Scarborough: 'No Way' Perry Can Beat Obama
Looks like Joe Scarborough aims to single-handedly winnow the Republican presidential field. A few weeks ago, the Morning Joe host dismissed Michele Bachmann as "a joke." Today—not for the first time, as NB's Scott Whitlock documented—Scarborough proclaimed that there is "no way" Rick Perry could beat Barack Obama.
Scarborough, imagining an anti-Perry ad, surmised that Perry's statements on Social Security, the selection of US Senators and secession would come back to haunt him. View video after the jump.
Watch Joe jump all over Perry, along the way dismissing Pat Buchanan's parallels between the Texas governor and Ronald Reagan, who before running for President had also uttered statements some found controversial.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: You put that in a 30-second commercial, that Rick Perry does not believe that the United States Senate should not be voted on democratically, you put there that he calls Social Security, he says, a Ponzi scheme that causes, quote, violence to American values. You know, I'm kind of thinking, he might lose the middle. There's some people out there [who say] Joe Scarborough's not a real Republican. Which I guess, you can only define yourself as a real Republican in 2011 by supporting candidates that can not win. If that is your definition of a real Republican, I'm not a real Republican. Because, guess what? I like winning.
A bit later, Scarborough rejected Pat Buchanan's analogy to Ronald Reagan, who had made statements some found controversial prior to running for president.
SCARBOROUGH: Unfortunately for Rick Perry, he didn't write his book 10 years ago. He wrote it last year. This is the same Rick Perry who talked about seceding from the Union a couple of years ago. This is the same guy that said Social Security caused violence to American values, basic American values. This is the same guy a year ago saying the United States Senate should not be voted upon by the people. I'm sorry, but --
PAT BUCHANAN: And right now, the country knows a lot of these things, Joe, and he's running fairly close to the President of the United States.
STEVE RATTNER: Come on, Pat. They don't know any of these things.
SCARBOROUGH: You know I love you, Pat. You are way out there on this. There is no way Rick Perry can win a general election. No way. Press the record button, Texas: there is no way Rick Perry can win a general election. No way.
Joe did leave himself a light-hearted little out: "unless you bring us back the day after he wins a general election."
- Mark Finkelstein's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
There is no way...
Submitted by c5then on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 8:48am.
Joe Scarborough could have his own show except on MSNBC.
Madison and Jefferson and Franklin built a Republic - Roberts killed it!
MSNBC's Token "Republican"
Submitted by Red Jeep on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 10:43am.
"Republican? Yeah we got one of those. We got Joe. We have a black too, Rev Al. See how diverse we are?"
term limits
Submitted by lrgon on Wed, 09/07/2011 - 2:01am.
"Part time Congress with term limits! - No more professional politicians. Let's start rebuilding the Republic! '
Sounds good but is no real solution. Instead of pushing for a term limits amendment the objective should be repeal of the 17th amendment.
What were the 2010
Submitted by ThisnThat on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 8:58am.
What were the 2010 predictions? Most liberals refused to see reality, and clinged to their published believe of a toss-up in the House. NPR, for example, predicted Republicans 219 seats, Dims 216 seats. They either used faulty arithmetic or completely fudged the polls; but bottom line, they and many other libs were simply whistling in the dark. Same as today. Can't wait till 2012.
__________
“Didn't win the Medal of Honor? Didn't even serve? Then lie about it. We'll support you." — 9th Circuit Court
Wow
Submitted by HeavyChevy on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 8:58am.
If Scarborough would have said that on a well reputable, unscripted, nonpartisan news outlet I would be deeply concerned.
Disregard Scarborough no matter what show he says . . .
Submitted by Galvanic on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 9:13am.
. . . it on.
Scarborough is a Beltway Republican who still thinks of himself as a member of the House of Representatives. While he often cites his political roots in the Pensacola district he represented, he's no different than McCain, McConnell, Hatch, Graham, and the rest of the Beltway elites.
Scarborough's show is a Beltway echo chamber. Occasionally he vehemently disagrees with his pro-Obama guests, but for the most part, he sees the Tea Party and related candidates as too extreme for Washington.
I lived in Pensacola briefly in 1979; that Florida panhandle is often referred to as 'southern Alabama' because politically it is more conservative than southern Florida. I'm sure that if Scarborough went back to Pensacola to run against a Republican who had Tea Party endorsement, Scarborough would lose.
Sorry Galvanic I forgot my /S tag
Submitted by HeavyChevy on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 9:43am.
at the end of my statement. :-)
You're right!
Submitted by shannon76 on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 10:38am.
I live in Pensacola right now. And you're absolutely 100% correct. Scarborough wouldn't have a prayer in Pensacola. The conservatives here turn out to vote in our primaries, and they're not too keen on the Washington beltway types anymore. If Scar-Bro tried for a more ambitious spot in Florida, he'd have the Charlie Crist problem. Scar-Bro couldn't win a GOP primary in this current climate. If Crist couldn't do it, Scar-Bro would have not shot. Heck even McCollum, who went up against ObamaCare, had a hard time with the Tea Party here. This is Rubio country now.
Scar-Bro would have a better shot on the UWS of Manhattan. Which is to say, he couldn't get elected anywhere in this country. And that's why he's making himself more than comfortable at MSNBC.
Remember Reagan
Submitted by Gat New York on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 9:04am.
This hypocrit who liberally evokes the name of Reagan should remember that during the primaries and even in the general election the liberal media characterized Reagan as a joke - a B rated actor - as Bedtime for Bonzo - and no way he could beat Carter.
What is being done to Perry is about the same and Scarborough should recognize that.
And don't forget
Submitted by motherbelt on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 10:12am.
what a bumbling dolt George W. Bush, who won twice, was!
Don't worry
Submitted by HeavyChevy on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 9:09am.
Tomorrow that radio controlled bug up his @ss will prompt him to say something critical of this administration (I think his quota is still once every blue moon?) as not to make Scarborough come off like the crouching crotch vacuum we already know he is.
Joe -- Anybody is better than Obama!
Submitted by okiehawk44 on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 9:12am.
I think it's wonderful that the great thinkers of the day like Mika and Joe (excuse me I just cracked myself up) are touting Obama's immense popularity but I just don't see it out here in "Realville."
In fact I think an orange could beat Boy Blah-Blah in 2012.
That's 'cause
Submitted by HockeyKid on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 9:32am.
Joe 'n' Mika only play inside-the-Beltway baseball. They think average Americans are tuned in to (and very concerned about) the selection process for Senators. In reality, most Americans want a chance to earn a living, help their kids, and pretty much be left alone. Statists don't understand any of these three concepts.
"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me
Speaking of bumper stickers....
Submitted by jdripper on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 9:18am.
Zero Job Growth, 9.1% Umemployment
Jack
How about
Submitted by HockeyKid on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 9:36am.
0 JOBS = 0bama
"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me
Or, ...
Submitted by Newsbubba on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 10:58am.
..., "NO WAY? WAY!"
It ain't Perry yet
Submitted by jon_torlin on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 9:22am.
I love how these shows seem to have picked out the candidates long before they get into the final run.
We don't even know it's going to be Perry(though I'm biased because I'm Texan, I want it to be Perry).
And if anyone saw Sean Hannity's special report last night about Fast and Furious last night, Soetoro is going to have a real hard time lasting till the next Election. That report was impressive and pretty damning, especially when they brought up the chain of command which shows Holder and Soetoro at the top.
-Jon
Perry just happens to be leading now.
Submitted by Newsbubba on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 11:04am.
The libs are going to beat the snot out of whomever is leading if they think that that person can actually beat Bambi.
If someone who doesn't have a snowball's chance in Hell (can I still say "snowball"?) of winning gets into the lead (a big if) they will quiet right down, and may actually push that candidate, a la McCain, Hee Hee Hee!
Perry scares the living Shiite out of dumbocrats. They would much rather have Huntsman in the lead, and they don't miss an opportunity to push him.
Tell you something about Huntsman?
Any Scarborough prediction
Submitted by Texndoc on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 9:23am.
Any Scarborough prediction story should include the FACT this man predicted and supported Charlie Crist until days before the polls closed in that race when it was inevitable Marco Rubio had pulled miles ahead.
I tune in occasionally and can't believe he can even keep a liberal audience watching. Everything is him when he was a Congressman. Everything. Even when discussing 9-11 tributes upcoming, when the talk gets to Joe it's ..........well, I don't have to tell you.
I'll vote for anyone in the
Submitted by poseA on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 9:30am.
I'll vote for anyone in the running who proposes repeal of the 17th amendment to the constitution. Currently I know this includes Rick Perry and Ron Paul.
For the sovereign states, this would be a good first step to taking the power back.
I'll vote for anyone who's name is not Obama!
Submitted by Newsbubba on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 11:06am.
.
I haven't made up my mind about Perry yet...
Submitted by Morganfrost on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 9:35am.
But he's definitely got all the right enemies.
Perry is largely irrelevent in Texas
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 10:02am.
As most Texas governors are. The governor here is largely a figurehead.
And he definitely holds some big government ideas. He pushed, and pushed, and then finally gave up, on the Trans Texas Corridor. This would have taken much private property, and put in the hands of foreign interests. He pushed for mandatory Gardisil vaccinations for girls entering the sixth grade, even signing an executive order mandating them. This was eventually blocked.
As for jobs in Texas, yes, businesses are moving here due to low taxes and no state income tax, but Perry has had little to do with that. The Eagle Ford Shale formation, just south and east of San Antonio is also creating jobs. There are four or five big companies building, or planning to build, infrastructure on San Antonio's far south side, including Baker Hughes and Halliburton. Again, not much to do with Perry as much as some good fortune.
Is Perry better than president downgrade? Sure, but not by as much as you might think.
What you say about Perry makes sense to me. We all...
Submitted by jawebster1 on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 11:04am.
know he is much better than Obama. The question is, is he better than Bush? Bush turned out to be a big spender. Our next president must be a big "cutter", even if it means he serves only one term.
If he is successful in cutting spending, he will go down in history with that other successful one termer, James K. Polk, as one of our greatest presidents.
He's probably better than Bush
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 4:34pm.
But I don't know that I'd lay too much dough on that bet. Certainly wouldn't be the big cutter we're looking for.
I think everything
Submitted by Semus on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 10:02am.
I think everything Scarborough says has to be taken with a grain of salt, he may still have political aspirations, then again maybe he wants to keep his gig at MSNBC. If there still exists in him political ambition he may consider these Republicans to be rivals down the road, why else would he attack them? It's evident Obama, and the head long spiral down and to the left is in trouble, they are in a panic therefore the treasonous incitement of violence and in some cases the actual violence. If Scarborough were true to conservative beliefs he wouldn't be tolerating the vitriol from the left, he would be incensed by daily, but no he keeps tearing down Republicans.
Based just on what Scarborough say's I'd never trust or support him. Maybe he's given up all political ambitions and just permanently infected working for MSNBC. Either way I don't care and I don't think anyone really listens to him.
The talking points have been issued and will be repeated
Submitted by johnsonl on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 9:49am.
as necessary.
I don't think there's one person on this planet who truly believes that Obamao will have another term.
I honestly don't understand
Submitted by FAR52 on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 9:56am.
I honestly don't understand how any of you could realistically believe that a guy like Perry or a gal like Bachmann could garner enough middle of the road voters to dislodge Obama from the oval office. I'm sorry, it just eludes me.
So let's nominate McCain
Submitted by Semus on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 10:07am.
So let's nominate McCain right? He'll appeal to the left and right, until they get to the voting booth that is. Any so called middle of the road, person who'll still consider voting for this President, isn't a middle of the road at all, and never would've voted for anyone else.
You can't compare the two
Submitted by FAR52 on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 10:24am.
You can't compare the two scenarios. In 2008 McCain was running against a guy with no record who had captured the imaginations of the left and the middle. No one was going to beat him after 8 years of Bush. But that's not the case now. The middle is shopping. Do you honestly think they want a Rick Perry or a Michele Bachmann? Come on folks, we have to be realistic.
In 2012, our weakest candidate can beat Obama and...
Submitted by jawebster1 on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 10:48am.
our weakest candidate IS NOT Rick Perry or Michele Bachmann. We're talking Newt or Huntsman here. Maybe even our worst candidate can beat Obama. (Here, we're talking Ron Paul.)
McCain never had a shot at
Submitted by Semus on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 2:29pm.
McCain never had a shot at getting elected. and everyone knew it, some candidates did worry them however. They were never worried about McCain, the Maverick they knew he was an anathema to many on the right who'd stay home rather than vote for him. Many didn't see just how insidious the this new Administration would be. The shell game by the left was to pretend to support McCain before the nomination, glowing columns about the Maverick then toss him out him once he is nominated which they did.
It would have worked, except a VP like Palin (no one expected that) boosted McCain's numbers higher than Obama's. It was decided more was required so a crash was orchestrated by some very wealthy Obama people (we're talking billionaires) to shake up the proletariats. More damage was done than expected. But this is another story. I'll just say my hope is that there will be an investigation on this there have been some rumblings about this although I've heard nothing lately.
Huntsman in 2012 knowingly or unknowingly is the shill for the left, as McCain was the shill for the left (I'm quite sure unknowingly) in 2008.
See my post,
Submitted by johnsonl on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 10:21am.
it's right above yours.
Charlie Brown/Linus Van Pelt could defeat Obamao in 2012.
Seriously.
Yes, because Obama and his
Submitted by FAR52 on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 10:29am.
Yes, because Obama and his billion dollars he will raise and his cohorts in the MSM will forget to report on all of the crazy things Perry and Bachman have said through the years. Thank God. If that stuff got out, the voters in the middle might actually go with the devil they know.
Here's a flash, Far.
Submitted by Newsbubba on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 11:15am.
There ain't no "middle of the road" anymore. I think most of the "middle of the roaders" have figured out that the only thing you get if you're in the middle of the road is your a$$ run over!
I'm speaking as one who was a democrat for years, moved to "the middle," and have gone so far right lately that I sleep with a loaded and cocked weapon!
(Okay, the "cocked" part is a stretch)
Another Useful Idiot - and his sidekick
Submitted by scottyusmc on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 10:06am.
Joe Scarborough shows his irrelevance each time he opens his mouth!!! Useless tool!!!
If that is your definition of
Submitted by motherbelt on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 10:07am.
If that is your definition of a real Republican, I'm not a real Republican. Because, guess what? I like winning.
Yup, even if the Republican has to run with Democrat policies to do it. Because all that matters is the "R," right Joe?
Even though Obama was known
Submitted by Rusty Shackleford on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 10:18am.
Even though Obama was known (by the informed at least) to be unaccomplished and wildly anti-American in 2008 he was still considered "electable" and he actually won. Now we're supposed to believe an inept and failed president is re-electable while a perfectly adequate governor of one of America's biggest states is un-electable.
I'm sorry, but the rules on what is electable and what is not were completely thrown out the window in 2008. As far as I'm concerned, Obama in 2008 reminded me of Spuds Mackenzie in the 1984 election.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Matthews: The Joy Behar of MSNBC.
Bill Maher: The Joy Behar of HBO.
Paul Krugman: The Joy Behar of The New York Times.
why are you afraid of Perry?
Submitted by ohio granny on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 10:37am.
Joe, why are you so afraid of Perry? You don't get to say who the republican nominee is and your mouth cannot keep him from being elected. I for one don't care what you have to say.How many people even listen to what you have to say?
If not for NewsBusters, most people would not know...
Submitted by jawebster1 on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 10:41am.
who Joe Scarborough is. He shows up in the morning on MSNBC. At least I think he does. I've never seen his show.
Hos Joe ever considered . . .
Submitted by rickbren on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 10:42am.
. . . that maybe more than a few folks want the 17th Amendment repealed? That MOST educated people DO consider social security a Ponzi scheme?? That 75% of America thinks the country is going in the WRONG direction??
And...
Submitted by Meredith1966 on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 10:58am.
I should like to point out that Joe would be wise to acknowledge the low-key effort on the part of Lefties and 'Progressives' to alter the nature of the Senate by changing it to a system of proportional representation, like that of the House. I've picked up on statements made over the past several months that imply the Senate is somehow unfair because the more populous states have the same representation as the less populous states. Apparently, California having two senators and North Dakota having two senators is a bad thing to their side. Joe should acknowledge this effort at packing the Senate and explain the Constitutional argument behind the equal representation for each State in the Senate.
This, of course, leads into Perry's statements about how the Senate is selected. It seems to me that Perry is trying to go back to the originalist argument for having a Senate, that the Senators (appointed by each state legislature) are supposed to represent the individual state legislatures at the federal level, and not the people. The people are already represented in the House, having them represented in the Senate is redundant. When we went to direct election of Senators, thanks to the Progressives of the late 19th century, we lost a vital component in our system of federalism--representation of the States as sovereign political entities. If Perry is suggesting we go back to that, I'm all for it, and it would do Joe Scarborough some good if he would explain the basis for Perry's statement rather than do his knee-jerk reaction to it.
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." - Thomas Jefferson
I used to be in favor of popular elections. That was...
Submitted by jawebster1 on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 11:20am.
before Bush vs Gore. Our founding fathers were correct in creating the "Electoral College". (And also how Senators were selected prior to the 17th amendment.)
I live in California and the last thing I want is for people like the people of my state selecting our leaders, i.e., Barbara Boxer!.
cancel
Submitted by Red Jeep on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 11:52am.
.
Pat should have made a
Submitted by eaglewingz08 on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 11:17am.
Pat should have made a gentleman's bet with Crazy Joe. First Pat should have asked, if it was a contest between Obama and Perry would he support the GOP nominee, even if he felt he was "unelectable"? Second, he should have asked, If Perry wins the GOP nomination and wins the general election would Joe resign from MSLSD, and never comment on republican and national politics again?
Hmmm...I seem to remember
Submitted by Beukeboom on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 12:00pm.
Hmmm...I seem to remember libs saying things like
"No way can Reagan beat Carter."
"No way can Bush beat Gore."
"No way can Bush beat Kerry."
"No way Obama can beat Clinton."
I really don't put stock in MSNBC predictions.
Joey is doing all he can do to get Romney the nomination.
Submitted by Conservator on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 1:14pm.
Why? Because Obama can't beat Gov. Perry and Joey knows it. This clown claims to be a conservative Republican, but spends 3 hours a day agreeing with leftists mostly. Here's an article published today that shows Obama is in trouble in California.
Poll illustrates California voters' anger - Tuesday, September 6, 2011
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-poll-economy-20110906,0,3541449,full.story
Nearly 3 in 4 say the country is on the wrong track, and nearly half favor slashing government spending — a potentially dismal finding for President Obama, who will unveil a jobs plan this week.
Video - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Lp11QYxh48&feature=player_embedded#!
If Obama is already showing weakness in a poll of Californians, please explain why Perry can't defeat this progressive ideologue.
nearly half in favor
Submitted by kata on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 1:21pm.
nearly half in favor of slashing government spending? I am guessing that's the half thats being tapped to pay for it.
I read an article at PJMedia pitting our current President against a Sack of Hammers. Needless to say, the Hammers won.
someone please tell Joe and the other pundits
Submitted by mom_rox on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 1:35pm.
that even PolitiFact has rated the Rick Perry / Texas Secession comment as false.
no way
Submitted by Agnostic on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 1:49pm.
Perry can beat Obama.
Also, no way you could have a political career and have no knowledge of an aide that died in your home/office due multiple blunt traumas after a 'heart attack'
Scarborough Is Our Of The House And Here Is Why
Submitted by Avitar on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 2:38pm.
Rick Perry will win in a walk. This year the Democrat Party will be lucky to survive.
Joe ... there is no way ....
Submitted by jmigyanka@msn.com on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 6:20pm.
.... you didn't murder your office assistant, Lori Klausutis, in your Florida office - just prior to your sudden resignation! For all the suspicious facts, try these for openers:
1. http://archive.democrats.com/preview.cfm?term=Joe%20Scarborough
2. http://www.americanpolitics.com/20010808Klausutis.html
3. http://flyingsnail.com/Dahbud/firejoescarborough.html