BACHMANN: “Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann is limping toward Tuesday's Iowa presidential caucuses,” the AP writes. “She's losing staff. She's faced calls for her to abandon her bid. And she has no money.” And: “[I]nstead of ending the exhausting sprint on a high note, Bachmann found herself facing a new reality: Rick Santorum was the conservative candidate whose standing was rising ahead of the caucuses, not her.” A day after losing a state campaign chairman, she lost her political director.
The Boston Globe’s Glen Johnson highlights more difficulties: “But as if to underscore the momentum she has lost, Bachmann had several uncomfortable pauses as she waited for audience questions after her speech. And later, during an appearance before mortgage brokers at the Iowa State House, she suffered another indignity: Bachmann walked in with a speech in her hand but no podium upon which to place it. As she delivered opening to a group numbering no more than 40, aides carried over a table and placed a platform atop it.”
GINGRICH: Rep. Steve King’s still not endorsing (yet), but he said he’d pick Gingrich over Romney (though he wasn’t without some praise for Romney). “Mitt Romney is a significantly better candidate than he was four years ago,” King told Newsmax. “He’s been campaigning now for five or so years for president,” King said. “If you want someone in charge that you’ll know the trains will run on time, Mitt Romney is the man that we have confidence in that he can do that.”
More: “He’s been consistent over the last four or five years, however, and the burden that he carries with him is his healthcare policy in Massachusetts makes it really hard for him to challenge Barack Obama on Obamacare,” King said. “And this race must be about a full 100 percent repeal of Obamacare. I give the nod to Gingrich in that particular contest.”
HUNTSMAN: He picked on Iowa yesterday for picking “corn” not presidents, but the Des Moines Register reminds Huntsman that New Hampshire actually only has picked the eventual nominee just one more time than Iowa has since 1976. It suggests Huntsman should instead focus on South Carolina, since its gotten every nominee right since 1980. But “If Huntsman makes a push there, he might want to lay off the tobacco jokes,” the paper writes.
The Boston Globe notes that as Huntsman has New Hampshire to himself for the next few days, he’s confronting skeptical voters, asking him about his viability as a Republican candidate -- if he’s considering an independent bid and why he didn’t get on the Virginia ballot. And: “According to the Associated Press, Huntsman said he may drop out if he does not finish in the top three in New Hampshire.”
PAUL: The New York Times: “This month, a wealthy Republican called up two officers who served as platoon leaders in Iraq and Afghanistan with a proposition: He would lend them his private jet, and they would fly around Iowa to Representative Ron Paul’s campaign events in the weeks before the Jan. 3 caucuses, telling reporters at each location that the congressman’s foreign policy and military positions were dangerous and naïve. The deal never came to pass. But it reflects both Republican establishment concern about his insurgent candidacy — polls now place Mr. Paul, of Texas, at or near the top of the pack in Iowa — and unease among many traditional Republican voters who support the party’s tougher line on national security."
PERRY: “It’s been a long 12 months for Rick Perry. The Texas governor started 2011 in triumph, at the peak of his political power, with a high gloss on his boots and a national audience of conservatives eager for just the tale he was telling,” The Texas Tribune writes. “He ends the year treading water. His boots — ‘Freedom’ and ‘Liberty’ — might as well be named ‘Oops’ and ‘Dang.’” Ouch.
“Explaining that he's ‘not a lawyer,’ Rick Perry on Wednesday said he was unfamiliar with the anti-sodomy case Lawrence v. Texas litigated in part during his time as governor of Texas,” NBC’s Carrie Dann reports.
The Texas Tribune: “The seminal civil rights decision overturned a Texas law that outlawed the practice of sodomy between homosexuals.” And: “Despite his failure to remember it today, Perry mentioned the case in his anti-Washington book, Fed Up! In the book's sixth chapter.”
ROMNEY: The AP’s Elliott: “Mitt Romney, watching as Republicans flail for a not-Romney alternative, is looking with optimism at Iowa, the state that rejected him four years earlier but now appears at least open to the possibility that he could be the GOP presidential nominee.”
The AP’s Hunt: “Romney's effort to come across as a man of the people” with talk of Ramblers and cross-country trips “has been anything but a smooth transition.” And that “he can still struggle to connect with people on a personal level.”
Examples: “One woman recently told him that she had to endure a five-hour commute to work because her company moved out of state. How could he help keep good jobs in Iowa, she asked. ‘Sometimes it's counterintuitive,’ replied Romney, a former businessman, explaining that businesses often invent new, more efficient ways to compete. ‘The term is called productivity. Output per person,’ he said. ‘Our productivity equals our income.’”
And: “When one retired firefighter in New Hampshire said he was drawing a reduced Social Security check because he also had a state pension, the former Massachusetts governor was less than sympathetic. ‘If there's a competition for who will give you the most free stuff, go vote for that guy.’ When the man said he wasn't asking for any handouts, Romney said, ‘You knew what you were getting into… I wish you well, but I'm not going to promise you more bucks.’” (Wow.)
Romney seemed to up the stakes in Iowa yesterday: When he “was asked by CNN whether finishing second after Ron Paul in Iowa could still be considered a win, Romney quickly responded, ‘Uh, no,’” Political Wire writes.
The New York Times adds, “With days left before voting begins in Iowa, Mitt Romney has fully embraced the state that spurned him four years ago, betting that heightened expectations for his performance at the Republican caucuses here on Tuesday will not undercut his chances of a strong start to the presidential nominating contests.”
Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC) endorsed Romney.
SANTORUM: “Santorum's vehicle of choice is a supporter's heavy-duty pickup truck with an aide working in the back seat,” AP’s Glover writes. “Iowa's airwaves are filled with TV commercials. But Santorum's presence is much more restrained. That's largely a consequence of the fact that he can't afford much of one. And yet, Santorum's low-key, scaled-down approach appears to be working.”
Rick Perry attacked Santorum for requesting earmarks as a senator. Santorum’s response: "Absolutely I had earmarks while I was in the United States Senate. Look at the Constitution. Who has the responsibility to spend money? Please go take a look at my earmarks. Are there things in there I'm proud of? You bet there are.
More: "People say I voted for the 'Bridge to Nowhere.' I did! Who am I in Pennsylvania to tell Alaska what their highway priorities should be? You had a city that was separated from its airport. And of course in Alaska, you travel by air, and they had to have a ferry. Well there were times when they couldn't get across and so they built this bridge. I gave the benefit of the doubt to the people who have the expertise and knowledge about what's best for their state. Look at the Constitution. The Constitution says, 'roads.' So this is clearly a federal function." (hat tip: GOP 12.)


All over but the crying Michelle. Funny how God firmly stamped out your delusions of grandeur. Or will you only listen to Him when He agrees with your ambitions?
Is your belittling directed at Michelle or God?
Come next week more people will be jumping from the clown car of the Tea-bagger/Republicans.
While the others vacation on the unsinkable ship of the left.
Look at how far we've come...it's been over 4 months since the state fair, fried butter and the Ames Straw Poll. That was August 13. Remember the results?
1. Michele Bachmann - 4,823 - 28.6%
2. Ron Paul - 4,671 - 27.7%
3. Tim Pawlenty - 2,293 - 13.6%
4. Rick Santorum - 1,657 - 9.8%
5. Herman Cain - 1,456 - 8.6%
6. Rick Perry - 718 - 4.3%
7. Mitt Romney - 567 - 3.4%
8. Newt Gingrich - 385 - 2.3%
9. Jon Huntsman - 69 - 0.4%
10. Thaddeus McCotter - 35 - 0.2%
Now, here we are...about 100 hours from the Iowa Caucus and the first official result of the 2012 election calendar. Herman Cain, Thaddeus McCotter and Tim Pawlenty are out. Michele Bachmann is out of money and her staff is leaving her. Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry have risen and fallen. Rick Santorum now appears to be flavor of the week. The GOP is still scared s***less by Ron Paul. Conservatives are still desparately searching for an alternative to Mitt Romney. Jon Huntsman is still trying to gain traction (too bad he's not a walking sound-bite machine).
It's been over 4 months since Ames...and we're only just starting.
4 months of meaningless moonbat blather on First Read.
4 months closer to the spectacular defeat of Barack Obama and his failed Presidency.
It will be a Happy New Year in 2012.
Right on!
Ron Paul is Romney's worst nightmare as Paul will not win the GOP nod, but should and will go Independent - unless bought off. Paul as an Independent would kill any GOP presidential hope. Again, if the GOP wakes up and sobers up, they would give the nod to Huntsman unless the big money donors dictate otherwise.
Even more formidable, would be a Romney/Huntsman team, but that would mean the end of the TEA and there are still those disillusioned amongst the GOP that believe the TEA still garners substantive support - they don't.
Only in the entitlement mentality would this seem "out of touch". I applaud Romney for having the fortitude to openly express this sentiment.
Doug Ponder: "Screw the firemen. What have they ever done for us?" Remember just 10 short years ago when Police and fire were heroes? Now they need to shut up. Stop asking for entitlements? I'd give my shirt off my back if it'd help a fireman, policeman or vet. Not Romney or Doug Ponders... and that's sad. It's all about love for money over the needs of the people.
Wow!!! When the day comes (and it will) when you need assistance, whether from an individual or the bad ole government, I hope you get the same answer Mit gave this retired Fireman--GO EF YOURSELF.
Well hey, what's stopping you? Track him down and compensate him monthly for the amount his ss has been reduced. Be generous with your own money. Or STFU.
The reality is that the candidates from any one party are essentially the same and, once elected, they will all basically tow the party line by voting for what is best for the party itself. The two parties in power in the United States have become so entrenched and have amassed so much excessive power that they essentially can no longer be removed from government. And, as that has occurred, the two parties have moved increasingly far from the center, becoming diametrically opposed on essentially every issue. Because most Americans actually reside rather close to the center, this forces Americans to simply vote for the candidate that they dislike the least as opposed to the candidate that they actually feel represents their interests and ideals. This is true in both primary and general elections.
The excessive power and overentrenchment of the Reps and Dems is due in large part to the campaign finance system and balloting rules that these parties have installed for themselves, which 1) keeps these parties in power, 2) ensures that no third party can ever become a legitimate option, and 3) causes elected representatives to focus only on the needs and desires of the party with which they affiliate and the few large organizational contributors to those parties, so that the representative can ensure that he or she has sufficient funding for the next reelection campaign.
This is not how a democracy is supposed to operate. Our representatives are supposed to focus on the needs of their constituents and not the party itself. I encourage everyone to check out the American Overhaul Act at www.americanoverhaulact.org, which proposes a set of Constitutional amendments designed to correct the systemic deficiencies that are allowing these problems to persist. The Act is focused on six areas of concern: Federal Election Campaign Reform, Elimination of Party Favoritism, Congressional Compensation Limits, Congressional Term Limits, Congressional Size Limits, and Federal Budget-Deficit Reform. Please check it out, and, if you agree with the proposals, show your support for the Act, and also share it with your friends and family so that we may continue to gain the support needed to cause our government officials to take notice of this Act.
All the candidates say great things. Romney is the only one that has the problem solving skills to do the job.
Not true. Part of the problem solving skills of Romney includes saber rattling. Your kid going into the next war when Romney sends him/her?
Yawn. The GOP is boring now. Wake me when you all get to the voting states and the fur starts to fly. Oh! and FYI, don't blame the left because your field is full of nut jobs!
You might want to continue sleeping right through that really funny part when the great ship you're lounging on goes down. Perhaps the band continuing to play will arouse you to the reality that neither the left or anyone on the right, other than libertarian, Ron Paul, even saw the iceberg.
Iowa,
Really, this is not that hard. You can easily cross of Bachmann and Perry, they're just not smart enough to be president. Paul and Santorum are nuts and have no chance in the general election. (Have you read what they've written? Try it, you'll see. ) So, it's down to Romney, Gingrich, and Huntsman. They're the only ones that can do the job. If you don't like Mormons, vote for Newt. If you're a woman, don't vote for Newt, since he clearly has no respect for women. Just decide if you want someone with experience in corporate ventures (Mitt), experience in legislative practice (Newt), or experience in foreign affairs (Jon).
How about we just re-elect the guy who got Osama bin Laden?
Amy B Portland - that would be military personnel doing their job that got Osama bin Laden - not some politician who hasn't spent 5 minutes in a uniform. Even though Obama took credit for doing it, which made many in our military bristle at his little speech resplendent with "I's", your praise of him for that military accomplishment is undeserved. The mission to take out bin Laden had been in the works for years and consisted at best of notifying Obama that the military were in position to take him out, which pressed Obama to respond quickly with a 'yea' or 'nay' or more likely an "Uh, sounds good to me." How about we elect someone who is less interested in jumping on an opportunity to take credit for what he does not do and seat someone like Ron Paul who has answers to questions Obama's brain has proven unable to form.