E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Charles Dharapak / AP
Republican presidential candidate, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, greets supporters at his caucus night rally in Des Moines, Iowa, Tuesday, Jan. 3, 2012.
What we learned from last night: 1) Romney still has a problem with his party’s conservative base… 2) Rick Santorum may be for real… 3) New Hampshire is going to be fascinating to watch… Also: Measuring Santorum’s NH bounce… Romney gets McCain’s endorsement (but is that the best way for him to shore up his conservative-base problems?)… On Paul’s third-place finish… Newt strikes back… Perry sounds like he’s done… So does Bachmann (she holds a presser at 11:00 am ET)… And the GOP’s record (and still disappointing) turnout.
Read Wednesday's original First Thoughts: What we learned from last night
NBC's Chuck Todd and David Gregory assess the results from the Iowa caucuses and discuss where the race goes from here.
*** What we learned from last night: Despite the thrilling photo-finish start to the first voting of the 2012 presidential contest -- with Mitt Romney finally topping Rick Santorum by just eight votes (!!!) -- we learned pretty much what we already knew heading into last night’s Iowa caucuses, albeit with one big exception. We learned that Romney has a LONG way to go with his party’s conservative base. Of the 47% of caucus-goers identifying themselves as “very conservative,” Romney got just 14% of that vote (compared with Santorum’s 35%). Romney won another 14% from the nearly six in 10 who are evangelical Christians (versus Santorum’s 32%). At some point, he will have to win where conservatives put him over the top, and once he does he’ll be the nominee -- but not until then. (Maybe it'll be in South Carolina, maybe Florida, but he needs it somewhere.) We also learned that Romney still can’t crack the 25% he continues to get in many polls (and what just happened to be the percentage he won in Iowa four years ago).
*** Glass half full for Romney: On the positive side for Romney, we learned that he does MUCH better among Republicans who see the economy as their top issue and who want to beat President Obama in November. And we learned that his final opponent probably won’t be Newt Gingrich or Rick Perry, two folks who either had the money or the potential to go toe to toe with Romney over the long haul. On Monday, Romney said he was going to win Iowa. And he did. Unfortunately for him, his victory -- something he was unable to accomplish four years ago -- got overshadowed by someone else.
Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney, who won the Iowa caucuses by just eight votes, tells TODAY'S Matt Lauer he is "absolutely delighted" by the results of the caucuses but acknowledged it's going to be a "long road ahead" to the nomination.
*** Santorum may be for real: The one thing we didn’t know heading into last night that we ultimately learned: Rick Santorum is for real. Indeed, he became the story of the night, consolidating just enough of the conservative/evangelical vote to nearly win. (By the way, we’re guessing had Santorum had one more day, he probably would have won). His challenge now? To get the time to start putting together the resources and campaign infrastructure to compete with Romney in New Hampshire and beyond. What to watch: Do movement conservatives who have so far stayed on the sidelines (the Palins, the Cains, the DeMints, Tea Party groups, etc.) begin rallying to his side? This is the last conservative train leaving the station. Does Romney upset these folks enough that they want to potentially upset the eventual Republican nominee? That's the calculation that may be taking place among these folks.
*** New Hampshire is going to be fascinating to watch: And here’s another thing we didn’t know that we ultimately learned from last night: The upcoming New Hampshire contest is going to be FASCINATING, as well as potential trouble for Romney. It’s do-or-die time for Jon Huntsman. Gingrich last night warned that he will make New Hampshire his Alamo (more on that below). So you could have Huntsman hitting Romney from the middle and Gingrich hitting him from the right. That creates an opportunity for Santorum, who has the potential to stay above that fray and pull off another surprising finish. Second place in New Hampshire is worth something if it’s 25% or more.
*** Measuring Santorum’s New Hampshire bounce: How much can Santorum benefit in New Hampshire with his virtual tie for first in Iowa? Traditionally, the top-three finishers in Iowa haven’t experienced much of a boost – just 3 points jump on average from the last New Hampshire poll before the Iowa caucuses to the actual New Hampshire result. But the 1996 Republican presidential primary might be instructive (another year when a fairly weak front-runner (Bob Dole) was running for the second time and against a Democratic incumbent in the general election.) In 1996, Pat Buchanan finished second in Iowa and jumped 12 points in New Hampshire to win with 27%. Sen. Lamar Alexander, who faced questions of viability in the Granite State and was polling at just 9%, got a 14-point bounce and finished a very close third with 23%. The last Suffolk tracking poll showed Santorum at just 5% in New Hampshire, so if he gets the 12-to-14 point Buchanan-Alexander bounce, he could finish with 17%-21% -- still far short of what Romney is expected to get.
*** Romney gets McCain’s endorsement: When Romney gets to New Hampshire today, he’ll pick up the endorsement from John McCain, NBC News has confirmed. This means, by the way, that Romney will now have endorsements from three of the four living past GOP nominees (George H.W. Bush, Bob Dole, and John McCain). The exception: George W. Bush. But here is something to chew on for Romney: If he has a problem with conservative Republicans, and if they are his threat heading into the future GOP contests, why is he highlighting the Republican whom many movement and social conservatives love to hate?
*** Obama camp on Romney’s “poor performance”: Not surprisingly, the Obama campaign has pounced on last night’s results for Romney. “A day after predicting victory and after six years of trying to win Iowa, Mitt Romney was unable to reach the same margin of the vote he received in 2008 among a Republican field widely recognized as weak,” a campaign official emailed First Read. “It was a poor performance from a candidate who did everything possible to win -- even sacrificing principles to become the self-professed Tea Party candidate and to get to the right of Rick Perry, Rick Santorum, and Newt Gingrich.” Also, the Obama campaign’s Jim Messina and David Axelrod will hold a conference call with reporters at noon ET.
*** On Paul’s third-place finish: Turning to the other candidates, Ron Paul certainly did well with the young voters, independents, and first-time caucus-goers. But it wasn’t enough to avoid finishing third, at 21%. With his campaign money and his devoted followers, Paul has the potential to stay in the race for the long haul. But third place is a disappointment for the Texas congressman, because Iowa was the one place that had the potential for him to score a victory.
*** Newt strikes back: Gingrich made it very clear in his speech last night that he’s going on the attack against Romney. During his speech last night, Gingrich praised Santorum for running a positive campaign, but then he added: “I wish could say for all candidates.” Gingrich went on to say that the GOP would have a debate on whether to elect a Reagan conservative who helped change Washington, or a “Massachusetts moderate good at managing decay.” In fact, his campaign is already running a full-page ad in the New Hampshire Union Leader casting Romney as a “timid Massachusetts moderate.”
*** Perry sounds like he’s done: When Rick Perry -- after finishing a disappointing fifth -- said he was traveling home to Texas to assess the state of his campaign, he sounded like someone who is already done. We’d be very surprised if he makes it to New Hampshire or South Carolina.
*** Is Bachmann about to call it quits? Meanwhile, NBC’s Jamie Novogrod reports that Michele Bachmann -- who finished in sixth – will be holding a media avail this morning at 11:00 am ET at the West Des Moines Marriott. Spokeswoman Alice Stewart says that Bachmann has canceled her trip to South Carolina. While Bachmann last night vowed to stay in the race, this feels like someone who could call it quits today.
*** The GOP’s record (and still disappointing) turnout: Here’s a final point on last night: GOP turnout in Iowa -- roughly 122,000 -- was a record. And it was important for Republicans that this turnout exceeded what they got in 2008 (118,000). But make no mistake: It was a disappointing number, especially given what Republicans were hoping for to show the enthusiasm to defeat President Obama in the fall. Getting 140,000 or 150,000 would have shown real enthusiasm. Republicans didn’t get that last night. It may have been more a reflection on the candidate field than on the prospect of defeating the president.
Countdown to New Hampshire primary: 6 days
Countdown to South Carolina primary: 17 days
Countdown to Florida primary: 27 days
Countdown to Nevada caucuses: 31 days
Countdown to Super Tuesday: 62 days
Countdown to Election Day: 307 days
Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
Check us out on Facebook and also on Twitter. Follow us @chucktodd, @mmurraypolitics, @DomenicoNBC, @brookebrower
PROGRAMMING NOTES.
*** Wednesday's “Daily Rundown" line-up (live from New Hampshire): Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA) on last night's results and what's next for his campaign… Southern Illinois University's David Yepsen and the University of New Hampshire's Dante Scala on what Iowa momentum (or lack thereof) means for New Hampshire and beyond… Rep. Steve King (R-IA) on what he saw in his caucus last night… More 2012 headlines and analysis with NBC's Ron Mott, the New York Times' Gail Collins and WMUR's James Pindell.
*** Wednesday’s “Jansing & Co.” line-up: MSNBC’s Chris Jansing interviews former NH Sen. Bob Smith (a Gingrich supporter), SC Dem Chair Dick Harpootlian and SC GOP Chair Chad Connelly, FL GOP Chair Lenny Curry, the New York Times’ Charles Blow and Karen Hunter, the Nation’s David Corn, Dem strategist Steve McMahon, and MSNBC political analyst Michelle Bernard.
*** Wednesday’s “MSNBC Live with Thomas Roberts” line-up: MSNBC’S Thomas Roberts talks with MSNBC’S Ed Schultz, Gingrich campaign adviser David Winston, Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC), Politico’s Reid Wilson, the Huffington Post’s Jennifer Donahue, Republican Strategist Susan Del Percio, and Democratic strategist Doug Thornell.
*** Wednesday’s “NOW with Alex Wagner” line-up: Alex Wagner’s guests include former Deputy White House Press Secretary Bill Burton, MSNBC Political Analyst Richard Wolffe, MSNBC contributor Meghan McCain, Time’s Rana Foroohar, and the Huffington Post's Jon Ward.
*** Wednesday’s “Andrea Mitchell Reports” line-up (from Manchester, NH): President Obama delivers remarks on the economy from 1:15 pm to 1:45 pmET. NBC’s Andrea Mitchell also will talk to the Washington Post’s Dan Balz and Chris Cillizza, Romney adviser Kevin Madden, Steve Forbes, and Politico’s Joe Williams.
*** Wednesday’s “News Nation with Tamron Hall” line-up: MSNBC’s Tamron Hall interviews The Hill’s AB Stoddard, Michael Smerconish, Steve Deace, and Scott Siepker.
2012: Eight is Enough
The Des Moines Register: “Mitt Romney wins Iowa caucus by 8 votes.” (The print edition front page: “Romney wins by 8 votes.” Subhed: “Contrasting tactics yield photo finish.”)
The AP’s Beaumont: “In many ways distinctly different, Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney took near opposite paths to twin victories in Iowa's presidential caucuses.”
With 30,015 votes, Romney finished six votes short of his 2008 total of 30,021.
The New Hampshire Union Leader: “Romney edges Santorum by 8 votes in Iowa caucuses; on to NH.”
“Mitt Romney’s quest to swiftly lock down the Republican presidential nomination with a commanding finish in the Iowa caucuses was undercut on Tuesday night by the surging candidacy of Rick Santorum, who fought him to a draw on a shoestring budget by winning over conservatives who remain skeptical of Mr. Romney,” the New York Times says.
The New York Daily News: “Mitt Romney tops Rick Santorum in historically-close Iowa caucuses.” Its lede: “Mitt Romney pulled off a shocker over a surging Rick Santorum in an historically-close Iowa caucuses Tuesday night - winning by a razor-thin eight votes out of nearly 122,000 that were cast. Santorum’s strong showing dashed Mitt Romney’s hopes to quickly lock up the inside track to the GOP nomination.”
The New York Post front page: “GOP dead heat.”
The State newspaper in Columbia, S.C.: “Right candidate could topple Romney in S.C.”
The AP: “Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney waged a seesaw battle for supremacy in Iowa's Republican presidential caucuses late Tuesday night, a dramatic opening round for the campaign to pick a challenger to President Barack Obama.” It called the dead heat, a fitting conclusion to a race as jumbled as any since Iowa gained the lead-off position in presidential campaigns four decades ago. Regardless of the outcome, there was enough for both to claim a victory -- Romney as the man to beat for the party's nomination and Santorum as the leader among those struggling to emerge as the former governor's unvarnished conservative rival in the primaries yet to come.”
“Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney said he's looking forward to a long nomination race as he finished in a dead heat Tuesday with Rick Santorum in the Iowa caucuses,” AP’s Hunt writes.
“Republican presidential hopeful Rick Santorum declared that his strong Iowa showing means it's ‘game on’ for the party's presidential nomination, and he's heading to New Hampshire for round two,” AP’s Glover writes.
BACHMANN: “Michele Bachmann told a small group of supporters Tuesday night that she's staying in the presidential race as the only true conservative who can defeat the sitting president, despite a bleak showing in the Iowa caucuses,” the New York Daily News writes. “The Minnesota congresswoman was running in last place among six candidates as returns came in from the nation's first Republican presidential nominating contest.”
HUNTSMAN: “As all eyes turn from Iowa to New Hampshire, Republican presidential candidate Jon Huntsman today sharpened his critique of his major rival in New Hampshire, former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney,” the Boston Globe writes. Huntsman said: “If you’re the largest recipient of funds from the banking sector, as Governor Romney is, for example, do you think you can fix what needs to be fixed?” No way, no how. It’ll be a status quo outcome.”
Yesterday, Huntsman had a message for whoever the winner is of the Iowa caucuses, per NBC’s Jo Ling Kent: "Welcome to New Hampshire. Nobody cares."
Marking his 150th public campaign event last night, Huntsman -- who skipped campaigning in Iowa and is fully focused on New Hampshire -- got his biggest New Hampshire audience since entering the GOP race, with more than 350 people packing an iconic town hall.
PAUL: “Ron Paul, the libertarian maverick, displayed the strength of his candidacy among young people at a joint public event on caucus day,” the Boston Globe writes
PERRY: “Perry’s stunning revelation – which pundits believe will soon lead to the official termination of his campaign – was a stark reversal from his tough talk just hours before,” the New York Daily News writes. “He vowed to stay in the race. Perry released a campaign schedule for South Carolina – held in two weeks – and he also announced a TV ad buy in the Palmetto State, seemingly clear signals that he intended to fight in the Southern battleground state.”
ROMNEY: “Mitt Romney likes to boast that he built his 2012 presidential campaign for the long haul. Good thing,” the Boston Globe’s Glen Johnson writes. “By virtually splitting the vote in last night’s Iowa caucuses with Rick Santorum and Ron Paul, Romney not only gained an emboldened opponent with an organization of this own (Paul), but also one with an ideological backing that has always eluded him (Santorum). In addition, he now faces a trident of sorts, as a wounded Newt Gingrich launches his own assault on the former Massachusetts governor.”
OBAMA AGENDA: Obama speaks to Iowa Democrats
President Obama holds an event on the economy in Cleveland, OH, and he speaks at 1:15 pm ET.
“Trying to drown out the Republican din Tuesday night, President Obama said his first three years in office have shown he is making good on his 2008 campaign pledge to bring hope and change,” the New York Daily News writes. “‘In some ways, I’m actually more optimistic now than I was when I first ran, because we’ve already seen change take place,’ Obama said in a Web chat with Democrats in Iowa, who held their own caucus, albeit symbolic, on the same night as the GOP. ‘And part of what 2012 is about is ... reminding the American people of how far we’ve traveled.’
More: “Obama used the video talk to tick off the promises he has kept since he won the contested Iowa Democratic caucus in 2008: ending the Iraq War and expanding the number of people with medical insurance and a variety of middle-class tax break.”
Leave a Comment:
Go Romney!!!!!!!!! I couldn't be more happy that he won it! I am very excited to see him go all the way and make it. We need a President like Romney.
I agree. If Romney had gotten more support from the very conservative faction, he wouldn't be as "electable" in the general election.
Romney can beat Obama . That's what will matter in the end.
Romney for jobs jobs jobs.
What we learned well this "AMERICANS ARE IMBECILES".
Specifically what is apparent at this GOP session is know one has a clue about what really they are voting for. I wonder why !!! The people are being fed THE SAME STUFF OVER AND OVER AGAIN for DECADES and DECADES.
AND NOT ONE OF THE SLUGS HAS CHANGED ANYTHING ! GOSH, when are the politicians going to listen to THE PEOPLE and not the TOP RICH ONES at every CAMPAIGN.
I want to see our government CLEANED UP and THROWN OUT and have meaningful LAWS that change all the corruption and the wheeling and dealings so prevalent within abolished.
I want to see BILLS and LAWS that are ONLY FOR THE PEOPLE and nothing else.
Then I can call it a FREE MARKET and the government for the PEOPLE by the PEOPLE !!!
Alain: "I want to see our government CLEANED UP and THROWN OUT"
Then the first thing we need to do is GET RID of Obama.
Step 2. We should "clean up" Congress by getting rid of the Democrat "insider traders" like Pelosi and the Democrat tax cheats ( Charlie Rangel, Tim Geitner) too. Not to mention Democrats , like Maxine Waters, who funneled "stimulus" dollars to her husband's bank.
Democrat = Hypocrite
This is what the caucus is all about. Weed out the contenders from the pretenders. Now at least the rest of the country won't have to listen to her continued whining.
Leona,
I don't know whether to laugh or be saddened by your comment. Either way, it's obvious your myopia is strictly politically motivated. As reported by 60 Minutes, the 'lead' quote was about a prominent Republican.
Steve Kroft reports that Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-AL), now the chair of the House Financial Services Committee, bet against the market in the days before the 2008 financial crisis hit — after getting 'apocalyptic briefings' from Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke and then-Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson. Kroft also raises questions about the trading patterns of Speaker of the House John Boehner (a Republican, in case you'd forgotten that) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (a Democrat, but I think you know that based on your insipid rant) — and the real estate purchases of other senators and representatives (both Democratic and Republican).
So be as 'ignorant' (meaning aware of the facts and ignoring them, or not having the intellect to actually inform yourself) as you want to be, but don't come around here brandishing your version of the truth. As for President Obama, that's all a matter of opinion to be sure. Remember, you can have your opinion. That's your right. But you can't have your own facts. That's just wrong.
As for agreeing with Alain and "cleaning up and throwing out" so we have people who have no earthly idea of what they're doing or how to govern. Yeah, we got that with the Teabaggers and I for one am definitely disgusted by the result of their "governing" (and I'm being very charitable calling their obstructionist agenda "governing")
In the end I guess I'll be charitable and just be saddened by how horribly uninformed you are.
First timer,
I have a news flash for you.....most Americans agree with me about Pelosi ......and Obama has an abysmal record when it comes to jobs. So, I'd say YOU are "uninformed."
When it comes to Bachmann, the liberals call her "dumb." Michelle Bachmann is a tax attorney and a Congresswoman. Did she get there by being "dumb?"
The liberals should focus on getting rid of Nancy"insider trading" Pelosi (D). ........it was Pelosi who said "PASS THE BILL TO KNOW WHAT'S IN IT."
PELOSI (D) who funneled "green" jobs to her brother-in-law so he could rich.
Pelosi (D) who has brought her husbands business partner to D.C. ( since 2007) to "speak" to Congress about what to do with the economic situation. No one in Congress knew the man had any connection to Pelosi's husband. She conveniently left out who he was.
She needs to leave now , just like B.Frank (D) is doing. Frank is leaving because he knows he'll never get re-elected. Barney Frank (D) was largely to blame for Fannie and Freddie bankrupting the housing market. ( and we wont mention he had a gay brothel in his home, lol)
Leona,
Thanks for nothing more than your continued political rant. As for your statement about your news flash about most Americans 'agreeing with you about Pelosi' given that she's in Congress I'd say about 90% of America agrees with that statement, but it's aimed at both Republicans and Democrats. But don't let that get in your way and continue with your ignorant rant.
As for Obama's abysmal record regarding jobs, you might want to look a little deeper into your Republicans' record on jobs. You remember, the single platform item they ran on in 2010? While I know you're about to spew the Faux (rhymes with "blow") News fact about the Republicans putting forth numerous jobs bills, the majority of them were either comprised of tax credits for the wealthiest Americans, removal of regulations, or some combination thereof.
Let's take these assertions and put them up against what ACTUAL business owners have to say: In a recent survey conduct by the Hartford Financial Group, when small-business owners were asked to name the single biggest barrier to success, only 9 percent cited government rules and regulations. Just 2 percent cited “too many taxes or uncertainty related to taxes.” I know that the right likes to point to these things as causing our current economic problems, but the men and women who actually own these business don't share their talking point in the least.
http://boss.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/21/small-businesses-over-taxed-and-over-regulated-a-survey-says-no/
Business owners cited other factors beyond taxes and regulation, including a lack of paying customers and unspecified complaints about the economy. In fact, regulations and taxes were the two smallest of the four factors, while lack of paying customers and those unspecified complaints were cited by 26 percent of all responders. Putting additional monies in the pockets of the middle class creates demand and therefor stimulates the economy. It's Econ 101 Leona. But don't let the facts dissuade you from your position of ignorance. Remain strong in the face of all of it.
And remember the GOP Senate's jobs plan, the one that freshman senator Rand Paul said, and I quote, "[t]he entire plan will not add one penny to the federal debt, while creating 5 million new jobs"? Yeah, well economists stated that the "plan" was just a mish mash of tax cuts, abolishing regulations and a federal balanced budget amendment. The claim regarding the number of jobs to be created was labeled "ludicrous".
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/the-gops-ludicrous-claim-about-their-jobs-bill/2011/10/19/gIQAgX4GzL_blog.html
So once again Leona, you're horribly uninformed and ridiculously myopic.
And you realize, don't you, that Michelle Bachmann (don't know how she got into this conversation but it's typical to not address the points you previously made which were factually refuted at every turn and then start throwing out everything you've got, including Barney Frank's sexuality [like that's a big secret]) got her JD (that's juris doctorate, in case you didn't know) from O.W. Coburn Law School which opened in 1979 and closed in 1985. (They had Harvard and Yale quaking in their boots there at the end with their intellectual horsepower!) By the way, O.W. Coburn Law School was never accredited by the ABA and the school, its 5 professors and 23 students moved to CBN University (now Regent University). Since the new CBN law school would not initially be accredited (and in fact did not receive provisional accreditation until 1989), students graduating in spring 1986 were allowed to state they graduated from Coburn, in order to be listed as graduating from an accredited school. Bachmann was a graduate of the last class at Coburn. Yeah, she's a Rhodes Scholar (more like a 'road' scholar). On the more practical level, have you heard her speak? Have you heard the tripe that comes tumbling out of her mouth? Significant lies and misstatements, wrapped up in a bunch of religious nonsense.
And I've changed my mind. There's no reason to feel sad for you. You're that part of the party that revels in touting their ignorance in the face of science and facts. Now I'm just laughing. Thanks for that. It does a body good!
Leona,
It is clear to me based on your arguement(s) that all that is wrong is caused by the Democrats and that they alone are to be blamed for our current situation of a worthless dollar, illegal wars and the destruction of the middle class. You are only half right because a representative government that is outlined and constructed by the Constitution of the United States provides for the adgenda of the ruling party and a party that faces in opposition. Unlike a Parlimentary government, which builds consenses, our governemt has built in it the rules of compromise. And you must agree that compromise is something our elected officials continually fail to do. Why is that? Politicians go to the people who have money. And I suspect that does not include you or me. The people who have money are the people who make up large, emotionless, self-serving corportations. Both Republican and Democrat politicians are bought by this money. They are in bed with one another and their politician denizens want you to rant because, after all, it keeps people like you hateful and from really understanding as to what they really do. They've succeeded with you---your focus is as in Plato's "Allegory of the Cave."
Until and unless the so called Conservative base and the TP make the decision to throw money at Santorum Mittens will be the candidate of the GOP with 25% support and the rest holding their nose and only the biggest of haters and bigots will go to the polls come November, the rest will stay home and lament that they did not have one good candidate willing to step up.
Romney for jobs jobs jobs ( something Obama knows nothing about) .
ROMNEY WILL WIN BECAUSE HE CAN WORK WITH DEMS TO GET THINGS DONE. He's already worked with the "other side."
Obama is a partisan sniper and despises Republicans. That is very bad for the country.
Leona !! close the liquor cabinet door and go iron or something people are starting to think your challenged
We learned that 75% of the caucus voters voted against Romney. We also learned that Perry does not want to lose any money on his airline ticket to South Carolina. He's going there to buy his year's supply of boiled peanuts.
My two favorite quotes about Rick Perry:
1. He's the only governor alive that makes George W. look brilliant.
2. (Referring to Perry's comment about Obama thinking he's the smartest guy in the room and the troubles that causes). When Rick Perry is in a room by himself and someone else enters, Perry's chances of being the smartest guy in the room drop precipitously.
Currently living in Texas, I can attest to both being factually accurate.
We learned that yes they are as dumb as we thought.Can't wait till its over and President Obama has a new Democratic congress to work with.
I thought TP was toilet paper
Santorum coming in close second last night, certainly has made this interesting. Huntsman may come in close second in NH behind Romney.From there, I don't know...
That Santorum is obsessed with gays, abortion and Catholic pedophile priests
Wait....strike that last one
Santorum has yet to go after child predator Roman Catholic pedo-priests