Tag Archives: Michele Bachmann

Drake University Hosts Thought Provoking Debate

Posted on by Ryan Kantor

on December 10th ABC broadcast a GOP debate from Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa. It was the first major debate with Gingrich as the front runner. Here are some key takeaways:

Mitt Romney defended himself on “Romneycare” when Rick Perry again claimed that Romney’s book said that he wanted the Massachusetts healthcare plan to be a model for the nation (implying at the federal level). Romney responded sternly (and awkwardly) by offering Rick Perry a $10,000 bet that he had in fact misquoted him. Romney then clarified the quote from his book which actually says that each state should consider such a plan, because they are the laboratories of Democracy. Mitt could not have made his opinion or past comments more clear, but he’ll probably continue to be asked about them, and the weird $10,000 bet offer may irk some Iowans come caucus time.

Shameless Plug for My Father: On the topic of Mitt Romney and healthcare, Dr. Keith Kantor, is working with the Romney campaign in a limited context to provide information about how to lower healthcare costs by promoting all natural food with a Blue Ribbon Advisory Panel. Details here, be sure to check it out.

Newt Gingrich got an opportunity to reexplain his position on illegal immigration, clearly stating that he is not for amnesty, but rather a realistic plan in which people who have been living in the country for years upon years can receive residency (not citizenship). Decisions would be made on a local level with his plan. He refuses to support a plan where families who have been living in America, paying taxes, have children and grandchildren who live here, and are part of communities, and churches will be hunted down and deported. Good for Newt for saying something that may not be politically savvy in terms of gaining numbers in the polls, but is honest. Of course, he’d  quickly admit that it’ll all moot until the border is secured.

The real high point of the debate came when Newt Gingrich stood by his past comments regarding the Palestinians. Previously he stated,

“We’ve had an invented Palestinian people, who are in fact Arabs, and were historically part of the Arab community, and they had a chance to go many places. And for a variety of political reasons we have sustained this war against Israel now since the 1940s, and I think it’s tragic.”

He explained that the Palestinian argument for land is based on historical falsehood, and that the term “Palestinian” is a relatively new word that began being used after the creation of Israel. Romney argued that Gingrich should be more careful of what he says as his comments could cause “tumult,” and further claimed that he would exercise “sobriety” in his comments if he was to become President. Newt didn’t back off his comments, explaining that Palestinian textbooks teach hate towards the Jews. Michele Bachmann waffled on standing fully behind Gingrich, but did spend some time talking how her experience seeing the hatred written in their elementary school textbook, quoting one textbook that used murdering Jews as an example in a children’s arithmetic problem.

Did anything else really stand out to you? Feel free to share your thoughts in the comments below.

As always, please subscribe to this blog by clicking the “Follow” button at the top of the right sidebar. If you don’t have a WordPress account, you’ll have to enter your email address. Thanks for reading!

Herman Cain Proves Critics Wrong By Winning FL Straw Poll

Posted on by Ryan Kantor

Two weeks ago I wrote in a blog post:

“Herman Cain has no shot. He’s said some things you just can’t say, and even if they were misconstrued, I don’t think he has much of a shot at this point.”

Well, I can admit when I’m wrong. Herman Cain, a so-called second-tier candidate, won the Florida straw poll. While a straw poll shouldn’t be confused with a normal political poll, and isn’t a great predictor of public sentiment, it gives Herman Cain quite a boost.

Rick Perry finished second with 15.4%, but devoted more time and resources to the straw poll than other candidates. His second place finish is considered a major loss.

Other candidates finished as shown below:

Mitt Romney: 14%
Rick Santorum 10.9%
Ron Paul, 10.4%
Newt Gingrich 8.4%
Jon Huntsman 2.3%
Michele Bachmann 1.5%

The take away from this is that Herman Cain is on the rise, while Michele Bachmann is on her last leg.

After Cain’s performance surprised the heck out of me, I felt that I had to give him some credit and admit that I was wrong about the legitimacy of his candidacy (although I still think Romney will win).

For information on how a straw poll works, check out this wikipedia explanation.

Mitt Romney Big Winner in 9/12 CNN Tea Party Debate

Posted on by Ryan Kantor

A few notable things came of the September 12th CNN debate sponsored by the local Tea Party organization.

  1. Ron Paul’s campaign essentially came to an end when Rick Santorum highlighted a blog post on Ron Paul’s website that essentially said it was largely America’s fault for our involvement in the Middle East. Ron Paul didn’t back down from the post on his website and was promptly booed. That’ll probably be it for him.
  2. Michele Bachmann was much more aggressive. She attacked Rick Perry multiple on multiple points, but most harshly on a mandate that Gov. Rick Perry enacted in Texas requiring young girls to be vaccinated for HPV, a STD that leads to cervical cancer. She tied the issue to Obamacare and big government. She even pointed out possible political dishonesty from the Perry administration in Texas. Perry denied any dishonesty, but admitted some fault in the policy itself.
  3. Mitt Romney was a big winner with all the attacks focused on Rick Perry. Rick Santorum also did well, but has a lot of ground to make up. Mitt and Bachmann could move up slightly in the polls. Ron Paul probably won’t move much, but no longer has any chance to gain ground outside of his base.

Republican Primary Primer: My Take

Posted on by Ryan Kantor

The murky waters of the Republican primary are beginning to clear up. With Tim Pawlenty dropping out of the primary, and Rick Perry (Governor-TX) joining the field, we’re starting to get a feel for the front runners and their varying views.

The front runners seem to be Mitt Romney, Michelle Bachmann, and Rick Perry in that order, but the pack is closer than it was just a few weeks ago. Behind them, Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, and Ron Paul remain in the race.

Romney seems to be the most economically savvy. While some politicians will ride business for out sourcing jobs, Romney was a business man that had to outsource jobs to increase efficiency. He’ll surely be attacked for doing so, but it means he understands the problems that lead to outsourcing and instead of blaming business and empowering unions like liberals do, he’ll fix the system so that American jobs aren’t best suited for outsourcing. We don’t know much about him regarding foreign affairs, except that he wouldn’t disrespect and throw Israel under the bus as Obama did, but the biggest issue in this election is the economy and that is Romney’s strong suit. He’ll also be attacked for the state run healthcare he set up as Governor of Massachusetts, in which subsidized abortions were included, and while his plan may have been wrong and may hurt him in the primary, it will paint him as desirably moderate come general election time.

Michelle Bachmann is in the position many expected Sarah Palin to fill, female conservative representing the Tea Party element of the Republican party. Liberals will surely try to tether her to Sarah Palin to deny her the opportunity to topple Obama. The native Iowan won the Iowa Straw Poll last week and now has to be considered a viable candidate. Bachmann stands firms against farm subsidies, which is extremely respectable considering she is an Iowan and farm owner (I wrote in a previous blog post about how Calvin Coolidge stood against big government farm subsidies). She claimed that her family farm never received any government subsidies, but was recently found to be incorrect as financial records showed they did receive subsidies. Regardless, she seems to be extremely forthcoming, genuine, and willing to to state what she truly believes. Where Romney is extremely polished and rote, she is full of piss and vinegar. Where Romney may say what gets him the most votes, she appears more likely to stand on principle. That said, she may not have the business acumen or the ability to beat the extremely polished politician that currently occupies the White House.

Rick Perry is largely an unknown. He just recently entered the race, and seems to be somewhat of a middle ground between Romney, the polished businessman, and Bachmann the true conservative. He’s already being tied to Bush as both served as the Governor of Texas, which he’ll have to overcome, but he seems like a strong candidate that we’ll have to learn more about in the coming weeks.

Herman Cain has no shot. He’s said some things you just can’t say, and even if they were misconstrued, I don’t think he has much of a shot at this point.

Newt Gingrich is great. He’s very intellectual, but the fear was and is that he’s just not very captivating. While he may do a great job forming effective policies, he’s generating very little buzz and it’s becoming extremely hard to think he can win. That said, he was the speaker of the house that forced Clinton to balance the budget. He’s done great things and there’s little doubt in my mind he’d make a great president, I just don’t think he’s polished and energizing enough to win the Republican primary, let alone defeat Obama.

I’m a fan of both Rick Santorum and Ron Paul, and I enjoyed seeing them spar in the last debate. Check it out on YouTube here. That’s a pretty good sparring over Iran there.

Rick Santorum is a true conservative on social, economic, and foreign affairs. Ron Paul is a true Libertarian running in the Republican primary. I consider my views to fit squarely between the Christian Conservative views that Santorum has expressed and the small government sentiment that oozes out of each and every pore of Ron Paul. On one hand, I don’t want our government to do too much because they’re liable to screw it up, but on the other hand sometimes the government needs to stop certain things, like Iran getting a Nuclear missile. It doesn’t seems like either candidate is likely to emerge and beat out the three leading candidates, but there is still much time. I wish I could mush these two candidates together and make a super candidate that really represented my views…wait that’s Ron Paul’s son, Rand Paul!

Social issues are the toughest to reconcile between the two views (America as a moral enterprise vs. small government). It’s almost ironic that big government liberals don’t want the government to restrict social behaviors like smoking marijuana since they love large government so much. I find the debate on Iran between Santorum and Paul the most interesting, on the one hand, is it really our place to spend billions getting into another foreign operation? It sounds awful! On the other hand can we allow a nation ruled by a truly evil man to get a nuclear weapon and potentially wipe our Israeli allies off the map? We’re the “Big Satan,” doesn’t it concern our safety as well?

Anyway… My very early prediction…Romney, who entered as the front runner, wins the election due to its focus on the economy. His business acumen leads him against Obama who has mishandled the economy, and come 2012 Mitt Romney is the leader of the free world. What do you think? Please share in the comment section below.

Note: After the 12/10 debate in Iowa it looks like Newt Gingrich may have cemented his new spot as the front runner for GOP nomination.