Posted on 09/08/2011 2:54:42 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[snip]
The news media really don’t get Rick Perry and his appeal to Republicans. The questions designed to undermine him (Social Security, death penalty, creationism, etc.) strengthened him with Republicans. Mainly, they liked what he said and how he said it. Perry’s a natural, like the man whose library served as a backdrop. No question Perry’s problem will be in finding enough swing voters in Purple states to create an Electoral College majority; being deeply Red probably isn’t enough, even in a strong GOP year, and the stereotype of Perry as “Bush on steroids” was proven true.
As usual, Romney turned in an acceptable performance, but he appealed to the head, not the heart. Romney’s nomination depends heavily on Republicans’ coming to the conclusion that Perry cannot beat Obama — and the polls are going to have to show this clearly, month after month. Obama is not cooperating with the Romney “remainder” strategy, since POTUS is sinking steadily.
Michele Bachmann got little time when it mattered, and is proving how deadly is the combination of gravity and inertia. Newt is winning applause but not votes. Jon Huntsman (R., News Media) got caught in a trap laid by his own campaign manager; he’s going nowhere. Paul will keep but not expand his 10 to 15 percent. Santorum and Cain didn’t break out. On to the next two debates — and the long roller-coaster ride before a victor is crowned.
— Larry J. Sabato is director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia.
[snip]
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
“But Perry also said that Obama must have the worst intel or is an abject liar for saying the border in El Paso is safer.”
After the debate, that Rachel Madcow guy was on with some phony ‘fact-check’ crap about Perry lying on that, because they had proof that the border town of Austin was safer than ever! WTF?
Huntsman? Doesn't he also look creepily like Rahm Emmanual? I'm surprised he didn't show up in tights.
Obama didn’t have an option on the Afghanistan operation and at every turn he has given up any strategic advantage we ever had. What he did was to do the absolute minimum that would barely get him over whatever focus group polling that was being done at the time so it was never generated as the right thing to do. Besides, it took him three months at that to make a simple decision.
Combine that with yesterday’s story about Obama leaving only 3000 soldiers in Iraq to complete the mission that the fewest recommended by any commander was 15-25K?
Use that to compare and contrast, we don’t need to be in the business of feeding the left with any ideas because they would never beleive us in the first place. Besides, would it be a bit optomistic to think they could actually do a little deductive reasoning, for once?
It was fun watching him try to out whit Newt.
That sounds like something from Shiela Jackson Lee.
I saw a tiny bit of the show after the debate. Quite a little cadre of nincompoops that assembled for that. Sharpton was saying something about Gally O, and I figured the rest of the commentary would be about that intelligent, so I quit watching.
Newt had the best lines when he attacked john harris of politico for his biased questions.
Perry is weak on illegal immigration wants no border fence and looked foolish about his executive order having 12 year old girls taking shots for a cervical cancer problem.
If it comes down to perry vs mitty, I'm going with the cowboy.
Social Security is a "monstrous lie," a "Ponzi scheme," and will be a failure for future generations. Those things are true, but piling negative descriptions on the problem is not the same as finding a solution. The office blowhard can complain at the water cooler, but that doesn't mean that he can offer fair, workable solutions. Rick Perry needed to give the impression that he can give solutions, and he didn't.
Many of us are climate change skeptics and some even have doubts about evolution. Outside of a very narrow slice of church goers, Americans are not yearning for someone to lead us on a crusade against evolution. The swing voters may be wrong to be as wrapped in evolution as they are, but by tilting that windmill, Governor Perry casts himself as someone who doesn't understand science and cannot be trusted to deal with science issues.
In his only question about a "Perry doctrine" on foreign policy, he completely failed to explain himself beyond platitudes that he passed off as "philosophical" discussion. His position sounded okay, but he didn't explain what he really meant. He sounded a little better than Herman Cain did when Mr. Cain said that he wouldn't give an answer about Afghanistan until he had all of the information, but Governor Perry's answer was no better. For people looking for something that tells them that this candidate is ready to occupy the nation's highest office, he gave us nothing.
Ron Paul, Michele Bachmann, and Rick Santorum properly criticized Governor Perry for his Gardasil order. I would have been more critical than they were. I'd like to see someone ask, "Governor Perry, you didn't trust parents enough to make decisions for their daughters about a year-old vaccine for a behavior-based disease. What other decisions do you not trust parents to make for their own children?" Mr. Perry's "opt out" excuse sounded more like an attempt not to take full responsibility for his mistake. Mitt Romney took a forgiving tone, but the forgiveness is necessary because Governor Perry erred badly.
Governor Perry's defense of the death penalty was strong and principled. He showed that he understands the responsibility of a state using capital punishment. He didn't try to make the death penalty into a macho thing that focused on him as an individual. He gave a great answer. The problem is that enough people are squeamish that he really won't win swing voters on that answer.
This debate was the chance for people to see whether Rick Perry is really head and shoulders above the rest of the GOP field and whether he can win the general election. He did neither, and in that sense, he lost. His core supporters will be enthusiastic about him. Others will realize that he may be just the latest "anyone but Romney" fad.
I didn't get that feeling.
And going back to the "death in Texas -- do you lose sleep?" question, I believe the audience (and by extension) the country is looking at the Obama administration's obvious concern about terrorists over citizens, and special interest groups (to the point of inciting them to riot) over the general population and thinking that Texas (and Perry) won't put up with that - that a President Perry is a much more attractive visual than the reality of President Obama in the Oval Office.
Yep! And when Perry stated what happens when you commit murder in Texas, I was hoping he`d quote comedian Ron White: “If you come to Texas and kill somebody, we will kill you back!”
Huntsman screams narcissist.
The border town of “Austin?” LOL
Rachel M. is stupid.
I guess since Texas is a border state, to a brain-dead msm elite, Austin is a border town.
I also found Matthews more bizarre than when I last saw him preform. He made the unfunny crack that people were going to HAVE to watch MSNBC because the debate was on this channel. Beyond that he was just plain mean and shrill — sicking to be subjected to such partisan drivel. Is something wrong with his throat. Cancer?
I was laughing at the spectacle of Rev Al (Rachel’s term) pontificating on how when he was in presidential debates ....blah, blah....They all came across as partisan loons.
I love Ron White!!!!!
It sounds to me that the anti- GOP moderators of this debate and their questions (along with the need of many on the stage to take mulitiple hits at Perry to be noticed and make news) suited your already negatively cemented view of Gov. Perry.
I thought he did a good job. He will certainly have more opportunities to get his points across as the field thins.
Perry supports a fence.....where it will work. Most of the Texas border is the Rio Grande river where a fence will not work because you either have to give the river to Mexico, take it away from Mexico or try to build a fence down the middle of a river. There are tons of other reasons, but it is not as simple as some who do not live there proclaim.
Perry and others agree that is has to be a combination of fence, technology and more people on the ground.
Regarding Guardasil, Perry gave the best explanation yet.....I could have done it differently.
Perry doesn’t have to “justify” anything. He has to put his views out there so the public can decide if they’re good ideas. As for “swing” voters, they’ll go Democrat. They only thing they swing on is the GOP primary. I don;t understand the problem with Gardasil. Then again, I don;t understand parents who don’t want their kids immunized for whooping cough either.
Everyone took shots at both Governor Perry and Governor Romney. The shots taken at Governor Perry are noticed more because he didn’t handle them as well. My negatively cemented view of Governor Perry keeps getting set more strongly by his words and the attitudes of his supporters.
I had noticed that too for the past year. He must have something wrong there. Constant clearing his throat and burping/ puking up in his mouth.
I see. Anything else?
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.