Posted on 09/24/2011 6:37:39 AM PDT by TexasFreeper2009
no, not really.
I think the article gets that right: a number watch the debates, the vast majority of those were never in play anyway (they are just junkies, or D’s, or like freepers, they were supporting a candidate and hoping to see their candidate do well). But those that watch the debate are exceptionally vocal. Their loudmouths drive the news coverage, which in turn, drives money and other opinion leader stuff.
THEN...a few months down the road, the votes are cast by tens of millions in the primary, state by state.
The problem for Perry is that the game is real NOW. It is not the final game of gathering votes. But it is part of it, and an important part of it.
And his performance made it more likely that Christie, and because of that, that Palin will get in.
If both of those happen NEXT week, Perry is going to lose all press for two weeks or so, and thus will have to start retailing in order to undo the debate damage.
All of that happens in the context of those who watch coverage, and then finally, after New Year’s Day, the rest of the primary electorate will start watching.
By then, the field will be set, and the damage from the debate will either be long forgotten, or ....will have proven fatal.
(Personally...I just want to beat obama.....)
I am beginning to think Mitt Romney had a point when he said at a previous debate that Rick Perry was dealt four aces when he took over as governor in Texas. I guess it would be hard for even a Mike Dukakis to screw up a state that already had a booming economy, a conservative legislature, a lack of socialist unions and a host of other advantages going for it. Does Perry really deserve the credit for Texas' success or did he just inherit a good situation and is now trying to taking credit for it?
I mean, it would be like if Ronald Reagan in 1984 put a clownish oaf in charge of his re-election campaign and then after his landslide re-election, everybody hailed this incompetent buffoon as a political genius who then proceeded to spend the next 30 years screwing up campaigns and making fools of his clients. Oh wait...I think that scenario actually happened!
So do we really want to make that same mistake with empty suit Rick Perry?
Other than looking good on camera and possessing the same artificial homespun drawl and snake-oil charm that worked so well for Bill Clinton, what exactly does Rick Perry offer us? Are there any real-life examples of Rick Perry being a real conservative or true leader that any of his rabid supporters can point to? If elected, will Rick Perry be a game-changer who will advance the conservative cause, or will he just more of the "same old same old" who will give us 4-8 years of weak leadership, paving the way for the next Democrat administration?
I understand we all want to beat Obama but we don't want to send a card-board cut-out there who will just be a place-holder with a "Republican" title. To use a football metaphor, the Democrat socialists have driven the ball (under Obama) into the red zone and it's 4th-and-goal at about the four yard line. If we allow them to get into the endzone in 2012, it's game over. On the other hand, it's not enough for us to just make a goal line stand and hold our ground. We need to get the ball back and start driving back down the field. Will Rick Perry be the man to move the chains if we let him have the ball? I don't think so.
they are not running
and
they never will run.
You don't just pop up in October and say... HEY ! surprise! I am running!
lol
If they were running you would be hearing constant chatter about all the things they are doing in prep, like we did with Perry, and by the time they actually announced it would be anti-climatic.
The field is set, like it or not, these are our candidates to choose from and only two are even out of the single digits, take your pick.
bump.
If either or both Christie and Palin get in, Romney is a lock, because conservative votes will be split — same as the way McCain got the nomination.
And if Romney is a lock, so is Obama.
Brilliant strategy on the part of conservative and selfish on the part of conservatives.
If conservatives would support Perry, who IS the most electable conservative, he could get the nomination and beat Obama — but no, we have to have a handful of conservatives splitting the vote, so Romney can win.
People aren’t considering the consequences of their action.
You might well be right, and the sheer forces of (real) history (not freeper history) certainly agree with you.
But this cycle, because of the carnage caused by obama, might well be different.
What do you make of Christy’s “reconsidering” announcement?
Personally, I take that at face value. I think he may well be reconsidering.
I don’t think Palin can run for the reasons you noted, unless Christy clears a path. (Insert offensive lineman jokes here).
I don’t know how this will play out exactly. But the GOP has got to come up with someone to oust obama. That is the one thing that I do know.
Are you kidding me? Lol, I want them both defeated. Romney is worse than Perry but they But they both represent everything that is wrong with politics in the United States.
How about trying to elect someone who Co uld be a breath of fresh air for this nation. Someone who is willing to stand up against politicians like Perry and Romney and break down the insiders grip on Washington.
If we don’t do it now we are doomed as a nation to failure.
People aren’t considering the consequences of their action.”
Everything you wrote is spot on true.
But..it is also true that Perry caused this himself. You or I could have outperformed him last week. Why didn’t he prep? Or why did he prep poorly? We don’t know; we just see the result, and now this.
It could also be pointed out that he has acted selfishly by performing poorly.
I suppose the problem of all this is that you don’t became a Governor and still have self-reflection skills remain intact. You have to believe in your own Teflon, and disregard all evidence to the contrary. Because that is what Perry showed the other night. He showed that he thought he didn’t have to prepare and that it doesn’t matter.
Alas.
(GOP: just give us someone to beat obama.....).
But never saying a word about Romney, even though nearly 100% of what he did they disagree with.
I know, I know your gonna say, but everyone KNOWS that Romney is horrible.... but I will say no everyone only knows that if you keep saying it. If you only attack Perry without also pointing out how Romney is 10 times worse on that issue, you are helping Romney by omission.
Perry is new to the scene. Thus more attention towards him. You are right though, most know what Romney is all about. So why bother pointing out the obvious. :-)
You are right. Perry finally shoved illegal immigration in my face one time too many on Thurs and I just could not ignore it any longer.
I don't know for instance if a single Mass. cop ever detained a single illegal alien under Romney's watch, while Perry has ordered Texas rangers to the border than detain hundreds each day. Perry went along with 99% of the Texas legislature and signed a bill allowing the children of illegal aliens who have lived in Texas for the previous 3 years to receive in-state tuition rates (which they would have easily passed over his veto) while Romney is the architect of Romneycare the precursor to to Obamacare, and 70% of those using Romnycare are illegal aliens. Romney also as governor issued an executive order to all state agencies to implement gay marriage. I could go on and on.
Anything that Perry is bad on, Romney is 100000 times worse on. Remember that even McLame seemed conservative by comparison to Romney. I remember this, and maybe you remember this, but obvioiusly many here don't since many appear to be considering Romney instead of fighting like heck to sink him!
I can think of a couple off the top of my head....Perry (a non-lawyer) made tort reform a priority. It wouldn't have gone anywhere otherwise.
Likewise Texas push-back against the EPA. (air-quality etc.) Only a governor has stubborn as Perry would stand up against the Feds like he has.
Then Texas sued and won a lawsuit against the Feds over strings attached to education money owed the state. Don't know if Perry should get credit for that or not but it certainly wouldn't have happened w/o his backing and maybe his initiation. The state democrats were all for the federal stings.
He also was adamant (rightly or wrongly) against Texas spending it's total rainy day fund in the budget shortfall this past legislative session insisting on cuts instead. Without his opposition, the entire fund would have been used.
One of his priorities now is holding college administrators feet to the fire over the cost of higher education. He thinks they are inefficient and professors are teaching too little among other things.
I'm sure others can add to this and I could too if I wanted to put in some research time. IMO he's been a pretty effective governor.
True, Perry said no on below $5,000.00 , but then you may think that is low. But it does establish he is for sell, but you need to haggle over the price.
“2 RINO’S, I WONT VOTE FOR EITHER. IF THEY ARE NOMINATED I WILL QUIT THE GOP!”
Are you going to hold your breath and stomp your feet, too?
I think it may actually show just the opposite. That he was OVER prepped, OVER prepared.
An example of this was at the end when he was trying to show that Romney was a flip-flopper. That was something he'd OBVIOUSLY planned to say. He'd memorized it and practiced it but unfortunately messed it up. That one sequence colored the perception of his entire performance.
Many people didn't like his in-state tuition comments but he said them well.
When Perry is out among the people speaking extemporaneously, he's articulate and at ease. I don't think he's been at ease in any of the debates.
What do you make of Christy’s “reconsidering” announcement?
That announcement came from Newsmax.com .. which has proven itself to be a totally unreliable source. If you read the article, and not the headlines, it cites an *unnamed source* and provides absolutely nothing to back up the headline.
Someone said something in here earlier that really made sense to me. As Perry continues to do so poorly, logic tells us that the poor showing will encourage Christie or Palin to get in. And no .. it’s not too late.
I am not going to be content this election with simply putting a guy in the White House with an (R) after his name. We need a federal government that will move the country in the right direction and advance the conservative cause.
Notice I said government and not president. Because it will not be enough to simply replace Obama with a Republican. We will need additional seats in Congress to increase the GOP majority (preferably to a super majority) and we will need to put the Senate back under GOP control. Only then can we truly move the country in the right direction again by repealing Obamacare, stopping Cap & Trade, reducing regulations that are strangling our industries, reducing the tax burden for individuals and corporations, reducing the size of government, putting conservatives back on the Supreme Court, adopting the "Arizona" approach to illegal immigration, and I can go on and on. None of this will happen however if we are just putting a placeholder in the White House who will have little or no coattails.
So all that said, is Rick Perry the man that is going to move the chains for us? The Democrat/Socialists have us backed up on our 4-yard line and it's 4th-and-goal for them. If we stop them only to go four and out ourselves, we are only going to give them the ball back in 4 years in great field position. Instead, we need to get the ball back and hand it to a leader who will start picking up 1st downs for us so that we can march back across the field ourselves.
Sorry for all the football references but that is the best way I can explain our situation. We cannot settle for beating Obama with a president who will be weak on offense. We need a real quarterback who will be able to put together a game winning drive despite being backed up in his own end zone.
So I ask again, is Rick Perry going to be that quarterback? I do not think so. Definitely not Mitt Romney and probably not any of the other current candidates besides maybe Herman Cain. Sarah Palin? Absolutely. She is the one that will energize the base, win us the Senate and perhaps a super majority in the House. If she was able to put someone like Herman Cain on her ticket, she would completely neutralize the Obama/Hillary ticket that I see coming down the road (yes, I see Obama dumping Biden for Hillary at next summer's convention).
If it's Obama/Hillary against a Perry/Santorum ticket, we might as well all move to Canada.
You don't have to worry about Perry picking Santorum as VP (if given the opportunity). Regardless of who the candidate turns out to be, they'd be wise to pick Rubio.
As of now, I still support Perry for the following reasons: (1) He's had over 10 years of executive experience in a diverse, large population state and is a strong "state rights" person. States Rights = smaller federal government. (2) He is socially and fiscally conservative. Marriage between a man and a woman, anti-abortion with legislation to prove it. (3) Strongly pro-Israel (4) Believes American can and should be energy independent. (5) Wants a Federal balanced budget amendment. (Texas has one) (6) Hates the EPA and would certainly reform or abolish it. Same for the Justice Dept. re: Fast and Furious (7) Would secure the border contrary to the stupid charge that he is "open borders". (8) Believes in local control of schools (vouchers) (9) He realizes that it's imperative that changes be made in the entitlement programs. (10) He is a Christian.
George Bush has never been as tough as Perry is. His (Perry's) detractors say he is "ruthless" and "uncompromising" in accomplishing his goals. I don't know about that but I wouldn't mind having somebody "tough" as our commander-in-chief, as long as they had common sense and a true love for our country.
I very much like Herman Cain as well. The others are a no for me but I'll support anybody who can get Obama OUT. It's imperative.
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.