Tag Archives: Rick Perry

Santorum Sweeps Three States, Reframes Race

Posted on by Ryan Kantor

Last night (Tuesday, Feb 7th) was another game changer in a wild race for the GOP nomination. Newt Gingrich had his big night back in South Carolina, then lost momentum as Romney won Florida and Nevada back-to-back. Santorum though, never really had his time. His win in Iowa wasn’t known until after the votes were certified. By then, the opportunity for momentum and publicity was largely diminished.

Now, Rick Santorum will get his belated moment in the spotlight. Three wins in one night have given his campaign second life. Santorum exclaimed “Conservatism is alive and well…We doubled him up here, and in Minnesota.” He even managed to win Colorado, where Romney won handily in 2008.

Newt Gingrich has been attempting to cast the election as a two-man race between a moderate, Mitt Romney, and a true conservative–himself. Negative ads coupled with heaps of baggage and an “angry” approach to the campaign have led many to look away from Gingrich, making this anything but a two-man race. Those looking for a true conservative are finding that Rick Santorum holds genuine convictions where other candidates (save Ron Paul) seem more like wind socks.

Santorum showed principle and discipline when he avoided attacking Mitt Romney for his work at Bain Capital, this while Gingrich and Rick Perry were pounding away and it was the in vogue thing to do. I find it very hard to believe that Newt Gingrich really has a problem with a venture capital firm buying ownership of a company, streamlining the business, saving the company, and selling it for massive profits. Few, if any, real economic conservatives have a problem with this, but Newt has relentlessly bashed Romney for this while also claiming to be the true conservative in the election.

Rick Santorum is largely known for his social stances, especially his defense of the unborn. He contrasts boldly with Barack Obama (who is currently in a battle with the Catholic Church) when he talks about the Declaration of Independence and God-given rights. Santorum referenced this bold contrast as a key to beating President Obama in the general election.

I’m not sure how I feel about that. There’s no doubt in my mind that Rick Santorum is the most honest, consistent, and genuine conservative in the race, but will his “bold contrast” with President Obama help or hurt him in the general election?

If Santorum is the nominee President Obama will likely try to focus on social issues, which is not what the Republicans want. Obama is much better off if the election is about Santorum’s social views instead of his own record handling the economy. Any way the President can minimize talk of the Keystone XL Pipeline, a Canadian oil pipeline that would have crossed America’s breadbasket and provided much-needed jobs and energy, is a win for him. His decision to block construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline could be a political nightmare for him as gas prices inch up and the general election inches near. He’d also probably like to avoid talk of Solyndra, a solar energy company his administration sought to boost though government funding that ended up filing for bankruptcy. Will Santorum’s bold stances allow Obama to move the focus of the election to more favorable issues?

The problem with nominating a moderate is the lack of passion you get from your base. You need passion to get people to knock on doors, donate money, and otherwise contribute to your campaign. Gingrich warned that all the areas that Romney won in Florida had especially low turnout relative to the areas he lost. The positive to having a moderate as your party’s nominee is that they are more likely to do well with independent voters. That’s not to say that Rick Santorum can’t attract moderate voters though. His economic plans, which I believe he needs to extenuate more, and his personality seem to attract blue-collar “Reagan Democrats.”

Santorum has proposed cutting corporate taxes on manufacturing to 0%… again to 0%. This would bring a ridiculous amount of manufacturing jobs back to America and help a good many Americans. This coupled with Rick Santorum’s vote against right-to-work laws while in Senate and Obama’s blocking of the Keystone which was expected to create 20,000 new jobs, many of which would have been union jobs could make Rick Santorum a very strong candidate in the rust belt. Is it unrealistic to think he can win states like Ohio and Indiana? I’d venture to say no.

Do you think Rick Santorum could give Obama a solid battle in a general election, or do you (like current national polls) think he’d lose badly? You can watch his full victory speech on Youtube by clicking here.

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. You can share your opinions in the comment section below or by tweeting to @Ryan_Kantor. Thanks for reading! 

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.

Republicans Duke It Out On Liberal MSNBC

Posted on by Ryan Kantor

Conservative Republicans came together in Simi Valley California for a debate on the most liberal news network in the country–MSNBC. Brian Williams hit the Republicans with some very tough questions and in general they responded beautifully. While it may seem like a cop-out, I felt that Romney and Perry were the winners. Ron Paul also had some great comments, however I suspect they were over the most people’s heads (such as why we should nix FEMA). Below are some of the key take-aways, and great lines from tonights debate.

  • Mitt Romney lampooned Obama and his lack of private sector work experience: “The President doesn’t understand the economy, I do because I lived in it.”
  • Brian Williams often tried to pit Romney squared against fellow front runner Rick Perry, and they often squared off, but they both come out looking good.
  • In response to the moderators trying to get Republicans to nit pick each other’s stances on healthcare, Gingrich called out the MSNBC crew by saying “I’m frankly not interested in your effort to get Republicans fighting each other.” He followed this up by strongly asserting that all candidates oppose Obamacare and that’s the bottom line. Great response by Gingrich that earned him some points.
  • Herman Cain on his 9% tax system: “if 10% is good enough for God, 9% should be good enough for the Federal Government.”
  • Romney made some great comments on energy. I really don’t see any possible reason anyone can disagree unless it’s environmental fears like global warming (which we’ll get to next). Here’s what he said: “This president blocking offshore drilling, stopping the capacity to build new coal plants, this president having held up nuclear plants, and not developing the Marcellus shale gas and other shale oil. He’s just strangling America’s economy. It’s keeping Americans from working. He keeps talking about ‘green jobs.’ Where are they? Let’s have real jobs. we can have energy jobs. Let’s get that done, and if I’m president I’m making that happen on day one!
  • Huntsman called other Republicans anti-science. He said they were not mainstream because none believe in global warming and some don’t belive in evolution. Aside from evolution being irrelvant to this election, attacking his competitors faith…poor taste. Since global warming is something that the general conservative electorate does not really believe in (or at least doesn’t care to injure the economy to fix) this seemed strange. Huntsman does have Al Gore in his corner though. Gore would even say his competitors are as bad as racists for denying global warming.
  • Ron Paul mentioned that nixing minimum wage would create jobs.
  • Peter Jennings hit Rick Perry with a questions asking how we would address the fact that the median income of Afircan-American families is 20x lower than that of white families. He did a great job answering the awkward question by referring to the previous question about creating jobs, and then talking about how creating jobs will help people of all races.
  • Ron Paul nailed Rick Perry about his letter that supporting hillary care, after Perry had been smashing Romney his Massachusetts state healthcare plan. He also admitted that Ronal Reagan wasn’t perfect, which was new.
  • Rick Perry, in his book, called social security is a Ponzi scheme. He stood by his initial assertion. Mitt Romney strongly disagreed, and said our nominee has to be someone who is committed to fixing, not abolishing social security. It’s worth noting that it was LBJ who took us off personal accounts and turned social security into what Rick Perry (and I) call a Ponzi scheme.
  • Ron Paul made some interesting economic commentary about FEMA explaining that it conditioned people to build where they shouldn’t be building and essentially killed the market effects that would keep people from building in these unsafe regions.
  • Huntsman did make a thoughtful comment on immigration when he said that Vancouver has the fastest growing real estate market in the world, and it’s largely due to their laws allowing legal immigration, thus we should allow legal immigration. Unfortunately for him, I don’t think the general conservative electorate probably doesn’t agree with him. Huntsman definitely came across as the most liberal Republican in the debate.
  • The best policy statement of the night came from Mitt Romney when he said he expects to create 4% annual economic growth by removing all capital gain taxes, taxes on interest, and taxes on dividends.
  • The best statement of the night came at the very end from Ron Paul. Paul was presented with a sad story about the malnourished children in Texas that inspired a young LBJ to eventually create the “Great Society,” and subsequently questioned about his lack of support for welfare. his response…
    A welfare state is not authorized in the consititution. Under the US constitution states have the right if they feel obligated to create a welfare system. Don’t say we who believe in liberty lack compassion. The idea that there’s something wrong with those who don’t want to lavish free stuff is wrong!

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.