[af_vet_rr]

Why shouldn't Perry continue on? He should do better in SC than Iowa and why should we be calling this nomination process over after the first caucus?

Except that the polls say he's not doing better in SC. He might get a slight bump from Bachmann leaving, and I have a feeling that Bachmann leaving helped him to decided whether or not to say in the race today, but even if he got all of Bachmann's folks, that still only puts him ahead of Ron Paul. It doesn't address the definite surge Santorum will get, and Perry won't get all of Bachmann's backers. In fact, Bachmann's supporters could easily push Santorum past Perry and into 4th or 3rd place.

And let we forget, there were FReepers and others saying that Perry was doing a lot better in Iowa than the 8% - 12% polling that we were hearing, and that he had an amazing ground game and was spending millions on advertising.

He finished with 10%. That is not doing better than the polling indicated. In fact, it's worse than some of the polls indicated, but it's uncanny how Perry was within a percentage point of the last two weeks of polling.

[Conservativegreatgrandma]

So,what does it matter? We’re just starting and already amazing things have happened and they continue to happen.

[John Valentine]

Perry was the only candidate in Iowa other than the “big three” to cary a county - he carried 2, and was a strong second place finisher in several more.

He needs to send his campaign pollsters into these counties to find out what went right - and use that information to tweak his campaign message.

I think SC could be very fertile ground for Perry. He is absolutely right on each and every issue that I care about, and he has the executive experience to back that up. I think that he could be the most electable candidate on the field. He certainly does not have any of the negatives that plague Romerry, Gingrich, and Santorum - all talkers. Or Paul, either, whose cotton stuffing is showing through the seams.