[smoothsailing]

"The change we seek will never emanate out of Washington. It will come from the windswept prairies of middle America; the farms and factories across this great land; the hearts and minds of God-fearing Americans -- who will not accept a future that is less than our past, who will not be consigned a fate of LESS freedom in exchange for MORE government. We do not have to accept our current circumstances. We will change them. We're Americans. That's what we do. WE roll up our sleeves, WE get to work, WE make things better."

Excerpt from Perry Presidential announcement speech-Source

"I was quite sure that he wasn't going to run, because he was adamant until about four months ago that he wasn't going to run. I was surprised that he had changed his position on that, but I'm glad that he's going to be in there. I'm thankful that he's going to jump in this arena. It's rough and tumble and tough,...That adds to the debate. It adds another choice for Americans to consider headin' into 2012."

Sarah Palin today at Iowa State Fair - Source

[TexasFreeper2009]

This is exactly what I thought after watching that debate. Perry won, because everyone already in the race looked SO BAD.

[MNJohnnie]

Would help his case if you bothered to get his facts correct.

Lincoln would have NO idea what a beanbag was. He never said any such thing.

[MNJohnnie]

Let us try this again.

It would help his case if HE bothered to get his facts correct.

Lincoln would have NO idea what a beanbag was. He never said any such thing.

[ImJustAnotherOkie]

I’m not going to get caught up in this ‘Perry Fever’ yet.

If recent history teaches us anything it is two things.

1. Listen and study a candidate a great deal before endorsing it. (OBAMA)

2. Don’t pay heed to this ‘Heir Apparent’ nonsense. (Hillary)

My two cents on the debate...Ron Paul looked like the kook he is; spouted nonsense. He’s toast.

[Tribune7]

I thought Michele looked OK. The rest, not so much.

[MNJohnnie]

Childish, ignorant and superficial are the nicest things that can be said about this article

[wk4bush2004]

If that truly is part of his speech tomorrow, it’s excellent! This is so exciting! This is the candidate we’ve been waiting for!

“FREEDOM, PROSPERITY, RESPONSIBILITY: RICK PERRY 2012!”

[ex-snook]

Change you will get if they became President.

Gingrich, Cain, Santorum - War with Iran

Bachmann - default on debt

Romney & Huntsman - Elect me an find out

Paul - Pull out of wars & audit Federal Reserve

Pawlenty - Just a governor

No Shows - Palin and Perry

---

Fox news interviewers were pathetic.

[normy]

Thank you for that quote of Palin’s at the fair today. Another thread on FR had a tweet from someone there trying to act as if Palin was disparaging Perry. The full quote does nothing of the sort.

[nathanbedford]

Having read the first 28 posts, I am convinced that most have misconceived the debates last night and have misunderstood how they should be judged.

The challengers have a substantial advantage in debates especially when the incumbent is generally out of favor as is Obama. In these circumstances the challenger in the general election must merely show that he/she is "presidential" to "win" the debate. That's because the debate is really a contest over undecideds. Those who have already decided their vote are not going to be swayed to the other side unless there is a really profound gaffe.

The undecideds are undecided because they are unhappy about the incumbent but not yet convinced about the challenger. The challenger's job is to show that he will not embarrass the country by looking presidential and avoiding gaffes.

So we looked through the debate last night and we ask first, whether any individual who did not look "presidential?" The answer is no but Pawlenty, Huntsman and Cain only barely qualified. Ron Paul is sui generis and does not really factor in. Bachmann, Gingrich, Romney and Santorum all looked completely presidential and would therefore be acceptable as alternatives to an unpopular incumbent. Second, we ask did anyone make a disqualifying gaffe? The answer is no but Pawlenty came close. Therefore, the debate last night was a great success because it demonstrates that all of the candidates are presidential timber.

Now the question arises from a conservative's point of view, whom should we pick? That is always a subjective weighing of true conservative commitment vs. electability. That is a tension which need not exist but does because the media makes it so. All true conservatives are painted by the media as being crazies and therefore their electability suffers. That is what is going on now with Michele Bachmann and we saw it in the 2010 elections.

Right now Gov. Perry seems to have the best balance of conservative values and electability. That does not mean that he triumphed his absence last night as the author asserts. It means that he has a good record subject to complaints especially about immigration and he combines that record with an extremely good telegenic appearance. In that respect he ranks right up there with Romney. The problem for Perry is that he comes off too Texas and too much of a folksy shit kicker which people will describe as a resemblance to George Bush but which can turn off a lot of Easter and Northern voters as well who might as a result regard him as a masculine version of Sarah Palin.

So Gov. Perry must submit himself to the process like every other candidate and he must show that he can look presidential and avoid gaffes. He must to some degree mitigate his good old boy image If he does so we can expect him to emerge at the head of the pack and, most important, he can beat Obama.

[Paul Ross]

Part of the problem here is that when a women mixes it up in the political arena, and gets punched, she must punch back. The danger to the woman here is that every time she punches back, which she must do, she hardens a little bit of her soul and sacrifices a little bit of her femininity. I'm not sure that's a good trade.

Sexist. Sad.

Seems like he forgets...

[Tunehead54]

"But Ms. Bachmann chose to get into the ring, and can't complain if punches are thrown, nor should anyone complain on her behalf. That's one of the reasons to question whether it's a good idea for women to get involved in the rough and tumble of politics"

---

Uhh ... your thoughts, ladies?

[dragnet2]

Last night's big winnner? Easy -- Rick Perry

The people that didn't join the debate are the winners?

That will really sell well.

You betcha!

[mikhailovich]

I tend to believe the Perry hype is not from any brigade of rich conglomerates or establishment elite. I honestly think its because he looks like a president and brings a high level of poise, polish, self-confidence, swagger, and charisma. It only takes a few minutes watching him on tv before the average person reaches that conclusion. Nor is the media or (Fox News) pimping him. The fact is, he has the Clint Eastwood factor, along with a super story to tell. He comes from extremely humble roots - no aristocracy. The hype exists because people are damned excited to have him come on board. And the media fears him. Put that in your book. The liberal media and the White House are scared to death.

Having said all of that, I expect Perry to stumble and face his own issues on the campaign trail. I also fear that his slow-talking Texas style will come off noticeably different than the rest of the candidates in the debates. Last night sounded like a yankee-fest to me. Pardon me for that, but it did. Everyone was zipping and zappin' at 100 mph. Perry is going to be a huge contrast when he starts speaking.

But that also can come off as presidential and assured. So it should be interesting to say the least.

[Allegra]

[Scythian]

Wow, the FR has totally lost it !!!

[raptor22]

Rick Perry is the perfect candidate to explain why Barack Hussein isall hat and no cattle.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2762967/posts

[casinva]

I agree with the writer that Rick Perry, and Sarah Palin for that matter, helped their campaigns by not being there. Disagreeing with an earlier poster, my take from last night’s debate was that SEVERAL of the candidates did not look very presidential, and the couple that perhaps look presidential either have baggage or seemed last night to be still a little inexperienced for such a job as the POTUS.

Of the ones who were there, Newt showed very well, and he certainly raised the intellectual level there. If Newt will continue on, he will make it much easier for us voters to see who really has an understanding of things and who does not!

However, while some may have taken themselves right out of the race last night, no one rose to a higher level either. The added factor that the debate questions were a joke and the atmosphere was one of the panel rooting for a pit bull fight or girl mud wrestling made last night’s EXTREMELY unprofessional. THEN add to the fact that the panel focused on questions that may have exhibited personalities but did not touch much at all on issues, answers, or visions. I sure would not have wanted to have been associated with last night’s Fox News debate because it came off as so amateurish.

I feel badly for the candidates that were exposed to last night’s debate. It was, overall, I believe, a lackluster environment for a debate and an uninteresting platform where no one could really stand above others, for whatever reason might have allowed them to. I don’t think it helped any of them save maybe Newt who still carries baggage but at least was able to shine despite the panel members.

However, Rick Perry and Sarah Palin were the winners by not being associated with that debate at all. My take on it as stated here doesn’t quite give Rick Perry or Sarah Palin credit for anything. It just discredits last night’s debate. I’m just glad neither of those two hard working, experienced stallions had to be confined in the horse stalls which last night’s panelists were in.

That said of the debate, I’m looking forward to seeing / hearing Rick Perry’s official announcement tomorrow!

AND... I am not afraid if Sarah Palin were to decide to join in either.

I’m good with a Perry-Somebody ticket or a Palin-Perry ticket.

I hear some say “wait til Rick Perry starts getting vetted, and we’ll see”, some saying that because they actually are waiting for information to help them decide and others saying that believing people won’t like him once he’s vetted. I say “bring the vetting on!” He’s grown up in politics and he’s been the governor of Texas for what, 12 years or so now? There’s plenty of vetting to do, but he’s also plenty of a good man overall to help get our country back to what America should be.

Thanks for the article, smoothsailing!