Replies

I've read the argument this morning that Perry has time to improve in debates. While that's true, it must be remembered that Perry is a career politician who has never been a good debater. For that matter, Perry has been seldom effective when interviewed in a less than friendly environment (thus far, Perry has done no interviews in which he's been challenged).

Whether good or bad, these are tests in our system of primary elections to determine our Party representative.

More troubling to me though are Perry's positions versus his record. I continue to see more evidence that Perry isn't what his campaign has claimed him to be, a solid Conservative.

I've had the feeling for a while now that as bad a President as Obama is, he still has a massively effective campaign (including most of the MSM). While I do believe in the ABO philosophy, I'm even more convinced now that either of the current Republican front-runners would likely lose to Obama in November 2012.

I'm still optimistic though since (regardless of what the media keeps saying) it is still early and lots of things can change.

Rick Perry really just isn't quick on his feet and seems to get testy when criticized. No amount of coaching is going to change that. Those here and elsewhere who are expecting his performances to improve are simply engaging in an exercise of wishful thinking. I have every expectation that his performances will continue to deteriorate with each subsequent debate as the stakes for each will rise and bring with them an increased pressure to perform.

IMO, Perry's political science brains have miscalculated badly. What sells in Texas isn't necessarily going to sell nation wide. And at some point the voters are going to expect a candidate to at least reasonably articulate what they believe in and why.