Natalie Gonnella
Follow Natalie on Twitter
Barely into it's second presidential election cycle, new media has already had an astoinishing impact on American politics, and YouTube is ready to celebrate.
Commemorating five years of an ever-increasing presence in the US political arena, here's a look at how the video site has so far made it's mark on Washington:
Natalie Gonnella
Follow Natalie on Twitter
Candidate campaigns aside, as the 2012 election quickly approaches amid social media's ballooning influence on US politics (from Facebook's zip code specific political ads to the success of YouTube's Townhall platform), a new infographic from Hasai media strategists offers an interesting take on the ever-evolving definition of the American identity.
From the most socially savy states (North Dakota, New Jersey) to the country's Facebook frequency, here's a look at how the average American measures up according to the most popular social media sources:
Texas Governor Rick Perry
Saturday August 13, 2011
RedState Gathering 2011
Charleston, South Carolina
Howdy. Thank you, Erick (Erickson, editor of RedState). It is great to be at RedState. And I’ll tell you what, it’s even better to be governor of the largest red state in America.
It’s sure good to be back in the Palmetto State, in South Carolina. I enjoy coming to places where people elect folks like Nikki Haley, true conservatives. And also where they love the greatest fighting force on the face of the earth…the United States Military.
And I want to take a moment and ask you to just take a silence, think about those young Navy SEALs and the other special operators who gave it all in the service of their country. Just take a moment to say Thank you, Lord, that we have those kind of selfless, sacrificial men and women. Their sacrifice was immeasurable, their dedication profound, and we will never, ever forget them.
I stand before you today as the governor of Texas. But I also stand before you the son of two tenant farmers, Ray Perry, who came home after 35 bombing missions over Europe to work his little corner of land out there, and Amelia who made sure my sister Milla and I had everything that we needed, including hand-sewing my clothes until I went off to college.
I am also the product of a place called Paint Creek. Doesn’t have a zip code. It’s too small to be called a town along the rolling plains of Texas. We grew dryland cotton and wheat, and when I wasn’t farming or attending Paint Creek Rural School, I was generally over at Troop 48 working on my Eagle Scout award.
Around the age of 8, I was blessed – didn’t realize it, but I was blessed to meet my future wife, Anita Thigpen, at a piano recital. We had our first date eight years later. And she finally agreed to marry me 16 years after that. Nobody says I am not persistent.
There is no greater way to live life than with someone you love, and my first love is with us today, my lovely wife Anita. We’re also blessed to have two incredible children, Griffin and Sydney, and they are also with us today, and our wonderful daughter-in-law Meredith. I’d just like to introduce those two. Thank you.
What I learned growing up on the farm was a way of life that was centered on hard work, and on faith and on thrift. Those values have stuck with me my whole life. But it wasn’t until I graduated from Texas A&M University and joined the United States Air Force, flying C-130’s all around the globe, that I truly appreciated the blessings of freedom.
To paraphrase Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan, I realized that the United States of America really is the last great hope of mankind. What I saw was systems of government that elevated rulers at the expense of the people. Socialist systems cloaked maybe in good intentions but were delivering misery and stagnation. And I learned that not everyone values life like we do in America, or the rights that are endowed to every human being by a loving God.
You see, as Americans we’re not defined by class, and we will never be told our place. What makes our nation exceptional is that anyone, from any background, can climb the highest of heights. As Americans, we don’t see the role of government as guaranteeing outcomes, but allowing free men and women to flourish based on their own vision, their hard work and their personal responsibility. And as Americans, we realize there is no taxpayer money that wasn’t first earned by the sweat and toil of one of our citizens.
That’s why we reject this President’s unbridled fixation on taking more money out of the wallets and pocketbooks of American families and employers and giving it to a central government. “Spreading the wealth” punishes success while setting America on course to greater dependency on government. Washington’s insatiable desire to spend our children’s inheritance on failed “stimulus” plans and other misguided economic theories have given us record debt and left us with far too many unemployed.
But of course, now we’re told we are in recovery. Yeah.
But this sure doesn’t feel like a recovery to more than nine percent of Americans out there who are unemployed, or the sixteen percent of African Americans and 11 percent of Hispanics in the same position, or the millions more who can only find part-time work, or those who have stopped even looking for a job.
One in six work-eligible Americans cannot find a full-time job. That is not a recovery. That is an economic disaster.
If you think about it, for those Americans who do have full-time jobs, they aren’t experiencing economic recovery with the rising fuel costs and the food prices that are going up. Recovery is a meaningless word if the bank has foreclosed on your home, if you are under water on your mortgage, or if you are up to the max on your credit card debt. Those Americans know that this President and his big-spending, big-government policies have prolonged our national misery, not alleviated it.
And what do we say to our children? Y’all figure it out? Don’t worry, Washington’s created 17 debt and entitlement commissions in 30 years, but the fact of the matter is they just didn’t have the courage to make the decisions to allow you to have the future that you actually deserve? That Washington wouldn’t even make modest entitlement program reforms in this last debate? And the President even refused to lay out a plan, for fear of the next election? How can the wealthiest nation in the history of civilization fail so miserably to pay its bills? How does that happen?
Well, Mr. President, let us tell you something: you can't win the future by selling America off to foreign creditors.
We cannot afford four more years of this rudderless leadership. Last week, that leadership failed, and the tax and spend and borrow agenda of this President led to the first ever downgrade of the credit rating of the United States of America.
In reality though, this is just the most recent downgrade. The fact is for nearly three years President Obama has been downgrading American jobs. He’s been downgrading our standing in the world. He’s been downgrading our financial stability. He’s been downgrading our confidence, and downgrading the hope for a better future for our children. That’s a fact.
His policies are not only a threat to this economy, so are his appointees – a threat. You see he stacked the National Labor Relations Board with anti-business cronies who want to dictate to a private company, Boeing, where they can build a plant. No president, no president should kill jobs in South Carolina, or any other state for that matter, simply because they choose to go to a right-to-work state.
You see, when the Obama Administration is not stifling economic growth with over-regulation, they are achieving the same through their reckless spending. Debt is not only a threat to our economy, but also to our security.
America’s standing in the world is in peril, not only because of disastrous economic policies, but from the incoherent muddle that they call foreign policy. Our president has insulted our friends and he’s encouraged our enemies, thumbing his nose at traditional allies like Israel. He seeks to dictate new borders for the Middle East and the oldest democracy there, Israel, while he is an abject failure in his constitutional duty to protect our borders in the United States.
His foreign policy seems to be based on alienating our traditional allies, while basing our domestic agenda on importing those failed Western European social values. We don’t need a president who apologizes for America. We need a president who protects and projects those values.
Look, it’s pretty simple: we’re going to stand with those who stand with us, and we will vigorously defend our interests. And those who threaten our interests, harm our citizens – we will simply not be scolding you, we will defeat you.
Our nation cannot and it must not endure four more years of aimless foreign policy. We cannot and must not endure four more years of rising unemployment, rising taxes, rising debt, rising energy dependence on nations that intend us harm.
It is time to get America working again. To get citizens – to get our citizens working in good jobs and getting the government to working for the people again.
Page one of any economic plan to get America working is to give a pink slip to the current resident in the White House.
Listen, we just got to get back to the basic truths of economic success. As Governor, I’ve had to deal with the consequences of this national recession. In 2003, and again this year, my state faced billions of dollars in budget shortfalls. But we worked hard, we made tough decisions, we balanced our budget. Not by raising taxes, but by setting priorities and cutting government spending. It can and it must be done in Washington, DC.
Dr. Schwertner (State Representative, R-Williamson County, TX), we have led Texas based on some just really pretty simple guiding principles. One is don’t spend all of the money. Two is keeping the taxes low and under control. Three is you have your regulatory climate fair and predictable. Four is reform the legal system so frivolous lawsuits don’t paralyze employers that are trying to create jobs.
Over the years, we have followed this recipe to produce the strongest economy in the nation. Since June of 2009, Texas is responsible for more than 40 percent of all of the new jobs created in America.
Now think about that. We’re home to less than 10 percent of the population in America, but forty percent of all the new jobs were created in that state.
I’ve cut taxes. I have delivered historic property tax reductions. I was the first governor since World War II to cut general revenue spending in our state budget. We passed lawsuit reform, including just this last session a “loser pays” law to stop the frivolous lawsuits that were happening.
And I know I’ve talked a lot about Texas here in the last little bit. I’m a Texan and proud of it. But first, and foremost, I’m an incredibly proud American.
And I know something: America is not broken. Washington, D.C., is broken!
We need balanced budgets. We need lower taxes. We need less regulation. And we need civil justice reform – those same four principles. Our country’s most urgent need is to revitalize our economy, stop the generational theft that is going on with this record debt.
I come to South Carolina because I will not sit back and accept the path that America is on. Because a great country requires a better direction. Because a renewed nation needs a new president.
It is time to get America working again. And that’s why, with the support of my family, and an unwavering belief in the goodness of America, I declare to you today as a candidate for President of the United States.
It’s time for America to believe again. It’s time to believe that the promise of our future is far greater than even our best days behind us. It’s time to believe again in the potential of private enterprise, set free from the shackles of overbearing federal government. And it’s time to truly restore our standing in the world, and renew our faith in freedom as the best hope for peace in this world that’s beset with strife.
The change we seek will never emanate out of Washington, D.C. It will come from the windswept prairies of Middle America, the farms and factories across this great land, from the hearts and minds of the goodhearted Americans who will accept not a future that is less than our past, patriots – patriots who will not be consigned to a fate of less freedom in exchange for more government.
We do not have to accept our current circumstances. We will change them. We are Americans. That’s what we do. We roll up our sleeves. We go to work. We fix things.
We stand up and proudly proclaim that Washington is not our caretaker and we reject the state that, in Margaret Thatcher’s words, she said a state that takes too much from us in order to do too much for us.
We will not stand for that any longer.We’re dismayed at the injustice that nearly half of all Americans don’t even pay any income tax. And you know the liberals out there are saying that we need to pay more. We are indignant about leaders who do not listen and spend money faster than they can print it.
In America, the people are not subjects of government. The government is subject to the people. And it is up to us, to this present generation of Americans, to take a stand for freedom, to send a message to Washington that we’re taking our future back from the grips of central planners who would control our healthcare, who would spend our treasure, who downgrade our future and micro-manage our lives.
It is time to limit and simplify the taxes in this country. We have to quit spending money we don’t have. We need to get our fiscal house in order and restore our good credit. And we will repeal this President’s misguided, one-size-fits-all government healthcare plan immediately.
We’ll create jobs. We’ll get America working again. We’ll create jobs and we’ll build wealth, we’ll truly educate and innovate in science, and in technology, engineering and math. We’ll create the jobs and the progress needed to get America working again.
And I’ll promise you this: I’ll work every day to make Washington, D.C. as inconsequential in your life as I can. And at the same time, we’ll be freeing our families and small businesses and states from the burdensome and costly federal government so those groups can create, innovate and succeed.
I believe in America. I believe in Her purpose and Her promise. I believe Her best days have not yet been lived. I believe Her greatest deeds are reserved for the generations to come. With the help and the courage of the American people, we will get our country working again. God bless you and God bless the United States of America.
Natalie Gonnella
Follow Natalie on Twitter
With soaring unemployment, stagnated growth, and the first ever US credit downgrade, it's no surprise that Americans are disappointed with their elected leaders (President Obama included).
And after a tumultuous month of debt debate, barely eight months into the current term, according to Gallup, registered voters are already looking for a change when it comes to the 112th Congress.
In the latest congressional approval poll, just 21% of registered voters feel that most lawmakers deserve reelection - the lowest percentage on record in the 20 year history Gallup has asked this question.
But while Americans' collective view of Congress has rapidly deteriorated, when it comes to their own district, Americans appear far more forgiving (likely due to more localized support). Overall, more than half of likely voters say their Representative deserves re-election. But while this seems more encouraging, Gallup does note that:
Even though a majority believes their own representative should be re-elected, the current percentage is on the low end of what Gallup has measured historically. The lowest readings were 48% in October 1992 and 49% on two occasions in 2010.
As lawmakers ready for their return to Washington in September, with concern growing over the upcoming super committee and the subsequent effects of the S&P downgrade, it will be interesting to see how voters' views will change (for better or worse) as the next phase of the budget battle gets underway.
The full analysis from Gallup's latest congressional poll is available to view here.
Ryan Streeter
Follow Ryan on Twitter
Here’s a helpful picture of the spending cuts in the debt deal that have many Democrats up in arms.
The bars in the graph don't exactly look like spending cuts worthy of the hysteria that has overtaken some quarters of Washington.
Chris Edwards at the Cato Institute created the graph based on the CBO score of the debt ceiling bill that passed the House last night.
Edwards provides this commentary:
The “cuts” in the deal are only cuts from the CBO “baseline,” which is a Washington construct of ever-rising spending. And even these “cuts” from the baseline include $156 billion of interest savings, which are imaginary because the underlying cuts are imaginary.
No program or agency terminations are identified in the deal. None of the vast armada of federal subsidies are targeted for elimination. Old folks will continue to gorge themselves on inflated benefits paid for by young families and future generations. None of Senator Tom Coburn’s or Senator Rand Paul’s specific cuts were included.
Will Wilkinson observes that what we have here is a pretty good picture of democracy in action.
Paul Krugman is flipping his wig over this hand-waving, non-binding promise to mildly decrease the future rate of spending growth. Not only will the debt-ceiling deal retard growth, Mr Krugman argues, but "by demonstrating that raw extortion works and carries no political cost, it will take America a long way down the road to banana-republic status." Where Mr Krugman sees "raw extortion" tending toward "banana-republic status" I see "democracy"…
Unless the bill fails, which it might, it looks like our democracy will have raised the debt ceiling, didn't really cut a thing, passed off responsibility for substantial deficit reduction to a "super committee", which will either come up with a plan that does not bind the future executive and legislature or will trip a "trigger" that won't go into effect until after the next election, and then, again, will go into effect only if the government of the future wants it to go into effect. If this is what "raw extortion" delivers, it's not very much.
Many commentators have been opining about who will benefit politically from the deal or get blamed if the deal is perceived to hurt the economy.
One element most have ignored, though, is this boring but important notion of baseline budgeting, and how much the public will grasp it. When most people hear "cuts," they think "spending less on something than we are now." What we really have is "spending less than we would have had we not made these cuts."
At some point, it will become clear that what we have are:
(1) cuts in the rate of spending, not actual program cuts in the way most people understand them; and
(2) cuts that are minimal up front and heavier down the road, which means a future Congress can change them (e.g., the deal only cuts $22 billion next year, or less than 1% of the budget, and pushes out bigger cuts to later in the decade).
It's still a good deal in the sense it's the best we could hope for in the current environment. But given that 66 Republicans voted against it because it didn't go far enough, the public will hear plenty about what the bill does and doesn't do. And one thing it doesn't do is implement structural change into how Washington spends money in the long run, which most Americans rightly perceive as a threat to our future way of life.
Independents have grown more conservative since Obama became President, according to Gallup yesterday. They have tracked with Republicans on spending more than they have Democrats.
What this likely means is that as (if) public discontent grows with the debt deal (assuming the deal passes the Senate and is signed into law), Republicans can make November 2012 look a lot like November 2010 by focusing on spending.
The Democrats, whose hysteria over the “drastic” nature of the current deal, look bad in almost every scenario when spending becomes the main topic.
We really need to be focusing on jobs and growth, but as the full effects of the debt deal are felt by the public, we may be in for a year when Tea Party 2.0 kicks into gear and makes spending the central topic once again.
Ryan Streeter
Follow Ryan on Twitter
There’s hope! Listen to this podcast of Paul Ryan and Marco Rubio to get a sense of just how much the Republican Party has changed in the past couple of years - from a party devoid of ideas and leadership to the party of thoughtful personalities.
The podcast, published today as the first in a series from Ryan’s PAC, Prosperity Action, has Ryan playing the radio host with Rubio calling in as a guest.
There’s no jargon, no committee-approved talking points. Just two smart, principled guys talking about the policy and politics of the debt deal and more.
Ryan describes the debt negotiations as a “fiasco” because of Democratic unwillingness to confront the true nature of America’s precarious fiscal situation: how we budget and spend taxpayers’ money.
Rubio calls on Republicans who have run on the idea of a balanced budget to get serious and match their words with actions when they are in Washington. He also talks through how he has managed to push reforms to Medicare and Social Security in Florida with its famously high number of retirees.
The two agree that the Democrats are vulnerable in the Senate in 2012 since the group up for re-election last won their seats in 2006, when the wind was at the Democrats’ backs. This creates a big opportunity for Republicans to keep up the drumbeat on spending and deficit reduction, which will uncomfortably hold the Democrats’ feet to the fire.
Bill Kristol has recently reissued his call for a Ryan-Rubio ticket in 2012 with links to videos (here and here) of the two men to show how refreshingly different they are.
He’s right. They are solid. The podcast provides even more evidence that their strengths are genuine and enduring. Whether or not they run (and I wish they would), they are defining what the emerging voice of the GOP sounds like: focused on big issues, practical about politics without being captivated by politics, and motivated by a deep sense of urgency and service.
Ryan Streeter
Follow Ryan on Twitter
It's been a good week for Republicans in the polls, despite being a rocky week in the debt ceiling talks. Old people, young people, moderate people - the GOP is gaining in multiple categories. While all eyes are on the GOP as it tries to wrangle votes on the Boehner plan, it's worth looking at the trends that are working in the party's favor.
Writing in the Wall Street Journal yesterday, Karlyn Bowman and Andrew Rugg of the American Enterprise Institute describe how “flower power” might be coming to the GOP’s aid. That is, boomers – the notoriously liberal children of the 60s – are growing more conservative and Republican. They’re not in the GOP’s pocket yet, but they’re definitely trending that way.
This doesn’t mean the youth vote doesn’t matter. It does. Millennials are now America’s largest generation depending on how you do the math.
And that’s where Michael Barone’s latest column comes in.
While acknowledging that the GOP still has a long way to go among Hispanics (and we all know how far apart African Americans and the GOP are), Barone writes:
The Democratic edge in party identification among white Millennials dropped from seven points in 2008 to three points in 2009 to a one-point Republican edge in 2010 and an eleven-point Republican lead in 2011.
The change these younger folks thought they were seeking in 2008 has, as Barone points out, been “anything but hopeful.”
And that’s not all. What about independents? Well, Obama’s got plenty to worry about there, too.
Writing in the Weekly Standard a few days ago, Jay Cost tracks the numbers.
Assuming various scenarios about how Democratic the electorate will be in 2012, Cost calculates “under anything less than a very Democratic electorate, Obama’s support among independents has been too soft to secure reelection for nearly two years.” And the electorate is not showing signs of being very Democratic next year.
It gets better. Michael Barone has been on a roll this week calculating the relationship between presidential elections and votes for the preceding off-year House elections. Since 1996, there has been less than a 1% difference for Democrats.
This portends trouble for Obama…
…since the popular vote for the House in 2010 was 52 to 45 percent Republican. Translate those numbers into electoral votes and you have something like a 331 to 207 Republican victory.
And then yesterday’s Pew poll showed that Obama’s 11 point advantage over Republican opponents in May has evaporated. Today, 41% prefer Obama, and 40% prefer a Republican – a statistical tie. Even more worrying for Obama, and consistent with Cost’s findings cited earlier, independent support for Obama has dropped from 40% to 31% since May, and risen for a Republican opponent from 34% to 39%.
All of this means:
Republicans still struggle with Hispanics as a whole, and of course they've done virtually nothing to make inroads into the African American community. But in almost every other category worth following they are gaining steam - which will make 2012 a great year for not only for political junkies but hopefully for the nation as a whole.
UPDATE: The Daiy Caller has cross-posted this piece today here.
Ryan Streeter
Follow Ryan on Twitter
It’s looking like House Republicans stand the best chance of getting what they want by voting for what they don’t want.
What?
The Boehner plan, which falls far short of the objectives in the Cut, Cap, and Balance bill, appears to offer the best path toward what rank-and-file members want: serious spending cuts and fiscal solvency without raising taxes. Note that I said "path toward," not that the Boehner plan achieves these goals itself.
The only way ultimately to reach the goals House Republicans and millions of Americans want is to keep America fiscally sound enough through next year, and then win the White House and make gains in the Senate, so that real entitlement reform – and therefore real fiscal solvency – are possible.
The odds of success next year are better than ever. More on that in a minute.
Supporting the Boehner plan requires adopting a 16-month strategic view, not just a view toward making a strong policy statement in the course of the next week.
This is why the Wall Street Journal editors say this morning that failing to support Boehner ultimately has the GOP playing into Obama’s hands:
The reality is that the debt limit will be raised one way or another, and the only issue now is with how much fiscal reform and what political fallout. If the Boehner plan fails in the House, the advantage shifts to Mr. Reid's Senate plan...It's true that the Boehner plan doesn't solve the long-term debt problem, but Mr. Obama won't agree to anything that does.
This is also why Paul Ryan took to National Review late yesterday to say that, even though the bill is far from perfect, he supports “this reasonable, responsible effort to cut government spending, avoid a default, and help create a better environment for job creation.” The reason is straightforward: the GOP only controls one half of one third of the government, so this is the best it can hope for (subject to figuring out how to get the $850 billion in cuts in the current CBO analysis of Boehner’s plan up to the $1 trillion he promised). GOP leaders are hoping the “Ryan effect” will temper a rank-and-file animus driven by a belief that standing so firmly on principle will lead to a default for which the public will blame Obama, not them.
Which brings us back to the point about the odds of success for next year. In 2010, and since then in the polls, independents have sided more with Republicans on spending issues than Democrats. They are sick of Washington’s over-reach. But they are also unlikely to go along with the rank-and-file objectives of the House if that means default and worsening economic conditions. And Republicans need independents in a big way in 2012. Losing them by standing on principle – especially when standing on principle won’t get us any closer to our goals – is ultimately self-defeating.
To understand the importance of independents next year, read Jay Cost’s useful article this morning at the Weekly Standard. He shows how Obama’s declining support among independents has made him vulnerable. After assembling various data points, Cost ends with the following chart, which projects how Obama would do under three different scenarios, each of which is based on different levels of Democratic turnout in past elections.
It’s clear that under any scenario Obama is in trouble. The more 2012 can look like 2010 (red line), however, the better. And key to this is to (1) keep America’s fiscal condition operable over the next year and (2) put Obama on his heels by making 2012 about his fiscal and spending records. The Boehner plan does that. The House Cut, Cap, and Balance plan – though it is the best plan, hands down – does not.
Ryan Streeter
Follow Ryan on Twitter
The spat(s) over the weekend between the two presidential contenders from Minnesota has the feel of two campaigns showing early signs of unravelling. The mini-feud has been going on for a couple of weeks, but temperatures rose noticeably the past few days.
Pawlenty’s campaign sent out an email on Saturday touting his record of experience. The email also took a swipe at Bachmann’s lack of experience without naming her.
Bachmann didn’t take the criticism sitting down. On Sunday she fired back. According to Katrina Trinko at The Corner, Bachmann accused Pawlenty of (1) praising big government, (2) praising the individual mandate, (3) supporting TARP, (4) supporting cap-and-trade, and (5) messing up Minnesota’s budget before leaving office. Wow.
The spat continued throughout the day. By last evening, Pawlenty had resorted to going after Bachmann by name, and Bachmann ended up comparing Pawlenty to Obama.
Trinko reports an update from each campaign:
Pawlenty shot back at Bachmann by saying that while he was busy moving a liberal state in a conservative direction, Bachmann “was giving speeches and offering failed amendments.” No more veiled critiques, apparently.
Bachmann replied by claiming “there’s very little daylight, indeed, between Governor Pawlenty’s record and the Obama administration’s policies.” Really?
Pawlenty’s attacks on Bachmann may have the effect of eroding some of the sheen on her campaign right now, but they ultimately leave him looking smaller than he should be.
Bachmann’s critique is littered with the sins of over-reach. Pawlenty is not at all like Barack Obama, and Bachmann knows it. He has also said over and again that his early support for cap-and-trade, for instance, was a mistake, so raising the issue makes her look like she’s grasping for any little piece of debris to use as a projectile. Her rhetoric simply goes too far and makes her look petty and defensive. Her biggest weakness is clearly her lack of executive experience. Everyone knows that. Her overly defensive reaction suggests she knows it, too.
The net result of all of this is that Mitt Romney, a highly flawed candidate, comes out looking good. He is sailing above the Minnesota fray.
Now, you might say, the Bachmann and Pawlenty feud should be seen in the context of their respective efforts to win in Iowa. And whoever wins Ames on August 13 will see a surge in his or her numbers, and will likely make gains against Romney. But Iowa is also a national stage on which candidates make impressions on voters across the country. And on that front, Bachmann and Pawlenty are weakening themselves.
The other winner in all of this is Rick Perry. It’s looking more and more like he will get into the race. And, of course, Romney, Pawlenty, and Bachmann are probably all worried about that, as they should be. The feuding Minnesotans each stand to lose support from a Perry candidacy. Perry’s record of accomplishments will take make it hard for Pawlenty (moving liberal Minnesota in a conservative direction hardly compares to Texas’s long run of job creation, low cost of living, low levels of bureaucracy, etc.), and his “Fed Up” persona and rhetoric will appeal to tea partiers currently casting their lot with Bachmann.
Natalie Gonnella
Follow Natalie on Twitter
With just under three week's to go before the Ames Straw Poll, the Iowa GOP State Central Committee yesterday officially announced the names of the nine contenders who will be listed on the August 13 ballot.
And as past hopefuls have not done well in the caucuses without investing significant time in the 'Hawkeye State', here's a look at who's done what in Iowa so far this year:
