I’m not sure we could find the difference.
I think we need to put all Perry’s positives and negatives on the scale.
Positives:
Pro-life
Pro-gun/2nd Amendment
Pro-Small government
Anti-Tax
Anti-regulation
a “global warming skeptic†— suing the EPA, realizing it’s a job-killer
He has a record of low taxes, low regulation, pro-private enterprise and job creation
Pro-secure border: asked for Naional Guard troops for the border, spent Texas money to secure the border, because the Federal government wouldn’t do it, wants “boots on the ground†to secure the border — for the terrain and river fence is not the best solution, his ideas are better for Texas, he DOES want to secure the border
He said he will repeal Obamacare
He took on trial lawyers and won
Excellent fund raising ability (needed to beat Romney and Obama)
Palin endorsed him and campaigned for him for his reelection campaign and called him “a true conservativeâ€
He can talk without a teleprompter and his speeches are just fine
Negatives:
After Texas Legislature passed law to give in-state tuition to children of illegal immigrants, with only four votes against him, he didn’t veto the measure, “to make a statementâ€, when his veto would have been easily overridden.
Foot-in-mouth in the debate — let he/she who never said something they regretted throw the first stone, especially after hours of everyone ganging up on him over one or two issues
Are Perry’s negatives so bad that we should rather have Romney walk away with the nomination and then be beaten by Obama? THIS is the real question. Let us take a step back and consider the above.