Frank Luntz Focus Group Gives Rick Perry Unanimous Win Over Mitt Romney on Social Security (Video)

The Frank Luntz focus group gave Governor Rick Perry a unanimous win over Mitt Romney on their Social Security exchange at last night’s debate. The Republican voters said Romney sounded too much like a democrat on the issue.

1 2 3 Newer Comments >>
`

#26 September 13, 2011 at 10:42 pm
neverends commented:

Cucumber & mayo sandwich Coctail Party establishment Romney knows he has a loser item on healthcare so he thought he would make social security an issue. Too bad the public knows that social security is a lost cause because of the people getting benefits that were never intended to receive them, thanks to the demorats and RINOs (Romney-likes). Perry should get on Romney over the healthcare issue at the next debate. That will only leave immigration that really may be an issue for Perry but no more so than the support of sanctuary cities that Romney allowed.
#27 September 13, 2011 at 10:52 pm
Joe Bean commented:

Perry is an illegal immigration lover. He sounded like a total democrat when he said that the color of the skin was not taken into account when Texas decided to spend millions of dollars on tuition assistance for illegal alien anchor children. A law which he promoted in the debate as sound. We know he does not intend to actually enforce the federal laws on immigration based upon his stance.

On top of that Perry is also a former supporter of Al Gore. I suppose that is as bad as any Romneycare baggage. if you ask me, both guys are bad choices for Republicrats. I think that Herman Cain and Rick Santorum sound like the candidates with the least amount of bagggage. At the same time Perry has zero proposals on how he intends to carry out his economic improvement plans. Whereas Romney just released his proposal and Herman Cain has released his 999 plan.

Perry seems like an unpolished and unprepared hip shooter. I don’t believe a word he utters.
#29 September 13, 2011 at 10:54 pm
Rose commented:

I want Sarah! Even Bill O’Reilly has given talking points tonight TO THE RIGHT of Perry!

How Pathetic is THAT!

And Bobby Jindal qualified his endorsement of Perry which he gave last night – qualified it today with his differences from Perry, pretty much the same points – reiterated his endorsement.
#30 September 13, 2011 at 10:59 pm
Joe Bean commented:

Sarah is about as real a chance of a winner as Biden does as President. She’s on the Fox payroll and she has no skills for delivering speeches (almost as bad as Obama and the teleprompter) and Palin has no plans at all. She has just responses. Much like Bachmann. If either of those potential candidates or candidates wants to break out into real contendor territory they need to be more than reactionary. They’ll need to either get some accomplishments under their belts pronto (an impossibility) or they will need to deliver a calculated plan like Cain or Romney. Otherwise they’d be eaten up by the Democratic machine.

If Perry get’s the nomination he better be ready to deliver his plan on the economy or he will get eaten up by the same democratic machine. Don’t underestimate that.
#31 September 13, 2011 at 10:59 pm
Old Fan commented:

Okay, sounds like a desperate spin in the face of a very lackluster debate offering from Mr. Perry.

“neverends” is an example of the fashion we see today amongst us. They are stuck on image, somehow seeing a Free Market entity such as Romney as the ‘establishment’ – who was bitterly opposed by the disastrous Maverick – the real Beltway Insider, a life long politician with little accomplishment, vision, ability, etc.

No, instead we see the debasing of Romney, a true Private Sector hero of sorts, while the life long Public Sector entity of Mr. Perry is being championed. He is the new flavor of the month, following the overt hype over so many, including Trump of all people. Perry has a good CEO record indeed, but he is a former Al Gore employee, whose entire existence is a product of working in politics and the Public Sector. It is ironic, as Perry has his own ‘dream act’ enabling illegal immigration, wrote gushing letters to Hillary Clinton praising her for her Nationalization Schemes, provided Executive Order mandates which seems to have been a product of peddling influence to Merck, etc.

Yet, even with all the vivid contradictions, the image/identity game plays Perry as the real ideal, while it still debases Romney the actual Free Market success who empowered Our US Capitalist system. It is yet another vivid display in the contradiction of the fashion which dominates much of Our once powerful Conservative arena.

It didn’t matter that one celebrity provided Climate Panel bureaucracy or produced populist tax increases on Oil Companies, this image/identity offering could even embrace the dreadful Maverick Ticket and be promoted as the ideal. And while we speak, the same fashionable voices are out there debasing Christie, Boehner, Ryan, Cantor, etc., as being mere “RINOS”. Seems Perry and all the other fashionable image offerings would also classify as a RINO by the same standard.

All of it is leading to more Delaware Debacles. Reminds one of the self destructive sophistry which vilified Murkowski overtly driving her farther away, instead of growing the attractive nature of the sound conservative cause – all in the name of a fraudulent offering named Miller.

So when do we learn? When do we return to the serious basis which WFB created?

Perry lost that debate dramatically, and he better do far better. If Perry is pushed as the fashionable ideal and wins the Nomination, then loses to Obama, there will be an enormous backlash to the fashionable who again pushed – enabled weakness. I strongly opposed the Maverick offering, and today I hope many will be objective, reasoned, serious about this Primary. I am open to Perry, Romney, etc. But there is little doubt, Mr. Perry has to do much better. So far, he is mailing it in, like a typical life long politician who spent his days in Government.
#32 September 13, 2011 at 11:01 pm
retire05 commented:

Joe Bean, everything you just said about Perry was also said about Ronald Reagan.
#33 September 13, 2011 at 11:04 pm
Joe Bean commented:

Perry is no Reagan my friend.
#34 September 13, 2011 at 11:04 pm
Joe Bean commented:

Old Fan nailed it completely!
#35 September 13, 2011 at 11:08 pm
retire05 commented:

Old Fan, you are welcome to not like Perry. You are not welcome to make up your own facts.

Perry never “worked” for Al Gore. Hell, he wasn’t even Gore’s Texas campaign manager. If anyone was Gore’s defacto campaign manager in Texas, it was Gib Lewis.

There is NO Texas “Dream” act. I suggest you read the federal “Dream” act to see the differences. Giving in-state tuition to the children of illegals, many who were born in Texas, is not a “Dream” act by any stretch of honesty.

Perry wrote a letter to Hillary in April, 1993, asking her to remember farmers/ranchers when designing Hillarycare. That was months before the actual plan was revealed by the Hillary commission on health care. Perhaps you can explain how Perry knew what was in a plan not yet designed or released?

Influence peddling by Merck? Hardly.

Dislike Perry for POTUS if you want. But stop lying about actual events.
#36 September 13, 2011 at 11:09 pm
retire05 commented:

Joe Bean, I never said Perry was another Reagan. I said that you are repeating the same crap that was said about Reagan. Comprehension seems to not be your forte.
#37 September 13, 2011 at 11:14 pm
Joe Bean commented:

Perry worked for Al Gore’s 2000 election.

Perry did embrace on the stage yesterday on national television a program which provides illegal aliens children taxpayer money . If you want to split hairs and avoid calling a dream act that’s fine, but the guy is really not a sound conservative on immigration from some people’s point of view and the terminology used is pretty much sound.

Perry looks like he is a career politician and he indeed attempted to use the office of governor to impose administrative law for vaccination. That’s pretty much a fine example of big government run amok.
#38 September 13, 2011 at 11:16 pm
Joe Bean commented:

Retire05 talk about comprehension. All you are doing is saying a lot of nothing. if you are going to state all I that I have said was also said about reagan, perhaps you should make some fine points on which things those were. As I talked about several different subjects. You are about as vague as can be and you have no wiggle room to ridicule for comprehension unless you intend to defend a baseless argument.
#39 September 13, 2011 at 11:17 pm
Rhonda commented:

I liked Romney very much in 2008 was very disappointed when McCain won/stole the nomination but since then he has been such a flip-flopper. you know he’s lying when he says he’ll rovoke obamacare. He’ll rovoke something but he won’t dismantle it. Perry is the Governor of Texas so of course his mind set is a little different. the immigration issue is going to kill him if he can’t see the problem with wanting to secure Texas borders and yet educating illegals at the same time.
#40 September 13, 2011 at 11:25 pm
Joe Bean commented:

BTW Retire05 I’ll also point out why I stated Perry is no Reagan and it wasn’t as you assume a response that you intended to declare him a second coming. It is however a response made because Reagan was a much greater orator and had much more charisma and delivery skills than Perry seems to possess. If you think Perry is on the same level as Reagan and has what it takes to beat Obama you should address specifically why this is worth consideration as there are obviously many doubters about this man, his background and his statements he recently made regarding several subjects. Reagan was light years ahead of this guy on many levels. To utter their names in the same sentence in the fashion you did, will more than often get the response that Perry is no Reagan. So if you don’t like that response, then pony up and be more clear on what you were bringing to the table for discussion instead of saying someone else is incapable of comprehension. Your lack of detail left comprehension and interpretation open for the taking. Don’t take it out on someone else if they took the discussion away from you.
#41 September 13, 2011 at 11:31 pm
LL commented:

I agree with the focus group and give the edge to Perry.
#42 September 13, 2011 at 11:37 pm
retire05 commented:

Joe Bean, do I have to type slowly so you understand that I was NOT making a comparison between Perry and Reagan? I simply said that everything you said about Perry was also said about Reagan. Is that too difficult for you to understand?

And now you are claiming that anyone who sends their kid to a university in their home state is “taking taxpayer money?” Is that your claim because if it is, there are a hellofa lot of people in the U.S. taking taxpayer money to send their kids to a state university.
#43 September 14, 2011 at 12:20 am
BS61 commented:

#6 September 13, 2011 at 10:59 pm
Old Fan commented:
. And while we speak, the same fashionable voices are out there debasing Christie, Boehner, Ryan, Cantor, etc., as being mere “RINOS”.

Hi Old Fan –

I was a huge Christie supporter, but not after reading conservative’s in New Jersey. I am still glad that he is outspoken and really know his subject matter, but after this site, I don’t agree with many of his positions.

http://conservativenewjersey.com/the-myth-of-christie-conservatism-intro

Sorry Jim, I don’t know if you have referenced this on your site.
#44 September 14, 2011 at 12:30 am
Freddy commented:

Romney’s problem in this section of the debate was simple. He took it upon himself to define Perry instead of letting Perry define Perry.

While this may seem odd, it is exactly why Romney came off a bit on the slimey side. IF one candidate is going to attack another, it needs to be done in a very crisp manner. Not with a ‘I am putting these words and intentions into your mouth cause I want them there’ act of desperation.

Oddly, Bachmann made the same mistake with that hpv vacination discussion. All she needed to do was to mention it without the drama of making false claims of children being vacinated because of Perry’s decision. She was very lucky in the debate he simply did not ask her to name one as there are NONE! Now that she has decided to keep pressing her claims on TV, she is going to have to find a way to run from those claims.
#45 September 14, 2011 at 12:43 am
Molon Labe commented:

Luntz showed Perry died on his lame immigration answer. Both Perry and Romney are RINOs. Fatally flawed and the more you get to know them the more you recognize them for what they are.

The GOP has a chance to put up a real candidate be it Palin, Bachman, Cain, anyone but a legacy RINO.

Perry came across as did Romney as a big government type who knew what was best for the proles. They are incapable of representing the people since they believe the elites know best. Screw them and the horse they rode in on.