Comments about ‘Rick Perry replaces Tim Pawlenty in race, looks to challenge Mitt Romney for GOP nomination’

Return to article »

Published: Sunday, Aug. 14 2011 7:27 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Richard Saunders
Provo, UT

Still can't bring yourselves to mention Ron Paul, huh? How much more do we have to hear about Jon Huntsman, when he continues to poll about 2% nationally? Ron Paul has begun to poll in the double digits and his support is increasing. Rick Perry is just another establishment/GWB type Republican. End the wars, balance the budget, restore sound money policy to the U.S. Ron Paul 2012

DN Subscriber
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Perry-Rubio 2012!

Ron Paul? Sorry, he is too far out on the fringe to be taken seriously.

bluemoon1977
Provo, Utah

No one currently in the race can beat Pres. Obama. Each of these candidates carries way too much baggage. Just a statement of fact.

Richard Saunders
Provo, UT

@DN Subscriber
Indeed, looking for an end to these wars and balancing the budget does make one fringe these days. Conservatives who call for a balanced budget have to realize that the only way achieve it is with some serious cuts to defense spending. Ron Paul predicted the housing crisis of 2008 and was right about the collapse of Freddie Mae and Fannie Mac. He understands economics and knows that both the Republicans and Democrats have contributed to the debt crisis. Also some may view it as such, liberty is not a "fringe" idea, and has not been over the course of American History. The support for Ron Paul is growing as more Americans realize that endless spending, rather for welfare or warfare, will put our grandchildren in bongdage. I'm voting my conscience and my wallet and they both say Ron Paul.

Clorinda
Layton, UT

@ Richard Saunders. The loyalty of Ron Paul supporters had me somewhat interested until I heard him in the debate on Thursday Night. He is way too extreme, and I find I don't agree with 80% of what he stands for. 20% good isn't good enough for most Republicans. Although I don't think he is precisely nuts, he did come across as a little nutty. But, you go a head and support him. I liked him better when I didn't know anything about him.

M. Matchette
Syracuse, Utah

Say Mr. Saunders, give us some examples of the baggage Ron Paul might be carrying. Let's look at his voting record. Do you see anything unconstitutional he might have voted for? Oh, and Rick Perry (Mr. Gardasil) in Feb 2007 requiring young girls to be vaccinated with a cancer causing agent, not to mention he was working for Al Gore's election campaign. Your right about the baggage that the other candidates carry, but Ron Paul is the only one who openly talks about bringing back Constitutional principles (as if a good newly elected president could get rid of the corrupt globalists in every nook-and-cranny), but let's hope the sparks of freedom and individual soveriegnty from such a win will blaze in every American heart...

UtahVoter
Spanish Fork, UT

It seems that the DesNews staff has no idea how to assess or write about Ron Paul in their stories . . . so they just don't. That's a serious dis-service to their readers - both in Utah and worldwide.

Ron Paul has a sizable following in Utah and amongst the LDS nationally. Ron Paul is the best match for my values and political viewpoints. I'm LDS, I'm active in the Utah Republican party as a precinct chair, and I know dozens of others in my area who are similarly active in local politics who have spent the last four years coming to understand why Congressman Paul is far and away the best candidate.

It's clear to me that none of the other candidates have the knowledge, experience, and understanding that Paul does. A number of the candidates are more telegenic -- and as a Paul fan, I'll admit that I wish he could somehow learn a thing or two from polished candidates like Romney in presenting to an audience that might not have the same depth of background on a particular political question -- but Paul is right on the most issues. He's has the vision America needs to implement.

utahboni
Ogden, UT

Ron Paul is particularly popular with the crystal-meth crowd. He advocates doing away with drug control laws. The meth-heads think he's next to God.

Bachman and Perry both have the same baggage. They are religious extremists. When things go wrong in Texas, Perry holds a prayer vigil. Bachman supports bringing back strict Biblical law. Their positions will never fly in states where sane, rational people outnumber the flakes. They will win in the same states that Huckabee won in.

Blue
Salt Lake City, UT

MMatchette: "Oh, and Rick Perry (Mr. Gardasil) in Feb 2007 requiring young girls to be vaccinated with a cancer causing agent,"

For the record, Gardasil is an effective vaccination _against_ a disease (HPV) that causes cancer in women, and there is _zero_ medical evidence that it ever has or could cause cancer. I think Mr. Perry would be a disaster as president, but his executive order as governor regarding Gardasil vaccinations was good public policy.

MMatchette's comment is the GOP's biggest problem in a nutshell - a significant percentage of GOP voters are deeply irrational and belligerently ignorant, and GOP candidates know that unless they can appeal to the crowd who think the world is flat they won't get their campaigns off the ground.

Thus we are left with Bob Bennett's convention defeat and the completely nuts Michelle Bachmann winning the Iowa straw poll.

IdahoStranger
NEWDALE, ID

In trying to determine which candidate one should support, I suggest that you go to their official websites (simply Google "Candidates name" for president) and spend some time looking at the Issues they have listed there or don't have listed.

I did that yesterday comparing Michelle Bachmann and Ron Paul. I like Michel and was encouraged by some of her answers on the debate. However, her statements about National Security on her website could be written by the most liberal Democrat. I have written her asking for a more concise and specific explanation of just what she would do as president.

Of all the websites I have visited (Romney, Huntsman & others) the past few weeks, Ron Paul's website gives me the best specific answers as to what he would do as president.

While debates are fun perhaps, they are NOT a good way to determine who you should vote for. The questions are "loaded" and I thank Newt Gingrich for pointing that out - "Mickey Mouse" indeed. Americans need to realize that the mainstream media has its own agenda, even "Faux News"! They are "News Makers", not news reporters.

Find out specifically what they would do as president. Ask THEM!

Doug10
Roosevelt, UT

Ron Paul has merits but he like Bachman is unelectable. He might be a great vp for someone though who wants the conservative vote.

Rick Perry is a Bushalike which will go against him by informed voters. He has sat as govenor in Texas while the state has raked in billions in petroleum royalties. It is not hard to spend when you have lots of money.

Even though Texas has plenty of funds they have not been spent educationg their people or bringing technology to lift its residents in any meaningful way. He has more or less blown the money his state has been given. If this sounds familiar it is. The change we need in Washington is not spelled Perry.

ksampow
Farr West, Utah

Concerning the HPV vaccination - abstinence remains the best way to prevent infection. A vaccine is a medical tool, but should not be MANDATORY. So much for Perry being against big government.

By the way, why is no one mentioning that Michele Bachmann is originally from Iowa? Wining the Iowa straw poll proves very little for her.

speed66
Heber City, UT

There is no strong candidate stepping forward. I admire Paul. He is one of the most sincere and consistent politicians of the day. I am not a supporter and would never vote for him but think his voice has been an important contribution.

Romney has displayed a willingness to say whatever he thinks his crowd wants to hear. His integrity is a serious issue and will become a bigger issue as time goes on. His use of his son's address for voting purposes was unacceptable.

Bachmann won't hold up to scrutiny and, in the end, voters want someone they think can win the big race. She's not it.

Perry is charismatic, good looking and will draw broader support than Bachmann or Paul. I think he will overtake Romney. He's not well-regarded by many in his own party - often critical of his intellect. I don't think that will matter to most primary voters and many of the big-money groups will actually like that.

I like Huntsman. I think he is rational, moderate and effective. While that would be enough in the general, it's not enough in the primaries.

Does anyone else believe Palin will still announce?

UtahVoter
Spanish Fork, UT

Doug10, I'd be interested to hear why you find Ron Paul "unelectable". That same charge has been made, quite compellingly, against nearly every eventual successful Presidential candidate. Amongst many pundits in 2007, the neophyte Obama was considered surely 'unelectable' despite many admitted "merits".

Paul is certainly electable to Federal office. He has won re-election dozens of times in his home district despite well-funded and organized opposition campaigns run by many of the best politically connected and elite in hardball politics in Texas.

Many of the most traditional polling organizations have been noting that surprising "electability" this go round. Rasmussen, for instance, was surprised to see Paul and Romney emerge as the *most* electable candidates in their large and detailed national sampling poll they completed a couple of weeks ago. This certainly wasn't the case for Paul four years ago.

Paul's merits are worth considering in greater detail. His alleged "fringe" claims deserve additional research. Four years ago, I found myself liking many of Paul's conclusions but stunned by some of his more unlikely sounding supporting claims. I've researched a number of those and found that Paul is often the best informed and 'wisest' candidate on the stage.

justcap
Provo, UT

The article says to expect Huntsman to drop out soon. I don't expect him to drop out until he has taken enough votes away from Romney so that someone else wins the bid. I bet he isn't interested in Presidency '12 but VP '12. That is why he attacks Romney and no other candidate-- he knows Romney would never pick him as VP, but if he plays it right he may have a chance at VP.

J-TX
Allen, TX

For all of you Utahns commenting on Perry:

If you know anyone in Texas, please ask them what they think of Perry. Pertinent accurate points made in this discussion are:

1) Mandating that every girl over 12 be vaccinated with Gardasil was NOT good public policy, and was overturned by the constituency with which he is out of touch.
2) Perry has been the fortunate resident during a great period of economic growth in Texas. While his ads say he "oversaw the greatest job growth in America in the last 2 years", they rightly stop short of taking credit for it. Texas' business-friendly climate pre-dates Perry. The only claim he can lay on economic prosperity in Texas is that his approach is laissez-faire. In doing nothing, he didn't make it worse (the same cannot be said of Mr. Obama.)
3) He is GWB-like. He is part of the Good-ol-boy, Oil-friendly, none-too-intelligent Texan political network.

Romney might do well to bring him on as a VP, as he is more conservative than Romney, but to vote for Rick Perry for President woulod be an egregious error.

Ask a Texan.

Richard Saunders
Provo, UT

@Pagen
Ron Paul's true position is that it should be left at the state level, so there would be no risk of it being legal here in Utah. But the point he made in the debate was that people don't use heroin because it's stupid, not because it's illegal. Ask someone if they would use heroin if it were legal. "Oh, not me, using drugs is stupid." So is it just the others who need government help to make good choices?

Pagen, I would think you would like Ron Paul. He has been the most consistent voice against the wars, against ALL the wars and would bring our troops home. He believes in protecting the rights of individuals, and not trying to enforce what we may consider 'moral' behavior through legislation. Please don't be so quick to marginalize your greatest ally on the right when it comes to foreign policy and civil liberties. (He has always opposed the Patriot Act). Ron Paul is one of the few Republicans that will recognize what his party has contributed to the debt. He is a consistent and clear voice in defense of the Constitution.

Grammy3
SOUTH JORDAN, UT

I feel that we need either Mitt Romney or Herman Cain because they both have worked in the Private Sector for years and know how to create Jobs as well as to fix the economy. This is what this country needs right now. Not someone who is so right wing and nutty to run this country. They all have issues because guess what they are Human Beings who change their minds on things or do things that might not be right at times. Just like all of the rest of us. We need to think on who can beat Obama so that he does not have four more years to destroy our Country. Then we need someone who can get us out of this mess that we are facing with those who can not find jobs or those who are being underpaid. We need Mitt or Herman as simple as that.

Richard Saunders
Provo, UT

@Pagen "Our troops are already coming home"

When are they coming home from Korea? When are we closing our hundreds of bases around the world? Has Obama talked about that?

"31 US troops, mostly elite Navy SEALs, killed in Afghanistan" -msnbc.com
End of 'combat operations' does not mean the end of deaths. Look past the party line and see there is only one anti-war candidate running for president in 2012. You have stated previously that you do not agree with Obama on Libya. You are probably much closer to Ron Paul on that point. At least give him credit for that.

Pagan
Salt Lake City, UT

'When are they coming home from Korea?' - Richard Saunders | 4:03 p.m. Aug. 15, 2011

You want to hold a current, sitting Democratic president accountable in 2011...

for a war that ended...in 1953?

I will grant you that Obama IS the president, but the GOP has blocked over 139 peices of legislation...

*'Hatch, Republicans challenge tax cut expiration' - By Becky Bruce, Deseret News - 12/01/10

'WASHINGTON, D.C. Republicans in the U.S. Senate are drawing a line in the virtual sand, vowing to keep all legislation off the Senate floor unless Congress extends the Bush-era tax cuts...'

I mean, did you SEE the healthcare debate?

People are STILL calling Obama names.

*'Newt Gingrich Slammed For Saying Obama May Hold 'Kenyan, Anti-Colonial' Worldview' - By Sam Stien - Huffington Post - 11/12/10

Sorry, but bringing troops home from wars started in 2001...

can be a good prep for a war that ended...

58 years ago, in my opinion.

And that, is what Obama is doing.

Ending wars that Ron Paul's party started and left for OTHERS to finish.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments