« | »

Perry Buries Hutchison – 51% To 31%

From a tone deaf Associated Press:

Gov. Perry defeats Hutchison in Texas GOP primary

By Kelley Shannon And Jay Root, Associated Press Writers

March 3, 2010

AUSTIN, Texas – Texas Gov. Rick Perry tapped into a rising wave of anti-Washington ire and rode it to an easy Republican primary win over Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, once seen as the candidate who could block his march toward four more years in the state’s highest office.

Perry emerged from the rancorous battle with Texas’ senior senator and a third candidate backed by some in the tea party movement to face a Democrat in many ways his polar opposite. Former Houston Mayor Bill White, a calm consensus-builder, easily defeated six opponents to win his party’s nomination.

Shortly after Hutchison called him to concede, Perry continued his non-stop attack on the nation’s capital, slamming Washington on spending, job losses and the heath care debate.

"Texas voters said no to Washington bureaucrats … and yes to leadership that controls spending, fights for individual freedoms and the United States Constitution," Perry told cheering supporters at the famous Salt Lick barbecue restaurant in Driftwood, just outside Austin. "Hardworking Texans sent a simple, compelling message to Washington: Quit spending all the money!"

With nearly all precincts reporting, Perry had 51 percent to Hutchison’s 30 percent. He managed to avoid a runoff even though nearly one in five voters cast ballots for the third candidate — Debra Medina, a GOP party activist who has strong libertarian leanings and supporters in the tea party movement.

Competing with Perry for the most conservative GOP voters, Medina raised relatively little money and told talk show host Glenn Beck there were "some very good arguments" that the U.S. was involved in the 2001 terrorist attacks. Yet she still managed to win over some voters who might otherwise have sided with Perry…

Note that once again, the “libertarians” split the conservative vote. Otherwise, it would have been an even more dramatic landslide.

The tea party movement’s influence wasn’t limited to the governor’s race; tea party-backed candidates ousted a longtime ally of the Texas House speaker Tuesday and sent another into a runoff.

"A lot of people did not understand, including myself, the growing resentment, the growing opposition in the state toward Washington, D.C.," said longtime Republican consultant Reggie Bashur, who credited Perry with identifying the anti-Washington sentiment just as the tea party movement was taking off a year ago — and jumping aboard.

Obviously, the Associated Press does not understand the “growing resentment,” either. Or, rather, they pretend not to.

But this isn’t an “anti-Washington movement. It is an anti-liberal movement.

The media still refuse to see ‘the writing on the hand.’ And it is nothing less than the rebirth of conservatism.

This is the tsunami the press should be reporting about – but won’t.

This article was posted by Steve on Wednesday, March 3rd, 2010. Comments are currently closed.

15 Responses to “Perry Buries Hutchison – 51% To 31%”

  1. canary says:

    Won’t that make their attempt for sovereignty easier. I think it will give them more border control too.

  2. mr_bill says:

    I pulled the lever for Gov. Perry yesterday, but it was not without some deliberation. Perry has had some stellar conservative moments and some that give pause. He deftly sidestepped the attempts of liberals in the state legislature to force a state income tax by sticking to conservative principles but then he supported mandatory HPV vaccines for 14 year-old girls as a requisite for attending public school. His advocacy of states’ rights is welcome, but his desire for the Trans-Texas corridor is not (read “free highway for illegals” and “jobs going south of the border”). He is a bit of a mixed bag when it comes to conservative ideals but he was the most conservative on the ticket, in my opinion (Medina was not a consideration because of her ‘truther’ status). Overall, I think Perry has been doing a good job but needs improvement in some areas. Crushing [sanctuary-city] Houston former mayor Bill White should be a walk in the park for Gov. Perry come November.

  3. tranquil.night says:

    Someday someone will capture the majesty of what these times were and how they ultimately reunited us and much of the world that chooses to come with us. Happy Death of Liberalism Day everyone; not unintentionally falling on a worldwide day of liberation.

    Perry’s nomination was never in doubt in my mind, but let the Libertarians have their candidates and lose time and time again – it just provides the visual confirmation to what the majority already know and believe. One day they will realize Conservatives are not the enemy just because they have social mores as well as fiscal.

  4. proreason says:

    This is about as stark as it can get.

    When a Washington RINO gets shellacked by someone like Perry, who is quite a bit less than a conservative hero in Texas, there are no pastels about the result. The votes for Medina would have gone overwhelmingly for Perry, so the result is really about 65% to 35% – a landslide vote AGAINST A RELATIVELY BENIGN WASHINGTON INSIDER who didn’t pull her punches in the campaign either.

    Perry will win the general election by 20, at least….assuming his opponent remains relatively anonymous.

    Once again, it’s a crystal clear message to the corruptocrats of all flavors who inhabit the Washington swampland.

    If only capital punishment were legal for politicians who violate the public trust.

  5. GetBackJack says:

    Perry should also pay attention to the results.

  6. GetBackJack says:

    And my wife said … they hated Perry, less.

  7. NickB says:

    Living in the Liberal Land known as Austin, we need Perry more than ever. I’ve held my nose and voted for Hutchison for Senate in the past because the alternative was always a foaming at the mouth liberal and any libertarian that ran didn’t trip my trigger either. KBH is no true conservative and the typical Washington insider who hasn’t met a spending program she didn’t like. I’ll be happy to see her go in 2012.

    • retire05 says:

      NickB, let’s face it, we here in central Texas have our work cut out for us. Lloyd Doggett, liar extrodinare, must be defeated, so if you are not familiar with Dr. Donna Campbell, get familiar with her.

      The bottom line on yesterday’s primary is this: KBH ran a horrible campaign, spearheaded by Washington, D.C. people and Perry used local talent that is atuned to the temperature of voters in Texas. KHB bashed Perry, while Perry bashed D.C. And Republicans came out in record numbers, something I don’t think will be a fluke and will carry on through the November elections. My own county, where registered Democrats outnumber Republicans 2 to 1, saw a greater number of Republicans voting yesterday.

      Also remember this; Hillary Clinton carried Texas over Obama by over 100,000 votes. But Obama took the state due to the archaic “caucus” system designed by the DNC. And I can tell you for a fact, there was some funny business the night of the primary. Democratic voters, arriving at the caucuses in towns like Mexia and Houston, found there were no sign up sheets for Hillary and that Obama goons were trying to block Hillary supporters from entering the caucus by the 7:p.m. deadline.
      Those actions are not going to be forgotten. And for those Hill supporters, who feel they were cheated by Obama supporters, are going to take it out on the Democrats in Texas.

      There is a shift going on nation wide. Which brings me to a line I once read: sometimes we (as a nation) have to elect a Democrat to remember just how bad they are.

      The November elections will also not see the number of youth voters (18-30) that came out in droves for Obama. That was a phenomenon not seen since the election of JFK. And with the announcement that the Department of Defense will take a contract for military tactical vehicles away from a company in Sealy, Texas to give it to a company in Wisconsin, and will cause the layoffs of 10,000 direct and related jobs, along with the defunding of NASA, even Democrats are going to be unhappy with the administration when they are out of a job.

  8. BillK says:

    I can’t be the only one who thinks that Palin supporting Perry was good, but it seems she’s mocking everything she claims to stand for by supporting McCain in his race?

    Can I?

  9. proreason says:

    Here he comes:



    1. Well positioned as a conservative
    2. Anti-Washington to the bone
    3. Experienced at governing, campaigning, and fending off the mad-dog press nitwits
    4. Looks Good
    5. Talks Good
    6. Perfect age (60)
    7. Get’s the Tea Partier’s blood boiling


    1. from Bushland (in my mind this is a big negative with many swing voters)
    2. as a long time politico, he has lots of positions to pick at
    3. no foreign affairs experience
    4. personal scandals?? The sharks will start circling right now.

  10. Mithrandir says:

    I have never liked KBH, and I am glad she didn’t win. Hopefully, the voters will tell her, “Get out of politics, and make way for a Conservative Republican, or we will sit on our hands, this election, let the Democrat win, then vote someone we really want in 6 years.”
    KBH, just get out of the way, and groom someone we really want!

    That’s what I do! If I don’t like the candidate, I am not going to keep voting for a crap candidate, just to avoid the worse candidate. I circumvent them by enduring the worse candidate’s term, then hopefully voting in someone who deserves to be there.

    Besides, the Tea Party movement isn’t anti-liberal, it’s anti-government, because it seems that no matter who gets in, their ruin and blow their chances to make real gains, so the movement is designed to limit gov’t so no one has the power to blow their opportunities.

  11. Dupree says:

    As a complete aside, I just read this article on Consumerist (mostly filled with libwits, but I still mostly like the site) about Domino’s new recipe and lower price point leading to soaring profits.


    Anyone else think we can parallel this as an illustration of tax cuts leading to increased government revenue and spurring economic growth?

    • mr_bill says:

      I like the analogy and I think it makes sense but more likely the liberal statists will declare ‘big pizza’ is making far too much in profits, institute a windfall profits tax, appoint a pizza czar, and nationalize the big three: Pizza Hut, Papa Johns, and Domino’s, then promptly run all three companies into the ground.

    • Rusty Shackleford says:

      The basic premise being “Of the government, for the government, by the government”.

      It’s the basic tenet that liberals operate under that nothing good can come of private enterprise; That the government, and ONLY the government can provide anything to the people, that is as long as it’s manned by those the lib-tards think can do it, whether they can or not.

      It’s truly an ideological struggle, as you point out. But the failure of the lib-tards at the very base of it is that if they aren’t getting any of those “obscene” profits, then something must be wrong. They don’t like “greedy” businesses taking “the people’s” money…yet somehow, it’s ok for the government to do it. The underlying motivation, of course being hatred, anger and jealousy.

      Liberals hate entrepreneurs, unless those entrepreneurs cough up huge sums of cash to “worthy” causes (AGW, stranded polar bears, the light-colored, northern tree moth, etc). Otherwise, they are somehow “evil” for not “sharing the wealth” regardless of how hard they had to work for it, how they got it, and what they choose to spend it on.

      Why, I recall mr liberal news himself, Walter Cronkite had a magnificent sailing yacht that was worth some large sum of cash…a 48 footer that, he managed to skirt costs on by using it as a “vehicle for underprivileged kids” to experience sailing. His way of “giving back” but in reality, avoiding paying taxes on it and using it as a “tax write-off”.

      Nope, money is only evil to those who don’t have it. And…for those who do, it’s other people’s money that’s evil.

      Lots of finger-pointing in and amongst the left, for sure.

  12. canary says:

    It’s always the lesser of two evils.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »