Showdown in Simi Valley: Bachmann vs. Perry

The Minnesota congresswoman has two choices in Wednesday’s presidential debate: Take the fight to Perry—or pull a Pawlenty.

2012 GOP presidential candidates Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry<a href="http://www.flickr.com/people/gageskidmore/">Gage Skidmore</a>/Flickr

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


The GOP presidential debate on Wednesday night has been billed as a coming-out for Rick Perry, the tough-rhetoric-slinging governor of Texas who has vaulted to the top position in the Republican field after recently gallivanting into the race. Perry, who ducked out of a candidates’ forum this past weekend to contend with wild fires in the Lone Star State, has yet to appear on a national stage with his fellow presidential wannabes. So Wednesday night at the Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, California, all eyes will be on the fella Molly Ivins once dubbed Governor Goodhair, with pundits and voters looking to see whether he’s more hat than cattle—or the opposite. Yet for all the Perrymania, there will be another candidate with something to prove: Michele Bachmann.

Bachmann was the darling of the past two debates. In New Hampshire in June, she confidently stood out among the guys as an I-feel-your-outrage tea party gal who could both stick to her anti-government talking points and remain disciplined enough to avoid saying anything too bizarre or factually dubious. Last month, at an Iowa debate—when she seemed to be the front-runner in that state—she handily fended off attacks by Tim Pawlenty (remember him?), who claimed her record of accomplishments was “nonexistent.” With a calm ferocity, she slapped Pawlenty silly for his past support of versions of cap-and-trade and a health care mandate. She went on to win the absurd but influential Ames straw poll.

For Wednesday’s debate, Bachmann’s challenge is a simple one: Can she effectively go on offense against Perry? The Texas governor’s entry into the race has harmed her chances the most. She’s fallen in the polls, with Perry attracting tea party loyalists. Bachmann, whose campaign manager and deputy campaign manager left their jobs, has been pushed from main story line to subplot. And with the possibility of Iowa moving its caucus to early December—if Arizona proceeds with a plan to schedule its primary in January (ahead of the current February date for Iowa)—Bachmann will have to claw her way back to the top of the heap quickly. Without Iowa, she’s nothing.

To begin this process, she can’t pull a Pawlenty. Prior to the June debate, Pawlenty began swinging at then-front-runner Mitt Romney, referring to Romney’s health care reform overhaul in Massachusetts as “Obamneycare.” But when Pawlenty appeared on stage with Romney, he declined the chance to jab the former Massachusetts governor, puzzling the commentariat, which had tuned in for the much-anticipated Pawlenty-Romney slugfest. Pawlenty’s retreat was quickly processed by the politerati as a sign he didn’t possess the you-know-whats to be a contender.

Bachmann shows no signs of ducking a showdown with Perry at the Reagan corral. Days ago, a super-PAC that supports her presidential campaign—the misleadingly named Keep Conservatives United—ran an attack ad blasting Perry for claiming to be a fiscal-discipline champion despite his spending binges as Texas governor. The ad noted, “There is an honest conservative [in the 2012 race], and she’s not Rick Perry.”

This is an effective line of assault for Bachmann, for it questions Perry’s tea party credentials. The ad also hints at another attack Bachmann might be contemplating. It mockingly referred to Perry as a self-proclaimed “tough hombre.” From Bachmann’s perspective, Perry has been an immigration appeaser. He has denounced the notion of a superfence to protect the border and has basically adopted the stance of the business community, which is not in favor of an immigration crackdown. It seems inevitable, given the tea partiers’ passions about immigration, that Bachmann will use this as a club (or cruise missile) against Perry. Immigration is considered a wedge issue nationally. It may well become one in the fight between Perry and Bachmann (and maybe Sarah Palin?) for the tea party wing.

The only question is whether Bachmann deploys this heavy artillery sooner or later.

At the Reagan library debate, Bachmann will have the opportunity to display her pugilistic capabilities. She certainly needs to stop Perry’s supersized momentum. It’s possible Perry might do that himself—with a poor performance or slip-up. (This is a presidential candidate who two years ago suggested Texas might consider seceding from the union.) And at the moment, it’s clear that what’s doing so well in the polls is the idea of Rick Perry, who remains largely unknown to voters outside his state. But if Perry doesn’t commit any major missteps, Bachmann will have to make a move.

Bachmann demonstrated last month that she can be a fierce defender. Yet going offensive is something else entirely. As the front-runner du jour, Perry has the task of ignoring the other candidates and doing his best to match up well with that Perry idea. Bachmann’s mission will be to take the shine off Perry’s boots.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate