Actually, now that Perry stepped in it by proposing Iraq War 2 - with Drudge picking up on it, he’s probably through (once and for all), so you see me having to discuss the issues that conservatives have with Perry too much more.
Perry hasn’t been relevant to this nomination process since that debate gaffe on Nov 9.
Really, he started falling fast after his heartless comment on immigration on Sep 22, that was quickly followed by Cain’s shock win of the FL straw poll and subsequent rise in the polls.
Perry hasn’t led nationally or in any state since the end of September. He hasn’t really even been close or competitive nationally or in any state since then as well, and definitely since the debate meltdown in early November.
If you look at polls in big states like CA, FL, NY, PA, IL, etc... he’s at 1-2%. He’ll be lucky to top 1% in NH on tuesday.
I have no idea why he’s sticking around to SC, but he’ll be out after that.
That Iraq return though may have been one of the dumbest debate things I’ve seen.
Disagree that he lost becuase of the Bush 2.0 thing, though. He lost a)because he insulted conservatives on immigration and came off as soft on it and b)because especially with that debate moment people just don’t think he’s up to the job.
Iraq War 2?? NOT!
Perry strategist Nelson Warfield emails to take issue with the original headline of this post, “Perry: Re-invade Iraq,” explaining: “Rick Perry wants to establish a strategic presence in Iraq like we have in hot spots around the world. That’s not an invasion, that’s common sense.”