He may have the best chance of unifying the party and that can't be a bad thing, although I'd be happier to see a Palin or Bachmann leading the parade. They've proven they have the nerve to go toe-to-toe with the Dark Star. I don't know if any of the men in the field have that nerve.
Probably one of the better posts I have seen on Perry. I have voted for him every time he has run for a statewide office in Texas simply because the alternatives were worse. He is not a true Conservative. You can track his career and see where he has moved left and right as the political winds blow. He is the consummate politician changing parties when it became obvious that a Democrat would not win a statewide office in Texas and moving further right with the election of Obama. If that is what you want, Perry is your man. If you want a principled Conservative LEADER, Perry will most likely disappoint once in DC.
I concur. Yet the man does have a proven track record of success as governor and seems to bury his own missteps rather quickly. He talks a good conservative game and gives them enough to keep them on the reservation but he also does things that keeps the moderate wing pacified as well.
I don't think he's liked by the Bushes, as witnessed by them getting behind KBH this last election, which is why the Beltway doesn't love him. I don't think he likes DC any more than I do.
I wouldn't do cartwheels for him but he may be the one with the best chance of giving both wings of the party enough that they can "live" with him and support him. Pawlenty is the other one that strikes me as a compromise candidate that could mollify both groups.
There's really two objectives here: 1) Dethrone Obama and 2) Be effective once in office to fix the country. I have more confidence in him accomplishing the first than I have confidence in him accomplishing the second. Conversely, I feel just the opposite about Palin.