Still, I like Perry. I'm acutely aware that "debating" is not his strong suit. (I wonder, do they have a debating team at Texas A&M???)
On the other hand, we're electing a president, not a Debater-in-Chief. So I am looking for presidential qualities, not the mere ability to prevail in a debate setting. You seem to have some reservations about this setting, too, having commented, "these three-ring-circus MSM events [that are] mislabeled 'debates.'" They are more like so-called "reality shows," which do not depict any actual reality that I'm aware of.
Back to presidential qualities, and why I think Perry has them. He indubitably has successful executive experience, having been elected three times to the Office of Governor of Texas. I sense he is a man of strong personal character — which I gather wmfights recognizes, too, having observed, "... he is the kind of person you could do business with on a handshake. He has that middle America rural background that places a premium on honor."
In other words, as my dearest sister in Christ Alamo-Girl has observed, he is a man who "leads from the knees." In this, he is the anti-Newt who, for all his intellectual brilliance and recent conversion to the Catholic Church, still comes across to me as a kind of moral gunslinger, shooting from the hip.
WRT Newt, I just ask myself: Do I want another "arrogant narcissist" occupying the Oval Office for the next four (or eight) years? Our Gangsta President amply demonstrates that arrogance and narcissism are not exactly presidential virtues.
Though it may be true that Newt is "the smartest man in the room" everywhere he goes, I can think of plenty of brilliant criminals — folks like, say, Bernie Madoff or Ted Bundy. :^) So intellect alone cannot recommend him to me.
Which is just to say that I am skeptical that Newt is sufficiently morally grounded and focused to be an effective president.
I thought Gov. Perry's debate performance last night was creditable, and an improvement over past efforts. I was thrilled he mentioned that yesterday was the 220th anniversary of the Bill of Rights. He specifically referenced the Tenth Amendment, and gave several examples of legitimate state functions that have been usurped by Washington in modern times.
One more thing: Governor Perry is the sort of man who is the Progressive Left's worst nightmare — a man who "clings to his Bible and his gun." In short, to them, Perry is an oafish, dumb hick from the sticks, not an elegant, "politically correct" left intellectual like themselves. Of course, they absolutely detest him, and would make his life miserable, were he ever to become the nominee.
But then they'll do that to any candidate with the temerity to challenge the Gangsta President....
Of course, if the Left hates Perry, that's all the more reason for me to like him. :^)
In conclusion, Perry "rings my bell," and I wish him well. It's early yet; we'll have to wait to see what happens.
Thanks so much for sharing your thoughts, PapaNew!
A national election (I maintained while Cain was complaining about a public trial) is basically a public trial in the court of public opinion. He won't win unless the majority of voter "gets" him. It's HIS job to make sure that happens. HE's the one on trial here and he's got to make his case better than anyone else. He's got to get out of the way of himself enough to communicate clearly to the American people who he is and what he stands for. It isn't enough for you and I and the rest of the low % to know it.