s distinguished career, but claimed it was more Wall Street than main street. Mitt countered that he was CEO of 4 main street companies & the Olympics.
Spin: as indicated, Dick Morris declared Romney the winner. Ari Fleischer said Mitt is in the lead & is opening his lead. David Gurgen said Mitt stood his ground well time and time again.
On Oct. 15 I volunteered for Mitt Romney’s campaign, making survey phone calls for 3 hours to GOP voters in the Las Vegas area (N. Las Vegas, Boulder City, Henderson, Pahrump, Alamo, Searchlight (Harry Reid country), Beatty, Tonopah, Overton, Panaca, Pioche & Round Mountain) just days before the CNN debate there. Questions included: what’s the next most important issue besides the economy & jobs, which candidate do you support, whether they planned on participating in the Nevada caucuses, and if they support Romney, whether they’d be willing to help and/or receive emails.
I made 93 calls, and got 18 to go thru the survey. Of those 18, 5 ½ for Romney (halves were split w. another candidate), 3 + two halves for Cain, 1 for Newt & ½ for Ron Paul. 7 undecided. A small sample, but seems consistent w. national polls, except Perry. I also left 39 voice messages (expected on a Sat. afternoon), 12 were unavailable (someone else answered), 10 not interested, 3 hung up on me, 3 said they’d already been surveyed, etc.
Debate #9 (& 12 to go, not even counting the Obama debates?!! Time to start voting people off the island!)
Tempers & the temperature of the debate got hotter this time. I missed the first part (saw clips), but understand the first 15 minutes focused on Cain’s 9-9-9 plan where he took flak, but didn’t give in.
Romney Care ad Nauseum
Apparently Santorum & Perry ganged up on Romney regarding Romneycare, and say that he said he endorsed it for the nation, and now says he wouldn’t – of course assuming it is a Siamese twin of Obamacare. He & I’ve dealt with it before, but ... As he’s pointed out, there are significant differences between the two – beyond the state vs Federal aspect (hardly insignificant, either), and even so, the Democrat Mass. legislature modified what he’d proposed. But most people get lost in those details and equate the two, having been so informed by the liberal mainstream media.
Still, at one point years before Obamacare he did say it was a good program, and I think said that it would be good elsewhere in the nation. I think some take that to mean a national program (like Obamacare), but I’m fairly sure he never endorsed that, and he clearly understands (& I believe understood) the constitutional issues & states having that latitude (only states can do mandates like car insurance, etc. – of course it hasn’t made it to the Supreme Court yet, but lower courts have seemed to agree). I believe he meant other states in the nation, and the other candidates in an earlier debate pretty universally agreed the states should have the right to experiment w. health care options. So I think between that and the other differences from Obamacare, and Romney’s crystal clear promise to grant Obamacare waivers to all states his first day in office, and push for repeal, he’s on good ground.
Even if he (or someone else) did remove a statement in his book that seemed to imply it would be good for the rest of the nation, that could easily be misconstrued now in the Obamacare era to mean a Federal program, and the other distinctions missed. And so I wouldn’t even fault Mitt (if he did it) if he wanted to distance himself even more explicitly and clearly from Obamacare by simply dropping the statement, rather than adding a post-Obamacare long postscript of explanation. And even if, worst case, he was thinking national program, he may well have not thought that through (with no need at the time), but have had realizations through the Obamacare debates and evolved (and as Pelosi said even then, “we’ll have to pass it to see what’s in it”). Even as he admits to have evolved somewhat on abortion (also discussed earlier – as governor his decisions were always on the side of life). Gov. Perry as well as Ronald Reagan both evolved from Democrat to Republican, and others have on various issues.
As I’ve said before, that’s not flip-flopping – it’s a one-way growth, not wishy-washiness, as Mitt’s been accused of. Perry’s clearly dragging a lot of liberalism with him still. Most Christians welcome and embrace converts & penitent souls, but apparently they don’t do so with Romney. I sometimes wonder if Romney’s bringing up Perry’s earlier working w. Gore isn’t a jab reminder of what he’s doing by accusing Romney, and that before pointing out the mote in another’s eye, one needs to remove the beam in one’s own eye.
Illegal Immigration
Later Perry accused Romney of showing the “height of hypocrisy” in supposedly hiring an illegal alien, and not firing them for a year after he learned of it. It turned into a real shouting match when Mitt tried to explain the facts, and Perry would have none of it, steadily interrupting him. Mitt didn’t tolerate his interruptions, saying if he wants to run for president, he needs to learn to listen, and that he’s understandably testy after his performance in the last 2 debates (& clearly sore over his being beaten up by several candidates over his immigration stands in Texas). Perry finally quieted down but if looks could kill....
Romney had already explained all this adequately in the last election (just as he’d addressed the religious issue), but these idiots just can’t seem to learn, or are so desperate that they’re willing to risk dredging up trivial non-issues for some possible short-term gain before they’re inevitably exposed. His lawn care contractor apparently did hire an illegal, and when Romney learned of it, immediately said he can’t have that, especially running for office, and made the contractor promise to get rid of the illegal, which I understand he did. But then a year later he hired another illegal, and when Romney learned of that, he fired the contractor.
What more could be expected? Is everyone supposed to hire private detectives to check on the legal status of the employees of the contractors they hire? On top of that, as Romney pointed out, he’s been a strong proponent of e-verify to verify legal resident status for employers, whereas Perry has been opposed. And then there’s Perry’s opposition to a border fence, in-state tuition breaks for illegals, etc., and accusing those who disagree of not having a heart.
Dennis Prager said Perry disgraced himself with this attack & showed innanity. Dick Morris said Romney clearly won the debate, and that Perry fought dirty and looked terrible talking over Romney (the audience seemed to agree). Reminds me of the Meg Whitman debacle that helped torpedo her governorship campaign in California – thanks to Gloria Allred. Same thing there – she believed her housekeeper’s forged documents when hiring her, then let her go when learning the truth. But the damage was done in the teary-eyed press conference of the poor “victim” illegal. What’s the saying about a lie going around the world many times before the truth even starts out? Maybe Gloria’s on Perry’s consulting staff.
I liked Cain’s statement that the Wall Street protesters should be protesting the White House (& Democrats in Congress?).
The Role of Faith
The Jeffress statement (about Mormons being a cult, non-Christian) came up, with candidates being asked whether faith should shape the debate. Santorum & Newt agreed only values and not theological points of doctrine are relevant. Perry said he didn’t agree w. Jeffress’ statement, but Jeffress had also said people should choose based on religion, and so it was unclear which statement(s) he didn’t agree with -- time will tell whether he & his supporters continue w. the subtle anti-Mormon card. Just seems to be another desperate, irrelevant tactic, like the accusation of hiring an illegal. Mitt said regarding the disparaging comments about his faith, he’s heard worse, and wasn’t so concerned with that. Rather what concerned him was the suggestion that people should be elected based on the church they go to, and that’s just basically un-American (e.g., Article VI of the Constitution).
Dennis Prager today seemed to think Romney was being petty, assuming he was concerned over the characterization of Mormonism, and I think he missed Mitt’s real concern, which I think is not petty. If we devolve into religious tribalism (rather than values) as the Shia & Sunni in Iraq, then we’re going down the wrong road. Rick Perry’s wife complains her husband is being persecuted because he’s a Christian – welcome to the club, and Mormons even moreso – by other “Christians.”
Misc. & Spin
Mitt made some good clarifications of nuances and types of foreign aid to counter those who simply want to stop all of it. I’d read much of that in Mitt’s book, No Apologies. Some good points.
The moderator pointed out that 41% of those surveyed thought Romney had the best chance of beating Obama – and of course each candidate took issue, citing their unique qualifications.
Perry once again boasted that Texas outdid Massachusetts in jobs creation. Mitt didn’t use the poker analogy this time, nor point out the resource, environment & population differences, but that MA did better in unemployment, and that Mitt’s created jobs personally – not just watched them created by others. Cain did acknowledge Mitt’s distinguished career, but claimed it was more Wall Street than main street. Mitt countered that he was CEO of 4 main street companies & the Olympics.
Spin: as indicated, Dick Morris declared Romney the winner. Ari Fleischer said Mitt is in the lead & is opening his lead. David Gurgen said Mitt stood his ground well time and time again.
Comments
Post a Comment