Exactly. He totally failed. I watched the debate. The effect was that I went from being a Perry supporter back to being a "wake me in November 2012 and I'll vote the ticket" supporter. I was amazed how ineffective Perry is as a salesman/persuader/spokesman.
I know it's cliche to say this, but it reminded me of GWB. I used to get so frustrated at Dubya's inability to make a strong, clear argument. I do this bit for my wife, where I'm GWB saying "The world is better off without Saddam Hussein." And his supporting argument: "It just is" (shrugging shoulders.)
Same thing with Perry. Seemingly unable to support his statements in any kind of persuasive way. It's not enough to be right. You have to be able to demonstrate it. Honestly, I thought Perry sucked.
You both miss the point.
Perry did a masterful job of shaping and selecting the battlefield. He did not intend to offer solutions the first crack out of the barrel. His crafty purpose was to gain control of the debate, not the one at the Regan Library but the total campaign debate.
He now has all others including Obama on defense and months and months to carefully and fully make his points. It was a brilliant play
Good grief, it is a long way until the election. There will be much more said than just last night. How much can one explain in a minute or two? You had unrealistic expectations.