2012 Republican Presidential Nomination

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
bbarrick8383 said:
Using your definition, she gave up easily.

Her legal fees exceeded her entire compensation if she had stayed four years.

Would you like my address?
Click to expand...
The Palins are NOT independently wealthy, and the frivolous lawsuits, all of which were dismissed, were bankrupting them, just as their enemies had planned. As we see now, their strategy backfired, and Gov. Palin has merely reloaded! :D Rob
 
Big_Ro said:
Huh??
Click to expand...
Sarah Palin had to hire lawyers to file defense motions in court.

Merely saying that you will fight, is not enough.

If someone sues you, you have to fight back and to fight back, you need lawyers.

If you merely do nothing, then the plaintiffs [the people who sued you] automatically get a summary judgement against you and you have to pay whatever they demand.

Making a speech does not do the job.

You have to show up in court and file motions against the plaintiffs.

And to do that, you need to hire lawyers.

Palin’s legal fees were already in the half-million dollar range, and she had no way of paying those bills. “Technically” she was bankrupt.

What she hoped to do was to write a book, maybe gain some sympathy and maybe earn enough to pay the legal bills.

Actually, it turned out she did much better than that.

But, she had no way of knowing that.

She didn’t have a biggie Harvard/Yale experience. No biggie family law firm. No family money; she and her husband fished salmon from an open boat! for goodness sake.

He worked a union worker in the oil fields.
 
Monte_RCMS said:
Sarah Palin had to hire lawyers to file defense motions in court.

Merely saying that you will fight, is not enough.

If someone sues you, you have to fight back and to fight back, you need lawyers.

If you merely do nothing, then the plaintiffs [the people who sued you] automatically get a summary judgement against you and you have to pay whatever they demand.

Making a speech does not do the job.

You have to show up in court and file motions against the plaintiffs.

And to do that, you need to hire lawyers.

Palin’s legal fees were already in the half-million dollar range, and she had no way of paying those bills. “Technically” she was bankrupt.

What she hoped to do was to write a book, maybe gain some sympathy and maybe earn enough to pay the legal bills.

Actually, it turned out she did much better than that.

But, she had no way of knowing that.

She didn’t have a biggie Harvard/Yale experience. No biggie family law firm. No family money; she and her husband fished salmon from an open boat! for goodness sake.

He worked a union worker in the oil fields.
Click to expand...
If I am not mistaken, Palin actually championed a law in Alaska that prevented public funds from being used to in defense of ethics charges. And, ironically, after she made her run as VP, then she was hit with 17 (maybe more) consecutive ethics charges. All of them were dismissed, but she had to take time away from governing and pay for lawyers out of her pocket. Since her Luitenant Governor was on the same page as she was, she stepped down as governor so as to stop being a distraction in Alaska politics. Not a single ethics charge was brought against the newly sworn in governor. That says that the whole thing was a political assassination attempt against Sarah Palin, who then looked down their nose at her and called her a quitter. She did what was best for the people of Alaska. I admire her for it.
 
Scott_Lafrance said:
If I am not mistaken, Palin actually championed a law in Alaska that prevented public funds from being used to in defense of ethics charges. And, ironically, after she made her run as VP, then she was hit with 17 (maybe more) consecutive ethics charges. All of them were dismissed, but she had to take time away from governing and pay for lawyers out of her pocket. Since her Luitenant Governor was on the same page as she was, she stepped down as governor so as to stop being a distraction in Alaska politics. Not a single ethics charge was brought against the newly sworn in governor. That says that the whole thing was a political assassination attempt against Sarah Palin, who then looked down their nose at her and called her a quitter. She did what was best for the people of Alaska. I admire her for it.
Click to expand...
👍
 
Big_Ro said:
politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0811/Romneys_earlystate_advantage.html

Romney’s early-state advantage

Alex Burns says Romney may not need to worry about Perry quite yet:

No matter how strong Perry’s national lead looks right now, Romney has a strong foothold in several early primary states that could allow him to hold back the momentum Perry’s picking up nationally.

In the last New Hampshire poll, Romney was ahead of Perry by 18 percentage points. A Mason-Dixon poll of Florida published yesterday gave Romney a 7-point lead there.

There’s been no recent polling in Nevada, but between the large Mormon population and the fact that he’s the only candidate to give the state real attention so far, Romney is expected to have a solid advantage there. And if Michigan keeps its early primary date, Romney would also be expected to hold a clear edge in the state where he was born, where his father was governor, and where Mitt won an important primary victory in 2008.

That’s either three out of five of the earliest states, or four out of six, where Romney is in a position to beat back Perry, even at this early and strong-looking moment for the Texas governor. In that kind of early-state split, the primary would likely go into a much longer, marathon race, perhaps with an advantage for Romney at the outset.
Click to expand...
I tend to agree with this. For one thing, the public doesn’t really know Perry and his views or his record as much as they tend to know Romney. As Perry becomes better known, some people will be attracted to him and some, who may feel attracted by his personality, may actually be turned off by his views. Since he seems to be the front runner in the Republican campaign, a greater focus will be placed upon him which will help voters decide whether they like him or not. His poll numbers will fluctuate in the months ahead.
Also, it is difficult to underestimate the groundwork that Romney has been doing for the past 4 years. As the article above stated, Romney has a lot of support among the eastern establishment and this is important for the early elections in New Hampshire and other places. Romney’s religion will also benefit him in some of the western states which have larger Mormon populations and early elections. His train may be hard to derail if he wins some of these early elections and Perry is unable to respond in a flexible way.
 
Tsuwano said:
I tend to agree with this. For one thing, the public doesn’t really know Perry and his views or his record as much as they tend to know Romney. As Perry becomes better known, some people will be attracted to him and some, who may feel attracted by his personality, may actually be turned off by his views. Since he seems to be the front runner in the Republican campaign, a greater focus will be placed upon him which will help voters decide whether they like him or not. His poll numbers will fluctuate in the months ahead.
Also, it is difficult to underestimate the groundwork that Romney has been doing for the past 4 years. As the article above stated, Romney has a lot of support among the eastern establishment and this is important for the early elections in New Hampshire and other places. Romney’s religion will also benefit him in some of the western states which have larger Mormon populations and early elections. His train may be hard to derail if he wins some of these early elections and Perry is unable to respond in a flexible way.
Click to expand...
Romney in 2002 gubernatorial debate:

“I’ve been very clear… I will preserve and protect a woman’s right to choose.”

Romney in 2011: conveniently claims to be pro-life after a “conversion”.

It appears that Romney will take on a position if he thinks it will help him politically. The obvious conclusion is that from a Catholic perspective (and pro-life view) he is suspect. We ought not to support a candidate who is all over the map on the most important issue of our time - the sanctity of life. That said, I can think of reasons a Catholic would be justified in voting for him. One is this: he says that as president he would nominate “strict, constructionist judges”. But can we trust what he says? Rudy Gulliani, another pro-choice Republican said that he would nominate constructionist judges. In an election between Obama and Romney, it seems to me that one would be morally obliged to vote against the most pro-abortion president in the history of America.

It is possible that there will be a vacancy on the supreme court in the next few years. As much as I would rather have a committed pro-life president (ala Rick Santorum), I would definitely settle for a president who’d nominate strict constructionist judges.

Ishii
 
Tsuwano said:
For one thing, the public doesn’t really know Perry and his views or his record as much as they tend to know Romney.
Click to expand...
No, and the media isn’t introducing Perry. They’ve introduced Texas, and everyone is getting to know Texas and they like what they see that has been going on in Texas.
As Perry becomes better known, some people will be attracted to him and some, who may feel attracted by his personality, may actually be turned off by his views. Since he seems to be the front runner in the Republican campaign, a greater focus will be placed upon him which will help voters decide whether they like him or not. His poll numbers will fluctuate in the months ahead.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but I have a feeling Romney will see his poll numbers drop and he will have to get a little more front and center than what he has. It seems he’s already doing that.
Romney’s religion will also benefit him in some of the western states which have larger Mormon populations and early elections.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure it will be enough to mitigate those who will not vote for a Mormon. Brian Kilmeade had a Catholic call in lambasting Mormonism because he was not allowed into a temple for a wedding.
His train may be hard to derail if he wins some of these early elections and Perry is unable to respond in a flexible way.
Click to expand...
It will not be an easy fight for Romney, Perry has never lost an election and he will be a tough opponent for any of them to beat.
 
bbarrick8383 said:
No, and the media isn’t introducing Perry. They’ve introduced Texas, and everyone is getting to know Texas and they like what they see that has been going on in Texas.

Maybe, but I have a feeling Romney will see his poll numbers drop and he will have to get a little more front and center than what he has. It seems he’s already doing that.

I’m not sure it will be enough to mitigate those who will not vote for a Mormon. Brian Kilmeade had a Catholic call in lambasting Mormonism because he was not allowed into a temple for a wedding.

It will not be an easy fight for Romney, Perry has never lost an election and he will be a tough opponent for any of them to beat.
Click to expand...
I agree that winning the Republican nomination will not be an easy fight for Romney . . . or Perry or anyone else running. First of all, we’re not even sure if anyone else will throw their hat into the ring. That would change the equation in an equally dramatic way. I also agree that Romney’s religion could hurt him in some states, but not in others. I don’t think it will hurt him in Nevada, one of the early western primary states. I think most people are cautious about their own prejudice toward Mormonism and will make a greater effort to insure they are not voting based upon prejudice . . . I think.
 
IBOPE Zogby Poll: Perry Races Far Ahead of Republican Field; 4 Announced GOP Candidates Tie or Lead Obama

In his first polling test against other announced Republican candidates for President, Texas Gov. Rick Perry is far ahead of the field with 41%, more than three times the total of second-place trailer Mitt Romney.

Four of the announced GOP candidates are tied or ahead of President Barack Obama, with Romney the only one with a lead beyond the poll’s margin of error.

These results are from an IBOPE Zogby interactive poll conducted from Aug. 25-29. The likely voter sample size for match-ups of Republicans against Obama is 2,335, and for the Republican nomination is 1,184 likely Republican primary voters.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who continues to say he will not run for president, continues to be the strongest possible Obama opponent in our IBOPE Zogby polling with a 49%-40% lead. Romney leads Obama, 45%-40%, while Perry has a two-point lead over the president and Herman Cain and Rep. Ron Paul are tied. Rep. Paul Ryan, whom some promoted as a possible candidate before he took himself out of the running last week, also ties Obama.

ibopezogby.com/news/2011/08/30/ibope-zogby-poll-perry-races-far-ahead-republican-field-4-announced-gop-candidates-tie-or-lead-obama/
 
Can we agree, at least, that Perry is the frontrunner?

Frontrunner status in a Presidential campaign is far different from running for Governor and othe various and sundry state government offices in a State that is essentially a one party state. To suggest that the Democratic Party in Texas is pathetic is being overly generous to the level of opposition they provide. Mitt Romney and the rest of the Republican field, as it currently stands, will put up a much bigger fight than the Democrats in Texas could even imagine. The incumbent President will give him an even bigger fight.

Rick Perry will be the nominee, but he’s in for a fight like he’s never faced in his political career.
 
Big_Ro said:
Can we agree, at least, that Perry is the frontrunner?

Frontrunner status in a Presidential campaign is far different from running for Governor and othe various and sundry state government offices in a State that is essentially a one party state. To suggest that the Democratic Party in Texas is pathetic is being overly generous to the level of opposition they provide. Mitt Romney and the rest of the Republican field, as it currently stands, will put up a much bigger fight than the Democrats in Texas could even imagine. The incumbent President will give him an even bigger fight.

Rick Perry will be the nominee, but he’s in for a fight like he’s never faced in his political career.
Click to expand...
I don’t think you will find many who disagree with you there.
 
Big_Ro said:
theiowarepublican.com/2011/tir-exclusive-palin-to-fly-to-new-hampshire-following-iowa-appearance/

Iowa Republican Reports that Palin is scheduled to fly to New Hampshire for a Labor Day event. Hmmm? Is she getting in??
Click to expand...
There is another Tea Party event there and she will be joining the Tea Party Tour (whatever that means.) I don’t think she is in a position to run and win the nomination with Perry in the race, but you never know with Palin what she will do next. 🤷
 
Prediction: If Rick Perry is the Republican nominee, Barack Obama is reelected.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top