Does Perry have a plan?

posted at 9:25 am on September 28, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

Yesterday, I wrote that Rick Perry needs to stop worrying so much about his competitors in the Republican primary fight and start laying out his own plans for a Perry presidency in order to claim the mantle of a front-runner.  Jill Lawrence at the Daily Beast decided to take a look at Perry’s website to see what kind of argument that might be, and discovered why Perry might be a little too focused on attacking Romney:

In public at least, Rick Perry is among those writing off his stumbling debate performances as a verbal problem—as in, he’s not a slick, smooth talker like President Obama or Mitt Romney. But Perry would be less of a piñata, and sound more like a president, if he had laid out a full platform.

In his three debates so far, the governor has attacked Obama and Romney, defended himself, explained himself, and talked about Texas. But the biggest missing piece is his blueprint for America.

When Perry is under fire over some aspect of his Texas record, he hasn’t pivoted to signature plans for jobs or foreign policy. A spin through Perry’s website underscores the problem. Under “Jobs,” we find five paragraphs of conservative boilerplate. The most detailed sentence refers to “low taxes, reasonable regulations, a predictable civil litigation system and an educated workforce.”

Perry has only been in the race for a few weeks, Lawrence notes, and the campaign tells her that full policy papers will come “at a time of our choosing.”  That makes sense for a candidate who is just entering the race when it’s early in the cycle, but it’s not early any more.  Voters will have to make choices in four months, and the debates are taking place right now.

Perry’s competition have already laid out specifics on economic policy, especially his toughest foe, Mitt Romney, whose plan is detailed enough to be a 160-page book.  Herman Cain has his 9-9-9 plan, and even Jon Huntsman — who may not qualify for the next debate — has an economic plan that the Wall Street Journal takes seriously enough to review and praise. Not having anything beyond a few boilerplate conservative concepts doesn’t give voters a reason to positively support Perry, and being this far behind the others on stage puts him in a weak position to answer policy questions on the most important issue in the upcoming elections.  Not only does it make Perry sound unprepared, it has forced him into an explosion of cliches during the debates, according to Eric Ostermeier at Smart Politics.

That would still be all right if Perry focused on introducing himself rather than just go on the attack against Romney, but that’s not the direction Perry has taken.  Instead, he’s gone on the attack over Romney’s book (getting a three-Pinocchio review from WaPo’s Glenn Kessler for his second campaign ad), and doesn’t appear ready to change direction at all:

Rick Perry’s widely panned debate performances? Just a hiccup. Any major changes in debate prep? None planned. His unexpected and deflating Florida straw poll loss last weekend? Not a big deal.

Even as some of his supporters grow anxious, the Texas governor’s top aides insist they have no plans for real or even symbolic changes to their campaign. The only pivot they’ll make, they say, is to become more aggressive with Mitt Romney.

The defiant response in the face of nearly a week of sharp criticism is a reflection of Perry’s own pugnacious style — the best defense is a good offense. But it’s also a signal from the Austin powers about what they view as the bed-wetting within the GOP political class.

The Texan’s aides downplay the tele-town-halls Perry had Monday night with Iowa and South Carolina Republicans as having been long-planned – not exercises in reassurance. And the economic speech Perry has slated for Friday won’t feature a major policy roll-out.

“We’re not going to change what we’re doing,” said Perry spokesman Mark Miner. “It’s a long race.”

This points out the problem of late-race entries, because the time for introductions and policy rollouts gets crunched into weeks.  Unfortunately, Perry’s team doesn’t seem focused on doing either.  Perhaps Perry can pull it off, but at some point he’ll have to give more detailed answers to policy questions than just “Texas.”

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

He will.

kg598301 on September 28, 2011 at 9:28 AM

I’ve been saying this for weeks: Rick Perry hasn’t given me a reason to vote for him. Even his supporters have had some good things to say, but looking beyond the noxious policy positions (Gardasil, TTC, et. al), it’s hard for me to get past the complete-and-utter lack of vision.

Perrykrishnas like him because he’s a fighter. That looks like all he really has going for him at this point, unfortunately. He needs to decide who and what he is fighting for. Nothing wilts faster than laurels rested upon.

gryphon202 on September 28, 2011 at 9:31 AM

He will.

kg598301 on September 28, 2011 at 9:28 AM

I’m waiting.

gryphon202 on September 28, 2011 at 9:31 AM

Being the anti-Obama, the way things are going in America maybe that will be enough for any potential nominee.

Bishop on September 28, 2011 at 9:32 AM

Pretzels for gas jets?

lorien1973 on September 28, 2011 at 9:33 AM

Indeed. Stop getting in the mud with the other candidates. Act as if you are the nominee.

blatantblue on September 28, 2011 at 9:33 AM

Get a better staff, Perry.

parteagirl on September 28, 2011 at 9:34 AM

[when his Deputy Sheriff, his last hope of help, deserts him]
Will Kane: “Go on home to your kids, Herb.”

Limerick on September 28, 2011 at 9:34 AM

In defense of Perry and all the candidates, the solution to the jobs problem is not a complex one. They are actually fairly simple, even if they are conservative boilerplate. Lowering taxes, limited and predictable regulations, less government intrusion (such as the boeing mess), tort reform that discourages frivolous lawsuits, repealing Obamacare and providing a lose framework for states to find solutions, lower corporate taxes to encourage foreign investment, etc.

This is not complex. I don’t see why he needs a 100 page plan.

ramrants on September 28, 2011 at 9:37 AM

Yes he’s a bumbling debater. Yes he looks like a deer in the headlights too often and yes his collar rides too high on his neck.

But….if he wins the nomination, i’m voting for him. Fortunately for a Republican in California, our primary is so inconsequntial we can wait to see who you all pick.

dirtseller on September 28, 2011 at 9:38 AM

Elections schmelections.

Akzed on September 28, 2011 at 9:38 AM

How to make a million dollars job: First, get a million dollars job.

Apologies to Steve Martin.

Fallon on September 28, 2011 at 9:39 AM

A big chunk of any play has to be getting government out of the way, which is not a plan for government doing something.

Yes, he needs to lay out a proposal for restructuring the tax code and social security 7 medicare/medicaid, but part of the answer is also “I’m just going to get out of your way.”

rbj on September 28, 2011 at 9:41 AM

Rick Perry’s widely panned debate performances? Just a hiccup. Any major changes in debate prep? None planned. His unexpected and deflating Florida straw poll loss last weekend? Not a big deal.

Even as some of his supporters grow anxious, the Texas governor’s top aides insist they have no plans for real or even symbolic changes to their campaign. The only pivot they’ll make, they say, is to become more aggressive with Mitt Romney.

Attacking Mittens is all well and good, but that only helps if at the same time you’re making a credible case for yourself. Say what you will about Romney, but at the last debate he managed to deflect the criticisms from Perry(which wasn’t much of a challenge, BTW) and came off as coherent and almost Presidential at times. If Perry can’t do likewise, this is an exercise in futility because he’ll continue to fade.

Doughboy on September 28, 2011 at 9:42 AM

The point of a “seasoned executive politician” is his record.

Whatever “platform” that politician claims which contradicts his own record is merely Egyptian Sale false promises that convince suckers to trust the lie.

When the politician offers a non-apology for getting caught abusing the Constitution against the rights of citizens, see it for what it is, another sale’s pitch enforcing “I’d do it again, better” knowing he can get away with abuse at some point given further opportunity and POWER.

Does Perry have a plan? Rather, have the polls been assimilated so as to formulate what you’d buy?

maverick muse on September 28, 2011 at 9:43 AM

Yes he’s a bumbling debater. Yes he looks like a deer in the headlights too often and yes his collar rides too high on his neck.

dirtseller on September 28, 2011 at 9:38 AM

I knew I couldn’t be the only one who noticed this. A few of my conservative women co-workers and I were talking about him a while back and we all agreed that there’s something about his suit that doesn’t look right and decided that his collar was way too high. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a man’s collar that high up on his neck.

TxAnn56 on September 28, 2011 at 9:47 AM

9-9-9, we don’t need anymore plans…Perry just sign on to that.

right2bright on September 28, 2011 at 9:51 AM

I’m still not thrilled with his stance on illegal immigrations, and calling us heartless. A plan might sway me. But for now, I’m watching Cain. He just seems promising to me.

capejasmine on September 28, 2011 at 9:52 AM

You’re probably right Ed, but for me, all any GOP candidate needs to do is say that the gov should provide a well-maintained level field and then GTFO of the GD way! And do what TX has been doing.

Detailed plans is often just a BS wishlist (or maybe I’m just skewed by the memory of all the bogus stuff Obama promised on his campaign website). Still, you’re probably right that donors need to see some details on paper.

juliesa on September 28, 2011 at 9:52 AM

2nd that blatantblue

cmsinaz on September 28, 2011 at 9:55 AM

Romney can have 1600 pages of policy. He will flip flop on 1500 of those pages on Day 1 as president.

angryed on September 28, 2011 at 9:56 AM

I will not support anyone that doesn’t have some kind of plan forward.

Look, Cain’s 999 plan is not totally thorough, but it gives us a general idea where he would go.

Perry has…so far nothing. He keeps on telling us to look at Texas, which is well and good. But Texas has low taxes because of gas revenues, which I doubt will help me in my state of Ohio.

Even ‘getting out of the way’ takes a plan. The government is such a disaster, we need a plan to become a more truly federal type system.

Perry needs something soon, otherwise, he is likely to lose the base.

neoavatara on September 28, 2011 at 9:57 AM

This is not complex. I don’t see why he needs a 100 page plan.

ramrants on September 28, 2011 at 9:37 AM

You beat me to it and said it better. Obama’s trying to promote hiring with complicated tax incentives that small businessmen don’t have the time or money to decode. Obamacare is too complex and expensive, and so are all the unpredictable new regs that have been spewing from this admin–EPA, Dodd Frank, etc. We need less complexity, not more.

juliesa on September 28, 2011 at 10:00 AM

Perry has…so far nothing. He keeps on telling us to look at Texas, which is well and good. But Texas has low taxes because of gas revenues, which I doubt will help me in my state of Ohio.

neoavatara on September 28, 2011 at 9:57 AM

That’s a ridiculous argument. Then why doesn’t NY have low rates, they have Wall St? Why doesn’t CA have low rates, they have Silicon Valley?
Wall St and Silicon Valley produce more revenue dollars for those states than oil produces for Texas.

angryed on September 28, 2011 at 10:01 AM

Does Cain have a plan?

Do voters recognize Cain’s platform?

How many voters trust politicians? How many voters have wanted to vote out career politicians from government? If politicos believe in trickle down economics, then why the ballyhoo over good business in government?

Would a good business model threaten the politicians, frauds and embezzlers? How many voters have decided that our government needs an efficient business model that favors the productive worker rather than the administrative managerial elitist PC policy wonk? Who “needs” more administrative bureaucracy dictating your “rights” as citizens? How many prefer instead the corporate raider’s business perspective for quick turn-over (sell-out) profit undercutting the middle class and terminating US manufacturing for global-corporatist bloodsucking at the expense of real jobs and the lives of real tax payers, not to mention that “investment” raiders depleted the value that the Dollar no longer has to secure US sovereignty. How many voters want another Keynesian Ivy League potus, Obamalite? Fraud for sale. How many voters support PC Policy over the US Constitution?

Before Herman Cain beats Obama hands down in debate, as some anticipate, I’d suggest a series of private prep debates. Keep the focus on his agenda to best the GOP opponents. Much to the consternation of competitors, no one needs to tell Cain what to say, or teach him delivery style since people get him without the PC makeover affectations that would better suit naysayer propagandizing aficionados.

Cain vs. Perry/Romney
It’s one thing to say what everyone understands yet wonks distort out of proportion and out of context. It’s another thing to have a record in public service abusing the Constitution to deny citizens’ rights and over-reach limits of power “for the sake of the children”. And yet it’s another thing to have bankrupted the state for the sake of “health” (RomneyCare) and promising to again “err on the side of life” thrown against civil liberty.

Given Cain’s record of successful real-world WORK experience, I don’t see his agenda threatening US prosperity or further eroding our constitutional governance.

maverick muse on September 28, 2011 at 10:01 AM

His plan is to limit government.

Now he needs to tell us how he going to do that.

itsacookbook on September 28, 2011 at 10:01 AM

Texas Gov. Rick Perry says that if he’s elected president, he will work to make Washington as “inconsequential” to Americans’ lives as possible.

This opening salvo has the Left gnashing their teeth, go ahead Google it :)

Their hair has caught on Fire, What? Rick Perry is going to take away their billy club/fascist central?

The Left Hate Perry with a white hot passion, for even daring to suggest that the Federal Government, should be turned into a benign entity, what does that tell us?

If you remove the boot heel of the Federal Government from the American citizen’s necks, (Good ole Hope & Choke) the jobs will return. There is no need to re invent the wheel, we know what works in this country, we just need to return to what works.

Perry has to stop responding to non fiscal issues, “It’s The Spending Stupid” gardasil vaccine et al are just distractions.

Perry needs to get back on his bicycle, he’s already found his message, he just needs to hammer it home.

Dr Evil on September 28, 2011 at 10:03 AM

I’m willing to hear it. I’m beginning to think my gravitation towards him was the same as those who gravitate towards Gov. Christie. Both have done good things and their states and don’t suffer fools gladly. I’m just not sure that will get you to the White House. Based on the current occupant, the public leans to fairy tails and “nuance”.

Cindy Munford on September 28, 2011 at 10:05 AM

Ed, I see what you did there… a Palin thread and a Perry thread all competing for hits this fine morning. What could be greater? LOL…

TheRightMan on September 28, 2011 at 10:07 AM

Plan?

My plan for a Perry presidency would be for him to go into the oval office on day one, kick up his cowboy boots on that antique desk, and sit there for 4 to 8 years.

Do nothing. Your welcome.

tommylotto on September 28, 2011 at 10:07 AM

Perhaps Perry can pull it off, but at some point he’ll have to give more detailed answers to policy questions than just “Texas.”

Will he? We’re 3 years into Obama’s presidency, and he still hasn’t given us his detailed policy plan. And what policy he has implemented, has been the Pelosi/Reid plan.

besser tot als rot on September 28, 2011 at 10:12 AM

Perry is too used car salesman/politician for me… I’m standing with Cain.

kringeesmom on September 28, 2011 at 10:15 AM

Based on the current occupant, the public leans to fairy tails and “nuance”.

Cindy Munford on September 28, 2011 at 10:05 AM

I watched Chris Matthews get out the old electoral map on his program yesterday, showing how easy it was for Obama to win re election. The extent of wishcasting on the Left is a fascinating phenomena.

According to Matthews all Obama needs is to pick up Ohio, and he’s a shoe in for reelection. There must be video of him from yesterday.

I think the electoral map is tight, but I don’t think this election is Obama’s to lose, he’s got a titanic challenge ahead of him LOL!

Dr Evil on September 28, 2011 at 10:15 AM

On a more serious note, I agree that the Perry campaign has to make available as soon as possible his vision or plan for America. However, he also has no option but to go on the offensive against Romney.

You always skip one thing in your analyses, Ed. Perry hasn’t got the luxury of having attack dogs doing his bidding while he focuses on telling voters what he is for.

The last few debates were jokes! It devolved into “Perry said this or Perry did this… What do you think?” It was as if Perry is the sitting President, who has to defend his record.

But now you mention it, what is Bachmann’s plan? Santorum’s? Gingrich? Paul? Huntsman? Romney has released a 59-point plan filled with Washington-type platitudes… “full of sound and fury but signifying nothing”!

Perry doesn’t need a 59-point detailed plan. Infact, I would encourage the candidates to skip details, which the Dems will only demagogue and use to scare voters.

To create jobs, you only need one plan:

Get the Government out!

TheRightMan on September 28, 2011 at 10:17 AM

Agree with some of the above sentiment. Conservative bioler plate it may be, there is nothing more than govt can do to help the economy than those few things. I have not read Romney’s plan so I guess I better, but 160 pages? That sounds at first glance like a “too busy” government.

Anton on September 28, 2011 at 10:17 AM

slightly OT, the Schoen column that Lawrence links to is correct in this:

What was missing last night from Perry, Romney, and indeed any of the other seven candidates on stage was an overarching vision of what is wrong with America and why we are facing profound decline. There was little discussion of jobs after the first segment, and almost no discussion of what Pat Caddell and I have called the “profound national crisis” America is facing, let alone a set of policies and initiatives to reverse what appears to be an inexorable decline.

And Fox admits that they were trying to think up trap questions that would get the candidates fighting each other, because it would make good tv. This is why they didn’t ask anything about the critical issues. Just remember, folks, Fox is a mercenary and they are only on our side to the extent that they can make money by occupying that niche.

juliesa on September 28, 2011 at 10:20 AM

Dr Evil on September 28, 2011 at 10:15 AM

It is an amazing phenomenon, especially with the “scandals” coming to light. The press and his devotee are going to make Palin supporters look like pikers.

Cindy Munford on September 28, 2011 at 10:23 AM

Also Ed, Perry rushing out a not-so-well prepared plan is just going to present a rich goldmine for Romney to bash him over the head.

Considering that they’ve run out of ammo on the Gardasil and illegal immigrtion issues, I bet that is exactly what they are waiting for.

Allow Perry to also present his record and introduce himself to voters before rushing to prescribe medicine.

TheRightMan on September 28, 2011 at 10:24 AM

Will Kane: “Go on home to your kids, Herb.”

Limerick on September 28, 2011 at 9:34 AM

Winner!
I am not a crook. Nixon
I do not have lobbyists. Romney

Mitt Romney: “Listen to my words. Words have meaning. Listen to my words. Did you hear me? Listen to my words. Be respectful. Listen to my words.”

Weirdly, Romney exonerated himself with the ironic line that he was financing his own campaign. As if money doesn’t buy lobbyists.

Oh what a tangled web we weave,
When first we practice to deceive!

Sir Walter Scott, Marmion, Canto vi. Stanza 17.
Scottish author & novelist (1771 – 1832)

Western “The Rifleman” Townhall

maverick muse on September 28, 2011 at 10:29 AM

To create jobs, you only need one plan:

Get the Government out!

TheRightMan on September 28, 2011 at 10:17 AM

Yes it’s that simple, he already has a winning message, Perry just needs to hammer it home.

It’s past time to shrink the federal government. The cold war is over we have 900? bases around the world and 700,000.00 Pentagon bureaucrats. The Pentagon had 20,000.00 bureaucrats in WWII. What’s changed? Efficiency. We need a new global stance that reflects the transition from the cold war. It’s past time for audits and reform, we are currently positioning ourselves to come in behind other countries competing globally.

I would rather a military veteran get their benefits than a paper pusher, keep a seat warm in outer mongolia.

Dr Evil on September 28, 2011 at 10:29 AM

Cain’s Fair Tax plan, which is attractive, is one page. Would it be Ok if Perry rolls out a one page plan, or does it have to be a book?

juliesa on September 28, 2011 at 10:30 AM

His plan is to limit government.

Distinguish between plan (record) and propaganda.

Rick Perry says what voters want to hear.
Rick Perry does not limit government.

It is easier to argue how Rick Perry has enabled government to grow in size and power than to claim he’s ever limited federal government’s affect on Texans.

maverick muse on September 28, 2011 at 10:35 AM

Perry has no plan and based on the way he debates, I don’t think he’s smart enough to come up with one.

Conservative Samizdat on September 28, 2011 at 10:36 AM

Dr Evil on September 28, 2011 at 10:15 AM

It is an amazing phenomenon, especially with the “scandals” coming to light. The press and his devotee are going to make Palin supporters look like pikers.

Cindy Munford on September 28, 2011 at 10:23 AM

I don’t even know why Obama wants a second term if the Senate tips to the Republicans and they have the leadership in both houses, Obama is blocked. The investigations and what ensues from those investigations, isn’t going to be pretty. That’s the prevailing wisdom, the second term is always spent dealing with scandals….I don’t know that we haven’t just scratched the surface. My best guess Obama is seeking a second term to save Obamacare, his signature piece of legislation. If the Supreme Court strikes it down, that’s going to be moot.

I am curious, how many of these scandals are going to track back to Valerie Jarrett, one of his closets advisers? I think Jarrett, is going to be the Jamie Gorlick of the Obama administration.

Dr Evil on September 28, 2011 at 10:36 AM

As I understand things, Obama’s plan is to stoke his base to a fever pitch with a message that’s completely different from 2008. Then, he’ll turn to independents and argue that you don’t want to vote for the guy supported by those mean conservatives.

To further that argument, if Perry is nominated, Obama’s campaign will play over and over and over again Perry’s heartless criticism and say, “See, even their nominee thinks they’re beyond redemption.”

I’m sure that clip will show up in some ads in the next 14 months, but it will only be truly damaging if Perry’s the nominee.

Perry’s career in national GOP politics should be over. It should be easy for establishment types to avoid him. I’m just surprised that Perry isn’t at zero approval across the board.

BuckeyeSam on September 28, 2011 at 10:38 AM

Perry has no plan and based on the way he debates, I don’t think he’s smart enough to come up with one.

Conservative Samizdat on September 28, 2011 at 10:36 AM

Oh… I never knew there was a corellation between being a good debater and having a plan to fix the mess we are in.

You know who is a better debater than the hyped Romney? Obama the Won!

And how is Obama’s plan working out for you? /sarc

TheRightMan on September 28, 2011 at 10:38 AM

Plan 1: Hot Yellow Kool-aide.

Plan 2: Pretzel Gas Jets.

portlandon on September 28, 2011 at 10:40 AM

To further that argument, if Perry is nominated, Obama’s campaign will play over and over and over again Perry’s heartless criticism and say, “See, even their nominee thinks they’re beyond redemption.”

BuckeyeSam on September 28, 2011 at 10:38 AM

You really do hate Perry, don’t ya? What did he do to you?

I personally do not see Perry’s stances on HPV vaccine or illegal immigration hurting him in the general at all. Infact, it would be a plus.

OT: I also believe you are not beyond redemption with respect to seeing Perry in a whole different light.

TheRightMan on September 28, 2011 at 10:43 AM

Perry has no plan and based on the way he debates, I don’t think he’s smart enough to come up with one.

Conservative Samizdat on September 28, 2011 at 10:36 AM

He could buy a plan. Wait, what exactly is Romney’s plan?

portlandon on September 28, 2011 at 10:44 AM

based on the way he debates, I don’t think he’s smart enough to come up with one.

Conservative Samizdat on September 28, 2011 at 10:36 AM

So 10 years of successful governance of the the second largest state means nothing. Plus several other years in statewide executive office.

juliesa on September 28, 2011 at 10:44 AM

Dr Evil on September 28, 2011 at 10:36 AM

Because a Republican Congress will do for him what it did for Bill Clinton, made him the president of surpluses and welfare reform. It doesn’t matter that he was dragged screaming and kicking, it is his legacy. It will be a harder slog to help The Won but for him the only way it up.

Cindy Munford on September 28, 2011 at 10:46 AM

That’s a ridiculous argument. Then why doesn’t NY have low rates, they have Wall St? Why doesn’t CA have low rates, they have Silicon Valley?
Wall St and Silicon Valley produce more revenue dollars for those states than oil produces for Texas.

angryed on September 28, 2011 at 10:01 AM

Yep. In fact in New York City and state the liberals probably see the financial sector as a honey pot to exploit to support their prog-rams.

slickwillie2001 on September 28, 2011 at 10:55 AM

ED,

With all due respect – the US (and actually the World) economy is not capable of being planned. That would presume that government actually creates jobs.

What Perry is going to do is what he did in Texas, lower barriers to competition, lower the regulatory environment,enact sweeping tort reform, lower taxes, and spend less.

Fred Thompson was the only candidate in the last election to address social security and to have a economic plan – no one read it.

EricPWJohnson on September 28, 2011 at 10:55 AM

It wasn’t just the debate in Orlando, or Chance Number 1. Perry opened the CPACFL and I figured he’d blow the doors off the place.

It was miserable. Just a sorry performance ~ nothing new, same debate talking points, no fire, dingdingding at Romney (Shut UP about the books already!), with “don’t elect the slickest debater” excuse trotted out. WTF? That was Chance Number 2. All read off note cards and badly.

Out came Herman Cain. In control from the moment he hit the stage, no teleprompter, uses the same opening and closing lines, but red meat and a little something new in between. And en FUEGO. Had the place ON. ITS. FEET.

We were all ~ ALL ~ Perry supporters coming in (Part 1 of my report post as a delegate to P5 for Escambia County, FL), but that glow has faded rapidly.

Perry had Saturday’s speech to the delegates to make his case. Now, he badmouthed Bachman and Romney THAT VERY morning to CNN or someone for NOT participating in P5…and we were ALL waiting for him…only to find at the last minute he’d buggered out. Left. It’s his slot…and here comes a dapper, well spoken black gentleman to speak and 2500+ delegates are like, “And this is who…?” He was a far more competent advocate for Rick Perry than Perry himself had been, but it was too late. As my girlfriend next to me, a hard-core Perry supporter right up to when she marked her ballot for Herman Cain said:

“To know him [Perry] is not to love him.”

Herman Cain had brought the house DOWN. Seven times.

Made us believers.

tree hugging sister on September 28, 2011 at 10:56 AM

Perry has no plan and based on the way he debates, I don’t think he’s smart enough to come up with one.

Conservative Samizdat on September 28, 2011 at 10:36 AM

I agree. If debates were a job interviews, who in their right mind would hire this guy to get the job done? And not just any job but the toughest job in America.

Perry doesn’t defend his positions well, he doesn’t attack well in person or in ads (the Washington Post criticize both Romney attack ads as fabricated and deceitful) and he doesn’t strike me as a man who has thought much about the future, his or America.

When he said to Romney that ‘we’ll have to have that discussion’ and Romney shot right back ‘we are having that discussion now governor, we’re running for President.’

That moment was very telling about Perry.

Perry’s thinking comes across as lazy, anti-intellectual and mean. His style is that of a macho jerk who thinks he can stick out his chest, make some cocksure platitudes and win everyone over.

Go back to Texas Rick, that’s your true calling.

sheryl on September 28, 2011 at 10:57 AM

And Fox admits that they were trying to think up trap questions that would get the candidates fighting each other, because it would make good tv. This is why they didn’t ask anything about the critical issues. Just remember, folks, Fox is a mercenary and they are only on our side to the extent that they can make money by occupying that niche.

juliesa on September 28, 2011 at 10:20 AM

I was disgusted by that revelation as well, and it’s interesting that I’ve seen no response from Fox on that, no backdown or whining about ‘context’.

This demonstrates again that Fox News is content to be one inch to the right of the rest of the old media, because they have no competition.

slickwillie2001 on September 28, 2011 at 10:58 AM

Cindy Munford on September 28, 2011 at 10:46 AM

I think his scandals are going to be more serious than a stained dress. Even James Carville said, he should start firing people. But I don’t think these people surrounding Obama are like the people who surrounded Clinton, and would sacrifice themselves for him. I think there are folks Obama doesn’t dare fire – they know too much. Progressives/New Left, really are a rancid corrupt bunch.

Dr Evil on September 28, 2011 at 10:58 AM

at some point he’ll have to give more detailed answers to policy questions than just “Texas.”

Isn’t that enough?

Seriously, I am less interested in what he wants to do than what he wants to stop doing, as in which departments he will shut down.

Vashta.Nerada on September 28, 2011 at 11:04 AM

Step 3: Huge profits!

MidWestFarmer on September 28, 2011 at 11:05 AM

Dr Evil on September 28, 2011 at 10:58 AM

He doesn’t appear to be the kind of person who instills devotion does he? Maybe if he tried remembering peoples’ names it might help. In the case of Solyndra, between the turn down of the Bush administration and the apparent on the record misgivings of some of his cabinet, I don’t think he can disconnect himself. Although it will be fascinating to watch him and the media try.

Cindy Munford on September 28, 2011 at 11:05 AM

9-9-9, we don’t need anymore plans…Perry just sign on to that.

right2bright on September 28, 2011 at 9:51 AM

Can you answer any of the following?

1. How long will it take to get a Constitutional amendment for 9-9-9?
2. What will we do in the mean time?
3. What is the back up plan if we can’t amend the Constitution?
4. What will keep 9-9-9 from becoming 10-10-10 or worse?

MJBrutus on September 28, 2011 at 11:16 AM

Perhaps Perry can pull it off, but at some point he’ll have to give more detailed answers to policy questions than just “Texas.”

For me, that point is now! I am leaning heavily towards Romney now for precisely this reason. I have been asking for weeks to know what his plans for America are. If he has them and is not saying, that is dumb. If he doesn’t have any, that is worse than dumb and clearly undeserving of my vote.

MJBrutus on September 28, 2011 at 11:18 AM

Wait, what exactly is Romney’s plan?

portlandon on September 28, 2011 at 10:44 AM

It’s right here, silly.

MJBrutus on September 28, 2011 at 11:23 AM

Here is what Perry’s website says about jobs:

No other candidate for President – Republican or Democrat – can match Rick Perry’s record on job creation.

Rick Perry’s leadership has helped build the nation’s top economy. Since June 2009, more than 40 percent of all net new jobs in America have been created in Texas.

He cut taxes, including a historic property tax cut and a tax cut for small businesses. He established incentive funds to encourage employers to create thousands of jobs and invest in new technology. And he signed budgets that invest billions more in education, as well as some of the strongest lawsuit reforms in the country – including a “loser pay” law – to help create jobs.

Rick Perry’s support for low taxes, reasonable regulations, a predictable civil litigation system and an educated workforce has produced a job climate consistently ranked the best in the nation.

Perry’s pro-growth agenda, combined with real spending reductions, will lead to a new era of economic growth and the creation of millions of American jobs.

That’s it. All of it! So is that your plan for America, Rick? Is that why we should vote for you?

No Thanks.

MJBrutus on September 28, 2011 at 11:40 AM

Plans? You can get plans dime a dozen from any politician.

Policy and what the direction he sees for what the US has to do over the next few years? Actual policy from which plans are drafted and created so that there is a framework for them and people can understand where the plans come from?

Not so much.

And that is a problem with most of the field.

They have plenty of plans amongst them.

Policy they can state? Not so much.

ajacksonian on September 28, 2011 at 12:01 PM

MJBrutus

Because of his performance over the course of the three days, we were starting to come to the conclusion that the “Miracle in Texas” happened because Rick Perry stayed out of the way, vice being actively involved in its evolution.

tree hugging sister on September 28, 2011 at 12:01 PM

tree hugging sister on September 28, 2011 at 10:56 AM

I was afraid of that.

Perry is great when he’s being Perry… talking from the heart about something he’s really passionate about. But this guy walking around in Perry’s suit is not going to cut it.

Why do people like Cain? Bottom line…because he does his thing. He may not have all the answers, but you feel confident that you know the guy and have some idea of which way he’d go when the unforeseeable happens.

Why do people NOT like Romney? (Come on, a guy who has being running for this office for YEARS should be pulling in huge numbers just on name recognition) Because we really don’t know what he’d do.

Perry’s strength has always been that he listens to the constituency. Doing this before the election gets labeled “pandering.” Doing it after an election is called responsive to the people. (in-state tuition for children of illegals… over-whelming support… four coauthors, 14 co-sponsors, only four no votes)

I feel that if the state legislature put something on Perry’s desk for his signature that the People of Texas were widely opposing (such as just about anything the US Congress has done recently) Perry would veto it.

In any case, this national Perry isn’t succeeding at explaining who he is, what he believes in and what his executive management style is.

itsacookbook on September 28, 2011 at 12:08 PM

ajacksonian on September 28, 2011 at 12:01 PM

Plans are a manifestation of policy. If you go to Romney’s full plan you will find it explains his governing philosophy pretty well. His plans are the outgrowth of policy. I find it sparse in some areas, such as how he would reform entitlements, but it is very good in other areas such as the tax code.

You are right, that policy is probably more important than plans because we cannot begin to predict what new challenges will arise. It is policy and governing philosophy that determine how the POTUS will go about making decisions and what kind of plans he will create to address them.

MJBrutus on September 28, 2011 at 12:12 PM

Why do people like Cain? Bottom line…because he does his thing. He may not have all the answers, but you feel confident that you know the guy and have some idea of which way he’d go when the unforeseeable happens.

itsacookbook on September 28, 2011 at 12:08 PM

Sorry, I can’t go there at all. I like Cain because he’s a sincere, straight talking guy. But voting for him is completely out of the question for me.

I don’t find him the least bit predictable. He started out hyping the Fair Tax. Then he announces his 9-9-9 plan out of the blue. I think that he’s liable to come up with anything that seems good to him at the time. I don’t see a methodical or in depth thinker here. I see a reactive, reflexive type of person. Decisiveness is good, but he goes off half-cocked, IMHO. I don’t think he has any idea of how government works and the constraints that a POTUS must work with.

MJBrutus on September 28, 2011 at 12:18 PM

Although it will be fascinating to watch him and the media try.

Cindy Munford on September 28, 2011 at 11:05 AM

I thought I already read a head line, that was stating Solyndra wasn’t a big deal they were already trying to play it down. I think they are whistling past the graveyard…..those skeletons have legs – just like Solyndra debacle in the news cycle.

Fast and Furious took the long way home, but it’s jogging not walking, straight back to the DOJ.

Dr Evil on September 28, 2011 at 12:19 PM

Get a better staff, Perry.
parteagirl on September 28, 2011 at 9:34 AM

A while back he decided to use his usual local TX campaign staff for his Presidential run, which I thought was a bad idea. I still do.

whatcat on September 28, 2011 at 12:26 PM

Ed, Team Perry has a message for you:

OT: Defiant Team Perry’s plan: Hit harder

Rick Perry’s widely panned debate performances? Just a hiccup. Any major changes in debate prep? None planned. His unexpected and deflating Florida straw poll loss last weekend? Not a big deal.

Even as some of his supporters grow anxious, the Texas governor’s top aides insist they have no plans for real or even symbolic changes to their campaign. The only pivot they’ll make, they say, is to become more aggressive with Mitt Romney.

…“We’re not going to change what we’re doing,” said Perry spokesman Mark Miner. “It’s a long race.”…

An undefeated, forward-leaning politician, Perry has become perhaps the most powerful governor in Texas history in large part because of his relentlessness. So in responding to his young campaign’s first dose of adversity, he’s doing what he’s always done: hit harder.

“Romney’s words are our best offense — the fact that he’ll say anything and change his position based on which way the wind is blowing,” said Miner, dismissing any assessments from “a pundit sitting in a swivel chair in a TV studio.”

In essence, no dice. :)

Full steam ahead – attack Mr. “Flip-Flop” Romney!

TheRightMan on September 28, 2011 at 12:30 PM

Sorry, forgot the link:

OT: Defiant Team Perry’s plan: Hit harder

TheRightMan on September 28, 2011 at 12:31 PM

How is it possible that we have no decent, credible conservatives running?

Perry seemed like a good deal, but he is coming apart and some of his statements make me question him (caveat, I still support him as the most conservative viable candidate).

Romney is not conservative. He is a northeastern republican. He is the traditional republican candidate for the last 70 years, sans Reagan. Even W, for all the left hated him, was not very conservative at the end of the day.

Bachman has showed herself to be simply an opportunist at best.

Santorum – while I agree with him on most things – is not viable. Nor is Newt (and Newt has swung like a pendulum between conservative and not over the last decade).

Huntsman is a non-starter. He is probably less conservative than Mitt.

Ron Paul is a kook. I probably agree with about 70% Paul’s positions, but he is not the guy to sell conservatism to the masses (yes, I know, he is libertarian) and some of his positions go off the rails.

Cain is interesting, but I have a lot of concerns regarding his ability to win and his ability to govern. He can win me over, but hasn’t done so yet. And, b/c of his recent foray into politics, I don’t know how deep his conservatism is. I’d hate to see him “grow” in office.

This race just continues to demonstrate how little we (conservatives) have gained in the GOP. there should be 3 or 4 good, solid and credible conservatives vying for the nomination instead of this sorry slate of candidates.

Monkeytoe on September 28, 2011 at 12:42 PM

gryphon202 on September 28, 2011 at 9:31 AM

TTC? Are you an Alex Jones devotee? All the hollering about it has LONG AGO been debunked and put to bed.

Kermit on September 28, 2011 at 12:42 PM

Full steam ahead – attack Mr. “Flip-Flop” Romney!

TheRightMan on September 28, 2011 at 12:30 PM

I have no problem with him attacking Romney. but the problem is, if that is his whole strategy (which it appears it is), he is not telling us why we should vote for Perry. Fine, he is telling us why NOT to vote for Romney (I wouldn’t anyway). But that doesn’t give a reason to vote Perry.

I suppose that works as long as he is the front runner and the default votes go to Perry. But if one of the other candidates starts doing well, it will leave Perry in the lurch, having not defined himself to the voters as anything but “not Romney”.

Plus, going into the general (assuming he were to win), he needs a rational for running – a vision. Now would be the time to develop and test it and perfect it. Not doing so is going to leave him behind.

Monkeytoe on September 28, 2011 at 12:45 PM

How is it possible that we have no decent, credible conservatives running?

Monkeytoe on September 28, 2011 at 12:42 PM

I blame Mrs. Daniels.

MJBrutus on September 28, 2011 at 12:46 PM

Monkeytoe on September 28, 2011 at 12:42 PM

Bachmann has canceled a fundraiser and speaking event here in Louisiana, since yesterday. It was scheduled for Saturday. She had been scheduled to speak but last week demanded a fundraiser dinner the night before the speaking engagement or she would cancel. Typically this organization gets an attendance of around 1,000.

She is gone, and anyone who thinks otherwise there is a nearby (the same town as the speaking event) state mental hospital for an exam. Earl K. Long was once a patient there.

Oh, by the way, this a local Tea Party group who puts on this quarterly speaking event generally with 4 to 6 speakers and always a national figure among them.

Kermit on September 28, 2011 at 12:47 PM

Since Perry is not playing the campaign game and rolling out policy positions just yet, does the author consider that he may be keeping his powder dry until the right strategic moment?

Kermit on September 28, 2011 at 12:50 PM

Since Perry is not playing the campaign game and rolling out policy positions just yet, does the author consider that he may be keeping his powder dry until the right strategic moment?
Kermit on September 28, 2011 at 12:50 PM

Or, with a flash in the pan, he may have already used up all of his powder.

whatcat on September 28, 2011 at 1:02 PM

MJBrutus on September 28, 2011 at 12:12 PM

If a candidate cannot tell me what their policy is directly, then their plans are not being grounded on something firm.

I don’t care what the plans are if they can’t state their policy. Plans have this disturbing way of getting shifted for expediency… policy I expect to guide plans so that if one plan goes out then the next MUST fit within the policy. If that cannot be done then that tells me about the lack of character of that elected representative and they are not to be trusted. When expediency rules, our liberty are at danger… extreme danger.

Policy first.

Then plans.

Don’t expect me to do tea leaf reading: I expect to hear it and see it and see why a candidate thinks their policy directions are good and then demonstrate that by a coherent plan and methodology to implement same.

That is why I am dissatisfied with the entire field: they have a chance to create a policy via 21st century means and then see who can draft the best plans to implement it. That would tell us all very much about each and every single one of them beyond their snazzy plans and talking points.

ajacksonian on September 28, 2011 at 1:13 PM

With all due respect – the US (and actually the World) economy is not capable of being planned. That would presume that government actually creates jobs. . .

EricPWJohnson on September 28, 2011 at 10:55 AM

This is an important point. When I hear ‘plans’ I think of the old Soviet ‘Five-Year Plans’; I think of ‘central planning’. And no, the federal government cannot ‘create jobs’ (except by expanding the insufferable bureaucracy).

Did Ronald Reagan in 1980 have a ‘plan’? No, he had principles, and he had goals. He said he would rebuild the US military; he said he would cut taxes; and he said he would fight against abortion. That’s why I voted for him.

Principles and goals. That’s what we need to hear. Not ‘plans’.

MrLynn on September 28, 2011 at 1:19 PM

And, by the way—

Whatever happened to The Eleventh Commandment? Has Rick Perry nothing better to say than to carp about Mitt Romney? Yes, he caught Gov. Romney in a lie (or a lapse of memory?) about deleting a sentence from his book, but this kind of cheap infighting tells me nothing about principles and goals.

Where is the candidate who can rise about the need to attack his competitors?

MrLynn on September 28, 2011 at 1:27 PM

ajacksonian on September 28, 2011 at 1:13 PM

I’m afraid I just don’t know what the heck you are talking about then. Sure, policies are more general statements that guide planning. And yes, they are or should be far less dynamic since there are many ways to skin a cat to put a policy in to effect.

I don’t know what you mean by policy if you cannot find it in Romney’s plan for example. Are you worried that since it’s called a plan it doesn’t talk about the over-arching rationale for its parts? If so, then you should read it and see that it does that. Is the following not a policy statement?

Mitt Romney will rebuild the foundations of the American economy on the principles of free enterprise, hard work, and innovation. His plan emphasizes critical structural adjustments rather than short-term fixes. It seeks to reduce taxes, spending, regulation, and government programs. It seeks to increase trade, energy production, human capital, and labor flexibility. It relinquishes power to the states instead of claiming to have the solution to every problem. The plan does not increase the size of the federal budget or bureaucracy. To
the contrary, it cuts spending and streamlines regulation. It does not promise the immediate creation of some imaginary number of jobs, because government cannot create jobs—at least not productive ones that contribute to our long-term prosperity. It is economic growth, not government growth, that provides productive

Believe in America: Mitt Romney’s Plan for Jobs and Economic Growth Part III: Mitt Romney’s Plan opportunities for American workers. That is the lesson of these past three years, and one that America has learned well even if the White House has not. Any American living through this economic crisis will immediately recognize the severity of the break that Mitt Romney proposes from our current course. He is calling for a fundamental change in Washington’s view of how economic growth and prosperity are achieved, how jobs are created, and how government can support these endeavors. It is at once a deeply conservative return to policies that have served our nation well and a highly ambitious departure from the policies of our current leadership. In short, it is a plan to get America back to work.

There’s much more like the above with regard to more specific areas such as energy, education, etc. What more do you want to know with regard to “policy?” Have you read his plan?

MJBrutus on September 28, 2011 at 1:27 PM

Oops! ‘about’ should be ‘above’.

MrLynn on September 28, 2011 at 1:27 PM

MrLynn on September 28, 2011 at 1:27 PM

LOL… doubled over and laughing… coming up for air…

Seriously, please tell me you were abducted by aliens and missed Romney’s attacks on Perry: “Social Security is a Ponzi scheme = The evil Rick Perry wants to take away your Social Security” and his surrogates (Bachmann/Santorum) attacks on Perry: “Gardasil = Mental Retardation from the needle-injecting Rick Perry” and “In-state tuition break for kids of illegals = Pro-illegal immigration Rick Perry”.

TheRightMan on September 28, 2011 at 1:35 PM

I wrote this after the last debate, it was clear that Perry’s campaign has no theme and no platform.

Daemonocracy on September 28, 2011 at 2:20 PM

Perhaps Perry can pull it off, but at some point he’ll have to give more detailed answers to policy questions than just “Texas.”

+ 100..I agree 100% Capt. Ed..Perry is going to have to do more and sooner than later..:)

Dire Straits on September 28, 2011 at 2:27 PM

TheRightMan on September 28, 2011 at 1:35 PM

True, the others have attacked Perry, but this thread is about Rick Perry’s lack of a ‘plan’. Certainly Romney has not followed the Eleventh Commandment either; he has just been more adept at violating it.

Since when are Bachmann and Santorum “surrogates” of Romney? With the exception of Newt Gingrich (and maybe a couple of others), everyone wanted to attack the new ‘top dog’, when they should have concentrated on the true villain, the Puppet President.

MrLynn on September 28, 2011 at 2:36 PM

Since when are Bachmann and Santorum “surrogates” of Romney?
MrLynn on September 28, 2011 at 2:36 PM

You know a candidate is in trouble when the fallback excuse for his/her failures just has to be conspiracies.

whatcat on September 28, 2011 at 2:48 PM

You know a candidate is in trouble when the fallback excuse for his/her failures just has to be conspiracies.

whatcat on September 28, 2011 at 2:48 PM

Nope you know a candidate is in trouble when they cannot give a reason why they should be voted FOR and can only tell you the alternative will be worse.

That is what we will get in Romney vs. Obama: Vote for me because my opponent is worse.

No dice.

TheRightMan on September 28, 2011 at 3:11 PM

TheRightMan on September 28, 2011 at 3:11 PM

No. That’s not what you will get from Romney. Romney will say, “vote for me because here is how we’re going to get out of this mess.”

MJBrutus on September 28, 2011 at 3:24 PM

You know a candidate is in trouble when the fallback excuse for his/her failures just has to be conspiracies.

whatcat on September 28, 2011 at 2:48 PM

That is what we will get in Romney vs. Obama: Vote for me because my opponent is worse.

TheRightMan on September 28, 2011 at 3:11 PM

On the other hand, at least Romney could articulate that sentence.

whatcat on September 28, 2011 at 3:42 PM

On the other hand, at least Romney could articulate that sentence.

whatcat on September 28, 2011 at 3:42 PM

If articulation is the standard, then you wouldn’t begrudge me if given the choice between Romney and Obama, I opt for the better articulator – Obama. Right?

:)

TheRightMan on September 28, 2011 at 5:44 PM

That is what we will get in Romney vs. Obama: Vote for me because my opponent is worse.

No dice.

TheRightMan on September 28, 2011 at 3:11 PM

RightMan
I already told you on the other Romney HA story all the things Romney stands for my friend! Romney is THE only one out there that is WEEKLY rolling out plans and policies of things he will do…why? Because he is the only one that knows what it will take to turn this massive economy around.

g2825m on September 28, 2011 at 6:22 PM