Perry, Bachmann Latest to Decline Trump Debate
**Written by Doug Powers
The idea started out with such promise, but so far only Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum have agreed to participate in the Newsmax-hosted, Trump moderated debate on December 27th in Des Moines, Iowa. It might stay that way.
The latest candidates to decline the invite are Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann:
Perry’s Communications Director Ray Sullivan said they “respectfully declined the invitation for the December 27th debate” citing Perry’s “traditional retail campaigning in the days and weeks leading up to the Iowa caucus” as top priority for the longest-running Texas governor’s presidential campaign.
[...]
Although the debate was also endorsed by 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin, so far former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum and Gingrich are the only candidates who have agreed to attend. Perry now joins former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, Texas Rep. Ron Paul, and Romney, all of whom previously declined to participate.Bachmann’s campaign announced later on Thursday that she would be skipping the debate, as well.
Meanwhile, Trump says he’s close to announcing his endorsement, and if “must be present to win” rules apply, we can safely narrow it down to one of the two candidates who have said they’ll show up:
The good news for the channel on which the debate is scheduled to air, Ion Television, is that even if all the candidates drop out, Trump will make sure that show will go on. Sources tell me The Donald plans engage in a Lincoln/Douglas-style debate with his hair if necessary.
For the record, I don’t think Donald Trump asking questions at a debate presents a credibility issue for Republican hopefuls… if that’s their concern. I mean, all the GOP candidates showed up for a previous debate that was moderated by Wolf Blitzer, and a couple of days later Wolf was interviewing Kermit the Frog for cryin’ out loud.
**Written by Doug Powers
Twitter @ThePowersThatBe
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Obama’s latest campaign angle: I’ve been saving America from wild Republican debts
May 24, 2012 04:33 PM by Doug Powers
55 Comments
Biden: Tea Party stopped us from growing the economy
May 23, 2012 01:55 PM by Doug Powers
44 Comments
Catholic lawsuit against Obamacare mandate cites 1993 legislation written by Ted Kennedy and Chuck Schumer
May 22, 2012 04:35 PM by Doug Powers
48 Comments
A 2012 campaign must-read: The conservative survival guide to Mitt Romney
May 21, 2012 10:23 AM by Michelle Malkin
159 Comments
Biden: Hey, I don’t blame people for voting for a convicted felon instead of my boss
May 18, 2012 01:21 PM by Doug Powers
73 Comments
Elizabeth Warren touted Cherokee heritage in 1984 collection of recipes
May 17, 2012 10:26 AM by Doug Powers
124 Comments
Categories: 2012 Campaign,GOP
JustOneMinute
» Barack, Youthful Leader!JustOneMinute
» Patterico And The Brett Kimberlin GangBabalu Blog
» U.S. Manned Space Flight in The 21st CenturyVillainous Company
» Must Read Post of the Day. Possibly, the Year
Here is what I saw, it was last Friday.
Early in the a.m. up on Drudge said, Trump to meet with Gingrich on Monday, day of Trump’s book was to be released, hopefully for the Trump endorsement. That fell low on radar and up popped Trump debate …
Hey, you got to get through to DWTS class somehow.
You want them to be serially stupid?
I think they are learning their lesson and differentiating between debates and the freak shows.
Trump? It might as well be Pee Wee Herman.
Santorum is every bit the debater as Gingrich. He would be a fool to not take on Gingrich one-on-one with The Donald “moderating”. Santorum is sufficiently clever and skillful enough to outwit any attempts by Trump to protect the candidate everyone is already assuming he was planning on endorsing, Gingrich.
This could be the most entertaining “debate” if Santorum steps up to the plate and seizes the moment. I can already see Gingrich trying to spread the love while Trump attacks Santorum for not playing by the rules.
It doesn’t work if all Santorum does is play nice and explain his positions. He needs to point out that Gingrich is a shape-shifter who just recently was exposed by Glenn Beck as still being a global warming zealot, supporting the Obamacare individual mandate, amnesty for illegals, the bank bailout and other Obama positions.
Now that Bachmann has stuck to her pattern of only doing and saying things that hurt Obama and everyone but Romney, the ball is all in Santorum’s court. If he fails to seize the opportunity, then all the event will prove is that Gingrich is Trump’s personal fool. That’s good too.
Why should she waste ammo and attack Romney? You can stick a fork in him.
His odds are about equal to Perry’s. Game over Mitt.
Stacy McCain captures my take on Santorum and the GOP perfectly at Hot Air moments ago.
It is too early to surrender to the RINOs.
Plagiarism wouldn’t be beneath a liar Phildo
Santorum is great. Always has been.
She only attacks Romney’s opponents when they are down. It feeds my suspicion that she cut a deal after last November’s elections to accept the VP nomination if Romney wins in exchange for not raising a stink about not getting the Chairmanship of the Republican House Conference Committee in reward for the Tea Party victories. Her quietly demurring was strange for someone with a “titanium spine” and I have pointed it out many times since.
She is not running like someone who is trying to win, kind of like Romney in 2008.
Here is William Jacobson’s (Legal Insurrection) assessment of Bachmann as a serious candidate. I don’t share his conclusion and I only suspect that she has cut a deal so I don’t write her off. But he provides a good list of the many odd things she has done to knee-cap her credibility as a conservative candidate.
Unless Santorum bombs at the Trump debate, I will give Bachmann the benefit of the doubt and vote for her in the primaries. But it’s up to Santorum to step up and seize the opportunity. He has nothing to lose by shaking things up.
VP? Why? If Bachman is not the nominee she is my #1 choice for Speaker of the House. Boehner can take a seat. Rubio as Senate Majority Leader.
Oh ya!!
His opinion counts as much as mine. I picked Bachmann as my choice some time ago. But I could easily switch to Santorum before January 3. I have ALWAYS admired him. I understand the logic about Newt becoming the Romney firewall, but Newt would cause me to hold my nose. He’s got some god awful positions.
Perry and Mitt are not acceptable under any terms.
Great debating skills there OKL! Do you have anything but vulgarity, lies and bile to offer? You are just the resident punk hoping for his punk droogs to jump in and have another hate frenzy.
I completely understand why ILMC posts his obnoxious comments. It’s the joy of knowing the power his comments have over the people whose heads explode every time he posts them. Reading you and your droogs post your drivel gives me the same pleasure.
I must really be hitting a sensitive spot with you morons to inspire such a pathological response of hate. You can count on my continuing to make you heads explode. Just don’t expect me to respond. It’s enough for me to comment in the morning and then come back in the evening to see how much time you and your droogs are willing to waste completely devoted to me. I have power over you. Do you like that? Is that vein on your neck bulging and throbbing again? Hatred is so exhausting isn’t it?
Hahahahahahahahahaha!
Even though this was written at 3:50pm, it was ‘The Other McCain’ capturing the Phil’s take at 10:45pm.
Is that how that works
Trump Has give more money to dems than pubs fits right in with RINO people !He is in it for Donald ONLY ! Newt is for Newt only ,he changed after 96 listen to the ones that worked with him .
Santorum is a good guy and smart .
I graduated Roland-Story High. It’s a small world.
Idiot. In 1980, Bush, Sr bought, stole, bullied and otherwise did every dirty trick to steal the Iowa caucuses from Reagan. I know, I was there. And Bush, Sr, like Bush, Jr, and Clinton and Obama and McCain… was a progressive, not a conservative.
I’d watch a Gingrich-Santorum debate, and I’d be open to supporting Santorum in the general election.
Why don’t you grow up and give up the schoolyard, incessant attack on your opponent? Just because Pasadena Phil posted at 10:48 doesn’t mean he formulated his opinion of Santorum at that point in time, and you darn well know it!
Stop the vindictive attitude and participate in the general debate, because I, for one, and freaking tired of logging in and read you, and Phil, and the rest of the schoolchildren wasting bandwidth on ad hominem attacks.
Ms Malkin, you know I hesitate even to call for the banning of ILMC… but you really should do something to put a stop to this childish infighting between Pasadena Phil, OK_Loyalist, Whirled Peas and others who seem more interested in fighting with other members of your blogsite than actually discussing and debating the issues.
And, yes, it’s full of typos. It’s 12:48am here and I’m tired (which is why I’m grouchy about this… NONSENSE).
I know how you hate it when your lover gets caught lying … BTW, you’re being called in the Rudolph thread for saying you would kill Peter Hughes… we are waiting
BTW Dildo’s
It says
Leave a comment
Not Leave A Debate
OK_Loyalist, I complained about Phil as well as you, and I even mentioned Whirled Peas. I’m tired of y’all using Ms Malkin’s site for your personal animus with each other. Just *ignore* one another, or comment on the topic at hand.
You can’t help but attack people with ad hominems, apparently.
Answer the Killing of Peter Hughes question in that thread
Don’t tell me what to do.
And I already did.
Btw… The above is ad hominem, and it is vulgar. It doesn’t belong on Ms Malkin’s site. Believe me, I have no trouble exchanging insults or vulgar comments with anyone. But, as I have respect for Ms Malkin, I will not sully her site with such vulgarities. Remember, in your emotional outburst, leftists will visit this site and use everything we say against her.
And, as you said the other thread is dead, I’ll give you some clarification here: I will kill anybody who perpetrates violence on me and makes the mistake of leaving me alive, whether I’m in the right or wrong. That’s pretty much my only concrete, immutable rule. I have no ego that needs to prove I’m tougher, stronger, smarter or have a bigger willy than someone else. I merely require that they leave me untouched.
I agree with Hiraghm. The quality of this site is being seriously diminished by the childishness of a few posters. I realize that heavy-handed moderation can reduce participation, but too little moderation reduces serious participation and moves the site towards a Yahoo comments mentality. I don’t think that’s something to strive for.
The candidates who don’t show up seem rather cowardly to me. Just as they have been too cowardly to challenge Obama’s credentials. I am seeing a GOP repeating pattern. I don’t see any of them having my back. As far as dignity of the office. That was ruined when Clinton was in it with interns and chinese communists.
True and that is why I wouldn’t vote for him. I have never bought into the lesser of two evils. We have 300 million citizens, it never boils down to two evils for me. I just start picking from the other 300 million.
How soon we forget what a joke Ronald Reagan was in being a candidate for President. Bedtime for Bonzo, Wagon Train host, “B” movie actor. Come on people! Wake up. These other candidates are afraid to debate Newt. Plain and simple they are running for cover now that Newt gets most of the time in a debate. He’ll eat them up! Let’s pick a fighter not a “statesman”. Watch Rove and co. get their underwear in a bind talking about Newt! LOL.
I agree. Perry doesn’t want to participate in a debate and he’s found a reason that everyone will “understand.” Except that maybe he doesn’t do well in debates. Sorry, I can’t understand why anyone wouldn’t want to get in front of the nation and tell it what their views are…Like CNN or MSNBC is more credible than Donald. Regardless, Newt will be our nominee.
I disagree. This dog and pony show is beneath contempt of the Presidency. The candidates with half a brain are right in avoiding something better left to Jerry Springer or Morton Downey Jr. Just because Clinton and the current nitwit have sullied the office does not mean it cannot be repaired. Start now, vote for the candidate most serious and presidential, not necessarily the most electable.
Bachmann: What in the damn is that thing on his head?! It looks like a badger took a dump on it!
Rogue – how do you know it’s going to be a dog and pony show? I think the biggest reason these people aren’t attending is because it’s pretty much a “given” that Trump is going to endorse Newt so they believe participating would only help his election campaign. But it doesn’t have to be that way. IMHO, they are behaving like children but why change now, that’s what they’ve been acting like since they joined the race. Whining, crying and tattling to the American people about what the other guy is doing.
When have you known the Donald to be serious about anything, other than making money. He doesn’t care about the US other than how it effects his bottom line. Trust me,this is a dog and pony show barely above the level of ‘Cheaters’.
Hasn’t Trump recently said he is considering getting back into the race? Why then would someone want to participate in a debate that he leads.
Trump bothers me. He’s not a conservative nor a Republican. He has put pressure on Obowmao but didn’t he support him against Bush? And he is always about the money.
Check this out.
The GOP in Alabama is having to change its immigration policy.
Turns out you folks were wrong again and now it’s blowing up in your face.
Between you people and Donald Trump, it’s hard to say why anyone would ever support conservatives.
http://news.yahoo.com/ala-gop-leaders-2nd-thoughts-immigration-191341807.html
mmkay
I don’t blame them for not going to this debate. It is a couple days after Christmas, so it is not likely that many people will be watching. There have already been so many debates that if they keep it up they will find fewer and fewer people tuning into them (at least until it the field is narrowed down further).
Please don’t feed the troll.
Looks like Trump may cancel the debate. Of course he says it isn’t about most of the candidates not showing up; instead he says it is cause he may still run as an independent.
With only two in the debate and now the possibility of Trump cancelling, I wonder if this will hurt Newt. ‘Trump’s lackey” etc… not that I believe that but the media could use it against him.
Trump shoulda gotten agreement from all or most of the candidates before he opened his big mouth. But, that’s Trump.
I am glad to see Mr. Santorum accepted this debate. He has been completely ignored by ALL of the media, and yet he soldiers on. I have heard him speak a number of times and I am very impressed. He is NOT your ordinary politician…he has very strong character and he loves this country. I hope you’all will check out his website.
Yep, Trump believed that if he booked it, they would come…
Sorry, forgot the link:
http://www.ricksantorum.com/
If he doesn’t, Ron Paul will. They both have no sense and a lot of ego.
I agree. Just by saying he might run as third party bothers me…a LOT! Diluting the vote will give the election to Obama. Maybe that is what he wants. Ron Paul also might run third party. I call it traitorous. Anyone who dilutes the vote for the main candidate, thus giving Obama 4 more years to destroy us, is a traitor. They KNOW what that would do. They aren’t stupid. So, KNOWING that running third party would ensure an Obama win, and going ahead anyway…well, what would YOU call it??
I’d call it Liberty! Eff the current parties if they have no interest in preserving the Sovereignity of the US but only their own power!
yeah….agreed. Can it already. Go watch a soap opera or something for your drama fix. Way past sick of the dildo references.
FREEEEEDOOOOOOOOOOOOMMM!!
So, it is perfectly fine with you that Obama gets four more years? Because that is basically what would happen. I love ya, RC, but that is just wrong. If we get the Senate and keep the House AND get a Republican (even a RINO) as POTUS, we can get a lot done AND undone. If Obama is there to veto anything a Repubican Congress submits, we are screwed.
Rogue. I disagree with your disagreement. heh…
I think any reasonably well organized forum that gets the candidates in front of voters is worth doing. Even if 75% of the questions put the candidates were non-sense, Trump would likely ask some reasonable questions and probably try to pin the candidates down to an answer. Even if he couldn’t get definitive responses to everything asked, it would be interesting to see how they handle the situation.
And as far as beneath the presidency goes, for Perry to take that position is just ridiculous. He did Letterman’s Top Ten for cryin’ out loud.
How different is this than a debate on CNN moderated by Wolf Blitzer???? CNN is doing it for the money. As is Blitzer. No different than Trump.
I think they’re just bailing because they don’t want to be cornered. So much for a backbone.
Dit.to.
Please present any historical basis for this assertion? Perhaps you’ve forgotten that Republicans controlled both Houses and the White House not too long ago, and continued promoting the progressive agenda.
To paraphrase Patrick Henry:
Sorry Happy, I love you too, but I reject this premise. Blindly following the elite GOP strategery because to not do so will guarantee another four years of Berzerk Insane Obowmao, doesn’t cut it for me any more. That’s just fear mongering to control me into lockstep.