Length of time is irrelevant.
Perry made a pledge to the people of Texas he would serve out his full term and even right after he was re-elected just a week later told Romano of Newsweek he was NOT running for President.
Do you think some folks in Texas might have voted for Perry based on his pledge?
Not really.
You are being far too generous to Perry, techno, in analogizing his situation to Palin’s. The two are not even roughly equivalent.
First, in 2010, Perry campaigned very specifically on a pledge not to run for President, but to serve his full term. He was in a hotly contested primary during which he needed a certain someone’s help, and he was accused of planning a Presidential run, which he flatly denied. Palin, on the other hand, was NEVER asked during her 2006 campaign if she was going got serve out her term and she NEVER promised to do so. If the PDS brigade has any quotes to the contrary, please post them.
There is a second distinction. Rather than continue to take a government check from the people of Alaska when she knew she would be campaigning in the runup to the the 2010 elections, and when she knew the bogus ethics complaints would further inhibit her ability to be a full time governor, Sarah Palin had the integrity to resign and give the people of Alaska a full time governor.
Rick Perry, having misled the people of Texas into rehiring him by pledging not to run for President, did not have the integrity to resign. He continues to collect his $150,000 a year government check for work he does not do (while jetting off to New Hampshire and Iowa) and he continues to live rent free in the governor’s mansion and to enjoy a large staff (also paid for by the taxpayers he duped) which he no doubt uses for the very endeavor he promised the same taxpayers he would not undertake.
But Perry’s not a quitter. He doesn’t have nearly that much integrity.
Umm...let me think.
No.