Posted on 04/17/2015 5:10:56 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
Rick Perry may run for president again, and he made the case at a Republican dinner last night that Americans are ready to move past a “young, very attractive” President Obama.
According to NBCDFW, Perry made the case for a Republican president (not necessarily him) who’s more than just a “critic-in-chief,” but also a “tested, results-oriented executive who has a record of accomplishment.”
And just like in past years, Perry brought up the critique of Obama that he lacked any executive experience before he became president. Perry told the Republican crowd the country is ready to move past “eight years of this years of this young, very attractive, amazing orator, junior U.S. senator.”
I don’t buy that an “inexperienced senator” is a problem. And none other than dear leader is a great example of why. Viewed objectively, dear leader has been very effective at implementing his agenda. Unfortunately that agenda is socialism and America’s ruin. But I have to admit: he’s been effective. Look at his so-called gop opposition. It’s leaders can’t decide whether to shine his shoes or kiss his behind. But they will trample each other to kowtow to dear leader.
Sell-by date: expired.
We tried Perry too, but he couldn’t stand up to Romney.
Obama’s FAIL is not because he was a “Young, Inexperienced Senator.’ Nor was it because he is black. It is his complete and vile hatred for this nation and all we stand for.
Get lost, Perry. You won’t unseat Cruz.
Does anyone (including Perry) really believe that if Obama had been a governor that he would have been a better President? That’s about the stupidest argument that I keep hearing.
Amen....Dittos.....one thousand percent right.
Same here. But, in the event that everything gets turned upside down and he appears on the final ballot, I would vote for him rather than let the Dem be unopposed. I'm crazy that way....
Or Rand
I think Perry knows who his competition is and it isn't Rand Paul. I think his shot was named at Ted Cruz.
I’ll take an inexperienced authentic conservative senator over an experienced liberal, nanny state,crony capitalist serving republican fraud of a governor any day.
You’ve got to figure, though, that one notable feature of the Republican can field is that there are three freshman Senators. One of the biggest criticisms of Obama is his lack of experience, and like it or not that same criticism can be rightly leveled at Cruz, Paul, and most especially Rubio. All three of these guys poll ahead of Perry, and Perry is pretty equal opportunity as to his competitive streak. Anybody who has seen all the ads to relocate to Texas and seen the lengths to which their university system goes to recruit talent can attest to that.
"I think a governor is going to be the nominee, a governor or a former governor, because I believe that our party and our country need someone who's actually run something," Christie said in his interview, conducted in New Hampshire, where he is testing the nation's political waters. "And while I have great respect for a number of those folks, I don't believe that we've done well with the experiment of a one-term U.S. senator being president of the United States."
Perry is sort of the anti-Jebby, to my mind. Jeb is one of those guys who is going to be all magnanimous with other people’s stuff, Perry OTOH would be good for eating other foreign governments lunch and peeing on all the corners like the neighborhood tomcat. I like that he understands that he is an American and has escaped ivy league hothouse flower syndrome.
Didn’t Rick Perry used to be relevant?
Someone should ask Perry, If executive experience is so important, then why is Obama no better a president in his second term than in his first?
Because he has successfully run a large government for a number of years. The three first term senators have nothing close to the experience needed to do the job. What have they run? An office with a generous taxpayer funded allowance? We live in a world where news travels fast and so the relevant experience is even more important because there is very little breathing room to rearrange things if you make the wrong call.
Because he's not actually trying to learn or improve.
He's accepted that he's not going to get better at working with Congress -- he's not even going to try -- so he's just going to do what he wants to do whether it works or not.
He's trying a "brute force" approach (metaphorically speaking), rather than trying to finesse things.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.