Full Text Political Transcripts December 9, 2016: President-elect Donald Trump Thank You Rally in Grand Rapids, Michigan

POLITICAL TRANSCRIPTS

TRUMP PRESIDENTIAL TRANSITION:

President-elect Donald Trump Thank You Rally in Grand Rapids, Michigan

Advertisements

Full Text Campaign Buzz 2016 September 3, 2016: GOP Nominee Donald Trump’s speech to African American Church in Detroit Transcript

POLITICAL TRANSCRIPTS

2016 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN:

Donald Trump’s speech to African American Church in Detroit

Political Headlines March 7, 2013: Senator Carl Levin, Michigan Democrat Will Not Run for Another Term in 2014

POLITICAL HEADLINES

https://historymusings.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/pol_headlines.jpg?w=600

OBAMA PRESIDENCY & THE 113TH CONGRESS:

THE HEADLINES….

Senator Carl Levin, Michigan Democrat, Won’t Seek Another Term

Source: ABC News Radio, 3-7-13

Roll Call/Getty Images

Democratic Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, 78, the Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman, announced Thursday evening that he will not run for reelection in 2014….READ MORE

Full Text Political Headlines January 5, 2013: GOP Weekly Address: Rep. Dave Camp on Growing the Economy and Cutting Spending

POLITICAL HEADLINES

https://historymusings.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/pol_headlines.jpg?w=600

OBAMA PRESIDENCY & THE 113TH CONGRESS:

THE HEADLINES….

GOP Address: Rep. Dave Camp on Growing the Economy and Cutting Spending

Source: ABC News Radio, 1-5-13

US House of Representatives

As the House returns for the 113th Congress, Rep. Dave Camp says its 2013 resolution is clear: to grow our economy, getting government spending under control and making Washington more accountable to Americans.

Camp, who represents the fourth district of Michigan and is chairman of the House Ways and  Means Committee, says in this week’s Republican address that the real reason we’re in a “fiscal mess” is because “Washington takes too much of your money and then wastes it … We have to make sure Washington is accountable for every tax dollar it spends.”…READ MORE

Full Text Obama Presidency December 10, 2012: President Barack Obama Speech on the Fiscal Cliff, Economy and Middle-Class Tax Cuts at the Daimler Detroit Diesel Plant, Redford, Michigan

POLITICAL BUZZ

OBAMA PRESIDENCY & THE 112TH CONGRESS:

President Obama Talks About “the Idea that Built America”

Source: WH, 12-10-12

President Obama Tours the Detroit Diesel Facility, Dec. 10, 2012.President Barack Obama watches as workers explain the process of assembling connecting rods and pistons during a tour of the Detroit Diesel Facility in Redford, Mich., Dec. 10, 2012. (Official White House Photo by Lawrence Jackson)

President Obama was in Detroit today to talk about the economy — how companies are reinvesting in American workers and why it’s so important to extend tax cuts for middle class families.

“I believe America only succeeds and thrives when we’ve got a strong and growing middle class,” he said to the crowd at the Daimler Detroit Diesel Plant. “I believe we’re at our best when everybody who works hard has a chance to get ahead; that they can get a job that pays the bills; that they’ve got health care that they can count on; that they can retire with dignity and respect, maybe take a vacation once in a while — nothing fancy, just being able to pack up the kids and go someplace and enjoy time with people that you love; make sure that your kids can go to a good school; make sure they can aspire to whatever they want to be. That idea is what built America.”

Remarks by the President at the Daimler Detroit Diesel Plant, Redford, MI

President Obama Speaks on the Economy and Middle-Class Tax Cuts

President Obama Speaks on the Economy and Middle-Class Tax Cuts

Daimler Detroit Diesel Plant
Redford, Michigan

2:29 P.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT:  Hello, Redford!  (Applause.)  It is good to be back in Michigan.  (Applause.)  How is everybody doing today? (Applause.)

Now, let me just start off by saying we have something in common — both our teams lost yesterday.  (Laughter.)  I mean, I would like to come here and talk a little smack about the Bears, but we didn’t quite get it done.  But it is wonderful to be back. It is good to see everybody in the great state of Michigan.  (Applause.)

A few people I want to acknowledge — first of all, the Mayor of Detroit here — Dave Bing is in the house.  (Applause.) We’ve got the Redford Supervisor — Tracey Schultz Kobylarz.  (Applause.)  We’ve got some outstanding members of Congress who are here — please give them a big round of applause.  (Applause.)

I want to thank Martin for hosting us.  I want to thank Jeff and Gibby for giving me a great tour of the factory.  (Applause.) I’ve got to say I love coming to factories.

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  I love you!

THE PRESIDENT:  I love you.  (Applause.)

So in addition to seeing the best workers in the world — (applause) — you’ve also got all this cool equipment.  (Laughter.)  I wanted to try out some of the equipment, but Secret Service wouldn’t let me.  (Laughter.)  They said, you’re going to drop something on your head, hurt yourself.  (Laughter.) They were worried I’d mess something up.  And Jeff and Gibby may not admit it, but I think they were pretty happy the Secret Service wouldn’t let me touch the equipment.  (Laughter.)

Now, it’s been a little over a month since the election came to an end.  (Applause.)  So it’s now safe for you to turn your televisions back on.  (Laughter.)  All those scary political ads are off the air.  You can answer your phone again — nobody is calling you in the middle of dinner asking for your support.  But, look, I have to admit there’s one part of the campaign that I miss, and that is it is a great excuse for me to get out of Washington and come to towns like this and talk to the people who work so hard every day and are looking out for their families and are in their communities, and just having a conversation about what kind of country do we want to be; what kind of country do we want to leave behind for our kids.  Because ultimately, that’s what this is about.

And I believe — and I’ve been saying this not just for the last six months or the last year, but ever since I got into public office — I believe America only succeeds and thrives when we’ve got a strong and growing middle class.  (Applause.)  That’s what I believe.  I believe we’re at our best when everybody who works hard has a chance to get ahead; that they can get a job that pays the bills; that they’ve got health care that they can count on; that they can retire with dignity and respect, maybe take a vacation once in a while — nothing fancy, just being able to pack up the kids and go someplace and enjoy time with people that you love; make sure that your kids can go to a good school; make sure they can aspire to whatever they want to be.

That idea is what built America.  That’s the idea that built Michigan.  That’s the idea that’s at the heart of the economic plan I’ve been talking about all year long on the campaign trail. I want to give more Americans the chance to earn the skills that businesses are looking for right now, and give our kids the kind of education they need to succeed in the 21st century.  I want to make sure America leads the world in research and technology and clean energy.  I want to put people back to work rebuilding our roads and our bridges and our schools.  (Applause.)  That’s how we grow an economy.

I want us to bring down our deficits, but I want to do it in a balanced, responsible way.  And I want to reward — I want a tax code that rewards businesses and manufacturers like Detroit Diesel right here, creating jobs right here in Redford, right here in Michigan, right here in the United States of America.  (Applause.)  That’s where we need to go.  That’s the country we need to build.  And when it comes to bringing manufacturing back to America — that’s why I’m here today.

Since 1938, Detroit Diesel has been turning out some of the best engines in the world.  (Applause.)  Over all those years, generations of Redford workers have walked through these doors.  Not just to punch a clock.  Not just to pick up a paycheck.  Not just to build an engine.  But to build a middle-class life for their families; to earn a shot at the American Dream.

For seven and a half decades, through good times and bad,  through revolutions in technology that sent a lot of good jobs — manufacturing jobs — overseas, men and women like you, your parents, maybe even your grandparents, have done your part to build up America’s manufacturing strength.  That’s something you can all be proud of.  And now you’re writing a new proud chapter to that history.  Eight years ago, you started building axles here alongside the engines.  That meant more work.  That meant more jobs.  (Applause.)  So you started seeing products — more products stamped with those three proud words:  Made in America.
Today, Daimler is announcing a new $120 million investment into this plant, creating 115 good, new union jobs building transmissions and turbochargers right here in Redford — (applause) — 115 good new jobs right here in this plant, making things happen.  That is great for the plant.  It’s great for this community.  But it’s also good for American manufacturing.  Soon, you guys will be building all the key parts that go into powering a heavy-duty truck, all at the same facility.  Nobody else in America is doing that.  Nobody else in North America is doing that.

And by putting everything together in one place, under one roof, Daimler engineers can design each part so it works better with the others.  That means greater fuel efficiency for your trucks.  It means greater savings for your customers.  That’s a big deal.  And it’s just the latest example of Daimler’s leadership on this issue.

Last year, I was proud to have your support when we announced the first-ever national fuel-efficiency standards for commercial trucks, which is going to help save consumers money and reduce our dependence on foreign oil.  That’s good news.  (Applause.)

But here’s the other reason why what you guys are doing, what Daimler is doing, is so important.  For a long time, companies, they weren’t always making those kinds of investments here in the United States.  They weren’t always investing in American workers.  They certainly weren’t willing to make them in the U.S. auto industry.

Remember, it was just a few years ago that our auto industry was on the verge of collapse.  GM, Chrysler were all on the brink of failure.  And if they failed, the suppliers and distributors that get their business from those companies, they would have died off, too.  Even Ford could have gone down — production halted.  Factories shuttered.  Once proud companies chopped up and sold off for scraps.  And all of you — the men and women who built these companies with your own hands  — would have been hung out to dry.  And everybody in this community that depends on you — restaurant owners, storekeepers, bartenders — (laughter and applause) — their livelihoods would have been at stake, too.

So I wasn’t about to let that happen.  I placed my bet on American workers.  We bet on American ingenuity.  I’d make that same bet any day of the week.  (Applause.)  Three and a half years later, that bet is paying off.  This industry has added over a quarter of a million new jobs.  Assembly lines are humming again.  The American auto industry is back.

And companies like Daimler know you’re still a smart bet.  They could have made their investment somewhere else, but they didn’t.  And if you ask them whether it was a tough call, they’ll tell you it wasn’t even close.  So the word is going out all around the world:  If you want to find the best workers in the world, if you want to find the best factories in the world, if you want to build the best cars or trucks or any other product in the world, you should invest in the United States of America.  This is the place to be.  (Applause.)

See, you’re starting to see the competitive balance is tipping a little bit.  Over the past few years, it’s become more expensive to do business in countries like China.  Our workers have become even more productive.  Our energy costs are starting to go down here in the United States.  And we still have the largest market.  So when you factor in everything, it makes sense to invest here, in America.

And that’s one of the reasons why American manufacturing is growing at the fastest pace since the 1990s.  And thanks in part to that boost in manufacturing, four years after the worst economic crisis of our lifetimes, our economy is growing again. Our businesses have created more than 5.5 million new jobs over the past 33 months.  So we’re making progress.  (Applause.)  We’re moving in the right direction.  We’re going forward.

So what we need to do is simple.  We need to keep going.  We need to keep going forward.  We should do everything we can to keep creating good middle-class jobs that help folks rebuild security for their families.  (Applause.)  And we should do everything we can to encourage companies like Daimler to keep investing in American workers.

And by the way, what we shouldn’t do — I just got to say this — what we shouldn’t be doing is trying to take away your rights to bargain for better wages and working conditions.  (Applause.)  We shouldn’t be doing that.  (Applause.)  These so-called “right to work” laws, they don’t have to do with economics; they have everything to do with politics.  (Applause.) What they’re really talking about is giving you the right to work for less money.  (Applause.)

You only have to look to Michigan — where workers were instrumental in reviving the auto industry — to see how unions have helped build not just a stronger middle class but a stronger America.  (Applause.)  So folks from our state’s capital, all the way to the nation’s capital, they should be focused on the same thing.  They should be working to make sure companies like this manufacturer is able to make more great products.  That’s what they should be focused on.  (Applause.)  We don’t want a race to the bottom.  We want a race to the top.  (Applause.)

America is not going to compete based on low-skill, low-wage, no workers’ rights.  That’s not our competitive advantage. There’s always going to be some other country that can treat its workers even worse.  Right?

AUDIENCE:  Right!

THE PRESIDENT:  What’s going to make us succeed is we got the best workers — well trained, reliable, productive, low turnover, healthy.  That’s what makes us strong.  And it also is what allows our workers then to buy the products that we make because they got enough money in their pockets.  (Applause.)

So we’ve got to get past this whole situation where we manufacture crises because of politics.  That actually leads to less certainty, more conflict, and we can’t all focus on coming together to grow.

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  That’s right!

THE PRESIDENT:  And the same thing — we’re seeing the same thing in Washington.  I’m sure you’ve all heard the talk recently about some big deadlines we’re facing in a few weeks when it comes to decisions on jobs and investment and taxes.  And that debate is going to have a big impact on all of you.  Some of you may know this:  If Congress doesn’t act soon, meaning in the next few weeks, starting on January 1st, everybody is going to see their income taxes go up.

AUDIENCE:  No!

THE PRESIDENT:  It’s true.  You all don’t like that.

AUDIENCE:  No!

THE PRESIDENT:  Typical, middle-class family of four will see an income tax hike of around $2,200.  How many of you can afford to pay another $2,200 in taxes?  Not you?

AUDIENCE:  No!

THE PRESIDENT:  I didn’t think so.  You can’t afford to lose that money.  That’s a hit you can’t afford to take.  And, by the way, that’s not a good hit for businesses, either — because if Congress lets middle-class taxes go up, economists will tell you that means people will spend nearly $200 billion less than they otherwise would spend.  Consumer spending is going to go down.  That means you’ve got less customers.  Businesses get fewer profits.  They hire fewer workers.  You go in a downward spiral. Wrong idea.

Here is the good news:  We can solve this problem.  All Congress needs to do is pass a law that would prevent a tax hike on the first $250,000 of everybody’s income — everybody.  (Applause.)  That means 98 percent of Americans — and probably 100 percent of you — (laughter) — 97 percent of small businesses wouldn’t see their income taxes go up a single dime.  Even the wealthiest Americans would still get a tax cut on the first $250,000 of their income.  But when they start making a million, or $10 million, or $20 million you can afford to pay a little bit more.  (Applause.)  You’re not too strapped.

So Congress can do that right now.  Everybody says they agree with it.  Let’s get it done.  (Applause.)

So that’s the bare minimum.  That’s the bare minimum we should be doing in order to the grow the economy.  But we can do more.  We can do more than just extend middle-class tax cuts.  I’ve said I will work with Republicans on a plan for economic growth, job creation, and reducing our deficits.  And that has some compromise between Democrats and Republicans.  I understand people have a lot of different views.  I’m willing to compromise a little bit.

But if we’re serious about reducing our deficit, we’ve also got to be serious about investing in the things that help us grow and make the middle class strong, like education, and research and development, and making sure kids can go to college, and rebuilding our roads and our infrastructure.  (Applause.)  We’ve got to do that.

So when you put it all together, what you need is a package that keeps taxes where they are for middle-class families; we make some tough spending cuts on things that we don’t need; and then we ask the wealthiest Americans to pay a slightly higher tax rate.  And that’s a principle I won’t compromise on, because I’m not going to have a situation where the wealthiest among us, including folks like me, get to keep all our tax breaks, and then we’re asking students to pay higher student loans.  Or suddenly, a school doesn’t have schoolbooks because the school district couldn’t afford it.  Or some family that has a disabled kid isn’t getting the help that they need through Medicaid.

We’re not going to do that.  We’re not going to make that tradeoff.  That’s not going to help us to grow.  Our economic success has never come from the top down; it comes from the middle out.  It comes from the bottom up.  (Applause.)  It comes from folks like you working hard, and if you’re working hard and you’re successful, then you become customers and everybody does well.

Our success as a country in this new century will be defined by how well we educate our kids, how well we train our workers, how well we invent, how well we innovate, how well we build things like cars and engines — all the things that helped create the greatest middle class the world has ever known.  That’s how you bring new jobs back to Detroit.  That’s how you bring good jobs back to America.  That’s what I’m focused on.  That’s what I will stay relentlessly focused on going forward.  (Applause.)

Because when we focus on these things –- when we stay true to ourselves and our history, there’s nothing we can’t do.  (Applause.)  And if you don’t believe me, you need to come down to this plant and see all these outstanding workers.

In fact, as I was coming over here, I was hearing about a guy named Willie.  (Applause.)  Where’s Willie?  There’s Willie right here.  There’s Willie.  (Applause.)  Now, in case you haven’t heard of him, they actually call him “Pretty Willie.”  (Laughter.)  Now, I got to say you got to be pretty tough to have a nickname like “Pretty Willie.”  (Laughter.)  He’s tough.

On Wednesday, Willie will celebrate 60 years working at Detroit Diesel — 60 years.  (Applause.)  Willie started back on December 12, 1952.  I was not born yet.  (Laughter.)  Wasn’t even close to being born.  He made $1.40 an hour.  The only time he spent away from this plant was when he was serving our country in the Korean War.  (Applause.)  So three generations of Willie’s family have passed through Detroit Diesel.  One of his daughters works here with him right now — is that right?  There she is.  (Applause.)

In all his years, Willie has been late to work only once.  It was back in 1977.  (Laughter.)  It’s been so long he can’t remember why he was late — (laughter and applause) — but we’re willing to give him a pass.

So Willie believes in hard work.  You don’t keep a job for 60 years if you don’t work hard.  Sooner or later, someone is going to fire you if you don’t work hard.  He takes pride in being part of something bigger than himself.  He’s committed to family; he’s committed to community; he’s committed to country. That’s how Willie lives his life.  That’s how all of you live your lives.

And that makes me hopeful about the future, because you’re out there fighting every day for a better future for your family and your country.  And when you do that, that means you’re creating value all across this economy.  You’re inspiring people. You’re being a good example for your kids.  That’s what makes America great.  That’s what we have to stay focused on.

And as long as I’ve got the privilege of serving as your President, I’m going to keep fighting for you.  I’m going to keep fighting for your kids.  I’m going to keep fighting for an America where anybody, no matter who you are, no matter what you look like, no matter where you come from, you can make it if you try here in America.  (Applause.)

Thank you very much, everybody.  God bless you.  (Applause.)

END
2:51 P.M. EST

Full Text Obama Presidency February 28, 2012: President Barack Obama’s Speech to UAW / United Auto Workers Conference Praises Auto Industry Bailout & Announces New Trade Enforcement Agency — Stark Contrast to GOP / Republican Candidates

POLITICAL SPEECHES & DOCUMENTS

OBAMA PRESIDENCY & THE 112TH CONGRESS:

A new trade enforcement agency announced today will ensure the playing field is level and that American products can be exported across the world

President Barack Obama speaks at the United Auto Workers Conference
President Barack Obama delivers remarks at the United Auto Workers Conference at the Marriott Wardman Park in Washington, D.C., White House Photo, Pete Souza, 2/28/12

President Obama Speaks to United Auto Workers

Source: WH, 2-28-12

President Barack Obama Delivers Remarks at the United Auto Workers Conference
President Barack Obama delivers remarks at the United Auto Workers (UAW) Conference at the Marriott Wardman Park in Washington, D.C., Feb. 28, 2012. (Official White House Photo by Lawrence Jackson)

Today, President Obama spoke at the United Auto Workers Annual Conference to discuss the success of the American auto industry.

After nearly collapsing three years ago, our nation’s big three automakers are turning profits and opening new factories. The industry has added more than 200,000 jobs. And those workers aren’t just building cars again–they are building better, more fuel efficient automobiles that help Americans save money at the pump every time they fill up. The cars they are building to meet new fuel efficiency standards will average 55 miles to the gallon by 2025, cutting our oil consumption by 2 million barrels a day.

When the President took office, our nation’s three largest automakers were on the brink of failure. The economy was in complete free fall and private  investors weren’t willing to take a chance on the auto industry. Doing nothing, as some proposed, would have cost more than a million Americans their jobs, and threatened the livelihood of many more in the communities that depend on the industr. As President Obama explained today:

Think about what that choice would have meant for this country, if we had turned our backs on you, if America had thrown in the towel, if GM and Chrysler had gone under. The suppliers, the distributors that get their business from these companies, they would have died off.  Then even Ford could have gone down as well. Production shut down. Factories shuttered. Once-proud companies chopped up and sold off for scraps. And all of you, the men and women who built these companies with your own hands, would have been hung out to dry.

President Obama wasn’t willing to let that happen. He stepped in and offered the support automakers needed in return for some restructuring on their end:

[W]e were not going to take a knee and do nothing. We were not going to give up on your jobs and your families and your communities.  So in exchange for help, we demanded responsibility. We said to the auto industry, you’re going to have to truly change, not just pretend like you’re changing.  And thanks to outstanding leadership…we were able to get labor and management to settle their differences.

Since then, the President has taken even more steps to help our automakers and other manufacturers. Thanks to the bipartisan trade agreement he signed into law last year, there will be new cars in the streets of South Korea imported from Detroit and from Toledo and from Chicago. And a new Trade Enforcement Unit, introduced in the State of the Union and launched today, will help counter unfair trading practices around the world to level the playing field for American workers and manufacturers. As the President explained:

…America always wins when the playing field is level. And because everyone came together and worked together, the most high-tech, fuel-efficient, good-looking cars in the world are once again designed and engineered and forged and built — not in Europe, not in Asia — right here in the United States of America.


Read more:

POLITICAL QUOTES & SPEECHES

Remarks by the President to UAW Conference

Washington Marriott Wardman Park
Washington, D.C.

11:30 A.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT:  How’s it going, UAW?  (Applause.)  It is good to be with some autoworkers today!  (Applause.)  All right. Everybody have a seat, get comfortable.  Go ahead and get comfortable.  I’m going to talk for a little bit.  (Applause.)

First of all, I want to say thank you to one of the finest leaders that we have in labor — Bob King.  Give it up for Bob.  (Applause.)  I want to thank the International Executive Board and all of you for having me here today.  It is a great honor.  I brought along somebody who is proving to be one of the finest Secretaries of Transportation in our history — Ray LaHood is in the house.  Give Ray a big round of applause.  (Applause.)

It is always an honor to spend time with folks who represent the working men and women of America.  (Applause.)  It’s unions like yours that fought for jobs and opportunity for generations of American workers.  It’s unions like yours that helped build the arsenal of democracy that defeated fascism and won World War II.  It’s unions like yours that forged the American middle class — that great engine of prosperity, the greatest that the world has ever known.

So you guys helped to write the American story.  And today, you’re busy writing a proud new chapter.  You are reminding us that no matter how tough times get, Americans are tougher.  (Applause.)  No matter how many punches we take, we don’t give up.  We get up.  We fight back.  We move forward.  We come out the other side stronger than before.  That’s what you’ve shown us.  (Applause.)  You’re showing us what’s possible in America.  So I’m here to tell you one thing today:  You make me proud.  (Applause.)  You make me proud.

Take a minute and think about what you and the workers and the families that you represent have fought through.  A few years ago, nearly one in five autoworkers were handed a pink slip — one in five.  Four hundred thousand jobs across this industry vanished the year before I took office.  And then as the financial crisis hit with its full force, America faced a hard and once unimaginable reality, that two of the Big 3 automakers  — GM and Chrysler — were on the brink of liquidation.

The heartbeat of American manufacturing was flat-lining and we had to make a choice.  With the economy in complete free fall there were no private investors or companies out there willing to take a chance on the auto industry.  Nobody was lining up to give you guys loans.  Anyone in the financial sector can tell you that.

So we could have kept giving billions of dollars of taxpayer dollars to automakers without demanding the real changes or accountability in return that were needed — that was one option. But that wouldn’t have solved anything in the long term.  Sooner or later we would have run out of money.  We could have just kicked the problem down the road.  The other option was to do absolutely nothing and let these companies fail.  And you will recall there were some politicians who said we should do that.

AUDIENCE:  Booo —

THE PRESIDENT:  Some even said we should “let Detroit go bankrupt.”

AUDIENCE:  Booo —

THE PRESIDENT:  You remember that?  (Applause.)  You know.  (Laughter.)  Think about what that choice would have meant for this country, if we had turned our backs on you, if America had thrown in the towel, if GM and Chrysler had gone under.  The suppliers, the distributors that get their business from these companies, they would have died off.  Then even Ford could have gone down as well.  Production shut down.  Factories shuttered.  Once-proud companies chopped up and sold off for scraps.  And all of you, the men and women who built these companies with your own hands, would have been hung out to dry.

More than one million Americans across the country would have lost their jobs in the middle of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.  In communities across the Midwest, it would have been another Great Depression.  And then think about all the people who depend on you.  Not just your families, but the schoolteachers, the small business owners, the server in the diner who knows your order, the bartender who’s waiting for you to get off.  (Laughter.)  That’s right.  (Applause.)  Their livelihoods were at stake as well.

And you know what was else at stake?  How many of you who’ve worked the assembly line had a father or a grandfather or a mother who worked on that same line?  (Applause.)  How many of you have sons and daughters who said, you know, Mom, Dad, I’d like to work at the plant, too?  (Applause.)

These jobs are worth more than just a paycheck.  They’re a source of pride.  They’re a ticket to a middle-class life that make it possible for you to own a home and raise kids and maybe send them — yes — to college.  (Applause.)  Give you a chance to retire with some dignity and some respect.  These companies are worth more than just the cars they build.  They’re a symbol of American innovation and know-how.  They’re the source of our manufacturing might.  If that’s not worth fighting for, what’s worth fighting for?  (Applause.)

So, no, we were not going to take a knee and do nothing.  We were not going to give up on your jobs and your families and your communities.  So in exchange for help, we demanded responsibility.  We said to the auto industry, you’re going to have to truly change, not just pretend like you’re changing.  And thanks to outstanding leadership like Bob King, we were able to get labor and management to settle their differences.  (Applause.)

We got the industry to retool and restructure, and everybody involved made sacrifices.  Everybody had some skin in the game.  And it wasn’t popular.  And it wasn’t what I ran for President to do.  That wasn’t originally what I thought I was going to be doing as President.  (Laughter.)  But you know what, I did run to make the tough calls and do the right things — no matter what the politics were.  (Applause.)

And I want you to know, you know why I knew this rescue would succeed?

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  How did you do it?  (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT:  You want to know?  It wasn’t because of anything the government did.  It wasn’t just because of anything management did.  It was because I believed in you.  I placed my bet on the American worker.  (Applause.)  And I’ll make that bet any day of the week.  (Applause.)

And now, three years later — three years later, that bet is paying off — not just paying off for you, it’s paying off for America.  Three years later, the American auto industry is back. (Applause.)  GM is back on top as the number-one automaker in the world  — (applause) — highest profits in its 100-year history. Chrysler is growing faster in America than any other car company. (Applause.)  Ford is investing billions in American plants, American factories — plans to bring thousands of jobs back to America.  (Applause.)

All told, the entire industry has added more than 200,000 new jobs over the past two and a half years — 200,000 new jobs. And here’s the best part — you’re not just building cars again; you’re building better cars.  (Applause.)

After three decades of inaction, we’re gradually putting in place the toughest fuel economy standards in history for our cars and pickups.  That means the cars you build will average nearly 55 miles per gallon by the middle of the next decade — almost double what they get today.  (Applause.)  That means folks, every time they fill up, they’re going to be saving money.  They’ll have to fill up every two weeks instead of every week.  That saves the typical family more than $8,000 at the pump over time. That means we’ll cut our oil consumption by more than 2 million barrels a day.  That means we have to import less oil while we’re selling more cars all around the world.  (Applause.)

Thanks to the bipartisan trade agreement I signed into law  — with you in mind, working with you — there will soon be new cars in the streets of South Korea imported from Detroit and from Toledo and from Chicago.  (Applause.)

And today — I talked about this at the State of the Union, we are doing it today — I am creating a Trade Enforcement Unit that will bring the full resources of the federal government to bear on investigations, and we’re going to counter any unfair trading practices around the world, including by countries like China.  (Applause.)  America has the best workers in the world.  When the playing field is level, nobody will beat us.  And we’re going to make sure that playing field is level.  (Applause.)

Because America always wins when the playing field is level. And because everyone came together and worked together, the most high-tech, fuel-efficient, good-looking cars in the world are once again designed and engineered and forged and built — not in Europe, not in Asia — right here in the United States of America.  (Applause.)

I’ve seen it myself.  I’ve seen it myself.  I’ve seen it at Chrysler’s Jefferson North Plant in Detroit, where a new shift of more than 1,000 workers came on two years ago, another 1,000 slated to come on next year.  I’ve seen it in my hometown at Ford’s Chicago Assembly — (applause) — where workers are building a new Explorer and selling it to dozens of countries around the world.

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  I’m buying one, too.

THE PRESIDENT:  There you go.  (Laughter.)

I’ve seen it at GM’s Lordstown plant in Ohio — (applause)  — where workers got their jobs back to build the Chevy Cobalt, and at GM’s Hamtramck plant in Detroit — (applause) — where I got to get inside a brand-new Chevy Volt fresh off the line — even though Secret Service wouldn’t let me drive it.  (Laughter.) But I liked sitting in it.  (Laughter.)  It was nice.  I’ll bet it drives real good.  (Laughter.)  And five years from now when I’m not President anymore, I’ll buy one and drive it myself.  (Applause.)  Yes, that’s right.

AUDIENCE:  Four more years!  Four more years!  Four more years!

THE PRESIDENT:  I know our bet was a good one because I had seen it pay off firsthand.  But here’s the thing.  You don’t have to take my word for it.  Ask the Chrysler workers near Kokomo — (applause) — who were brought on to make sure the newest high-tech transmissions and fuel-efficient engines are made in America.  Or ask the GM workers in Spring Hill, Tennessee, whose jobs were saved from being sent abroad.  (Applause.)  Ask the Ford workers in Kansas City coming on to make the F-150 — America’s best-selling truck, a more fuel-efficient truck.  (Applause.)  And you ask all the suppliers who are expanding and hiring, and the communities that rely on them, if America’s investment in you was a good bet.  They’ll tell you the right answer.

And who knows, maybe the naysayers would finally come around and say that standing by America’s workers was the right thing to do.  (Applause.)  Because, I’ve got to admit, it’s been funny to watch some of these folks completely try to rewrite history now that you’re back on your feet.  (Applause.)  The same folks who said, if we went forward with our plan to rescue Detroit, “you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye.”  Now they’re saying, we were right all along.  (Laughter.)

Or you’ve got folks saying, well, the real problem is — what we really disagreed with was the workers, they all made out like bandits — that saving the auto industry was just about paying back the unions.  Really?  (Laughter.)  I mean, even by the standards of this town, that’s a load of you know what.  (Laughter.)

About 700,000 retirees had to make sacrifices on their health care benefits that they had earned.  A lot of you saw hours reduced, or pay or wages scaled back.  You gave up some of your rights as workers.  Promises were made to you over the years that you gave up for the sake and survival of this industry — its workers, their families.  You want to talk about sacrifice?  You made sacrifices.  (Applause.)  This wasn’t an easy thing to do.

Let me tell you, I keep on hearing these same folks talk about values all the time.  You want to talk about values?  Hard work — that’s a value.  (Applause.)  Looking out for one another — that’s a value.  The idea that we’re all in it together, and I’m my brother’s keeper and sister’s keeper — that’s a value.  (Applause.)

They’re out there talking about you like you’re some special interest that needs to be beaten down.  Since when are hardworking men and women who are putting in a hard day’s work every day — since when are they special interests?  Since when is the idea that we look out for one another a bad thing?

I remember my old friend, Ted Kennedy — he used to say, what is it about working men and women they find so offensive?  (Laughter.)  This notion that we should have let the auto industry die, that we should pursue anti-worker policies in the hopes that unions like yours will buckle and unravel -– that’s part of that same old “you are on your own” philosophy that says we should just leave everybody to fend for themselves; let the most powerful do whatever they please.  They think the best way to boost the economy is to roll back the reforms we put into place to prevent another crisis, to let Wall Street write the rules again.

They think the best way to help families afford health care is to roll back the reforms we passed that’s already lowering costs for millions of Americans.  (Applause.)  They want to go back to the days when insurance companies could deny your coverage or jack up your rates whenever and however they pleased. They think we should keep cutting taxes for those at the very top, for people like me, even though we don’t need it, just so they can keep paying lower tax rates than their secretaries.

Well, let me tell you something.  Not to put too fine a point on it — they’re wrong.  (Laughter.)  They are wrong.  (Applause.)  That’s the philosophy that got us into this mess.  We can’t afford to go back to it.  Not now.

We’ve got a lot of work to do.  We’ve got a long way to go before everybody who wants a good job can get a good job.  We’ve got a long way to go before middle-class Americans fully regain that sense of security that’s been slipping away since long before this recession hit.  But you know what, we’ve got something to show — all of you show what’s possible when we pull together.

Over the last two years, our businesses have added about 3.7 million new jobs.  Manufacturing is coming back for the first time since the 1990s.  Companies are bringing jobs back from overseas.  (Applause.)  The economy is getting stronger.  The recovery is speeding up.  Now is the time to keep our foot on the gas, not put on the brakes.  And I’m not going to settle
for a country where just a few do really well and everybody else is struggling to get by.  (Applause.)

We’re fighting for an economy where everybody gets a fair shot, where everybody does their fair share, where everybody plays by the same set of rules.  We’re not going to go back to an economy that’s all about outsourcing and bad debt and phony profits.  We’re fighting for an economy that’s built to last, that’s built on things like education and energy and manufacturing.  Making things, not just buying things — making things that the rest of the world wants to buy.  And restoring the values that made this country great:  hard work and fair play, the chance to make it if you really try, the responsibility to reach back and help somebody else make it, too — not just you.  That’s who we are.  That’s what we believe in.   (Applause.)

I was telling you I visited Chrysler’s Jefferson North Plant in Detroit about a year and a half ago.  Now, the day I visited, some of the employees had won the lottery.  Not kidding.  They had won the lottery.  Now, you might think that after that they’d all be kicking back and retiring.  (Laughter.)  And no one would fault them for that.  Building cars is tough work.  But that’s not what they did.  The guy who bought —

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  What did they do?

THE PRESIDENT:  Funny you ask.  (Laughter.)  The guy who bought the winning ticket, he was a proud UAW member who worked on the line.  So he used some of his winnings to buy his wife the car that he builds because he’s really proud of his work.  (Applause.)  Then he bought brand new American flags for his hometown because he’s proud of his country.  (Applause.)  And he and the other winners are still clocking in at that plant today, because they’re proud of the part they and their coworkers play in America’s comeback.

See, that’s what America is about.  America is not just looking out for yourself.  It’s not just about greed.  It’s not just about trying to climb to the very top and keep everybody else down.  When our assembly lines grind to a halt, we work together and we get them going again.  When somebody else falters, we try to give them a hand up, because we know we’re all in it together.

I got my start standing with working folks who’d lost their jobs, folks who had lost their hope because the steel plants had closed down.  I didn’t like the idea that they didn’t have anybody fighting for them.  The same reason I got into this business is the same reason I’m here today.  I’m driven by that same belief that everybody — everybody — should deserve a chance.  (Applause.)

So I promise you this:  As long as you’ve got an ounce of fight left in you, I’ll have a ton of fight left in me.  (Applause.)  We’re going to keep on fighting to make our economy stronger; to put our friends and neighbors back to work faster; to give our children even more opportunity; to make sure that the United States of America remains the greatest nation on Earth.   (Applause.)

Thank you, UAW.  I love you.  God bless you.  God bless the work you do.  God bless the United States of America.  (Applause.)

END
11:55 A.M. EST

Campaign Buzz February 19, 2012: New Gallup Poll: Rick Santorum leads Mitt Romney nationwide by eight points — 36% to 28%

CAMPAIGN 2012

CAMPAIGN BUZZ 2012

STATS & POLLS

Poll: Santorum leads Romney nationwide by eight points

Source: CNN, 2-19-12

The latest results from Gallup’s daily tracking poll indicate Rick Santorum has overtaken Mitt Romney nationwide and now leads the former Massachusetts governor by an eight-point margin.

According to the poll released Sunday, 36% of registered Republicans said they are backing Santorum, while 28% prefer Romney.

The new numbers represent a five-point drop for Romney since Wednesday, when the candidate was statistically tied with his opponent, 33% to 31%. Meanwhile, Santorum has jumped five points in the same time period.

The survey was conducted Tuesday through Saturday, more than a week after Santorum snatched a trio of victories in Missouri, Colorado and Minnesota. One day before he pulled the big upset on February 7, Santorum was in third place in the daily tracking poll with 16%….READ MORE

Full Text Campaign Buzz November 9, 2011: CNBC “Your Money, Your Vote” GOP Republican Presidential Debate at Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan Transcript — 9th GOP 2012 Debate on Economy — Perry Experiences Oops Moment

CAMPAIGN 2012

CAMPAIGN BUZZ 2012

Fabrizio Costantini for The New York Times

Mitt Romney, Herman Cain, and Gov. Rick Perry of Texas at the Republican presidential debate on Wednesday. More Photos »

POLITICAL QUOTES & SPEECHES

CNBC’s “Your Money, Your Vote: The Republican Presidential Debate” Live from Oakland University in Rochester, MI …

CNBC ‘Your Money, Your Vote’ Republican Presidential Debate

The following is a transcript of the CNBC “Your Money, Your Vote” Republican presidential debate at Oakland University in Auburn Hills, Mich, as provided by Federal News Service.

Speakers: Representative Michele Bachmann (R-MINN.)

Businessman and Columnist Herman Cain

Former Speaker of the House of Representatives  Newt Gingrich (R-GA.)

Former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman (R)

Representative  Ron Paul (R-TEXAS)

Governor Rick Perry (R-TEXAS)

Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney (R)

Former Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA.)

Moderators: Maria  Bartiromo and John Harwood

MARIA BARTIROMO: Throughout the evening tonight, we’ll be joinedby an all-star line-up of the smartest people on CNBC. First uptonight: Jim Cramer, the host of “Mad Money.” Jim, welcome.(Cheers, applause.)

JIM CRAMER: Thank you, Maria.

JOHN HARWOOD: And we also want to hear your voice. Go to ourwebsite, debate.cnbc.com, and tweet us at hashtag CNBCdebate. All

night we’ll be showing your tweets on the bottom of the screen, so allthe candidates will have even more of a motive to impress.

MS. BARTIROMO: In the interest of time, the candidates haveagreed to forgo opening and closing statements tonight. So let’s getstarted.

And we begin with you, Mr. Cain. I want to begin with what wesaw today, another rough day for our money, for our 401(k)s. Onceagain we were all impacted by the news that the Dow Jones IndustrialAverage dropped 400 points today. The reason: Italy is on the brinkof financial disaster. It is the world’s seventh-largest economy. Aspresident, what will you do to make sure their problems do not takedown the U.S. financial system?

HERMAN CAIN: Let’s start with two things. First, we must growthis economy. We are the biggest economy in the world, and as long aswe are stagnant in terms of growth in GDP, we impact the rest of theworld. We must do that.

But we’re not going to be able to do that until we put some fuelin the engine that drives economic growth, which is the businesssector. This administration has done nothing but put stuff in thecaboose, and it’s not moving this economy. We must grow this economy,number one.

Number two, we must assure that our currency is sound. Just like — a dollar must be a dollar when we wake up in the morning. Justlike 60 minutes is in an hour, a dollar must be a dollar.

If we are growing this economy the way it has the ability to do, andat the same time we are cutting spending seriously, we will havethings moving in the right direction in order to be able to survivethese kind of (ripple effects ?)

MS. BARTIROMO: So to be clear: Focus on the domestic economy;allow Italy to fail?

MR. CAIN: Focus on the domestic economy, or we will fail. So,yes, focus on the domestic economy first. There’s not a lot that theUnited States can directly do for Italy right now because they have — they’re really way beyond the point of return that we — we as theUnited States can save them.

MS. BARTIROMO: Governor Romney, should we allow Italy to fail?Should we have a stake in what’s going on in the eurozone right now?

MITT ROMNEY: Well, Europe is able to take care of their ownproblems. We don’t want to step in and try and bail out their banksand bail out their governments. They have the capacity to deal withthat themselves. They’re a very large economy. And there will be,I’m sure, cries if Italy does default, if Italy does get in trouble,and we don’t know that’ll happen. But if they get to a point wherethey’re in crisis and banks throughout Europe could hold a lot ofItaly debt, we’ll — we’ll then face crisis. And there’ll have to besome kind of effort to try and uphold their financial system.

There will be some who say here that banks in the U.S. that haveItalian debt — that we ought to help those as well. My view is, no,no, no. We do not need to step in to bail out banks either in Europeor banks here in the U.S. that may have Italian debt. The rightanswer is for us — (applause) —

MS. BARTIROMO: But the U.S. does contribute to the InternationalMonetary Fund, and the IMF has given $150 billion to the eurozone.Are you saying the U.S. should stop contributing to the IMF?

MR. ROMNEY: I’m happy to continue to participate in worldefforts like the World Bank and the IMF. But I’m not happy to havethe United States government put in place a TARP-like program to tryand save U.S. banks that have Italian debt, foreign banks doingbusiness in the U.S. that have Italian debt, or European debt — we’rejust — of banks there.

There’s going to be an effort to try and draw us in and talkabout how we need to help — help Italy and help Europe. Europe isable to help Europe. We have to focus on getting our own economy inorder and making sure we never reach the kind of problem Italy ishaving.

If we stay on the course we’re on, with the level of borrowingthis administration is carrying out, if we don’t get serious aboutcutting and capping our spending and balancing our budget, you’regoing to find America in the same position Italy is in four or fiveyears from now, and that is unacceptable. We got to fix our — ourdeficit here. (Applause.)

JIM CRAMER: Congressman Paul. (Inaudible) — to say. You know,I really get that. But I’m on the front lines of the stock market.We were down 400 points today. We’re not going to be done going downif this keeps going up, if Italy keeps — the rate keeps going up.Surely you must recognize that this is a moment-to-moment situationfor people who have 401(k)s and IRAs and the like, and you wouldn’tjust let it fail, just go away and take our banking system with it.

REPRESENTATIVE RON PAUL (R-TX): No, you don’t. You have to letit — you have to let it liquidate. We’ve had — we took 40 years tobuild up this worldwide debt. We’re in a debt crisis never seenbefore in our history. The sovereign debt of this world is equal tothe GDP, as ours is in this country. If you prop it up, you’ll doexactly what we did in the Depression, prolong the agony. If you do — if you prop it up, you do what Japan has done for 20 years.

So, yes, you want to liquidate the debt. The debt isunsustainable. And this bubble was predictable because 40 years ago,we had no restraints whatsoever on the monetary authorities and wepiled debt on debt, we pyramided debt, we had no restraints on thespending. And if you keep bailing people out and prop it up, you justprolong the agony, as we’re doing in the housing bubble.

Right now Fannie May and Freddie Mac are demanding more moneybecause we don’t allow the market to determine what these mortgagesare worth. If you don’t liquidate this and clear the market, believeme, you’re going to perpetuate this for a decade or two more, and thatis very, very dangerous. (Applause.)

MR. CRAMER: Governor Huntsman. (Inaudible.) Italy’s too big tofail. It’s great. I would love it if we were independent. It wouldbe terrific (to say it’s your fault ?), it’s your fault and it’s yourproblem.

But if this goes, the world banking system could shut down. Doesn’tthat involve our banks, too?

JON HUNTSMAN: So we wake up this morning, and we find that theyield curve with respect to Italy is up and prices are down. So ifyou want a window into what this country is going to look like in thefuture if we don’t get on top of our debt, you’re seeing it playingout in Europe right now. You’re seeing the metastasy effect of thebanking sector.

And what does it mean here? What am I most concerned about, Jim?I’m concerned that it impacts us in a way that moves into our bankingsector, where we’ve got a huge problem called “too big to fail” inthis country. We have six banks in this country that, combined, haveassets worth 66 percent of our nation’s GDP, $9.4 trillion. Theseinstitutions get hit, they have an implied bailout by the taxpayers inthis country. And that means we’re setting ourselves up for disasteragain.

Jim, as long as we have banks that are too big to fail in thiscountry, we’re going to catch the contagion, and it’s going to hurtus. We’ve got to get back to a day and age where we have properly-sized banks and financial institutions.

JOHN HARWOOD: Thank you, Governor. (Applause.)

Governor Romney, I want to switch to the bailout drama that we’velived through in this country, and no state understands it better thanthe state of Michigan. I’m going to talk a little bit about yourrecord on that. Four years ago when you were running for theRepublican nomination and the auto industry was suffering, you said,where’s Washington? After the election, when the Bush administrationwas considering financial assistance for the automakers, you said no,let Detroit go bankrupt. Now that the companies are profitable againafter a bailout supported by your Republican governor here inMichigan, you said, well, actually, President Obama implemented myplan all along, or he gravitated to my plan. With a record like thatof seeming to be on all sides of the issue, why should Republicans beconfident in the steadiness of your economic leadership?

MR. ROMNEY: John, I care about about this state and about theauto industry like — I’d guess like no one else on this stage, havingbeen born and raised here, watched my parents make their life here. Iwas here in the 1950s and 1960s when Detroit and Michigan was thepride of the nation. I’ve seen this industry and I’ve seen this statego through tough times.

And my view some years ago was that the federal government, byputting in place CAFE requirements that helped foreign automobilesgain market share in the U.S., was hurting Detroit. And so I said,where is — where is Washington? They’re not doing the job they oughtto be doing.

My view with regards to the bailout was that whether it was byPresident Bush or by President Obama, it was the wrong way to go. Isaid from the very beginning they should go through a managedbankruptcy process, a private bankruptcy process. We have capitalmarkets and bankruptcy. It works in the U.S. The idea of billions ofdollars being wasted initially — then finally they adopted themanaged bankruptcy. I was among others that said we ought to do that.

And then after that, they gave the company to the UAW, they gaveGeneral Motors to the UAW, and they gave Chrysler to Fiat. My plan,we would have had a private sector bailout with the right — privatesector restructuring and bankruptcy with the private sector guidingthe — the direction, as opposed to what we had with the governmentplaying its heavy hand.

MR. HARWOOD: Governor, let me follow up, because — (applause) — the auto bailout is part of a larger issue facing your candidacy,as you know. Your opponents have said you’ve switched positions onmany issues. It’s an issue of character — not personal, butpolitical. You seemed to encapsulate it in what — the last debatewhen you said: I’m running for office, for Pete’s sake.

What can you say to Republicans to persuade them the things yousay in the campaign are rooted in something deeper than the fact thatyou’re running for office?

MR. ROMNEY: I think — John, I think people know me pretty well,particularly in this state, in the state of Massachusetts, NewHampshire that’s close by, Utah where I (served in ?) the Olympics. Ithink people understand that I’m a man of steadiness and constancy.

I don’t think you’re going to find somebody who has more of thoseattributes than I do.

I’ve been married to the same woman for 25 — excuse me — (chuckles) I get in trouble — for 42 years. (Laughter.) I’ve — I’ve been in the same church my entire life. I worked at one company,Bain, for 25 years, and I left that to go up and — off and help savethe Olympic Games.

I think it’s outrageous the Obama campaign continues to push thisidea when you have in the Obama administration the most politicalpresidency we’ve seen in modern history. They’re actually decidingwhen to pull out of Afghanistan based on politics.

Let me tell you this. If I’m president of the United States, Iwill be true to my family, to my faith and to our country, and I willnever apologize for the United States of America. That’s my belief.(Cheers, applause.)

MR. HARWOOD: Now, Governor Perry, I want to ask you about this,because you’ve raised this issue yourself about Governor Romney, andyou’re running as a politician with strong convictions. From the flipside, Ronald Reagan raised taxes when the deficit got too big. GeorgeW. Bush supported TARP and the auto bailout when he thought we mightface a Great Depression — second Great Depression. Does that,examples like that, tell you that good, effective leaders need to showthe kind of flexibility that Governor Romney has showed on someissues?

GOVERNOR RICK PERRY (R-TX): The next president of the UnitedStates needs to send a powerful message not just to the people of thiscountry but around the world that America is going to be Americaagain; that we are not going to pick winners and losers fromWashington, D.C.; that we’re going to trust the capital markets andthe private sector to make the decisions and let the consumers pickwinners and losers.

And it doesn’t make any difference whether it’s Wall Street orwhether it’s some corporate entity or whether it’s some Europeancountry. If you are too big to fail, you are too big. (Applause.)

MS. BARTIROMO: Speaker Gingrich, Federal Reserve Chairman BenBernanke has called the unemployment in this country a national crisisdue to the amount of days people are out — months that people are outof work and the number of people out of work. Many of you have comeup with tax reform plans. Why is tax reform the path to job creation?And if it’s not the only path, what else can you implement to getpeople back to work?

NEWT GINGRICH: Well, first of all, I think Ben Bernanke is alarge part of the problem and ought to be fired as rapidly aspossible. (Cheers, applause.) I think the Federal Reserve ought tobe audited, and we should have all the decision documents for 2008, ‘9and ’10 so we can understand who he bailed out, why he bailed themout, who he did not bail out and why he did not bail them out.(Cheers, applause.) So I’m — I’m glad that Ben Bernanke recognizessome of the wreckage his policies have led to.

I’ve — the reason we follow — I think most of us are for taxpolicies that lead to jobs is because we’ve had two cycles in mylifetime, Ronald Reagan and the Contract with America, both of whichhad the same policies: lower taxes, less regulation, more Americanenergy, and have faith in the American job creator, as distinct from aSaul Alinsky radicalism of higher taxes, bigger bureaucracy with moreregulations, no American energy — as the president announced againtoday in his decision on offshore — and finally, class warfare. So Iwould say that all of us on this stage represent a dramaticallygreater likelihood of getting to a paycheck and leaving behind foodstamps than does Barack Obama. (Cheers, applause.)

MS. BARTIROMO: Congressman Bachmann, same question to you. Howcan you create jobs as quickly as possible?

REPRESENTATIVE MICHELE BACHMANN (R-MN): Well, I think one thingthat we know is that taxes lead to jobs leaving the country. All youneed to know is that we have the second-highest corporate tax rate inthe world. And if you go back to 1981 and you look around the world,we had a lot of high corporate tax countries.

It was 47 percent, on average, on a lot of countries across the world.But if you look today in the United States, we have an effective rate,if you average in state taxes with federal taxes, of about 40 percent;but the world took a — took a clue. Because capital is mobile, andcapital went to places where corporate tax rates went to 25 percentand falling. We’re still stuck in a 1986 era of about a 40-percenttax rate.

We have to lower the tax rate, because of the cost of doingbusiness, but we have to do so much more than that. We — our biggestproblem right now is our regulatory burden. The biggest regulatoryproblem we have is “Obamacare” and Dodd-Frank. I will repeal thosebills. I’ve written those bills to repeal those bills. They gottago. But beyond that — (cheers, applause) — but beyond that, we haveto legalize American energy.

And here’s something else that we have to do that will help theeconomy. We have to build the fence on America’s southern border andget a grip on dealing with our immigration problem. (Applause.)

MS. BARTIROMO: OK.

MR. HARWOOD: Senator Santorum, you’ve proposed a zero tax onmanufacturing businesses.

RICK SANTORUM: I have.

MR. HARWOOD: All right. I understand the sentiment behind that,and the state of Michigan’s lost hundreds of thousands ofmanufacturing jobs over the last few decades. Isn’t that the kind ofdistortion in the tax code that people want to get away from in orderto get rates down — flatter, simpler, fairer?

MR. SANTORUM: I think getting the rate down to zero is down — is pretty far down. That’s good. It’s down to zero — (inaudible) —

MR. HARWOOD: But it’s down for the manufacturing industry, asopposed to people doing other things. Isn’t that picking winners andlosers?

MR. SANTORUM: It’s down for a sector of the economy, not pickingan individual winner or loser. It’s down for an entire sector of theeconomy, that we’re getting our hat handed to us by losing jobs. I — we see that here in Michigan; we see it across this country. And the

reason is government has made us uncompetitive. We need to compete ontaxes. We need to compete on regulations.

We need to repeal “Obamacare.” I’ve said I’m going to repeal everysingle Obama-era regulation that costs business over a hundred milliondollars. Repeal them all. We’ll save — we’ll send a very clearmessage out to manufacturers in this country and all over the worldthat America will compete.

Some have suggested we need to go into a trade war with China andhave tariffs. That just taxes you. I don’t want to tax you. I wantto create an atmosphere where businesses and manufacturers can beprofitable. Lower taxes, repatriating funds, zero percent tax if yourepatriate those funds and invest them in plant and equipment.

And then of course an energy policy that everyone on this stageis going to agree with, that says we are going to produce energy inthis country. I’m different than many of them, that — I’m going tocut all the subsidies out and let the market work, as opposed tocreating incentives for different forms of energy that the governmentsupports. (Applause.)

MS. BARTIROMO: You have all said that you will repeal thepresident’s health care legislation. We will get into that because wewant to know, then what? What is the plan once you repeal”Obamacare?”

But first, Mr. Cain, the American people want jobs but they alsowant leadership. They want character in a president. In recent days,we have learned that four different women have accused you ofinappropriate behavior. Here we’re focusing on character and onjudgement. (Boos.)

You’ve been a CEO. (Boos.) You know that shareholders arereluctant to hire a CEO where there are character issues. Why shouldthe American people hire a president if they feel there are characterissues?

MR. CAIN: The American people deserve better than someone beingtried in the court of public opinion based on unfounded accusations.(Cheers, applause.)

And I value my character and my integrity more than anythingelse. And for every one person that comes forward with a falseaccusation, there are probably — there are thousands who would saynone of that sort of activity ever came from Herman Cain.

You’re right, this country’s looking for leadership. And this is whya lot of people, despite what has happened over the last nine days,are still very enthusiastic behind my candidacy.

Over the last nine days — (applause) — over the last nine days,the voters have voted with their dollars, and they’re saying theydon’t care about the character assassination, they care aboutleadership and getting this economy growing and all of the otherproblems we face. (Applause.)

MR. HARWOOD: Governor Romney, when you were at Bain Capital, youpurchased a lot of companies. You could fire the CEO and themanagement team or you could keep them. Would you keep a CEO — areyou persuaded by what Mr. Cain has said? Would you keep him on if youhad bought his company? (Boos.)

MR. ROMNEY: I’m — look. Look, Herman Cain is the person torespond to these questions. He just did. The people in this room andacross the country can make their own assessment. I’m not going to — (applause) — inaudible). (Extended cheers and applause.)

MR. HARWOOD: Governor Huntsman, let me switch back to theeconomy. (Cheers, applause.)

Many Republicans have criticized the Occupy Wall Street movement.Well, we have have an NBC News/Wall Street poll this week that showeda large proportion of the American people, 76 percent, said theybelieve there’s something wrong with our economy that tilts toward thewealthy at the expense of others.

Do you consider something wrong with the structure of our economyand the income inequality that it produces? Is that somethinggovernment should do something about?

And if so, what?

JON HUNTSMAN: Let me just say that I want to be the president ofthe 99 percent. I also want to be the president of the 1 percent.This nation is divided, and it’s painful, and it is unnatural for themost optimistic blue-sky people this world has ever known. We areproblem solvers.

When I hear out the people who are part of the Wall Streetprotests, I (say ?) thank goodness we have the ability to speak out.I might not agree with everything they say. I don’t like the anti-capitalism messages. But I do agree that this country is never againgoing to bail out corporations.

I do agree — (applause) — thank you. I do agree that we haveblown through trillions and trillions of dollars with nothing to showon the balance sheet but debt and no uplift in our ability to competeand no addressing our level of unemployment.

And I do agree that we have institutions, banks, that are too bigto fail in this country, and until we address that problem — we canfix taxes, we can fix the regulatory environment, we can move towardenergy independence; so long as we have instant banks that are too bigto fail, we are setting ourselves up for long-term disaster andfailure.

MR. HARWOOD: So, Governor, you agree with Governor Romney thatthe bailout that Governor Snyder supports in Michigan was a mistake?

MR. HUNTSMAN: The bailout here in the auto sector, $68 billionworth — we’re going to end up footing a bill — Governor Snyder knowsthat — of probably $15 billion when all is said and done. I don’tthink that’s a good use of taxpayer money. Instead there ought to besome way of taking the auto sector through some sort ofreorganization, get them back on their feet. The people in thiscountry are sick and tired of seeing taxpayer dollars go towardbailouts and we’re not going to have it anymore in this country.(Applause.)

MR. CRAMER: Governor Romney, do you believe public companieshave any social responsibility to create jobs?

Or do you believe, as Nobel laureate Milton Friedman, the mostimportant, most influential conservative economist of the 20th centuryheld, that corporations should exist solely to create maximum profitfor their shareholders?

MR. ROMNEY: This is a wonderful philosophical debate, but youknow what? We — we don’t have to decide between the two because theygo together. Our Democratic friends think that when a corporation isprofitable, that’s a bad thing. I remember asking some, where do youthink — where do you think profits go? When you hear that a companyis profitable, where do you think it goes? And they said, well, topay the executives their big bonuses. I said no, actually, none of itgoes to pay the executives. Profit is what’s left over after they’veall been paid. What happens with profit is that you can grow thebusiness. You can expand it. You add working capital, and you hirepeople.

The right thing for America is to have profitable enterprisesthat can hire people. I want to make American businesses successfuland thrive. What we have in Washington today is a president and anadministration that doesn’t like business, that somehow thinks theywant jobs, but they don’t like businesses. Look, I want to see ourbusinesses thrive and grow and expand and be profitable. (Cheers,applause.) I want to see — (inaudible) — I want a (job ?) —

MR. CRAMER: Governor Perry, 30 seconds to you. Do you thinkthat companies can both be profitable and be able to create jobs? Doyou think it’s a dichotomy, or do you think they can do it?

GOV. PERRY: They better be. They better be, and that’s thereason the tax plan that I laid out, a 20 percent flat tax on thepersonal side and a 20 percent corporate tax rate — that will getpeople working in this country. (Applause.) We need to go out thereand stick a big old flag in the middle of America that says, “Open forbusiness again.” (Cheers, applause.)

MR. CRAMER: Mr. Speaker, how about to you? Can corporations doboth?

MR. GINGRICH: Look, obviously, corporations can and should doboth. And what is amazing to me is the inability of much of ouracademic world and much of our news media and most of the people onOccupy Wall Street to have a clue about history.

(Cheers, applause.)

In this town, Henry Ford started as an Edison Electric supervisorwho went home at night and built his first car in the garage. Now,was he in the 99 percent, or the 1 percent? Bill Gates drops out ofcollege to found Microsoft. Is he in the 1 percent, or the 99percent?

Historically, this is the richest country in the history of theworld because corporations succeed in creating both profits and jobs.And it’s sad that the news media doesn’t report accurately how theeconomy works. (Cheers, applause.)

MS. BARTIROMO: (Inaudible) — I’d like to know what the — Mr.Speaker, I’m sorry, but what is the media — what is the mediareporting inaccurately about the economy?

MR. GINGRICH: What? (Laughter.)

MS. BARTIROMO: What is the media reporting inaccurately aboutthe economy?

MR. GINGRICH: (I love humor disguised as a question ?). That’sterrific. (Laughter.)

I have yet to hear a single reporter ask a single Occupy WallStreet person a single rational question about the economy that wouldlead them to say, for example: Who’s going to pay for the park you’reoccupying if there are no businesses making a profit? (Cheers,applause.)

MR. CRAMER: Senator Santorum, I want to talk about a high-quality problem our country has. I just came back from North Dakota.We have made the largest oil discovery in a generation there. Notonly is it a — defined a big step toward creating energyindependence, it stands to create as many as 300,000 jobs. But whatthe guys tell me up there is that they can’t handle the rush withoutfederal help. Would you favor incentives — incentives to get workersand businesses to where the jobs are — to support this boom?

MR. SANTORUM: No, because we’ve done it in Pennsylvania.Pennsylvania has Marcellus shale. It took a while for us to ramp up,but we’re drilling 3(,000) to 4,000 wells. The price of natural gas,because of Marcellus shale — which is the second largest natural gas

find in the world — has gone from $12 to $3.65. And we let themarketplace work.

So no, we didn’t have the federal government come in and bail us out.

I want to make the point about manufacturing jobs again, becauseif you’re — if you’re talking about creating jobs that trickle down,I agree with Newt. We have folks who have (sic) innovators. But healways — he talked about innovators that created jobs for blue-collarworkers. The unemployment rate among non-college-educated is wellinto the double digits in America. It’s 4 or 5 percent for people whohave college degrees.

The reason I put forth this manufacturing point is not just so wecan say “made here in America.” That we can create opportunities foreveryone in America, including those that don’t have that collegeskill set. People who built this country, like my grandfather who wasa coal miner.

So that is a very important part that Republicans, unfortunately,are not talking about. We need to talk about income mobility. Weneed to talk about people at the bottom of the — of the income scalebeing able to get necessary skills and rise so they can supportthemselves and a family. And that’s what manufacturing does, andthat’s why I’m laser-beam focused on it. (Applause.)

MS. BARTIROMO: Let’s get back to tax reform.

Mr. Cain, let’s talk fairness in taxation. Ever since thiscountry started taxing income a hundred years ago, our system chargesthose people who make more money a higher rate than those people whomake less money. Governor Perry has said he doesn’t believe in thatapproach, and your 9-9-9 plan suggests you don’t either.

Why now, when the higher-income group is doing better than therest of America, is the time to switch to the same rate for all of us?

MR. CAIN: My proposal is the only one that solves the problem bythrowing out the current tax code, which has been a mess for decades — (applause) — and we need to put in something different that I’veproposed: 9-9-9. It satisfies five simple criteria.

It is simple. The complexity costs us $430 billion a year.

It is transparent. People know what it is. There are thousandsof hidden “sneak attaxes” in the current tax code. That’s why I wantto throw it out.

It is fair. The reason it’s fair is because of the definition inWebster, which says everybody gets treated the same, all businessesget treated the same, not having Washington, D.C., pick winners andlosers. This is why I have proposed a bold plan of 9-9-9: 9 percentbusiness flat tax, 9 percent tax on personal income, a 9-percentnational sales tax. It treats everybody the same. And it will boostthis economy.

MS. BARTIROMO: How do you ensure that when the government needsmore revenue, that the sales tax doesn’t go up and that plan doesn’tturn into 19-19-19?

MR. CAIN: Tax codes do not raise taxes, politicians do.(Cheers, applause.) And as long as it’s visible, the people will holdthe politicians’ feet to the fire. It’s not the code that raisestaxes, it’s the politicians. Because the code — because the approach9-9-9 will be very visible, the American people are going to hold therates at 9.

MR. HARWOOD: Governor Romney, Mr. Cain’s got a flat tax, RickPerry’s got a flat tax, Congresswoman Bachmann is talking about a flattax. You don’t have a flat tax. You’re proposing to preserve theBush era tax rates. What is wrong with the idea that we should go toone rate? Why do you believe in a progressive tax system?

MR. ROMNEY: Well, I would like to see our tax rates flatter.I’d like to see our code simpler. I’d like to see the special breaksthat we have in the code taken out. That’s one of the reasons why I’dtake the corporate rate from 35 down to 25, is to take out some of thespecial deals that are there.

With regards to our tax code, what I want to do is to take ourprecious dollars as a nation and focus them on the people in thiscountry that have been hurt the most, and that’s the middle class.

The Obama economy has really crushed middle-income Americans. Thispresident has failed us so badly. We have 26 million people out ofwork or in part-time jobs, that need full-time work or have stoppedlooking for work altogether.

Median incomes have dropped 10 percent in the last three years.At the same time, gasoline prices are up, food prices are up, healthcare costs are up. And so what I want to do is help the people who’vebeen hurt the most. And that’s the middle class. And so what I do isfocus a substantial tax break on middle-income Americans.

Ultimately, I’d love to see if — see us come up with a plan thatsimplifies the code and lowers rates for everybody. But right now,let’s get the job done first that has to be done immediately. Let’slower the tax rates on middle-income Americans.

MR. HARWOOD: Congresswoman Bachmann, Governor Romney isaccepting — (applause) — the premises of the Democratic argumentthat you have to have a fair approach to taxation that preservesdifferent rates for different people.

Why is he wrong?

REP. BACHMANN: Well, I would say President Obama is the onethat’s wrong, because President Obama’s plan for job creation hasabsolutely nothing to do with the true people who know how to createjobs. He should really be going to job creators if he wants to knowhow to create jobs.

Instead, he continues to go to General Axelrod in Chicago to lookfor his orders to figure out how to deal with the economy. That won’twork.

We know what needs to be done. We have a real problem. When youhave 53 percent of Americans paying federal income taxes, but you have47 percent of Americans who pay no federal income taxes, you have areal problem.

And that’s why in my tax plan, I have everyone paying something,because everyone benefits by this magnificent country. So even if itmeans paying the price of two Happy Meals a year, like $10, everyonecan afford to pay at least that. And what it does is create amentality in the United States that says that freedom is free. Butfreedom isn’t free.

We all benefit. We all need to sacrifice. Everybody has to be a partof this tax code. (Applause.)

MS. BARTIROMO: Congressman Ron Paul, you have said you want toclose down agencies. Tell us about your tax plan, as well as closingagencies, federal agencies. Where do those jobs go?

REP. PAUL: Well, eventually they go into the private sector.They don’t all leave immediately when the plan goes into effect.(Scattered applause.)

But what my plan does is, it addresses taxes in a littledifferent way. We’re talking about the tax code, but that’s theconsequence, that’s the symptoms. The disease is spending. Everytime you spend — (scattered applause) — spending is a tax. We taxthe people, we borrow, and then we print the money, and then theprices go up, and that is a tax. So you have to address the subjectof spending. That is the tax.

That is the reason I go after the spending. I propose in thefirst year cut $1 trillion out of the budget — (cheers, applause) — in five departments.

Now the — the other thing is — that you must do if you want toget the economy going and growing again is you have to get rid ofprice fixing. And the most significant price fixing that goes on, thatgave us the bubble, destroyed the economy and is preventing this fromcoming out is the price fixing of the Federal Reserve manipulatinginterest rates way below market rates. (Applause.) You have to havethe market determine interest rates if you want a healthy, viableeconomy.

MS. BARTIROMO: So you think the economy would be stronger ifinterest rates were higher right now?

REP. PAUL: You would have — you would have more incentive. Youwould take care of the elderly. They get cheated. They get nothingfor their CDs. Why — why cheat them and give the banks loans at 0percent? Then they loan it back to the government at 3 percent.They’re ripping us off at the expense of those on fixed incomes andthen retirees.

MS. BARTIROMO: Even though higher interest rates would make itmuch more expensive to borrow mortgages, borrow —

REP. PAUL: But what you want is the market to determine this.Whoever thought that one person, the Federal Reserve Board chairman,knows what the money supply should be? Just in the past six months,M1 has gone up at the rate of 30 percent.

That spells inflation. That spells lower standard of living andhigher prices. And watch out, they’re coming. (Applause.)

MS. BARTIROMO: We are just getting started tonight. When wereturn, how will the candidates breathe new life into the lifelesshousing market?

MR. HARWOOD: Plus, the view of the economy from the corneroffice.

(Video plays:)

MR. : I think that we’re in serious trouble. Businesspeopleare struggling.

MR. : The problems of the economy didn’t arrive in 20minutes, and they won’t be resolved in 20 minutes.

MR. : The most important economic issue of concern to me islack of leadership in government and the lack of any focus on buildingconfidence both with consumers and the business community.

(Video ends.)

MR. HARWOOD: So how are the candidates going to turn thingsaround? CNBC’s Republican presidential debate will be right back.Stay with us. (Applause.)

(Announcements.)

MS. BARTIROMO: Welcome back to CNBC’s Republican presidentialdebate. With us for this portion of the program, CNBC’s senioreconomics reporter, Steve Liesman.

Welcome, Steve. (Applause.)

STEVE LIESMAN (CNBC senior economics reporter): It’s great to behere, Maria. Thank you.

MS. BARTIROMO: Most economists agree that there can be noeconomic recovery without a recovery in housing. American familieshave lost some $7 trillion in home value in the last five years.Right now 4 million people are behind on their mortgage or inforeclosure. Twenty-five percent of homeowners owe more to the banksthan their house is actually worth.

Governor Romney has said that the government should let theforeclosure process play out so that the housing market can recoverand the free markets can work.

Speaker Gingrich, is Governor Romney right?

MR. GINGRICH: Well, he’s certainly right in the sense that youwant to get through to the real value of the houses as fast as youcan, because they’re not going to rise in value as long as you staytrapped, as Japan has done now for 20 years. But I think there aretwo specific steps you got to understand in terms of housing.

To pick up on something Congresswoman Bachmann said, if theRepublican House next week would repeal Dodd-Frank and allow us to putpressure on the Senate to repeal Dodd-Frank, you’d see the housingmarket start to improve overnight. Dodd-Frank kills small banks; itkills small business. The federal regulators are anti-housing loan.And it has maximized the pain level.

You could also change some of the rules so that it would beeasier to do a short sale, where the house is worth less than themortgage, than it is to do a foreclosure. Today the banks areactually profiting more by foreclosing than by encouraging shortsales.

But in the long run, you want the housing market to come back?the economy has to come back. When you’re at 4-percent unemployment,you suddenly have a dramatic increase in demand for housing. Whenyou’re at 9- percent-plus unemployment, it’s hard to get the housingmarket to come back.

MS. BARTIROMO: Governor Romney, respond in 30 seconds. Not oneof your 59 points in your economic plan mentions or addresses housing.Can you tell us why?

MR. ROMNEY: Yeah, because it’s not a housing plan, it’s a jobsplan. And the right way to get — (cheers, applause.)

The best — the best thing you can do for housing is to get theeconomy going, get have people working again, seeing incomes, insteadof going down, incomes coming up so people can afford to buy homes.The things the speaker just indicated are excellent ideas as well.You have to let the market work and get people in homes again, and thebest way for that to happen is to — is to allow this economy toreboot.

What we know won’t work is what this president has done, which isto try and hold off the foreclosure process, the normal marketprocess, to — to put money into a stimulus that failed and to put inplace a whole series of policies from “Obamacare” to Dodd-Frank thathave made it harder for this economy to get going. You want to getAmerica’s economy going, we know how to do it. It’s do almost theexact opposite of what President Obama has done. (Cheers, applause.)

(Off-mic exchange.)

MR. LIESMAN: Governor Romney, we’ve created 2.7 million jobssince February 2010. Over that period of time, the housing market hascontinued to decline. We’re at 2003 price levels now. If we keepgoing the way we’re going, in four or five years we’ll be at 1999price levels. The $7 trillion figure that Maria mentioned couldalmost double. Are you willing to let that happen in America?

MR. ROMNEY: And exactly what you — what would you do instead?Would you decide to have —

MR. LIESMAN: I’m asking you.

MR. ROMNEY: — have — to have the federal government go out andbuy all the homes in America? That — that’s not going to happen inthis country. Markets work. When you have government play its heavyhand, markets blow up, and people get hurt.

And the reason we have the housing crisis we have is that thefederal government played too heavy a role in our markets. Thefederal government came in with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — (cheers,applause) — and Barney Frank and Chris Dodd told banks they have togive loans to people who couldn’t afford to pay them back. And so — and so our friends — our friends in Washington today, they say, oh,if we’ve got a problem in the housing, let’s let government play abigger role.

That’s the wrong way to go. Let markets work. Help people getback to work. Let them buy homes. You’ll see home prices come backup if we allow this market to work.

(Applause.)

MR. LIESMAN: But Governor Perry, every quarter I get the report,the GDP figures, and it’s a negative number for housing. And we’velost some 2 million construction jobs. Housing creates jobs as well;doesn’t it?

GOV. PERRY: Not a negative number in Texas, and one of thereasons is because we have put policies into place that follow my planto get America back working again.

MR. LIESMAN: OK, so translate that plan to America, please.

GOV. PERRY: When you look at what I’ve laid out, whether it’sthe energy side and getting the energy industry going — and RickSantorum is absolutely correct on that, is let’s get our energyindustry freed up, federal lands, federal waters — pull back all ofthose regulations. Everybody on this stage understands, it’s theregulatory world that is killing America. (Applause.)

The tax side of it, yeah, have a flat tax. Have a corporate flattax in there, as well. But the real issue facing America areregulations. It doesn’t make any difference whether it’s the EPA orwhether it’s the federal banking, the Dodd-Frank or “Obamacare,”that’s what’s killing America. And the next president of the UnitedStates has to have the courage to go forward, pull back everyregulation since 2008, audit them for one thing: Is it creating jobs,or is it killing jobs? And if that regulation is killing jobs, doaway with it. (Applause.)

MR. HARWOOD: Well, Congresswoman Bachmann, in one of the lastdebates you were asked what you would do about foreclosures, and youtold moms to hang on. But your advice, as your colleagues havementioned, was: Let the economy recover. So you agree with GovernorRomney that the way to fix the housing market is to let theforeclosure process proceed more rapidly?

REP. BACHMANN: Well, what I agree with is that we have got tostop what we’re doing now. When we had the financial meltdown, 50percent of the homes were being financed by Fannie and Freddie; today,it’s 90 percent of the homes. In other words, the government is thebacker of the homes.

Well, let’s take a look and an analysis of what a great,brilliant job Freddie and Fannie are doing. They just applied thisweek for another $7 billion bailout because they’re failing. Theother one applied for a $6 billion bailout because they’re failing.

But what did they do? They just gave bonuses of almost $13million to 10 top executives. This is the epicenter of capital crony — crony capitalism. That’s what’s wrong with Washington, D.C. Forthese geniuses to give 10 of their top executives bonuses at $12million, and then have the guts to come to the American people andsay, give us another 13 billion (dollars) to bail us out just for thequarter? That’s lunacy. We need to put them back into bankruptcy — (applause) — and get them out of business. They’re destroying thehousing market.

MR. HARWOOD: Since you mentioned Fannie and Freddie, SpeakerGingrich, 30 seconds to you. Your firm was paid $300,000 by FreddieMac in 2006. What did you do for that money?

MR. GINGRICH: You — were you asking me?

MR. HARWOOD: Yes.

MR. GINGRICH: I offered them advice on precisely what theydidn’t do. (Laughter, applause.)

Look, look, this is not — this is —

MR. HARWOOD: Were you not trying to help Freddie Mac fend offthe effort by the Bush administration —

MR. GINGRICH: No. No, I do no — I have never done that.

MR. HARWOOD: — to curb Freddie Mac?

MR. GINGRICH: I have never done — I assume I get a secondquestion. I have never done any lobbying, every contract that waswritten during the period when I was out of the office specificallysaid I would do no lobbying, and I offered advice. And my advice as ahistorian, when they walked in and said to me, we are now making loansto people who have no credit history and have no record of paying backanything, but that’s what the government wants us to do, is I said — I said to them at the time: This is a bubble. This insane. This isimpossible.

It turned out, unfortunately, I was right and the people who weredoing exactly what Congresswoman Bachmann talked about were wrong.And I think it’s a good case for breaking up Fannie Mae and FreddieMac and getting much smaller institutions back into the private sectorto be competitive and to be responsible for their behavior.(Applause.)

MR. LIESMAN: Mr. Cain, government-sponsored entities Fannie Maeand Freddie Mac, as Congresswoman Bachmann said, now underwrite orguarantee 90 percent of the home financing in this country. Whatwould you do with these — with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? Would youshut them down even though it could mean higher interest rates forAmericans and make it even harder than it is right now for Americansto get home loans?

MR. CAIN: You don’t start there. You start with fixing the realproblem, which is growing this economy, which is why I have put a boldsolution on the table, 9-9-9.

Secondly, then you get the regulators off of the backs of thebanks, like someone mentioned, get the regulars out of the way, suchthat the small banks and the medium-sized banks aren’t being forcedout of the business. They would then be in a better position, andthey might develop a desire in order to help homeowners reset theirmortgages if they were able to see, number three, some certainty.Uncertainty is what’s killing this economy, and until we throw out thetax code and put in something bold, get government out the way byreducing the regulatory environment, we are going to still have thehousing problem.

MR. LIESMAN: I’m sorry, Mr. Cain, but you would come into officeand Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would be there, and the question was,what would you do with them?

MR. CAIN: OK, after I did those three things that I outlined,then deal with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

MR. LIESMAN: Right.

MR. CAIN: You don’t start solving a problem right in the middleof it, so we got to do that first.

I would also turn those GSEs into private entities. Thegovernment does not need to be in that business. I would find a wayto unwind Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac such that the marketplace candetermine the future of the housing market. (Applause.)

MR. HARWOOD: Governor Huntsman, I want to go back to the issuethat you raised before about “too big to fail.” If anything, thatproblem has gotten worse since the financial crisis than before. The10 biggest bank holding companies in this country now hold nearly 90percent of all the assets in the banking system, up from 75 percent in2006. So what would you do? Would you break up the banks to removethe risk or diminish the risk for American taxpayers?

MR. HUNTSMAN: Let me just say on the housing discussion here,lost in all of this debate is the fact that there are people tuning intonight who are upside-down in terms of the financing of their homes,who are feeling real pain, people who probably heard today that theylost a job. These issues are very real. They’re complicated. For usto say that there’s an easy solution to housing, that’s just notright. And that’s not fair. The economy does have to recover inorder for the housing market to pick up its slack and for us to getonto housing starts, which ought to be 15 percent of our nation’s GDP,and today it’s 2 percent.

With respect to the banks that are too big to fail, you know,today we’ve got, as I mentioned earlier, six institutions that areequal to 60 (percent), 65 percent of our GDP, $9.4 trillion. Theyhave an implied guarantee by the taxpayers that they’ll be protected.That’s not fair. That’s not right for the taxpayers.

MR. HARWOOD: So you break them up?

MR. HUNTSMAN: I say we need to — we need to right-size them. Isay in the 1990s you had Goldman Sachs, for example, that was 1.1 — that was — that was $200 billion in size. By 2008 it had grown to$1.1 trillion in size. Was that good for the people of this country?Or were — were we assuming — (inaudible) — process.

MR. HARWOOD: Well, how would you accomplish that? How would youright-size?

MR. HUNTSMAN: I think we ought to set up some sort of fund.Well, I think we ought to charge some sort of fee from the banks thatmitigates the risk that, otherwise, the taxpayers are carrying.There’s got to be something that takes the risk from the taxpayers offthe table so that these institutions don’t go forward with thisimplied assumption that we’re going to bail them out at the end of theday.

That’s not right, and it’s not fair for the taxpayers of this country.(Applause.)

MS. BARTIROMO: Let’s stay on regulation for a moment. You haveall said that you will repeal President Obama’s health carelegislation. Down the line, 30 seconds: If you repeal “Obamacare,”what’s the answer?

Jon Huntsman.

MR. HUNTSMAN: I would sit down and I would meet with the 50governors of this country. And I’d say: I did health care reform inmy state. Took us three years to get it done. We delivered aninsurance connector that was not a costly mandate.

You can sit down with the 50 governors and you can address costcontainment. This is a $3 trillion industry, half of which any expertwill tell you is totally nonsense and superfluous spending. How doyou get cost out of the system? How do you empower patients to betterunderstand what they’re getting when they go into the doctor’s office?

Number two, we need to do a better job in harmonizing medicalrecords so that we can pull up on a consistent basis the mostefficacious course of treatment for patients.

And third, we need to close the gap on the uninsured without acostly mandate, letting the free market work in bringing peopletogether with truly affordable insurance.

MS. BARTIROMO: That’s time. We want to get each of yourcomments on what the plan is.

Ron Paul.

REP. PAUL: We need to get the government out of the business.And we do need to have the right to opt out of “Obamacare,” but weought to have the right to opt out of everything. And the answer toit is turn it back over to the patient and the doctor relationshipwith medical savings accounts.

So I would say that we’ve had too much government. I’ve been inmedicine. It’s gone downhill. Quality has gone down. Prices haveskyrocketed because of the inflation. So you need to get a marketforce in there. But medical savings accounts.

But this mess has been created — it’s a bipartisan mess, so it’sbeen there for a while. But what we need is the doctor-patientrelationship and medical savings accounts where you can deduct it fromyour taxes and get a major medical policy. Prices then would comedown.

MS. BARTIROMO: Thirty seconds. Governor Perry.

GOV. PERRY: Obviously, on the Medicare side you have to have aninsurance type of a program where people have options, which givesthem a menu of options of which they can choose from.

I think you have to have the doctors and the hospitals and the otherhealth care providers being given incentives on health care ratherthan sick care.

And then on Medicaid, it’s really pretty simple, just like Jonand Mitt both know. You send it back to the states and let the statesfigure out how to make Medicaid work — (applause) — because I’llguarantee you, we will do it safely, we will do it appropriately andwe will save a ton of money.

MS. BARTIROMO: Mr. Cain.

MR. CAIN: The legislation has already been written: H.R. 3000.In the previous Congress, it was H.R. 3400. And what that does — it’s already been written. We didn’t hear about it in the previous — the previous Congress, because “Princess Nancy” sent it to committeeand it stayed there — (laughter) — it never came out. H.R. 30 — H.R. 3000 allows the decisions to be with the doctors and thepatients, not with the bureaucrats in Washington, D.C. Thelegislation has already been written. (Applause.)

MS. BARTIROMO: Governor Romney?

MR. ROMNEY: Health care in 30 seconds — it’s a little tough,but let me try. (Laughter.)

Number one, you return to the states the responsibility forcaring for their own uninsured, and you send the Medicaid money backto the states so they can craft their own programs. That’s numberone.

Number two, you let individuals purchase their own insurance — not just getting it through their company, but buy it on their own ifthey want to — and no longer discriminate against individuals whowant to buy their insurance.

Number three, you do exactly what Ron Paul said. I don’t alwayssay that, but I’m going to say it right now. (Laughter.) And thatis, you have to get health care to start working more like a market.And for that to happen, people have to have a stake in what the cost,and the quality as well, is of their health care. And so a healthsavings account or something called co-insurance, that’s the way tohelp that and make that happen.

And finally, our malpractice system in this country is nuts.We’ve got to take that over and make sure we don’t burden our systemwith that. (Applause.)

MS. BARTIROMO: Mr. Speaker.

MR. GINGRICH: Well, I just want to point out, my colleagues havedone a terrific job of answering an absurd question. (Laughter.)

To say, in 30 seconds —

MS. BARTIROMO: You have said you want to repeal “Obamacare,”correct?

MR. GINGRICH: I’d like to — let me just finish, if I may — (inaudible, applause) — to say in 30 seconds what you would do with18 percent of the economy, life and death for the American people, atopic I’ve worked on since 1974, about which I wrote a book called”Saving Lives and Saving Money” in 2002, and for which I founded theCenter for Health Transformation, is the perfect case of why I’m goingto challenge the president to seven Lincoln-Douglas style three-hourdebates with a timekeeper and no moderator, at least two of whichought to be on health care, so you could have a serious discussionover a several-hour period that affects the lives of every person inthis country. (Cheers, applause.)

MS. BARTIROMO: Would you like to try to explain — would youlike to — (cheers, applause) — would you like to try to explain, insimple speak, to the American people, what you would do after yourepeal the president’s health care legislation?

MR. GINGRICH: In 30 seconds? (Laughter.)

MS. BARTIROMO: Take the time you need, sir. Take the time youneed.

MR. GINGRICH: I can’t take what I need; these guys’ll all gangup on me.

MS. BARTIROMO: You want to answer the question tonight on healthcare, or no, Speaker?

MR. GINGRICH: (Inaudible) — something like — (inaudible).

MS. BARTIROMO: You want to try to answer the question tonight,Speaker?

MR. GINGRICH: No, let me — let me just say it very straight.One, you go back to a doctor-patient relationship and you involve thefamily in those periods where the patient by themselves can’t make keydecisions. But you relocalize it.

Two, as several people said, including Governor Perry, you putMedicaid back at the state level and allow the states to reallyexperiment, because it’s clear we don’t know what we’re doingnationally.

Three, you focus very intensely on a brand-new program on brainscience, because the fact is, the largest single (out-year ?) set ofcosts we’re faced with are Alzheimer’s, autism, Parkinson’s, mentalhealth and things which come directly from the brain. And I am forfixing our health rather than fixing our health bureaucracy, becausethe iron lung is the perfect model of saving people so you don’t needto pay for a federal program of iron lung centers because the poliovaccine eliminated the problem.

That’s a very short pracis. (Cheers, applause.)

MS. BARTIROMO: Congresswoman.

REP. BACHMANN: The main problem with health care in the UnitedStates today is the issue of cost. It’s just too expensive. AndPresident Obama said that’s what he would solve in “Obamacare.” We’dall save $2,500 a year in our premiums. Well, we have “Obamacare,”but we didn’t have the savings. So what I would do to replace it isto allow every American to buy any health insurance policy they wantanywhere in the United States without any federal minimum mandate.Today there is an insurance monopoly in every state in the country. Iwould end that monopoly and let any American go anywhere they want.That’s the free market.

Number two, I would allow every American to pay for thatinsurance policy, their deductibles, their copay, theirpharmaceuticals, whatever it is that’s medical-related with their owntax-free money. And then finally, I’d have true medical malpracticeliability reform. If you do that, it’s very simple. People own theirown insurance policies, and you drive the cost down, because what wehave to get rid of is government bureaucracy in health care. That’sall we bought in “Obamacare” was a huge bureaucracy. That has to goaway. (Applause.)

MS. BARTIROMO: Senator.

MR. SANTORUM: This is, I think, the difference between me and alot of the candidates. I heard a lot of responses, but I hadn’t — Ihaven’t seen a lot of consistency in some of the — some of thoseresponses on the last few questions.

When it comes to health care, back in 1992 I introduced the firsthealth savings account bill that everybody up here said was the basisfor consumer-driven health care. I was leading on that before anyoneelse was even talking about it. Secondly, I was someone who proposeda block grant for Medicaid way back in 1998 with Phil Gramm, againleading on this issue. Same thing reforming the Medicare program backin the 1990s. Again, I led on these issues. I was always for havingthe government out of the health care business and for a bottom-up,consumer-driven health care, which is different than Governor Romneyand some of the other people on this panel.

Number two — and — and I didn’t get a chance to answer the — any of the housing questions. I was on the bank and the housingcommittee when — in — in the United States Senate. I was one of 24people who wrote a letter to Harry Reid saying: Please let us bringup this housing legislation, which I voted for in the committee, thatwould have put curbs on Fannie and Freddie. I — I — I was out therebefore this bubble burst, saying this was a problem.

I — I was in Scranton, Pennsylvania, the other day and I had oneof a — a home builder. He was the head of the association, came upto me and said: Rick, I’m here to apologize. We came here to pushyou so you would oppose, you know, putting caps on Fannie and Freddie.You were right. We were wrong.

Time and time again, Wall Street — the Wall Street bailout — five of the eight people on this panel supported the Wall Streetbailout. I didn’t. I know that we solve problems best from thebottom up, not the top down and government intervention in themarketplace.

MS. BARTIROMO: Governor Romney, you have 30 seconds to respond.(Applause.)

MR. ROMNEY: That’s — that’s fine. I very — believe verydeeply in the functioning of markets. The work I’ve done on healthcare — I actually worked in — as a consultant to the health careindustry, to hospitals and various health institutions. I had theoccasion of actually acquiring and trying to build health carebusinesses. I know something about it, and I believe markets work.

And what’s wrong with our health care system in America is thatgovernment is playing too heavy a role. We need to get our markets towork by having the consumer, the patient, have a stake in what thecost and quality is of health care, give them the transparency theyneed to know where the opportunities are for lower cost and betterquality, to make sure that the providers offer them the broadest arrayof options that they could have. And once we have that happening,you’ll see us — we — 18 percent of our GDP is spent on health care.The next highest nation in the world is 12 percent. It’s a hugedifference.

MS. BARTIROMO: Time —

MR. ROMNEY: We have to get the market to work to make sure thatwe get the kind of quality and value that America deserves.

MR. HARWOOD: But Governor, let me ask you about health care,because Congressman Paul said put it back to the doctor and thepatient.

You said a few moments ago that you thought that states should havethe responsibility for insuring the uninsured. Of course, inMassachusetts you enacted an individual mandate and subsidies to havepeople who didn’t have insurance get it. So you think there’s apretty large role for government in this area.

MR. ROMNEY: Well, I think the people have a responsibility toreceive their own care. Doctor-patient relationship is, of course —

MR. HARWOOD: The government (has ?) responsibility to force it.

MR. ROMNEY: I didn’t know whether Ron Paul was saying he’s goingto get rid of Medicaid. I would not get rid of Medicaid. It’s ahealth program for the poor. What I said was I would take theMedicaid dollars that are currently spent by the federal government,return them to the states so that states can craft their own programsto care for their own poor rather than having the federal governmentmandate a one-size-fits-all plan in the entire nation.

“Obamacare” is wrong. I’ll repeal it. I’ll get it done.(Applause.)

REP. PAUL: John.

MR. HARWOOD: Congressman.

REP. PAUL: My plan of cutting the budget by a trillion dollarsdoes deal with Medicaid, and that is that it preserves it and there isa transition period, with the goal that eventually we would hope tomove that back into the economy. But right now it would be too muchto do it in one year. You know, finding a trillion dollars was a joband a half, and — (inaudible) — department.

So, yes, my budget takes into consideration health care for theelderly, health care on Medicaid, as well as child health care. Atthe same time, we deal with the bailouts, the banks and all thebenefits that they get from the financial system.

Because what we’re facing today is a crisis — on this housingcrisis, if I could just have one second on that. We face the housingcrisis once again because it’s price fixing. They’re fixing theprices of these mortgages too high, and this is why nobody will buythem. This is why you have to get rid of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac,sell all of that into the marketplace.

And the reason they do this is to prop up the banks, because thebanks have invested in Europe, they’ve invested in Fannie Mae andFreddie Mac and these credit default swaps.

They’re in big trouble, and that is why they’re getting bailed out,and that’s why they’re not allowing these mortgages to go down. Andthat is why we will most likely bail out Europe, which will be a realtragedy. (Applause.)

MR. HARWOOD: Congressman, it’s — thank you for that. It’s timefor a quick break —

MR. LIESMAN: Hold it. John, I wanted to give them 15 secondseach to solve the deficit problem.

MS. BARTIROMO: (Laughs.) We’ll come back to the deficit.

MR. HARWOOD: When we return, balancing the budget and cuttingthe deficit, making the college education more affordable.

MS. BARTIROMO: Plus, a little lesson on Social Security.

You’re watching CNBC’s “Your Money, Your Vote” Republicanpresidential debate. (Applause.)

(Announcements.)

MR. HARWOOD: And welcome back. Joining us for this portion ofthe debate, Rick Santelli, CNBC’s on-air editor — (cheers, applause) — and Sharon Epperson, our personal finance correspondent.

Now, we’ll get to them in a moment, but first, Senator Santorum,you were known as a tough partisan fighter in the Senate. But lookwhere partisan fighting got us this summer: gridlock and a debtrating downgrade. The American people don’t much like it, and neitherdoes Doug Oberhelman, the CEO of Caterpillar. Let’s take a listen.

DOUGLAS OBERHELMAN (CEO, Caterpillar Inc.): (From video.) Mostpeople think our politicians are not helping the country get back onits feet. The last two presidents made promises to work across partylines, and both failed.

How will you put our country ahead of your political party andsolve the issues that are so critical for Americans? Be specific,please — these are promises.

MR. HARWOOD: And Senator, let me ask you about — to set up thatquestion. If everyone on this stage rules out any tax increases, evenat a 10-to-1 ration of spending cuts, as you have done, what could youpossibly offer Democrats to get them to go along and compromise withyou on the things that Republicans want?

MR. SANTORUM: You create a — you create a platform that theycan buy into, because they see the advantages of your — of your plan.

For example, one of the reasons that I — I put forward thismanufacturing plan is because folks here in Michigan, Democrats andRepublicans, will vote for it. I was at the New Hampshire House ofRepresentatives the other day and spoke to a bipartisan group, talkedabout the tax plan — not just the manufacturing, but the broad-basedplan that I have.

And I had two Democratic house members go over to my chairman,Dan Tamburello, and said, hey, I want him to come to my district andtalk about this. We can support it.

So when you put together a plan — look, if the RepublicanParty’s just about keeping the top rate, you know, lower or cuttingtaxes, we’re not going to be reaching people. We’ve got to look atplans that bring people together. That’s why I’ve focused on thissector. I understand, John, that the Wall Street Journal won’t likethat I’m picking one sector over another. I don’t care.

What I need to do is bring America together, find a plan that canwork, that we — can be implemented right away. It may not be theboldest plan in the world, but it’s one that will work. It’ll putpeople back to work. It’ll give the ability to people to rise in oursociety. It’ll help with the jobs out in rural America where themanufacturing loss has been the greatest and the employment (sic) rateis the highest.

You put a plan like that together, you’ll get Democrats andRepublicans, and we’ll create jobs in this country. We’ll get thingsdone.

MR. HARWOOD: Governor Romney, you’ve shown that you can workwith Democrats. When you were governor, of course, you collaboratedwith Ted Kennedy on the health care plan that you enacted.

You raised fees to balance the budget and you used that as an argumentto get the credit rating of your state upgraded. Independent votersmight like that. Should Republican primary voters be nervous aboutit?

MR. ROMNEY: Thanks for reminding everybody. (Laughter.)

What I’ve found is, in a state like mine where there are a fewDemocrats in the legislature — 85 percent of my legislature wasDemocrat. To get anything done, I was always in an “away” game, ifyou will. And to get something done, I had to see if there wereDemocrats who cared more about the state than they cared about theirreelection or their party. And there were.

And right now, America faces a crisis. I think people on bothsides of the aisle recognize that this is no longer a time just forworrying about the next election. This is a time to worry aboutAmerica.

We see what’s happening in Italy, what’s happening in Greece.That’s where we’re headed if we don’t change our course. And thereare enough good Democrats and good Republicans willing to put asidepartisanship and do what’s right for the country, in my view, ifthey’re led by someone who cares more about the country, cares moreabout the future of America, cares about our kids and our grandkids,and is willing to step forward and lead.

What we have now is a president who, unfortunately, is driven byone thing: his reelection. It’s unbelievable that we have the crisisgoing on in America that we have — (applause) — and we have apresident who is focused on trying to get himself reelected. This isa — this is a crisis in America.

MR. HARWOOD: Time, Governor.

Governor Perry, you play only home games in Texas. Do you givehim points for winning on the road?

GOV. PERRY: Listen, there is a reason that Caterpillar movedtheir hydraulics manufacturing and their engine manufacturing to thestate of Texas. It didn’t have anything to do with Republican versusDemocrat. It had everything to do with creating a climate in ourstate where the job creators knew that they were going to have theopportunity to keep more of what they work for.

MR. HARWOOD: He’s said he did.

GOV. PERRY: And that’s what Americans are looking for.(Scattered applause.) They’re looking for a tax plan that basicallysays you’re going to be able to keep more of what you work for.They’re looking for a regulatory climate that doesn’t strangle thelife out of their businesses when they want to put those dollars outthere to create the wealth.

That’s what Americans are looking for.

I think we’re getting all tangled up around an issue here aboutcan you work with Democrats or can you work with Republicans. Yeah,we can all do that. But the fact of the matter is, we better have aplan in place that Americans can get their hands around, and that’sthe reason my flat tax is the only one of all the folks — these goodfolks on the stage. It balances the budget in 2020. It does thethings for the regulatory climate that has to happen.

And I will tell you, it’s three agencies of government, when Iget there, that are gone: Commerce, Education and the — what’s thethird one there — let’s see. (Laughter.)

REP. PAUL: You need five.

GOV. PERRY: Oh, five. OK.

REP. PAUL: Make it five.

GOV. PERRY: OK. So Commerce, Education and — the — (pause) —

MR. ROMNEY: EPA?

GOV. PERRY: EPA. There you go. (Laughter.) (Applause.)

MS. BARTIROMO: Let’s go —

MR: HARWOOD: Seriously? Is EPA the one you were talking about?

GOV. PERRY: No, sir. No, sir. We were talking about theagencies of government — EPA needs to be rebuilt. There’s no doubtabout that.

MR. HARWOOD: But you can’t — but you can’t name the third one?

GOV. PERRY: The third agency of government.

MR. HARWOOD: Yes.

GOV. PERRY: I would do away with the Education, the Commerce and — let’s see — I can’t. The third one, I can’t. Sorry. Oops.

MS. BARTIROMO: What about the EPA and the new rules coming outof the EPA? Mr. Cain, right now there is a situation with the EPA

getting aggressive, the National Labor Relations Board gettingaggressive, wanting to shut down a plant in South Carolina. Whatwould you tell Boeing to do?

MR. CAIN: What about —

MS. BARTIROMO: Should they shut down that plant in SouthCarolina unless they make it union?

MR. CAIN: Absolutely not. (Cheers, applause.) That’s what’swrong with government (tampering ?). Absolutely not. (Applause.)The government has no business trying to pick winners and losers, aswe have said, whether it’s through the front door with legislation orthe back door through regulation.

Now, if I may go back —

MR. HARWOOD: What about manufacturing? Zero tax rate for onesector of the economy.

MR. CAIN: Well, this is why my 9-9-9 plan — (cheers, applause) — makes every sector grow. How about helping everybody, not just onesector? And that’s the power of my 9-9-9 plan. Number one, it’sbold. And yes, I’m the only one that’s put a bold plan on the tableand not afraid to go out and defend it.

Now, as far as getting both sides of the aisle to work together — if I may; I don’t see that little yellow light yet — (laughter) — in terms of getting both sides to work together, it’s called provide acompelling solution, and the American people, if they understand it,they will demand it. That’s how you get both sides of the aisle towork together. (Applause.)

MS. BARTIROMO: Rick Santelli.

RICK SANTELLI (On-air editor, CNBC): Speaker Gingrich, for thefirst time in its 75-year history, Social Security is going to be inthe red. According to the Washington Post on October 29th, 105billion (dollars) this year. The reason: Political parties — bothsides — at the end of last year agreed that they wanted a tax cut.And the area they cut were payroll taxes, the main funding for SocialSecurity. If we continue that — and there seems to be some agreementon both sides of the aisle to extend that tax cut — for 2011 and2012, the cumulative amount will be closer to 260 billion (dollars).Are all tax cuts created equal? Is this a tax cut that you wouldback?

MR. GINGRICH: Well, I’m not prepared to raise taxes on workingAmericans in the middle of a recession that’s this bad. (Applause.)But let — but let me put Social Security in context. In 1968, inorder to fake a balanced budget, Lyndon Johnson brought SocialSecurity in the general budget. And ever since, politicians have hidbehind Social Security. Now it’s going to become a disadvantage to doso.

I think the first step is you take Social Security off thefederal budget. You don’t try to solve the budget deficit problem onthe back of working Americans and retirees.

You deal with Social Security as a free-standing issue. And the factis, if you allow younger Americans to have the choice to go to aGalveston or — or Chilean-style personal Social Security savingsaccount, the long-term effect on Social Security is scored by theSocial Security actuary as absolutely stabilizing the system andtaking care of it.

The key is, there’s 2 trillion (dollars), 400 billion dollars inSocial Security which — be — which should be off-budget, and nopresident of the United States should ever again say, because of somepolitical fight in Washington, I may not be able to send you yourcheck. That money is sitting there. That money’s available. And thecountry ought to pay the debt it owes the people who put the money inthere. (Applause.)

MR. HARWOOD: Governor Romney, if I could follow up, SpeakerGingrich just said he’s not prepared to raise taxes on the Americanpeople in the middle of a slow economy like this. That’s what wouldhappen if the payroll tax cut is not extended. Does — do you agreewith him? And would you also support, when it comes down to it, anextension of the payroll tax cut?

MR. ROMNEY: I want to — I don’t want to — I don’t want toraise taxes on people in the middle of a recession. Of course not.

MR. HARWOOD: So you’re for it.

MR. ROMNEY: That’s — and that’s one of the reasons why — whywe fought so hard to make sure the Bush tax cuts weren’t taken away by — by President Obama.

But look, this issue of deficits and spending — it’s not aboutjust dollars and cents. This is a moral issue. It’s a moralimperative. We can’t continue to pass on massive debts to the nextgeneration. We can’t continue to put at risk the — the greatestnation in the history of the earth because of the profligate spendingthat’s going on in Washington, D.C. And —

MR. HARWOOD: But to clarify, you agree with President Obama thepayroll tax cut should be extended?

MR. ROMNEY: I want to — I want to keep our taxes down. I don’twant to raise any taxes anywhere. Let me — I’m not looking to raisetaxes.

What I’m looking to do is to cut spending. And that’s why thislast week I put out a plan that dramatically cuts spending inWashington, that gets us to a 20 percent cap and makes sure that wehave a balanced budget thereafter. And how do I do it? I have threemajor steps.

Number one, cut programs. Get rid of programs we don’t have tohave, like “Obamacare.” Take a lot of programs that we have at thestate level, number two — excuse me, at the federal level — and sendthem back to the states where they can be better run with less fraudand abuse. And number three, finally, bring some productivity andmanagement expertise to the federal government. I would cut theworkforce by 10 percent —

MR. : Good.

MR. ROMNEY: — and I want to say one more, and that is this. Iwant to make sure we link the compensation of our federal bureaucratsto that which exists in the private sector. People who are publicservants shouldn’t get more money than the taxpayers that they’reserving. (Cheers, applause.)

MR. HARWOOD: Does any candidate on this stage disagree — doesany candidate disagree and oppose extension of the payroll tax cut?

REP. BACHMANN: Say that again.

MR. HARWOOD: Does any candidate disagree with the speaker andGovernor Romney, and oppose the extension of the payroll tax cut?

MR. : Yeah.

MR. LIESMAN: Go ahead.

MR. HARWOOD: You oppose it?

REP. BACHMANN: I do. I opposed it when it was first proposed,because I knew that it would blow a hole of $111 billion in the SocialSecurity trust fund. President Obama clearly did this for politicalreasons. That’s why he did it. And so I had made that warning then,because we actually have already run Social Security in the red. Wearen’t just about to; we already have — six years ahead of time.

Now, consider the context. We have Baby Boomers in their peakearning years. This is when money should be flooding into the SocialSecurity trust fund. Instead, we’re already in the red. When we talkthis evening about how much trouble we’re in with spending, we’re in atremendous amount of trouble with spending. Just consider, we pay alot of taxes in this country: 2.2 trillion (dollars) is what we sendin to Washington. The problem is, we spent at the government level3.7 trillion (dollars). You started out trying to cut —

MR. HARWOOD: Well — out of time, Congresswoman.

Rick?

MR. SANTELLI: Governor Huntsman, our federal government —

MR. HUNTSMAN: Thank you. It was getting a little lonely overhere. (Laughter.)

MR. SANTELLI: Our federal government still owns 500 millionshares of GM stock; guarantees trillions — trillions with a “T” — dollars of mortgages.

They are basically the lender doing 90 percent of all the mortgageorigination right now.

And you consider the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve haspurchased 2.62 trillion (dollars) — again with a T — of Treasurysecurities, agency securities and mortgage securities.

If you were president, how would your administration and wouldyour administration reverse these obligations?

MR. HUNTSMAN: I would clean up the balance sheet. And let metell you what I worry about as much as anything else. We talk aboutfailed leadership; we certainly have failed leadership. PresidentObama had three years to get this economy going and to move us towardan environment that speaks to job growth, and he’s failed miserably.

But along with that, we have a real trust crisis in this countrybetween the American people and our institutions of power: Congress,the executive branch, Wall Street as well. There’s no trust. We’rerunning on empty.

And when a democracy begins to run on empty because of governmentholdings and bailouts and being involved in ways that are absolutelyinappropriate based on constitutional government and where we shouldbe, that results in a diminution of trust by the American people.We’ve got to raise that trust.

So let me just tell you what I think needs to be done in terms ofbringing our economy up. We’ve heard about all these great tax plans.I think I’m the only one on this stage who’s actually delivered a flattax. And I did that as governor of my state. I put forward aproposal that I think is right for this country in getting it back onits feet. The Wall Street Journal has come out — the most respectededitorial page economically maybe in the entire world — has come outand endorsed my plan, said it’s the very best of the bunch.

And it very simply calls out, just as I did as governor — so I’mnot sitting here talking about academic theory. I stand here as apractitioner; I’ve done it before.

I want to phase out the loopholes and the deductions on the individualside, phase out corporate welfare and subsidies on the corporate side —

MS. BARTIROMO: Sharon Epperson.

MR. HUNTSMAN: — and lower the rates, make us more competitive.That’s the kind of work that is realistic. It can get done inCongress and fire the engines of growth that are so desperately neededto boost trust in this country. (Applause.)

MS. BARTIROMO: Sharon Epperson.

SHARON EPPERSON (personal finance correspondent, CNBC): I wantto turn the attention to why we’re here on this campus and what manystudents are very interested in, and that is the fact that,Congressman Paul, right now we are looking at student loan debt thatis near $1 trillion. Americans owe more on student loans right nowthan credit cards, and the average debt for a college senior right nowis over $25,000. It’s obviously a very hot topic right here on thiscampus and with students across the country. Just listen to what theyhave to say.

(Video begins.)

MR. : Tuition rates have increased roughly three times thatof inflation over the last three decades.

MS. : More students have to take out loans or forgo college.

MS. : My generation is graduating with student debt levels atan unprecedented level.

(Video ends.)

MS. EPPERSON: So Congressman Paul, you’ve already talked aboutthe fact that you want to get rid of the Department of Education.You’ve said that you want to get rid of federal student loans. So howwould you make college more accessible, more affordable for thesestudents and students around the country?

REP. PAUL: Well, I think you’ve proved that the policy ofstudent loans is a total failure. (Chuckles.) I mean, a trilliondollars of debt? (Cheers, applause.) And it’s going to be dumped on

the taxpayer? And what have they gotten? A poorer education andcosts that have skyrocketed because of inflation. And they don’t havejobs. There’s nothing more dramatically failing than — than thatprogram.

So no, there is no authority in the Constitution for the federalgovernment to be dealing with education. We should get rid of theloan programs. We should get rid of the Department of Education andgive tax credits, if you have to, to help people. But the inflationis the big problem. It’s three times the rate that the governmentadmits that inflation is, and that is natural and normal.

When governments inflate the currency, it goes in the areas that thegovernment gets involved in. Housing, high — (inaudible). Stockmarket, skyrocketing prices. Medical care, skyrocketing. Education —

MS. EPPERSON: But how will they pay for it? How do they now payfor college if they’re not —

REP. PAUL: The way you pay for cell phones and computers.(Cheers, applause.) You have the marketplace there. There’scompetition. Quality goes up; the price goes down. Can you imaginewhat it would have been like if the Department of Homeland securitywas in charge of finding one person — or one company to make the cellphones? I mean, it would have been a total disaster.

So when the government gets involved in the delivery of anyservice, whether it’s education, medical care or housing, they causehigher prices, lower quality, create bubbles, and they get us thismess that we’re in. That’s why we have to eventually get — we haveto wise up and look at where the bubbles come from. It’s from theFederal Reserve. And we should start by auditing the Fed, and then weshould end the Fed. (Cheers, applause.)

MS. EPPERSON: Thank you, Congressman.

Speaker Gingrich, Congressman Paul just talked about a bubble.And there are many that are concerned that unlike other types of debt,student loan debt does not have the same type of consumer protections.It cannot be wiped out in bankruptcy, by law. There’s really littleway to refinance it. Are you worried about student loan debt becomingthe next government bailout?

MR. GINGRICH: You know, this is a good place to talk about thescale of change we’re about to live through. We’re at the end of thewelfare-state era of dependency, debt, distortion and dishonesty. Thestudent loan program began — when Lyndon Johnson announced it, Ithink it was a $15 million program. It’s an absurdity.

What does it do? It expands the ability of students to stay incollege longer because they don’t see the cost. It actually meansthey take fewer hours per semester, on average; it takes longer forthem to get through school; it allows them to tolerate tuitions goingup absurdly. By 2014, there will be one administrator for everyteacher on college campuses in the United States.

Now let me give you a contrast that’s very startling. TheCollege in (sic) the Ozarks is a work-study college. You cannot applyto it unless you need student aid, and they have no student aid. Youhave to work 20 hours a week during the year to pay tuition and books.You work 40 hours a week during the summer to pay for room and board.Ninety-two percent of the students graduate owing no debt. The 8percent who owe debt owe $5,000 because they bought a car.

Now, that is a model so different it will be culture shock forthe students of America to learn we actually expect them to go toclass, study, get out quickly, charge as little as possible, andemerge debt-free by doing the right things for four years. (Cheers,applause.)

MS. BARTIROMO: Governor Perry — Governor Perry, name the topprograms that you would cut in terms of long-term deficit reduction.Include Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and defense spending inthe order you see fit.

GOV. PERRY: Well, every one of those — and by the way, that wasthe Department of Energy I was reaching for a while ago. So — (laughter, cheers, applause).

Here’s what we have to look at as Americans, and it’s theentitlement programs that are eating up this huge amount of moneythat’s out there. And it’s also the spending, Congressman Paul. Andthose — when you look at Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, andthose unfunded liabilities I think are over $115 trillion just inthose three programs. Those are the places where you go where youhave to make the really hard decisions in this country. Those are the —

MS. BARTIROMO: So what is your order? And you didn’t mentiondefense spending.

GOV. PERRY: Well, obviously Social Security is one of thosewhere we either can go to a blended type of a program where we blendprice and wages and come up with a program and can save billions ofdollars there. But the people who are on Social Security, they needto understand something today.

It’s going to be there for them. Those that are working their waytowards Social Security, we’ve made a pledge to them that thoseindividuals are going to have those dollars there for them.

But the young people out there — who’s going to stand up for theyoung people in this country, those that are at the workforce today,and stand up and say: We’re going to transform this program so it’sgoing to be there for you?

MR. HARWOOD: Well, Governor —

GOV. PERRY: I will do that. I will stand up for the youngpeople in this country and put a program into place that will be therefor them. (Applause.)

MR. HARWOOD: Speaking of young people, quick answer: Do youagree with Congressman Paul that we should kill the federal studentloan program?

GOV. PERRY: I happen to think there are a substantial number ofways — matter of fact, I’ve called for a $10,000 (graduate ?) program —

MR. HARWOOD: But would you kill the federal student loanprogram?

GOV. PERRY: I don’t think the federal government should be inthe business of paying for programs and building up huge debt outthere. I think we need to look at how do you force these universities —

MR. HARWOOD: So get rid of them.

GOV. PERRY: — how do force these universities to be efficient?And one of the ways is that the governors who appoint the — the — the trustees — they step in and they basically say: Listen, you aregoing to have graduation rates that are moving upwards. You’re goingto have tuition that is moving down. You have to have control overthose boards of regents, if that’s how you do it, or the legislaturehas to have control.

But the bottom line is, we have to put powerful economic forcesinto place. And one of those is using our technology.

MR. HARWOOD: Thank you, Governor.

GOV. PERRY: We have to let our kids have the opportunity to getan education — through long-distance learning, for instance.

MS. BARTIROMO: That’s time.

MR. HARWOOD: Thank you, Governor.

MS. BARTIROMO: We’re going to take one more quick break. Whenwe return: final questions to the candidates.

MR. HARWOOD: Our CNBC Republican presidential debate will beright back. (Applause.)

(Announcements.)

MS. BARTIROMO: Welcome back to CNBC’s Republican presidentialdebate.

MR. HARWOOD: Mr. Cain, I want to ask you a question. Under aRepublican governor, the state of California hired a company in Chinato build major portions of the new San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge;created thousands of jobs in China. And California did that becauseit was cheaper. Is that smart purchasing by government in a globaleconomy, or is there something wrong with that?

MR. CAIN: There’s something wrong with that, which is why I haveproposed a bold plan — (laughter) — 9-9-9 — and allow me to explainhow, under 9-9-9, that that company would be more inclined to keep thebusiness here.

On the first nine, you take sales minus purchases, net exportsand capital. It levels the playing field between goods produced herein the United States and the rest of the world. It makes the UnitedStates much more competitive, and businesses won’t be tempted to buildoverseas, send jobs overseas.

The tax code is what sends jobs overseas. The tax code is whatcaused them to buy those articles from the Chinese. It starts withreplacing the tax code.

MR. HARWOOD: Governor Romney, was it a mistake for GovernorSchwarzenegger to hire the firm in China to build portions of thatbridge?

MR. ROMNEY: Well, that’s a — a long answer to that because what — what China is doing is not playing fairly by the — the rules thatexist in our — in the WTO and in the world. China is, on almostevery dimension, cheating. And we got to recognize that. (Applause.)It is good for America — it — it is good for America to have freetrade. It is good for us to be able to send our goods and servicesaround the world and vice versa.

MR. HARWOOD: So a good decision to build the bridge over the —

MR. ROMNEY: That — that is — that is normally a good thing.But China is playing by different rules. One, they’re stealingintellectual property. Number two, they’re hacking into our computersystems, both government and corporate, and they’re stealing by virtueof that as well from us. And finally, they’re manipulating theircurrency and, by doing so, holding down the price of Chinese goods andmaking sure their products are artificially lowly — low-priced. It’spredatory pricing. It’s killing jobs in America. If I’m president ofthe United States, I’m making it very clear: I love free trade; Iwant to open markets to free trade, but I will crack down on cheaterslike China. They simply cannot continue to steal our jobs. (Cheers,applause.)

MS. BARTIROMO: How do you crack down? How do you crack down,Governor? Are you — are you talking about new tariffs? How are youcracking down?

MR. ROMNEY: I’m sorry? Pardon?

MS. BARTIROMO: How would you crack down on China?

MR. ROMNEY: Well, number one, I would do something thispresident should have done a long time ago, which is to label China acurrency manipulator. And then I’d bring an action at the WTO levelcharging them with being a — a currency manipulator. Number three,where they have stolen intellectual property, where they have hackedinto computers and where their artificial pricing is causing theirgoods to have predatory levels of pricing, I would apply, ifnecessary, tariffs to make sure that they understand we’re willing toplay on a level playing field. We want — we have to have free trade.That’s essential for the — the — the functioning of a strongeconomy. But we cannot allow one nation to continue to flaunt therules and kill our jobs by allowing them to continue as they have.(Applause.)

MS. BARTIROMO: Speaker, in addition to that, so many companies — multinational companies want to try to get a foothold in China andsell to the billion and a half people there. They can only do jointventures. They are not getting a fair shake in terms of selling tothat 1 1/2 billion-person population.

How would you move the needle?

MR. GINGRICH: There are two things here, and let me say inadvance that I would yield in part to Governor Huntsman because hespeaks fluent Chinese, he’s worked in China, and he’s been theambassador. And I’d be curious to get his reaction.

But there are two different parts here. The problem withbuilding the bridge is simple. What is it about American regulations,American taxation, American labor costs and attitudes that makes itcheaper to go to China than to go to the United States? (Applause.)

Now we do it — (see ?), first of all, you’ve got to decide, howare we going to be more competitive and how are we going to be thelowest cost? And there’s a — there’s a new Boston consulting studythat says by 2015 South Carolina and Alabama will be cheaper than theChinese coastal provinces to manufacture in.

Second, in terms of dealing with China strategically, I thinkwe’re going to have to find ways to dramatically raise the pain levelfor the Chinese cheating, both in the hacking side but also on thestealing and intellectual property side. And I don’t think anybodytoday has a particularly good strategy for doing that.

MS. BARTIROMO: Time — 30 seconds. Jon Huntsman, you were theambassador to China. 30 seconds to respond.

MR. HUNTSMAN: Thirty seconds! For heaven’s sake. (Laughter.)Let me just say that we’ve had a 40-year relationship with China.It’s a — it’s a troublesome and problematic relationship; very, verycomplicated. But the bottom line is — I mean, you can give applauselines and you can kind of pander here and there. You start a tradewar if you start slapping tariffs randomly on Chinese products basedupon currency manipulation. I — that’s not a good idea.

But longer term, we’re just going to have to do business the waywe’ve always done. You sit down, you find solutions to the problems,and you move forward. It isn’t easy, it isn’t glamorous. It’sgrinding it out the way we’ve done it for 40 years. And for 40 moreyears, we’re going to have to do it the same way.

MR. HARWOOD: Are you saying Governor Romney’s pandering?

MR. HUNTSMAN: I’m saying that you can throw out applause linesand you can say that you’re going to slap on tariffs. You know, thatdoesn’t work — (inaudible) —

MR. HARWOOD: But you’re suggesting it. He’s standing righthere.

Would you say that he’s pandering on this issue?

MR. HUNTSMAN: Well, I’ve said it before; I think that thatpolicy is one of simply pandering, just throwing a tariff on for thesake of an artificially valued currency, which is, in fact, the case.

But here’s what they do in response. They say: You have anartificially valued currency too, with those quantitative easingprograms, you too are manipulating your currency, and we’re going toslap something on your products. And before long, you have a tradewar. (Applause.)

But let me tell you —

MR. HARWOOD: Governor Romney, are you pandering?

MR. ROMNEY: Look, I’ve been in business all my life, 25 years.I consulted to businesses around the world. I’ve been in businesswhere we competed around the world. I understand free trade. I likefree trade. I know that America can compete with anyone in the world.Newt is right about our capacity to manufacture and compete heads-onversus the Chinese.

But I’ve also seen predatory pricing. I’ve seen people pricetheir goods at an artificial level for an extended period of time suchthat they can drive other people out of business. And then when theother people are out of business, they can raise their prices. That’swhat China’s doing by holding down the value of their currency.

Let the currencies float. If the U.S. currency, for instance, isbeing inflated, let it float. Let us float. Let us have a marketmechanism determine the value of our respective currencies, as opposedto the Chinese government continuing to put an advantage there fortheir producers. This is no longer a time for us just to sit back andsay we’re going to let them steal our jobs.

MS. BARTIROMO: Congresswoman Bachmann, weigh in here. How doyou open the markets in China for American companies?

REP. BACHMANN: Well, the Chinese have been bad actors. Recentlywe’ve found out that they’ve dumped counterfeit computer chips here inthe United States. We’re using some of those counterfeit computerchips in the Pentagon in some of our weapon systems. This hasnational security implications.

We also found out that the Chinese just finished building 3,000miles of underground tunnels where they’re housing some nuclearweapons. There’s some very real consequences to the United Statesoverspending to such an extent that we’re in hock to them over atrillion dollars.

We’ve sent so much interest money over to the Chinese to pay our debtsoff that we effectively built their aircraft carrier. And by 2015, wewill be sending so much interest money over, we will be paying for theentire People’s Liberation Army of China, the number-one employer ofthe — of the world.

What we need to do is stop enriching China with our money. Andwe do that by stop borrowing from them, by stop spending money that wedon’t have. (Applause.)

MR. CRAMER: Mr. Cain, I want to go to you with this question.This does not lend itself to 9-9-9 or any other number, OK?

MR. CAIN: I’m sorry, I didn’t hear the first part.

MR. CRAMER: This question does not lend itself to 9-9-9 or anyother (thing ?). This is our final word, OK? And it comes from ourviewers. And it is all about restoring trust and faith in our marketsand in our way of life.

I’m going to be quoting Joanne Kornbleat (ph). She emails us;she says: Our stock market has turned into a casino, with high-frequency computerized trading comprising 70 percent of alltransactions, and hedge-fund speculation resulting in volatile marketswings. Before privatizing Social Security, how would you make thestock market safer for individual investors?

And Mr. Cain — just simple — how do we restore faith in themarkets for the little guy?

MR. CAIN: The first thing we do is restore faith in business byproviding certainty so businesses can grow. A lot of the volatilityis being driven by uncertainty. Businesses are uncertain about whatthe health care rules are going to be. They don’t know what the taxrules are going to be. All of the uncertainty has this economystagnated. So the way you restore that: Grow this economy.

That’s job one. Many of the things we talked about up here todaystarts with growing the economy. And that’s why we’ve got to use abold plan — I won’t mention it — (laughter) — in order to grow theeconomy. (Laughter, applause.)

MR. CRAMER: But when the economy was growing great, sir, therewas no trust. You know, when the economy going great, people weregetting ripped off, and there was insider trading. When the economywas going great, people were getting hurt in the stock market.

Forget the economy.

MR. CAIN: Jim —

MR. CRAMER: Talk about the way the market’s regulated.

MR. CAIN: Jim, Jim, Jim, I — I feel your pain. Look, here’swhat I’m saying. Here’s —

MR. CRAMER: It (isn’t a feeling ?). (How about ?) the 90million people who’ve got money in the market — (inaudible)?

MR. CAIN: No, Jim, you got to provide certainty in the — you — in this environment, so businesses will grow. They have been in amode of survive. They need to be in a mode of grow. That’s what wegot to do first.

And I agree with some of the others who said we got to repealDodd-Frank. There’s three big things wrong with Dodd-Frank, which iswhy it needs to be a top priority to repeal. Number one, it doesn’tprovide oversight for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and we all agreedthat that was the catalyst for the meltdown in 2008.

The two other biggest problems with Dodd-Frank: Dodd and Frank.(Laughter, cheers, applause.)

MS. BARTIROMO: Governor Perry, Governor Perry, same question toyou — same question to you and Congressman Ron Paul: How do yourestore faith in the public markets?

GOV. PERRY: Well, we have the regulations in place and we hadthe regulations in place well before the meltdowns occurred. We havea culture in Washington, D.C., where these corporate lobbyists havethese cozy relationships with the people that they’re regulating. And

— and we have to have leadership in this country that not onlyrecognizes that but demands that those individuals who are working forus are in those agencies, whether it’s in the stock market or whetherit’s at — at Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, and when there areindividuals who are breaking the laws, who are pushing the bounds,that there are clear efforts that are made to take those people eitherout of those jobs or prosecute them for criminality, one of the two.

That has to happen. And then — and you can pass legislation, likeyou said, until the world looks level. But you’ve got to have men andwomen who are committed to the laws of this country and a presidentthat will push his administration to make sure that they’re done.(Applause.)

MR. HARWOOD: Congressman Paul, Governor Perry was just talkingabout the culture of Washington. His critics in the state of Texas — you’re a congressman from Texas — say crony capitalism is what he’spracticed as governor. Are they right?

REP. PAUL: I haven’t analyzed it well enough to call him a cronyor not. So no, I — I — I — I don’t know the details of that. Butthere is a lot of crony capitalism going on in this country. And thathas to be distinguished from real capitalism because that’s — thisoccupation stuff on Wall Street — if you’re — if you’re going aftercrony capitalism, I’m all for it. And those are the people whobenefit from contracts from government, benefits from the FederalReserve, benefits from all the bailouts. They don’t deservecompassion. They deserve taxation, or they don’t — they deserve tohave all their benefits removed.

But crony capitalism isn’t when somebody makes money and theyproduce a product. That is very important. We have to distinguishthe two. And unfortunately, I think some people mix that. But this,to me, is so vital that we recognize what crony — what capitalism isversus crony capitalism. And believe me, when you have aninflationary environment and all this speculation and all thatbailouts do to the monetary system, believe me, you’d get a majorityof them (to ?) crony capitalism. And that’s why we’re facing thiscrisis today. (Applause.)

MS. BARTIROMO: We want to thank all of you tonight. That is allthe time we have for CNBC’s Republican presidential debate. We thankall of the candidates for being here tonight and spending the time andputting their plans forward. We hope you now have a betterunderstanding of where each of them stand on the economy, jobs andyour money.

MR. HARWOOD: We’d also like to thank our partners, the Michigan Republican Party, and all of the Grizzlies of Oakland University. (Cheers, applause.)

Campaign Buzz November 9, 2011: CNBC “Your Money, Your Vote” GOP Republican Presidential Debate at Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan — Rick Perry Experiences Oops Moment — Herman Cain Addresses Allegations

CAMPAIGN 2012

By Bonnie K. Goodman

Ms. Goodman is the Editor of History Musings. She has a BA in History & Art History & a Masters in Library and Information Studies from McGill University, and has done graduate work in history at Concordia University. Ms. Goodman has also contributed the overviews, and chronologies in History of American Presidential Elections, 1789-2008, 4th edition, edited by Gil Troy, Fred L. Israel, and Arthur Meier Schlesinger to be published by Facts on File, Inc. in late 2011.

CAMPAIGN BUZZ 2012

Fabrizio Costantini for The New York Times

Mitt Romney, Herman Cain, and Gov. Rick Perry of Texas at the Republican presidential debate on Wednesday. More Photos »

IN FOCUS: REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES DEBATE IN MICHIGAN

CNBC’s “Your Money, Your Vote: The Republican Presidential Debate” Live from Oakland University in Rochester, MI

CNBC and the Michigan Republican Party presidential economic debate at Oakland University

“You bet I’m going to continue on. Going through that long list of government agencies is really what this campaign’s all about. I’m human like everyone else. This campaign is about ideas. It’s not about who’s the slickest debater or whether anyone’s made a mistake or not. We’re all going to make mistakes.” — Gov. Rick Perry in an interview on NBC’s “Today”

“Commerce, Education… The third one, I can’t… Sorry. Oops.” — Gov. Rick Perry

“The American people deserve better than someone being tried in the court of public opinion based on unfounded accusations. I value my character and my integrity more than anything else.” — Herman Cain

“Herman Cain is the person to respond to these accusations. He just did. And the people in this room and around the country can make their own determination.” — Mitt Romney

“I think people understand that I’m a man of steadiness and constancy.” — Mitt Romney

  • CNBC ‘Your Money, Your Vote’ Republican Presidential Debate: The following is a transcript of the CNBC “Your Money, Your Vote” Republican presidential debate at Oakland University in Auburn Hills, Mich, as provided by Federal News Service…. – NYT, 11-10-11
  • Live Analysis: G.O.P. Debate in Michigan: The Republican candidates for president gathered in Michigan tonight for a 90-minute exchange meant to focus on economic issues…. – NYT, 11-9-11
  • Live Blogging the Michigan Debate: The debate, to be broadcast nationally by CNBC, will be followed three days later by a gathering in South Carolina, where another face-off is supposed to keep the candidates talking about foreign policy questions. … – NYT, 11-9-11
  • Live Blogging the GOP Debate WSJ, 11-9-11
  • The CNBC presidential debate live blog WaPo, 11-9-11
  • GOP Debate Live Updates: Will Herman Cain’s harassment scandal sink his chances at the presidency? Who’ll be the new anti-Romney? The candidates takes the stage in Rochester, Michigan for the CNBC GOP debate…. – Newsweek, 11-9-11
  • Live: GOP candidates debate economic fixes: We ‘re live blogging the GOP presidential debate on the economy, being held at Oakland University in Rochester, Mich. CNBC is broadcasting the faceoff, with John Harwood and Maria Bartiromo moderating. … – USA Today, 11-9-11
  • Live blog: 8 Republican contenders kick off debate at Oakland U.: Republican presidential candidates are shown at a Republican presidential debate in Las Vegas. GOP candidates are slated to debate again at Oakland University on Wednesday in a forum sponsored by CNBC… – Detroit Free Press, 11-9-11
  • The Role of Regulation in Holding Back Business: Fact-checking Republican candidates’ claims from Wednesday night’s debate that regulatory uncertainty is holding back companies…. – NYT, 11-9-11
  • GOP candidates: Fix US economy or fail like Europe: United in agreement for once, Republican presidential rivals warned forcefully Wednesday night the United States could be doomed to the same sort of financial crisis that is afflicting Europe unless federal deficits are … – AP, 11-9-11
  • Cain denounces sex allegations during US debate: Herman Cain defended his character during a Republican presidential debate on Wednesday and said Americans “deserve better” than the controversy over sexual harassment allegations against him. … – Reuters, 11-9-11
  • CNBC presidential debate: Winners and losers: The 10th Republican presidential debate — this one from Oakland University in Michigan — is over. (The eight Republican candidates for president debated at Oakland University in Michigan Wednesday night.)…. – WaPo, 11-9-11
  • Romney rides high, Perry flops in debate: Mitt Romney rejected charges that he’s a flip-flopper in a Michigan debate on Wednesday night, and Texas Gov. Rick Perry took a flop of his own. Romney said he’s a man of “steadiness and constancy” and insisted that he’s been consistent…. – MarketWatch, 11-9-11
  • GOP debate: Romney on housing policy, plus palm oil prices: Something’s been missing from all the Republican presidential debates this fall. It certainly hasn’t been fireworks among the candidates, which headlined the historic clash in Las Vegas; it hasn’t been unclassy behavior by audience … – WaPo, 11-9-11
  • Live blog: GOP candidates face off in Michigan: The GOP presidential candidates just finished their ninth nationally televised debate of the year and a gaffe by Texas Gov. Rick Perry sticks out. Perry, who has said he’s not a good debater, stumbled when he tried to name … – USA Today, 11-9-11
  • CNBC debate: Jon Huntsman balks on Mitt Romney attack: Jon Huntsman stopped short of going after Mitt Romney directly at the CNBC debate Wednesday, even as the CNBC moderators baited him to call the GOP frontrunner’s China policies “pandering.” After Romney finished an extended attack on Chinese trade … – Politico, 11-9-11
  • Michigan debate: Candidates slamming China: The issue led off with Herman Cain, who said that there is something wrong with companies sending jobs to China because it’s cheaper, and used it to pivot to the ‘9-9-9’ plan without going into details about how he’d fix it. … – Politico, 11-9-11
  • GOP hopefuls say let Europe solve debt on its own: Republican presidential hopefuls agreed Wednesday night that Europe’s countries should rise or fall on their own without any American bailout and warned that failing to cut budget deficits at home will doom the US economy… – AP, 11-9-11
  • FACT CHECK: Romney’s clunker claim on auto bailout: Debating in Michigan, where the bailout was popular and credited with helping to save automakers, Republican candidates struggled at times to explain why…. – CBS News, 11-9-11
  • Rick Perry fails to remember what agency he’d get rid of in GOP debate: In a cringe-worthy moment during Wednesday’s Republican presidential debate, Texas Gov. Rick Perry couldn’t remember the third federal agency he has pledged to eliminate. Perry was discussing his jobs plan and his flat tax plan when he said…. – CBS News, 11-9-11
  • ‘Oops’ From Perry at Republican Presidential Debate: A day after an embarrassing stumble, Gov. Rick Perry of Texas said he had no intention of leaving the race, despite stinging G.O.P. criticism…. – NYT, 11-9-11
  • Rick Perry ‘oops’ debate moment: Has it done him in?: Rick Perry floundered during Wednesday night’s GOP presidential debate and has analysts wondering if it’s all over for his campaign. Some financial supporters are having second thoughts…. – CS Monitor, 11-10-11
  • Rick Perry’s ‘Oops’ in Republican debate could have long-lasting implications for his campaign: The Texas governor suffered from a particularly painful moment in Wednesday night’s debate, in which he couldn’t recall the third agency of the federal government that he would like to cut…. – WaPo, 11-9-11
  • For Perry, a Cringe-Worthy Gaffe: In the middle of an answer on his plans for the tax code, he turned to Ron Paul and proudly proclaimed that he would eliminate three federal agencies: Commerce, Education and … um. … – NYT, 11-9-11
  • Will ‘Oops’ be Perry’s campaign epitaph?: A visibly flustered Rick Perry was reduced to “Oops” after a painful 45 seconds of trying to remember the name of the third of three federal agencies that he would cut at a Republican presidential debate in Rochester, Michigan, on Wednesday. … – CNN, 11-9-11
  • Rick Perry on epic debate lapse: ‘I stepped in it, man’: Rick Perry made a rare appearance in the media spin room moments after Wednesday’s Republican debate, and was mobbed by reporters asking him if he could recover. An hour earlier, the Texas governor had struggled to name the three … – LAT, 11-9-11
  • Rick Perry’s brain freeze at the CNBC debate: Rick Perry just had a bizarre brain freeze where he couldn’t name the third agency he would want to cut as part of his revamp of the federal government…. – Politico, 11-9-11
  • Rick Perry fails to remember what agency he’d get rid of in GOP debate: Texas governor stumbles when trying to remember the third government agency he said he’d eliminate as president Read more by Kevin Hechtkopf on CBS News’ Political Hotsheet…. – CBS News, 11-10-11
  • Big Perry goof defines debate, may damage campaign: Rick Perry, who has proposed to eliminate three federal departments if he is elected president, couldn’t name all three during Tuesday night’s economic policy debate in Michigan. The Texas governor said he would abolish the federal Department of … – Houston Chronicle, 11-9-11
  • A look at key moments in the GOP debate: Key moments in Wednesday night’s GOP presidential debate: ___ Perry Flub: Texas Gov. Rick Perry struggled to remember the names of the three federal agencies that he would eliminate if elected president. … – AP, 11-9-11
  • Rick Perry’s ‘Oops’ at GOP Debate: In case you missed it, here’s the moment in the CNBC debate among GOP presidential candidates that set the political world abuzz Wednesday night. As Texas Gov. Rick Perry said afterwards, “I stepped in it.” Actually, it seemed more…. – WSJ, 11-9-11
  • Perry’s Key Moment in Debate: a Memory Lapse: Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s debate performance Wednesday night may be long remembered for what the candidate didn’t manage to say, rather than what he did. Mr. Perry set out to detail three federal agencies he’d eliminate if elected … – WSJ, 11-9-11
  • Perry: Bad. Cain? Worse. Another night at the circus with the GOP: What can you say about a debate in which one candidate had perhaps the worst moment ever in a presidential debate — Rick Perry’s brain freeze about the third of the three government agencies he wants to eliminate — and he didn’t…. – WaPo, 11-10-11
  • Rick Perry’s ‘Oops’ in Republican debate could have long-lasting implications: Rick Perry wants to get rid of three agencies of the federal government. Just don’t ask him to identify the third one. In easily the most painful moment of an already uneven set of debate performances, the Texas governor on Wednesday night fumbled … – WaPo, 11-9-11
  • Perry’s Debate Flub Not Necessarily Kiss of Death: GOP presidential candidate Rick Perry’s memory lapse at Wednesday night’s CNBC debate will go down as one of the worst debate flubs in history, but it may not mean the campaign kiss of death that the Twitterverse quickly proclaimed it to be.
    Despite the national audience of televised debates, a solitary sound bite is rarely the deciding factor between winning the nomination and foundering into failure.
    A 43-second clip that exemplifies one of the candidate’s biggest weaknesses, however, could deal a deathly blow to an already struggling campaign, said long-time political consultant Phil Noble
    “I don’t think this in and of itself is going to kill him, but I think that it could become the symbol of what kills him,” Noble said. “If he continues to reinforce this message of not being ready, of not being bright enough or smart enough, then this becomes the symbol of that larger message.”… – ABC News, 11-10-11
  • Big Perry goof defines debate, may damage campaign: Rick Perry, who has proposed to eliminate three federal departments if he is elected president, couldn’t name all three during Tuesday night’s economic policy debate in Michigan…. – Houston Chronicle, 11-9-11
  • Its Debate Night in America: The Dallas Cowboys aren’t the only Texans who have trouble in the second half. Rick Perry has repeatedly performed worse in the second half of presidential debates than in the opening portion. Tonight’s “oops” moment may have topped them all. … – Houston Chronicle, 11-9-11
  • Perry stumbles, Cain deflects in GOP debate at Oakland U: Texas Gov. Rick Perry stumbled just after GOP presidential debate’s midway point Wednesday night when he told the audience he planned to eliminate three federal departments when he arrives in Washington DC as president, but was unable to … – The Detroit News, 11-9-11
  • Pundits Pile On Perry: Larry Sabato: “To my memory, Perry’s forgetfulness is the most devastating moment of any modern primary debate.” Mona Charen: “That was the greatest flame-out I’ve ever witnessed in a debate.” Rich Lowry: “That might be the most uncomfortable moment … – Time, 11-10-11

“Any time you’re standing in front of however many million people we were and you have a loss of train of thought, sure. It impacts you. But the fact is one error is not going to make or break a campaign.” — Rick Perry on CBS’ “The Early Show.”

“It’s hard to overstate how badly damaged Rick Perry is after the debate, one in which he overall performed more or less well – save for about 50 seconds. That was how long it took the Texas governor to concede he couldn’t recall the third federal agency he’d eliminate as president.” — Maggie Haberman, Politco.com

“To my memory, Perry’s forgetfulness is the most devastating moment of any modern primary debate.” — Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics

“I thought Perry would get better after his first debate. I was wrong. I thought he couldn’t do worse than his last few debate performances. I was wrong. His blank moment on the three cabinet agencies was very uncomfortable to watch. It could happen to any of us, but having it happen to him, on this stage, was devastating.” — Rich Lowry, editor of the conservative National Review

  • Takes from the Michigan Mash-Up: AP: “Republican presidential hopeful Rick Perry says he would eliminate three federal agencies. Just don’t ask him to name them.” Politico: “The Rick Perry comeback hit a potentially disastrous snag Wednesday night, as the Texas governor again froze on … – Time, 11-9-11
  • Five things to watch for in GOP debate CNN, 11-9-11
  • Republican debate: Five key questions: Another day, another debate. Only a dozen or so more to go. But only Rick Perry is counting. The GOP field takes the stage tonight for a CNBC debate in the oh-so-important state of Michigan…. – WaPo, 11-9-11
  • Republican presidential debate in Michigan likely to focus on Herman Cain NY Daily News, 11-9-11
  • Romney on home-state territory for tonight’s GOP debate in Michigan: Mitt Romney returns to his home state today, where he was greeted this morning with full-page ads criticizing his position on the auto bailout and where he will be the focus of his seven rivals tonight on the debate … – Boston Globe, 11-9-11
  • Republicans to debate in jobs-starved Michigan: Rampant foreclosures, high unemployment and a volatile auto industry create a grim backdrop as the Republican presidential candidates debate in a state hit hard by the 2009 recession and longer-term … – MSNBC, 11-9-11
  • Entering the elimination round: The 2012 Republican primary is about to enter the elimination round. When the GOP presidential candidates meet in Michigan Wednesday for a CNBC debate on the economy, they’ll no longer be … – Politico, 11-9-11
  • Cain looks to move past controversy at US debate: Republican Herman Cain will try to move past an escalating sexual harassment controversy on Wednesday during a US presidential debate on economic issues held in the hard-hit manufacturing state of Michigan…. – Reuters, 11-9-11
  • Debate forum may benefit Rick Perry: Since he has decided to risk more presidential debates, Wednesday’s economy-focused forum may look like good medicine for Gov. Rick Perry’s ailing campaign. It gives him a stage in an economically battered state to talk about Texas … – Houston Chronicle, 11-9-11
  • Michigan GOP chair: Herman Cain’s sexual harassment problems shouldn’t be an issue: Michigan Republican Party Chairman Bobby Schostak says he doesn’t expect Herman Cain’s troubles over claims of sexual harassment will play much of a role in tonight’s GOP presidential debate. The focus of the televised debate, sponsored by CNBC…. – Dallas Morning News, 11-9-11
  • Stage set for GOP debate at Oakland University: Workers at Oakland University put the finishing touches on the CNBC stage for tonight’s Republican presidential debate. Herman Cain, inset, is battling allegations of sexual misconduct. … – Detroit Free Press, 11-9-11
  • Detroit Debate: Tests for Romney And Perry, Opportunity For Gingrich: The Republican primary debate in Motor City Wednesday night is the first one after a break of more than three weeks for the GOP candidates. The last debate was on Oct. 18 in Las Vegas. You remember. “Anderson! … – Huff Post, 11-9-11

Campaign Recap September 26, 2011: Herman Cain & Mitt Romney Beat Rick Perry in Florida & Michigan Straw Polls — GOP Candidates Debate in the Fox News / Google GOP Republican Presidential Debate

CAMPAIGN 2012

By Bonnie K. Goodman

Ms. Goodman is the Editor of History Musings. She has a BA in History & Art History & a Masters in Library and Information Studies from McGill University, and has done graduate work in history at Concordia University. Ms. Goodman has also contributed the overviews, and chronologies in History of American Presidential Elections, 1789-2008, 4th edition, edited by Gil Troy, Fred L. Israel, and Arthur Meier Schlesinger to be published by Facts on File, Inc. in late 2011.

CAMPAIGN BUZZ 2012

Chip Litherland for The New York Times

STATS & POLLS

Republican Presidential Candidates: Primaries 2012 — NYT

Democratic Nominee 2012: President Barack Obama’s Official Reelection Campaign Website — BarackObama.com

Republican National Committee

Democratic National Committee

  • Gallup Poll: Election 2012 — Track GOP Contender’s Images Week by Week — Generic Ballot Gallup
  • Gallup: Presidential Job Approval Gallup
  • Gallup Daily: Obama Job Approval: Each result is based on a three-day rolling average Gallup
  • Poll Watch: Polls and Related Articles From The New York Times NYT
  • Perry present favorite among Florida Republicans: A poll released early Thursday indicates Florida Republicans slightly prefer Perry over Romney in their party’s battle to find a nominee to face President Barack Obama next year. Perry was favored by 28 percent of the 374 registered Republican voters…. – AP, 9-22-11
  • Romney dominates NH poll, well ahead of Perry: Mitt Romney may be tightening his grip on New Hampshire voters, despite tremendous buzz surrounding Texas Gov. Rick Perry in the nation’s first presidential primary state and elsewhere.
    The former Massachusetts governor now leads his nearest rival, Texas Rep. Ron Paul, by 27 points among likely New Hampshire voters, according to a Suffolk University-7News poll released Wednesday night. Perry finished far back, earning 8 percent compared with Romney’s 41 percent. Paul took 14 percent and former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman received 10 percent to round out the top four finishers…. – AP, 9-21-11
  • Is Michele Bachmann’s campaign cratering?: A new poll shows Michele Bachmann falling back in the Republican field – and that her problems extend beyond front-runner Rick Perry siphoning off her supporters…. – CS Monitor, 9-20-11
  • Poll: Perry, Romney far ahead of field as SC looms: The Winthrop Poll shows Perry as the first choice among 30 percent of Republican voters; Romney is close behind at 27 percent. That’s within the 4 percentage-point margin of sampling error for the 596 GOP or Republican-leaning voters called between Sept. 11 and Sept. 18.
    Businessman Herman Cain had 7 percent, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin 6 percent and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich 5 percent.
    Reps. Michelle Bachmann and Ron Paul, both tea party favorites, were at 4 percent…. AP, 9-20-11

POLLS: MITT ROMNEY WINS MICHIGAN STRAW POLL OVER RICK PERRY

Romney Wins Michigan Straw Poll: Mr. Romney won 51 percent of the vote in the straw poll, far surpassing Gov. Rick Perry of Texas, who finished second with 17 percent. Herman Cain, the former chief executive of Godfather’s Pizza, was third…. – NYT, 9-25-11

  • Romney bests Perry in Michigan straw poll: Michigan native Mitt Romney rolled over Texas Gov. Rick Perry and the rest of his Republican presidential rivals in a Michigan straw poll on Sunday, reinforcing a favorite son status that could make it tough for anyone else to win the state’s GOP primary.
    It was the second day of bad news for Perry, who lost to businessman Herman Cain in a Florida straw poll Saturday before heading to the Mackinac Republican Leadership Conference in Michigan.
    Perry’s second-place finish in Florida came just days after he faltered in a debate in Orlando, Fla. Romney came in third there, although he isn’t officially competing in straw polls.
    More than 1,600 elected officials and party regulars attended Michigan’s three-day conference, and state Republican Chairman Bobby Schostak said it’s no surprise that the former Massachusetts governor did so well in Sunday’s poll…. – CBS News, 9-25-11
  • On Home Turf, Romney Prevails in Straw Poll: Mitt Romney didn’t disappoint on his home turf this weekend, receiving 51 percent of the votes at the Michigan Straw Poll, a wide victory over Texas Gov. Rick Perry who garnered just 17 percent. Third place in the straw poll went to Herman Cain…. – ABC News, 9-25-11
  • Mitt Romney wins Michigan straw poll, Rick Perry a distant second: Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney says he isn’t competing in any straw polls — not even the one this weekend on the island where he spent summers as a boy, where pictures of his father adorn the Grand Hotel and where George Romney’s legacy as a popular governor hung over the proceedings.
    To say Romney was the heavy favorite at the biennial Mackinac Republican Leadership Conference would be an understatement. And he did not disappoint, winning the straw poll with 51 percent of the 681 votes cast. His top rival for the nomination, Texas Gov. Rick Perry, finished second with 17 percent.
    For Romney, the victory was especially sweet considering that Perry flew here — a remote island on Lake Huron, accessible only by ferry and where visitors ride bicycles or horse-drawn carriages because automobiles are banned — to deliver a luncheon speech Saturday to conference attendees. Romney was here, too, and gave his speech during Saturday night’s dinner program.
    Former Godfather’s Pizza chief executive Herman Cain, who won the Florida straw poll Saturday, finished third in Michigan with 9 percent, according to the results announced Sunday morning. He was followed by Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tex.) with 8 percent; Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), 4 percent; former House speaker Newt Gingrich, 4 percent; former senator Rick Santorum, 3 percent; and former Utah governor Jon Huntsman Jr., 2 percent.
    The straw poll, organized and sponsored by National Journal Hotline and the National Association of Home Builders, surveyed the party leaders, donors and activists who attended this weekend’s conference.
    The poll also surveyed voters’ favorites to be the GOP vice presidential nominee. Sen. Marco Rubio (Fla.) easily won, with 23 percent of the 481 votes cast in that category. Cain finished second with 14 percent, followed by Gingrich with 13 percent and Bachmann with 12 percent…. – WaPo, 9-25-11

PRESIDENCY 5: HERMAN CAIN WINS FLORIDA STRAW POLL OVER RICK PERRY

Herman Cain Wins Florida Straw Poll: Herman Cain, the former chief executive of Godfather’s Pizza, won the Florida straw poll today, defeating second-place Rick Perry…. – NYT, 9-24-121

FLORIDA STRAW POLL RESULTS:
In a stunning upset Saturday, Herman Cain won Florida’s Presidency 5 straw poll, a vote of 2,657 Republican activists that in past years has predicted the party nominee. Here are the results:

Herman Cain: 37 percent
Rick Perry: 15 percent
Mitt Romney: 14 percent
Rick Santorum: 10.9 percent
Ron Paul: 10.4 percent
Newt Gingrich: 8 percent
Jon Huntsman: 2.3 percent
Michelle Bachmann: 1.5 percent

“Folks, this is what you call momentum. The Herman Cain train is picking up steam.” — Herman Cain, the former CEO of Godfather’s Pizza

“Floridians and voters nationally want a candidate who is clear on the issues and talks honestly about the future. Not someone who takes multiple sides of an issue and changes views every election season. Today’s vote demonstrates that Floridians are energized and ready to help get America working again.” — Rick Perry

“Cain won, we still have work to do. It’s his day. The conservative message won today. We’ve been in this race for five weeks. We’re going to continue campaigning hard….
It’s more of what happened to Mitt Romney. He’s not going to be crowned president of the United States. He’s going to have to work for it. And after five and a half years he once again got rejected in a key state in the Republican primary process.” — Rick Perry spokesman Mark Miner

  • Cain upsets Perry in Florida Republican straw poll: Former pizza executive Herman Cain surprised rival Rick Perry with an upset victory on Saturday in a nonbinding Republican presidential straw poll in Florida, dealing a disappointing loss to the Texas governor two days after a shaky debate performance.
    Perry, leading in the polls for the Republican presidential nomination in 2012, had needed a victory in the key test of strength in a crucial state to salve the wounds left over from a debate with his rivals on Thursday in which he struggled.
    Instead, former Godfather’s Pizza executive Cain, who is far behind the two top-tier candidates Perry and Mitt Romney, won with 37 percent of 2,657 votes cast.
    Perry was a distant second at 15 percent, just ahead of Romney, who won 14 percent despite not participating in the poll. Further back were Rick Santorum, Ron Paul, Newt Gingrich, Jon Huntsman and Michele Bachmann.
    Florida’s straw poll is a nonbinding popularity poll and is significant only in terms of showing a candidate’s strength in the state. The state contests to determine the Republican nominee do not start until early next year.
    The Perry camp shrugged off the results…. – Reuters, 9-24-11
  • Cain’s Moment in the Sunshine State: The former chief executive of Godfather’s Pizza has hit his rhetorical stride in the Republican contest, whipping up crowds of true-believers everywhere he goes. And he was rewarded on Saturday with a decisive win in the straw poll…. – NYT, 9-25-11
  • Herman Cain upsets Rick Perry in Florida straw poll: Rick Perry in a straw ballot of Florida Republican activists Saturday. The vote has no bearing on the choice of a 2012 nominee but, along with recent campaign events, is likely to increase the chances that the Republican presidential contest will … – LAT, 9-24-11
  • Cain wins Florida straw poll, finishing far ahead of Perry: Businessman Herman Cain won the Florida GOP presidential straw poll in a major surprise on Saturday, finishing well ahead of Texas Gov. Rick Perry…. – WaPo, 9-24-11
  • Perry on Straw Poll: “I have all my hopes on Florida”: In an effort to regain momentum after Thursday’s debate performance that left many Republicans here disappointed, GOP front-runner Governor Rick Perry lashed out at his rivals who have decided to skip Florida’s P5 presidential straw poll– a forum which has now become a significant test for Perry’s campaign for the White House.
    “There are a number of candidates who have spurned Florida’s straw poll and I think that’s a big mistake,” Perry said to a group of several hundred GOP delegates who had gathered to hear him speak at an Orlando breakfast event.
    “I have all my hopes on Florida,” Perry added.
    The poll is voted on by a convention of over 3,500 GOP delegates from across the battleground state…. – Fox News, 9-24-11
  • Herman Cain wins Florida straw poll in stunning victory; Perry in deep trouble: From the bottom of the polls to the top of the pack, businessman Herman Cain won the Republican Party of Florida’s nationally watched presidential straw poll Saturday in a sign that frontrunner Rick Perry is in deep trouble.
    Cain’s victory with 37 percent of the vote was a major defeat for Perry, the frontrunner in Florida and national polls, who garnered only 15 percent after wooing the nearly 3,000 party faithful with a free breakfast and mailers.
    The vote also showed how soft Republican support is for Mitt Romney, who came in third with 14 percent. Unlike Perry, though, he avoided schmoozing the GOP voters, called delegates. Miami Herald, 9-24-11
  • Can Herman Cain keep up the momentum after his Florida straw poll win?: Herman Cain is basking in the Sunday glow of his surprise win Saturday in the Florida straw poll. But he lags in national polls, and his Florida win may draw sharper scrutiny of his positions…. – CS Monitor, 9-25-11

POLITICAL QUOTES & SPEECHES

Mitt Romney: Speeches & News — Full Text & Transcripts mittromney.com

Rick Perry: Speeches & News — Full Text & Transcripts rickperry.org

Ron Paul: Speeches & News — Full Text & Transcripts ronpaul2012.com

Herman Cain: Speeches & News — Full Text & Transcripts hermancain.com

Michele Bachmann: Speeches & News — Full Text & Transcripts michelebachmann.com

Newt Gingrich: Speeches & News — Full Text & Transcripts newt.org

Jon Huntsman: Speeches & News — Full Text & Transcripts jon2012.com

Rick Santorum: Speeches & News — Full Text & Transcripts ricksantorum.com

  • Fox News-Google Republican Presidential Debate: The following is a transcript of the Republican presidential debate in Orlando, Fla…. – NYT, 9-23-11

IN FOCUS: FOX NEWS / GOOGLE GOP REPUBLICAN DEBATE IN ORLANDO, FLORIDA

GOP DEBATE EXCERPTS — QUOTES

Full Text Campaign Buzz September 22, 2011: Fox News / Google GOP Republican Presidential Debate — Rick Perry Under Attack Goes on the Offensive — Especially Against Chief Rival Mitt Romney — Social Security, Healthcare Main Issues Fox News, 9-22-11

Small business: Gov. Rick Perry: “What we’ve done in Texas over the course of the last decade is to lower that tax burden on small-business men and women, have a regulatory climate that is fair and predictable and a sweeping tort reform system that we passed in 2003. … That’s the way you get the government off the back of small businesses, and that’s the way you free up those small-business entrepreneurs when they know they can risk their capital and have a chance to get a return on their investments.
“If it will work in the state of Texas, it will work in Washington, D.C. And that’s exactly what I’m going to bring when I go there in November, excuse me, in January of 2013.”

States’ rights: Rep. Ron Paul: “The responsibility of the president would be to veto every single bill that violates the 10th Amendment. That would be the solution.
“Government is too big in Washington, D.C. It has run away, we have no controls on spending, taxes, regulations. … If we want government, whether it’s medical care or whatever, it’s proper to do it at the local level.”

Perry vs. Bush: Perry disputed any notion of a rift between him and former President George W. Bush. Perry said they have “a great rapport” and talk “on a relatively regular basis.”
“I highly respect the president and his public service,” Perry said.

Education: Paul: “If you care about your children, you will get the federal government out of the business of educating our kids,” he said.

HEADLINES FROM THE DEBATE….

    • Live Blogging the G.O.P. Debate in Orlando: Nine candidates will take the debate stage tonight in Orlando, Fla., in what is likely to feature the continuing slugfest between Mitt Romney and Rick Perry…. – NYUT, 9-22-11
    • Fact Checking the G.O.P. Debate in Orlando: Examining statements on Social Security, education, foreign policy and more…. – NYT, 9-23-11

Romney, Perry go after each other in GOP debate: Side by side in confrontational debate, Republican presidential hopefuls Mitt Romney and Rick Perry sarcastically accused each other Thursday night of flip-flopping on Social Security and health care, flashpoints in their intense struggle for the party nomination.
In a debate that focused on character and credibility as much as other issues, Perry insisted he had backed off “not one inch, Sir” from what he had written in a campaign-season book published a few months ago.
Romney vouched for his own steadfastness moments later. “There are a lot of reasons not to elect me,” he said. “There are a lot of reasons not to elect other people on this stage. … But one reason to elect me is I know what I stand for. I’ve written it down. Words have meaning.”
The two men assailed one another in the third debate in as many weeks in a race for the Republican presidential nomination growing testier by the day. AP, 9-22-11

  • Under Attack, Perry Hits Back at Rivals in GOP Debate: Texas Gov. Rick Perry, the GOP presidential front-runner, fended off fierce attacks during Thursday night’s debate from his rivals over his criticism of Social Security and his record on immigration…. – Fox News, 9-22-11
  • GOP presidential debate: Who won the wrangle in Orlando?: The critics were brutal about Rick Perry’s performance. But voters react to the images that candidates project in a presidential debate over time, as snippets are worked into news reports and political ads…. – CS Monitor, 9-23-11
  • GOP debate: Winners and losers: The six Republican presidential debate this year, which took place Thursday night in Orlando, Florida, left some candidates more prepared than others and gave some candidates some key standout moments. Here’s our breakdown of the winners and losers: … Winners: Mitt Romney — Rick Santorum — Herman Cain…
    Losers: Rick Perry, Michele Bachmann, Ron Paul, Jon Huntsman, YouTube Questions…. – CBS News, 9-22-11
  • Perry and Romney Come Out Swinging at Each Other in G.O.P. Debate: In their third debate in as many weeks, former Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts and Gov. Rick Perry of Texas engaged in a sometimes heated back and forth over immigration, health care and entitlements, their rivalry dominating a stage that included seven other candidates struggling to catch up in the race for the Republican presidential nomination.
    Mr. Romney and Mr. Perry arrived here with a strategic imperative to challenge the other’s consistency and conservative credentials. The tensions only grew as the night wore on, to the point where Jon M. Huntsman Jr., the former governor of Utah, joked that Mr. Romney and Mr. Perry were at risk of bludgeoning each other to death.
    Still, after two hours of dueling it was unclear whether Mr. Perry had achieved his goal of knocking Mr. Romney off his fairly unruffled stride. It was similarly not certain that Mr. Romney had made headway in knocking Mr. Perry down a few pegs in what has been a relatively strong opening to his young campaign…. – NYT, 9-22-11
  • GOP debate: Rick Perry vs. Mitt Romney, plus Gary Johnson and some dogs: If you believe pollster Frank Luntz’s focus group in the post-game analysis on Fox News, Mitt Romney did himself a lot of good in Thursday’s two-hour Fox News/Google GOP Debate, held in Orlando, Fla. Nine candidates faced questions from FNC anchors … – LAT, 9-22-11
  • The GOP debate: 6 takeaways: It’s official — the frontrunners aren’t a mutual fan club. With three debates in the books featuring Rick Perry and Mitt Romney, the animosity between the Texas governor and the former Massachusetts governor is palpable.
    Here are POLITICO’s six takeaways from Thursday’s slugfest in Orlando…. – Politico, 9-22-11
  • Republican Presidential Hopefuls Debate Health Care,Retirement: The top two contenders for the 2012 Republican Party presidential nomination fended off accusations of changing their positions on everything from health care to Social Security during a nationally televised debate Thursday in Florida. … – Voice of America, 9-23-11
  • Orlando GOP debate: A strong night for Santorum as Perry fades: When the Republican presidential contenders debated in Orlando tonight, it was really two debates. In the first third of the evening, a series of disjointed questions without follow-ups, Texas Gov. Rick Perry seemed strong and well-prepared. But he faded over the rest of the debate, appearing to lose his steam just as he was trying to paint Mitt Romney as a flip-flopper.
    The big winner of the night, however, was Rick Santorum…. – WaPo, 9-22-11
  • Thursday’s ‘high-stakes’ GOP debate: 4 key questions: The Republican presidential hopefuls are preparing to clash in yet another debate. What can we expect?
    The Republican presidential candidates repeatedly bashed each other’s records this week, ahead of Thursday night’s debate in Florida, a crucial swing state. Indeed, there will be “high stakes” for frontrunners Rick Perry and Mitt Romney — and for rivals struggling to keep their hopes alive — as the showdown in Orlando sets the table for a Saturday straw poll that leading Sunshine State Republicans say will predict the party’s 2012 nominee. What should viewers watch for when the candidates square off on stage Thursday? Here, four key questions:

    1. Can Romney take down Perry over Social Security?
    2. Which Rick Perry will take the stage?
    3. Can Gary Johnson make a difference?
    4. Will second-tier candidates break through?

    The Week, 9-22-11

THE HEADLINES: WEEKLY RECAP

    • Lady Gaga shows at Obama fundraiser: Pop singer Lady Gaga was among the guests at a Silicon Valley fundraiser for President Barack Obama. The intimate gathering was held under a tent in the yard of Facebook chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg on Sunday night…. – AP, 9-25-11
    • Obama takes shots at Perry, GOP debates: President Barack Obama is swiping at Texas Gov. Rick Perry, criticizing him as “a governor whose state is on fire, denying climate change.”… – AP, 9-25-11
    • NYC’s Bloomberg says Obama could be re-elected: New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg says he thinks President Barack Obama could win re-election next year in spite of the country’s high unemployment rate. Bloomberg cites the power of incumbency as one of Obama’s advantage. … – AP, 9-25-11
    • Obama adviser: GOP will target middle class: A top White House adviser is laying out the theme of President Barack Obama’s re-election campaign, saying the Republicans running for president would “take dead aim” at middle class Americans. Obama’s 2008 campaign manager…. – AP, 9-25-11
    • Romney using wife’s story to connect with voters: …Ann Romney, his wife of 42 years, stood with him, spatula in hand, wearing the same white apron and the comfortable smile of a woman who spent countless mornings flipping flapjacks for five hungry sons.
      Her presence on that day, like so many others during the long campaign, is an acknowledged blessing for a 2012 White House contender who struggles to shake a robotic image. Friends and foes alike say she makes him seem more genuine…. – AP, 9-25-11

“I see anybody that gets in the race that believes in America and is a small government but efficient government individual, I would welcome into the race. It just strengthens the point that the Republican Party’s all about getting our country working again. Whoever that is. And I’m also a big believer in these governors being freed up to be able to compete against each other. Chris Christie is a great competitor — and I’ll be up there, you know, in Jersey, looking for some businesses to move to Texas.” — Gov. Rick Perry

  • Perry works to show he’s strongest GOP contender: Texas Gov. Rick Perry worked to convince Florida Republicans Saturday that he is the strongest contender for the GOP nomination despite a shaky debate performance earlier this week that has sparked jitters about his bid…. – AP, 9-25-11
  • Perry, Romney look beyond early-voting states: Mitt Romney and Rick Perry are the only two Republican presidential candidates who can afford to spend their time and money in states that aren’t first on the primary calendar.
    That helps explain their appearances Saturday in Michigan, where GOP voters will have their say in 2012, but only after Iowa, New Hampshire and several other states that second-tier contenders must win to survive…. – AP, 9-24-11
  • Obama’s likability is keeping him afloat: This is a factor any Republican challenger must consider: Public opinion polls routinely show that Americans like the president personally even though they don’t agree with his policies, even if hurt by them.
    People who have lost their jobs or homes during Obama’s presidency nonetheless say they want him to succeed and, what’s more, they’re working to help re-elect him because of the affinity they feel for him…. – AP, 9-24-11
  • As Perry sags, Christie in spotlight: With the party’s frontrunner sagging, Chris Christie is reconsidering pleas from Republican elites and donors to run for president in 2012. Two Republican sources told POLITICO, says the governor will make a decision in roughly a week…. – Politico, 9-24-11
  • Can Rick Perry make a comeback?: Rick Perry’s debate performance this week was universally panned, even by conservatives. Now, he’s pushing his “authenticity” versus the “slickness” of his main Republican rival Mitt Romney…. – CS Monitor, 9-24-11
  • Tampering With the Electoral College: Pennsylvania Republicans propose changing the state’s voting system for partisan advantage…. – NYT, 9-24-11
  • Small Donors Are Slow to Return to the Obama Fold: The frustration and disillusionment that have dragged down President Obama’s approval ratings have crept into the ranks of his vaunted small-donor army…. – NYT, 9-24-11
  • Texas May Be Solid Red at the Ballot Box, but Big Money Makes It Bipartisan: Red state or blue doesn’t really matter when it comes to where politicians go to raise money, and Texas, a major supplier of campaign cash, is proof of that. NYT, 9-24-11
  • Perry and Romney Set Clear Lines of Attack: The animosity between Gov. Rick Perry and Mitt Romney has deepened as they compete for contributors and endorsements…. – NYT, 9-24-11
  • Perry on shaky ground? Doubts among some in GOP: The findings underscore Romney’s effort to present himself as an economic conservative capable of drawing independent voters in a head-to-head campaign with Obama. Regardless of the polling, some voters in Florida are grimacing. … – AP, 9-24-11
  • Democrats working to undercut Perry, Romney: To hear Democrats tell it, Gov. Rick Perry’s economic record in Texas is nothing more than a mirage and his views on Social Security make him “America’s Most Dangerous Cowboy.” In Massachusetts, President Barack Obama’s allies say job creation lagged under Mitt Romney, whose policies would undermine the middle class.
    Republicans won’t pick a candidate to challenge Obama for months but Democrats already are working to poke holes in the two who, according to polls, are mostly likely to win the GOP nomination…. – AP, 9-23-11
  • Tea Party Group to Form Super PAC: Unlike similar organizations, the FreedomWorks Super PAC plans to raise $20 million from small donors to spend in Republican primaries…. – NYT, 9-23-11
  • Romney Leads Endorsement Race: Endorsements can be a good predictor of electoral success, something that bodes well for Mitt Romney…. – NYT, 9-23-11
  • GOP presidential debate: Who won the wrangle in Orlando?: The critics were brutal about Rick Perry’s performance. But voters react to the images that candidates project in a presidential debate over time, as snippets are worked into news reports and political ads…. – CS Monitor, 9-23-11
  • Caucus Video: Five Key Moments from the Debate: Reporters look at the debate’s importance going forward in the Republican race…. – The Caucus, 9-23-11
  • Rick Perry’s Stance on Immigration May Hurt His Chances: For Gov. Rick Perry of Texas, the issue of immigration could be treacherous in early-nominating states that have few Hispanics…. – NYT, 9-23-11
  • Obama’s Los Angeles campaign office smashed up: Police said Friday they are investigating what appears to be a politically motivated attack on a campaign office for President Barack Obama in Los Angeles, only days before he’s scheduled to arrive in Southern California. … – AP, 9-23-11
  • Only Palms Are Swaying: Outside supermarkets and restaurants, inside bookstores and candy shops, Jewish voters in this affluent yet diverse Jewish community in north Miami said they planned to mostly stay the course…. – NYT, 9-23-11
  • Fears Gnaw at Liberalism: Local Jewish leaders say most of the more than 200,000 Jews who live in greater Philadelphia remain Democrats and are almost sure to support Mr. Obama in 2012…. – NYT, 9-23-11
  • An Enthusiasm Cools Down: At a small gathering Thursday morning in a rabbi’s office to chat about the president, those in attendance said they would vote for Mr. Obama again, regardless of their disappointment…. – NYT, 9-23-11
  • Romney, Bachmann challenge Perry on immigration: Keeping the heat on Rick Perry, rivals Mitt Romney and Michele Bachmann on Friday challenged his suggestion that people are heartless if they don’t support his Texas law that gives some illegal immigrants in-state tuition rates at universities.
    “If you’re opposed to illegal immigration, it doesn’t mean that you don’t have a heart,” Romney told a gathering of conservatives in Florida, which has a sizable immigrant population. “It means that you have a heart and a brain.”
    In her speech, Bachmann said: “We will not have taxpayer-subsidized benefits for illegal immigrants or their children.” She pledged to build a fence along the U.S.-Mexican border, a move that Perry opposes…. – AP, 9-23-11
  • Web verdict on Perry: Brutal: There was no election-ending gaffe or singularly disqualifying remark. But his second consecutive weak outing set off alarm bells on the right, where too many cringeworthy moments raised questions about Perry’s durability, his seriousness and ability to compete on a stage with Barack Obama…. – Politico, 9-23-11
  • Texas toast? Perry worries GOP: The first line of Rick Perry’s campaign obituary may have been drafted Thursday night: He got in too late…. – Politico, 9-23-11
  • The GOP debate: 6 takeaways: With three debates in the books featuring Rick Perry and Mitt Romney, the animosity between the Texas governor and the former Massachusetts governor is palpable…. – Politico, 9-23-11
  • GOP debate shows Michele Bachmann’s star continues to fizzle: Bachmann barely merited a mention in the post-debate analysis, from a post-debate focus group on Fox News to the ever-roiling debate-about-the-debate on Twitter. At one point mid-debate, conservative pundit Michelle Malkin tweeted, “Is Michele Bachmann still there?”… – Politico, 9-23-11
  • Analysis: Perry, Romney defend records in forum: The candidate who best figures out how to appeal to that audience without abandoning his own record is likely to win the nomination to challenge President Barack Obama in 2012. As governors of Texas and Massachusetts, respectively, Perry and Romney … – AP, 9-23-11
  • Romney, Perry spar on Social Security at Florida GOP debate: Under fire from Rick Santorum and Michele Bachmann on the same issue, Perry said he didn’t believe in punishing children who entered the country illegally through no fault of their own….
    Rick Perry and Mitt Romney traded charges of flip-flopping and political opportunism at the GOP debate in Orlando on Thursday night, with both men again turning to each others’ books for harsh, personal criticism…. – Politico, 9-22-11
  • FACT CHECK: Slippery assertions in GOP debate: Mitt Romney denied supporting an Obama administration education program that he had praised. But the most consequential exchange may have been over Social Security, and Perry’s changing thoughts about it…. – AP, 9-23-11
  • GOP candidates parry over Afghanistan withdrawal: Two Republican presidential hopefuls are divided over President Barack Obama’s plan to bring home troops from Afghanistan. Former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman says “this country has given its all” and the US is ready to bring home troops…. – AP, 9-22-11
  • Romney says US-Israel policy must be in step: Romney and other GOP candidates on Thursday criticized President Barack Obama’s administration and posture toward Israel. He says that Obama has disrespected its closest friend in the Middle East and has been unclear in its broader policy in the region…. – AP, 9-22-11
  • Romney says he wants all Americans to be rich: The Republican presidential contender said during a debate on Thursday that he wants all Americans to have the same opportunities to build wealth while President Barack Obama’s Democratic Party wants to raise taxes on wealthy workers…. – AP, 9-22-11
  • Candidates in Debate Trip Over Foreign Policy: The candidates gave some head-scratching remarks when quizzed about foreign policy and other topics on Thursday…. – NYT, 9-22-11
  • Republican Presidential Candidates Debate: With Gov. Rick Perry of Texas and Mitt Romney well out in front, the other candidates sought to break through in the Republicans’ third presidential debate in 15 days…. – NYT, 9-22-11
  • 5 things to watch in Thursday debate: Which Rick Perry will show up? And does Romney pin Perry down on Social Security and illegal immigration?… – Politico, 9-22-11
  • Perry Calls Prayer Vital to His Life: Rick Perry tells religious conservatives that he has “been driven to my knees on many occasions.”… – NYT, 9-22-11
  • McCotter Ends Long-Shot Presidential Bid: Representative Thad McCotter ends his presidential campaign as he faces a primary challenge for his House seat in Michigan…. – NYT, 9-22-11
  • Thaddeus McCotter drops 2012 bid for president, endorses Mitt Romney: Several candidates had already begun to make moves to run for McCotter’s seat in a redrawn Michigan district, making clear that they were not waiting to give deference to him. McCotter’s announcement, first reported by the Detroit News, comes days before state senator Mike Kowall’s campaign kickoff this weekend at the biennial Republican Leadership Conference on Mackinac Island.
    The Michigan lawmaker, whose presidential campaign was a longshot, “will likely run again” for his seat…. – Politico, 9-22-11
  • Is Rick Perry winning the ‘Donald Trump primary’?: Rick Perry met with Donald Trump last week. Mitt Romney is set to meet with him next week. Michele Bachmann met him in July. Why are all the Republican presidential candidates lining up?… – CS Monitor, 9-21-11
  • Perry rivals work to undercut his character: United on the economic issues that most worry voters, the Republican presidential candidates have turned to subjects like vaccines, immigration and the future of Social Security. And while there are some policy differences, Mitt Romney, Michele Bachmann and others are raising those topics partly to make character arguments against GOP front-runner Rick Perry…. – AP, 9-21-11
  • RNC surpasses DNC in August fundraising: The Republican National Committee raised about $8.2 million in August, far outpacing its Democratic rival in a typically slow fundraising month.
    The Democratic National Committee reported that it raised $5.4 million last month, including $1.4 million for the Obama Victory Fund, a joint fundraising account by the DNC and Obama’s campaign…. – AP, 9-21-11
  • FACT CHECK: GOP candidates overreach on Israel: The Palestinian bid to win UN recognition is focusing attention on the Obama administration’s Mideast policy, which Republican presidential candidates say is all wrong. Presenting themselves as stronger advocates for Israel…. – AP, 9-21-11
  • Perry Opens Record of Financial Investments: The Texas governor, now a Republican candidate for president, revoked his blind trust and must report his holdings to the Federal Election Commission…. – AP, 9-20-11
  • Dodd-Frank Act Is a Target on G.O.P. Campaign Trail: The Dodd-Frank Act, the sprawling law to address the causes of the financial crisis, is a job killer that should be repealed, Republican presidential candidates say…. – NYT, 9-20-11
  • Stuart Stevens, Redefining Romney’s Presidential Run: A laid-back yet competitive strategist has given the Romney campaign a very different feel this time around…. – NYT, 9-20-11
  • Obama says ‘better ideas’ will win him re-election: President Barack Obama says he intends to win the 2012 election because he’s got “better ideas.” Speaking at a fundraiser Tuesday night for his re-election campaign, Obama said his ideas are based on the notion that Americans should … – AP, 9-20-11
  • Republican candidates assail Obama over Israel: Republican presidential candidates slammed President Barack Obama’s Middle East policies Tuesday while emphatically declaring their own support for Israel as the United Nations considered a bid for Palestinian statehood. … – AP, 9-20-11
  • Obama warns of ‘perilous path’ for US: President Barack Obama warned Monday that the United States is headed down a “perilous path” if its leaders cannot move quickly and responsibly to help people get back to work. Obama, speaking at an exclusive Park Avenue fundraiser … – AP, 9-19-11
  • Mitch Daniels Calls for a More Honest Campaign Debate: The governor of Indiana says his party’s presidential candidates should “campaign to govern, not just win.”… – NYT, 9-19-11
  • Rivals ask: Is Perry weak on the right, or left?: Rick Perry’s Republican rivals are struggling to find a coherent, easy-to-grasp argument against the Texas governor, who tops GOP presidential polls despite attacks from all sides.
    In fact, it’s the “all sides” nature that complicates the opposition’s message. Republican voters who watched last week’s presidential debate and its aftermath might wonder: Should I see Perry as too conservative or too moderate?… – AP, 9-19-11

HOUSE — SENATE — GOVERNORSHIPS CAMPAIGNS & ELECTIONS

  • Warren’s TARP panel under scrutiny: Elizabeth Warren, who is seeking the Democratic Senate nomination in Massachusetts to take on Republican Scott Brown, has yet to break down exactly how her congressional panel spent more than $10 million on travel expenses, meals and consultants, nor has Warren revealed the total amount she was paid while serving as chairman…. – Politico, 9-22-11

CAMPAIGN 2012: ANALYSTS &S HISTORIANS COMMENTS

  • Politico Arena: Daily Debate with Policymakers, Opinionshapers & Academics Politico
  • Julian Zelizer: Should GOP go for inspiration or victory?: With all the talk about the ideological and strategic divisions within the GOP, the real choice that primary voters will have to make next year is a simple one.
    Republicans have to decide whether to pick a candidate who appeals to their hearts or to their minds. The field is still fluid, but so far Texas Gov. Rick Perry appears to be the candidate who appeals most strongly to the ideological passion of conservatives, even though he stumbled in last week’s debate.
    Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who doesn’t inspire that passion seems to be the right man at the right time to defeat a struggling incumbent president. In recent weeks, at least based on the polls, logic seems to be a stronger pull.
    Traditionally, voters tend to go for the candidate who appeals to their hearts, even if the choice may be less likely to win. The primary process favors candidates who play to the base of the party and voters want someone they can believe in…. – CNN, 9-26-11
%d bloggers like this: