The point is why was he a dem in ‘88? We knew that they were scum long before then.
The whole South were hard core Democrats for a looooonnnnngg time. Has to do with that “War between the State’s” thing. Things have changed over time.
I am going to assume you live somewhere up north and really want to be enlightened.
As a fairly new resident of Texas in 1988, I found Texas to be pretty much run by democrats. The real election was the democrat primary, where the liberal democrat ran against the conservative democrat. (Yes, there were conservative democrats in those days.) Republicans were pretty scarce, especially in east Texas, where Perry grew up. It was in the 80's and early 90's that the conservative republicans (all over the South) defied tradition and became republicans. John Connally, Phil Gramm and Rick Perry were part of that movement. Now Texas is pretty much run by republicans, with the governor, lieutenant governor, both houses of the legislature, two US Senators and most (all?) state-wide elective offices.
I accept Perry's explanation of his party switch as typical of the times. One negative I see for Perry is that he is a career politician. A career politician would strive to serve his party in an important position, for example, as state chairman for presidential candidate Gore. The other two active candidates with executive experience have not spent most of their lives seeking political office--Cain and Romney. Cain is a long-shot, Romney's conservative credentials are suspect.
My ideal candidate is not running. Neither, I suspect, is yours. We must choose from available candidates, and Perry is worthy of consideration.