Could Perry stage a comeback?

posted at 4:00 pm on December 4, 2011 by Karl

Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour seems to think so:

Q: Is it becoming clear that Mitt Romney will emerge as the Republican nominee?

A: I don’t think it’s clear. I think people make the mistake of writing off Rick Perry and believe he can’t come back. He’s got a mountain to get over, but I don’t think it’s impossible. Both Newt and Romney have a lot of support, but I don’t think it’s a two-man race. I think Perry could get back in it with Gingrich and Romney. I can’t look you in the eye and say nobody else can come up. You’ve got to learn your lesson this year not to say that about anybody.

Coincidentally, this subject came up a day or so earlier on Twitter, in a conversation involving Allahpundit, blogger Karol Markowicz, fundraiser/adviser Nathan Wurtzel and me. AP, skeptical of a possible comeback, asked me what I thought Perry would have to do to get back into contention.

I think the first and most difficult step is for Perry to stop being a bad candidate. He has gotten a bit better under the radar, but needs to continue to improve.

If Perry does improve, he may stand a shot at placing third in the Iowa caucuses. The new Des Moines Register poll has Perry near the bottom at six percent, but the poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.9 percentage points. PPP has a poll in the field in Iowa and teases that Perry appears to be in double digits.

The Register poll shows more respondents choose Gingrich as their second choice than any other candidate. However, Perry could benefit not only from Herman Cain’s collapse, but also from lingering doubts about Gingrich.

In Iowa, the doubts will primarily come from the religious right. In past cycles, social conservatives ensured victories for candidates like Pat Robertson and Mike Huckabee. This year, there is no consensus candidate.

Newt — he of the serial infidelities and divorces — bought himself some goodwill with some religious conservatives by pouring $150,000 into the successful 2010 campaign to oust three Iowa Supreme Court judges after the state’s high court struck down a state ban on same-sex marriage. But even that support has proved controversial among social cons in Iowa. And Newt probably did not help himself with them by telling Jake Tapper human life begins at implantation rather than conception.

Michelle Bachmann also hurt herself recently with this demographic by gaining access to the email database of a group of parents who homeschool their children in Iowa and sending them two unsolicited email blasts. Nor does there appear to be any groundswell in Iowa for Rick Santorum.

Perry seems to have figured all of this out; his latest ad is aimed squarely at religious conservatives. If Perry climbs back into third place (or at least ties it with Ron Paul) in Iowa, he has a shot at maintaining a viable campaign. There is the traditional spin about there being three tickets out of Iowa and Perry — like Romney and Gingrich — is blessed by his rivals. Conservative voters are looking for a viable NotRomney, and while they are currently flocking to Gingrich, all the polling suggests his support (like those for his rivals) remains soft.

NotRomney voters may also be looking for an insurance policy, given Gingrich’s demonstrated propensity to implode. Indeed, Gingrich looked as though he had his final implosion just a few months ago. And if Newt can make a comeback, it is possible that Perry could do the same. But it’s not likely unless Perry continues to improve his campaign over the next month.

This post was promoted from GreenRoom to HotAir.com.
To see the comments on the original post, look here.

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

Comment pages: 1 2 3

No.

Igor R. on December 4, 2011 at 4:04 PM

George Will thinks he has a chance too, with the disclaimer that is wife is working for Perry.

I could be wrong, but my sense is that the Newt surge is another bubble. There is just too much big government DC baggage, and his woman problem is serious. IMO

juliesa on December 4, 2011 at 4:05 PM

Quick – ask TheRightMan. He knows.

beatcanvas on December 4, 2011 at 4:07 PM

No.

Punchenko on December 4, 2011 at 4:07 PM

people wish this since on paper he would seem more electable, problem is he comes across as stupid in the debates and we want a smart articulate Conservative to go after Obama and the media this time.

Same reason there was such a groundswell for Christie

jp on December 4, 2011 at 4:08 PM

I would sooner see Perry than Newt or Mitt.

crosspatch on December 4, 2011 at 4:08 PM

Maybe VP, but not ready to go head to head with OPampers.

andy85719 on December 4, 2011 at 4:10 PM

If Newt blows it, Perry will make a comeback.

jhffmn on December 4, 2011 at 4:14 PM

people wish this since on paper he would seem more electable, problem is he comes across as stupid in the debates and we want a smart articulate Conservative to go after Obama and the media this time.

Same reason there was such a groundswell for Christie

jp on December 4, 2011 at 4:08 PM

He comes across stupid everywhere. He thought the voting age in the US was 21 while delivering a speech in New Hampshire.

Punchenko on December 4, 2011 at 4:14 PM

Anything is possible.

Wasn’t it just a few weeks ago that some were saying Cain was a ‘shoo in’? How did that prediction work out for you?

What a difference a week makes.

I don’t count any of the candidates out yet.

monique on December 4, 2011 at 4:15 PM

Given the fact that he’s tied in the delegate count with Mitt and Newt and Bachmann and Johnson and Paul and Santorum and Abner Huntsmann (as well as suspended Cain and dropout T-Paw), it technically wouldn’t be a comeback, would it?

It’s funny, or sad, that the inside-the-beltway punditocracy has so co-opted the narrative of candidate selection that this sort of balderdash is discussed with a straight face, before any actual citizen has had his or her official say.

Scream, yell, publish out-of-context quotes and unsourced rumors, spew hate and bile and venom, and eventually the money people will anoint their candidate, and if we don’t dutifully fall in line and vote for him/her, we’re stupid and unpatriotic and dooming our country to four more years of Obama.

Our nation teeters on the brink, and our democracy is terminally ill.

We’d be better off going back to the 50s and 60s method of choosing favorite son candidates and heading to a brokered convention. A lot more people ended up having a say that way than in this perverted mess of a selection process.

notropis on December 4, 2011 at 4:15 PM

Governor Barbour is right. Anything is possible — proven over and over again.

I would love to see Perry on the ticket. Gingrich’s big govt ties, unseemly personal life…blah blah blah….leave a bad taste in my mouth.

balkanmom on December 4, 2011 at 4:18 PM

‘Linger doubts about Gingrich…”? Seriously?

I won’t presume to speak for anyone else, but I’ve got major,immediate, and pressing doubts about that draft-dodging, pathologically lying, serially philandering windbag.

The fun part is watching self-styled conservatives defend Newt Gingrich as a conservative. He’s to the left of Romney in about every aspect and certainly far to the left of Perry, Bachmann, or Santorum. You simply can’t say you support Gingrich because he is the conservative alternative to Mitt Romney. It isn’t arguable within the limitations of human logic and language.

So yeah, Perry has a shot–and if Bachmann keeps plugging away as she has been since her Gardasil meltdown: poised, articulate and informed, she has a shot, too. McCain was third at this point during the last presidential primaries, after Rudy Guiliani and Fred Thompson.

troyriser_gopftw on December 4, 2011 at 4:18 PM

Hope so. He appears to be a decent man.

John the Libertarian on December 4, 2011 at 4:21 PM

John McCain was in 4th place..a distant 4th place at this time in 2007..I’d suggest not ruling anybody out. Well except Unka Jed (Paul)…

Tim Zank on December 4, 2011 at 4:25 PM

Did you see him on Huckabee yesterday? Are you kidding, he cannot speak extemporaneously. His commercials are good but he would get cooked in any debates with Obama

georgealbert on December 4, 2011 at 4:26 PM

Paul will outperform Perry in Iowa. Texas GOP voters despise Perry.

Spathi on December 4, 2011 at 4:28 PM

Did you see him on Huckabee yesterday? Are you kidding, he cannot speak extemporaneously. His commercials are good but he would get cooked in any debates with Obama

georgealbert on December 4, 2011 at 4:26 PM

Keep in mind, we political junkies pay close attention to debates, the masses pay attention to commercials (and their paychecks)….

Tim Zank on December 4, 2011 at 4:29 PM

I don’t count any of the candidates out yet.

monique on December 4, 2011 at 4:15 PM

Some do though, and that is what gets them in trouble.

cozmo on December 4, 2011 at 4:29 PM

Nope.

FlatFoot on December 4, 2011 at 4:30 PM

georgealbert on December 4, 2011 at 4:26 PM

good point, cause it was Bush’s stellar debate performances that swayed the public to elect him as president…..

chasdal on December 4, 2011 at 4:31 PM

Hope so. He appears to be a decent man.

John the Libertarian on December 4, 2011 at 4:21 PM

So are some of the illegal aliens he loves so much. And they have an almost equal chance of becoming President. Well, OK, they are not natural born citizens. But that’s not a prerequisite these days, is it?

Igor R. on December 4, 2011 at 4:32 PM

Barbour who is more reasonable for the GOP Revolution of 1994 than Newtie is someone to pay attention to.

If Hasays that Perry has a good shot, then my money is on what Haley says.

Kermit on December 4, 2011 at 4:33 PM

The answer is yes.

jaschenb74 on December 4, 2011 at 4:35 PM

What about Jordi Huntsman…?

Seven Percent Solution on December 4, 2011 at 4:36 PM

McCain was third at this point during before the last presidential primaries, after Rudy Guiliani and Fred Thompson.

troyriser_gopftw on December 4, 2011 at 4:18 PM

Slight correction, but other than that, you make some good points (minus the character assassination and vitriol). There are many reasons to support Newt (for one: he balanced the federal budget once, already. He may be our best chance to do it again.) His conservative credentials are not among them.

notropis on December 4, 2011 at 4:38 PM

good point, cause it was Bush’s stellar debate performances that swayed the public to elect him as president…..

chasdal on December 4, 2011 at 4:31 PM

Against Al Gore?

Or do you mean against Mitt Romney John Kerry?

sharrukin on December 4, 2011 at 4:43 PM

We’d be better off going back to the 50s and 60s method of choosing favorite son candidates and heading to a brokered convention. A lot more people ended up having a say that way than in this perverted mess of a selection process.

notropis on December 4, 2011 at 4:15 PM

+1000

ebrown2 on December 4, 2011 at 4:44 PM

A totally out-of-place, but not intended to hijack the thread thought about Newt and the general election:

People say his baggage will destroy him. I doubt it. Bring up his philandering, and people will be immediately reminded of Clinton, which will remind them how much better off they were when Clinton was president than they are now. Barack Obama does not want people thinking about Bill Clinton. All Newt has to do is remind everyone that he (Newt) was at least half of that economic success equation.

Nostalgia is a powerful force in a presidential race, especially when times suck.

notropis on December 4, 2011 at 4:44 PM

notropis on December 4, 2011 at 4:38 PM

newt NEVER balanced the federal budget. DC accounting is full of crap that the private sector would go to jail for. to give him credit for what they claim is a balanced budget would just reinforce the behavior we are trying to change.

chasdal on December 4, 2011 at 4:47 PM

sharrukin on December 4, 2011 at 4:43 PM

if you want to pick a candidate on how he performs at the debates instead of how he is on the issues thats fine. i dont think the vast majority of voters are as vapid or shallow as you.

chasdal on December 4, 2011 at 4:49 PM

Hope so. He appears to be a decent man.

John the Libertarian on December 4, 2011 at 4:21 PM

I agree John. I hope he at least sticks the primnary out till the end. I’d like to see him debate better, but as a leader, I think he’s already been tested.

hawkdriver on December 4, 2011 at 4:49 PM

I think the first and most difficult step is for Perry to stop being a bad candidate.

Difficult doesn’t begin to describe it. Fundamental maybe.

I like Perry, but he’s going nowhere Karl. I think his endorsement will be worth alot though.

BacaDog on December 4, 2011 at 4:49 PM

Of course he could.

If he actually admits to himself at the least what his flaws are and addresses those flaws to the people. Remember what really has driven Obama’s poll numbers down is ObamaCare, the government forcing down the throats of it’s citizens healthcare and a mandate to go with it. While Bush was never a solid conservative, what finally brought the conservatives out to bear against him was the push for comprehensive immigration reform. Big government interference led to the housing bubble and subsequent meltdown of the economy, and Bush pointed to it early in his first term, but the first push back, he caved in and let the bubble expand until it became as destructive as it did. Anyone think those three items are off the radar for the American public at this time? Anyone think that some of Perry’s positions make him less desirable as a candidate to the people?

EO to mandate health care.
Immigration policy that is aimed at keeping those already in the country in the country, or at the very least, there was nothing said about getting them to leave, only an argument to allow economic migration and no citizenship for illegal aliens.
Argued against Social Security when he first entered the race, and two days later was spouting the same go along to get along arguments every other politician is signing.

I know I have these things on my front burner, and they do detract enough from Perry that he is not coming back with my support until he addresses them more to my liking.

astonerii on December 4, 2011 at 4:51 PM

if you want to pick a candidate on how he performs at the debates instead of how he is on the issues thats fine. i dont think the vast majority of voters are as vapid or shallow as you.

chasdal on December 4, 2011 at 4:49 PM

Funny, I thought Obama got elected.

sharrukin on December 4, 2011 at 4:53 PM

Didn’t Cain’s entire Iowa campaign staff flip to Perry?

Isn’t it true that Newtie has NO ground game in Iowa or New Hampshire?

Kermit on December 4, 2011 at 4:54 PM

is he a imperfect FEARLESS, CONSISTENT CONSERVATIVE?

Can he communicate a Conservative vision?

Can he enthusiastically promote the limits of the Constitution?

If so then sure………..but I don’t think so.

PappyD61 on December 4, 2011 at 4:54 PM

Slight correction, but other than that, you make some good points (minus the character assassination and vitriol).

notropis on December 4, 2011 at 4:38 PM

Character assassination implies what I wrote about Gingrich is untrue. All of it is true: he did dodge the draft–and not from any deep-seated moral convictions or ideological opposition to the Vietnam War, and he does lie pathologically–look at his recent depiction of his $1.6 million lobbying gig for Freddie Mac–and he was a serial philanderer, with whole platoons of women waiting to come forward on live national television should he clinch the nomination. As an aside, Gingrich told one of his former affairs that he preferred oral sex because then he could say under oath that he didn’t have ‘intercourse’. Tell me, does this self-aggrandizing twit sound like someone you want running the country? Haven’t had enough sleaze or double-dealing yet, or what?

Should he win the GOP nomination, Gingrich will lose to President Obama and we’ll lose one of our last, best chances to halt or–with luck–roll back the transformation of our country into yet another failed socialist superstate. The stakes are too high and Gingrich is too small.

troyriser_gopftw on December 4, 2011 at 4:55 PM

if you want to pick a candidate on how he performs at the debates instead of how he is on the issues thats fine. i dont think the vast majority of voters are as vapid or shallow as you.

chasdal on December 4, 2011 at 4:49 PM

Except for the fact that how a person can handle themselves under pressure while trying to get people to move to their side of a debate, I would agree with you. The problem for Perry is that he needs to demonstrate the charismatic charm that people would associate with that ability to persuade others. Being the (R) governor of Texas does not require much arm twisting or persuasion to get conservative policies implemented. Remember, if we are going to get change, the President is going to have to lead, out front, and persuade not just the Republicans, but most of the independents and a few of the Democrats to support those changes.

astonerii on December 4, 2011 at 4:57 PM

Quick – ask TheRightMan. He knows.

beatcanvas on December 4, 2011 at 4:07 PM

Call my name once and I appear… :)

Karl, you missed one (or two) key points in your write-up.

Perry can rebound and has a shot at placing in the first two at Iowa because:

1. Only three candidates currently have a solid ground game in Iowa – Perry, Romney, and Paul. Gingrich just set up his Iowa office last week.

2. The rise of Gingrich is leading many to question whether the 3-minute soundbite gotcha debates should be the sole criterium for selecting our candidates.

Moreso, since candidates like Romney have trained for the last five years to robotice perfection to excel in such formats but perform horribly in direct interviews and other similar formats. Perry OTOH does pretty good in those formats and doesn’t come across as a robot but human.

TheRightMan on December 4, 2011 at 4:59 PM

Face it. Perry isn’t Tim Tebow.

lorien1973 on December 4, 2011 at 5:01 PM

who knows at this point?

golfmann on December 4, 2011 at 5:02 PM

lorien1973 on December 4, 2011 at 5:01 PM

Excellent game.

Cindy Munford on December 4, 2011 at 5:05 PM

4 years ago, Giuliani was way out front in polls.
Kay Bailey was 25 points ahead of Perry in 2009. He kicked her butt in the primary.
Perry will come back.

lonestar1 on December 4, 2011 at 5:06 PM

I’d like to see Gov. Perry get another opportunity. It’s hard to see someone fail based on debates when they have almost nothing to do with the actual job.

Cindy Munford on December 4, 2011 at 5:06 PM

I’d like to see Gov. Perry get another opportunity. It’s hard to see someone fail based on debates when they have almost nothing to do with the actual job.

Cindy Munford on December 4, 2011 at 5:06 PM

You think that was the only reason people abandoned him?

astonerii on December 4, 2011 at 5:09 PM

Being the (R) governor of Texas does not require much arm twisting or persuasion to get conservative policies implemented…

astonerii on December 4, 2011 at 4:57 PM

You mean just like being a Republican President with majorities in the House and Senate gave us nothing?

astonerii, you can try and diminish Perry’s record in every way you can but you won’t succeed. There are many Repubican states but few can match the success in Texas. And you want to put it down to what? Luck?

A recent example is the shenanigans Alabama played by intorducing a law against illegal immigrants that has succeeded in arresting two foreign executives of major car firms and caused untold damage to their economy. I guess the governor can be excused for his stupidity in going along with the law without assessing the potential damage and tweaking it in a way to mitigate that damage.

TheRightMan on December 4, 2011 at 5:10 PM

Remember, if we are going to get change, the President is going to have to lead, out front, and persuade not just the Republicans, but most of the independents and a few of the Democrats to support those changes.

astonerii on December 4, 2011 at 4:57 PM

And who said Democrats in Texas are a silenced minority. I bet Perry has the best record amongst the field in dealing with Dems and meeting the concerns of all stakeholders.

- Romney, when faced with a Democrat legislature, quickly moved to the left where he appears to be comfortable.

- Gingrich, while Speaker, managed to alienate even his own base – as Dr. Coburn revealed today.

Who else? Bachmann? Heh. Santorum? Surely you joke.

TheRightMan on December 4, 2011 at 5:15 PM

#PerryReboot

publiuspen on December 4, 2011 at 5:16 PM

NO, NO, and… er… I know there’s a third answer, I just cant quite…. Ummm.. let me get back to ya…

Always Right on December 4, 2011 at 5:17 PM

“The republican party” has totally screwed up 2012 presidental race. Why in the world would they even consider, let alone, support Romney for “the candidate to beat Obama” when they know most Americans HATE Obamacare, and Romney’s Massachusetts heathcare is Obamacare!!! This is total insanity. I honestly believe republicans are intentionally sabotaging 2012. No sane person/party would be this reckless or stupid if they were serious about winning!

Zcat on December 4, 2011 at 5:20 PM

I think, from Perry’s POV, that Cain dropped out in the nick of time. He dropped out of a fluctuating field with enough time left on the clock for former Cain supporters to recover and think about their new candidate, and for uncommitteds to look at the now (marginally) slimmer field and make their final decision.

He was second in the last HA poll, before Cain finally suspended his campaign. If Perry gets a little swing out of that it may pull some other folks his way, particularly those who a) don’t want to see Newt running away with all the early primaries and/or b)don’t want to see the field reduced to only two + RP too early on.

TexasDan on December 4, 2011 at 5:22 PM

Call me heartless, but I’d say no.

Ted Torgerson on December 4, 2011 at 5:24 PM

I’d like to see Gov. Perry get another opportunity. It’s hard to see someone fail based on debates when they have almost nothing to do with the actual job.

Cindy Munford on December 4, 2011 at 5:06 PM

You think that was the only reason people abandoned him?

astonerii on December 4, 2011 at 5:09 PM

I wince when I hear the man asked a moderately hard question. Half the commenters here can enunciate the argument for individual freedom better than Perry. The bully pulpit is important. We need someone who can speak and convince. The debates allow us an opportunity to be convinced. Is he holding town halls regularly? Can he? At least Bush did that.

Perry would make a good president. But you have to get there first. I don’t see it in him.

beatcanvas on December 4, 2011 at 5:26 PM

Compare and contrast: Perry’s leadership vs. Obama’s during the Texas wildfires.

Compare and contrast Jindal’s leadership vs. Obama’s during the Gulf oil spill. Jindal was one of the early Perry supporters.

Compare and contrast Barbour’s leadership vs Obama’s during the Gulf oil spill. Barbour sees executive leadership in Perry.

onlineanalyst on December 4, 2011 at 5:26 PM

here’s what worries me. Barry is evidently going to go full TR mode soon…you know the same TR that McCain was so fond of.

I predicted that barry was going to repeat the 37 election of FDR, with a rant about economic roalists and hoarding and the whole thing…worked real well in 37. but it looks like i was about 25 years off, the 1910 New nationalism speech of TR.

Wonderful. Barry has been already sounding that charge.

Barry gave a speech the other day saying the chicoms were beating us in the Green area and that we need more subsidies and more venture socialism (ok, he didn’t say that part) to beat the chicoms

this is straight national industrial planning..from a Nationalist point of view. (remember when nationalism used to be a bad word?)

Anyway…the R party will be unable to respond to this IMO. the main people in the R party haven’t read Hayek, have forgotten Milton freidman, Buckley…have not a clue about Lester Thurow.

the left is constantly building an ‘intellectual’ base (regrettablly based on fail and ancient nostrums) Rs do no such thing. They have an Ad Hoc system, atheortic, based on a general feeling that free enterprise is better than socialism, most of the time.

i increasingly think barry is in for four more years. And we’ll all get to see what barry does unleashed.

r keller on December 4, 2011 at 5:30 PM

Barry gave a speech the other day saying the chicoms were beating us in the Green area and that we need more subsidies and more venture socialism (ok, he didn’t say that part) to beat the chicoms

rkeller: Did Barry say that his administration’s foot dragging on the Keystone Pipeline is making the delivery of oil to China more likely if the pipeline is diverted to the Pacific ports?

onlineanalyst on December 4, 2011 at 5:34 PM

John McCain was in 4th place..a distant 4th place at this time in 2007..I’d suggest not ruling anybody out.

Tim Zank

McCain was in second place, trailing Rudy Giuliani by 12 at this point in 2007. Also, McCain hadn’t disqualified himself for the job in the eyes of the voters by calling them heartless, and coming across as a moron. Perry has, and that’s why he won’t be coming back.

xblade on December 4, 2011 at 5:35 PM

That’s a negatory Night Rider, the pattern is full.

esnap on December 4, 2011 at 5:39 PM

I already made my pics known.

Gov Perry, Former Gov Romney, and Speaker Gingrich the dark horse.

Former Gov Huntsman (executive experience) with a decent enough conservative record, refuses to help himself. There is no reason he shouldn’t have participated in Mike Huckabee’s forum on Fox News last night, it would only have been a plus. Same goes for Donald Trump’s debate – He’s offering them all face time, with a different demographic that tunes into him and NBC, and if they don’t accept, they are being very shortsighted.

Newt Gingrich is running a smart campaign, whether he appeals to folks here on HA or not, I think it’s worth noting, he’s got it going on.

Rick Perry needs to move past, have another look at me message, and get on with his sales pitch. You’re burnin daylight Rick ;)

I really don’t think the Republicans are going to nominate anyone without executive experience this go around. With the exception of Newt Gingrich he’s the wild card.

Dr Evil on December 4, 2011 at 5:40 PM

So are some of the illegal aliens he loves so much.

Igor R. on December 4, 2011 at 4:32 PM

rightwingyahoo, is that you?

John the Libertarian on December 4, 2011 at 5:42 PM

I think the first and most difficult step is for Perry to stop being a bad candidate. He has gotten a bit better under the radar, but needs to continue to improve.

As I said in the Green Room thread, “under the radar” is not the place to be when you’re pandering for votes.

gryphon202 on December 4, 2011 at 5:42 PM

A recent example is the shenanigans Alabama played by intorducing a law against illegal immigrants that has succeeded in arresting two foreign executives of major car firms and caused untold damage to their economy. I guess the governor can be excused for his stupidity in going along with the law without assessing the potential damage and tweaking it in a way to mitigate that damage.

TheRightMan

Thanks for showing why no one here should take you seriously. And no one does, in case you weren’t aware.

xblade on December 4, 2011 at 5:43 PM

McCain was in second place, trailing Rudy Giuliani by 12 at this point in 2007. Also, McCain hadn’t disqualified himself for the job in the eyes of the voters by calling them heartless, and coming across as a moron. Perry has, and that’s why he won’t be coming back.

xblade on December 4, 2011 at 5:35 PM

This. But McCain did come across as a moron and implied that those of us who disagreed were heartless when he “temporarily suspended” his campaign to vote for TARP.

gryphon202 on December 4, 2011 at 5:44 PM

Hilarious. The “negatives” for some people are preached as if they are etched in stone for all eternity, while Perry can fall from 40% to barely-a-pulse 4% but yet he can make a comeback. No, he’s not coming back.

ddrintn on December 4, 2011 at 5:45 PM

“The republican party” has totally screwed up 2012 presidental race. Why in the world would they even consider, let alone, support Romney for “the candidate to beat Obama” when they know most Americans HATE Obamacare, and Romney’s Massachusetts heathcare is Obamacare!!! This is total insanity. I honestly believe republicans are intentionally sabotaging 2012. No sane person/party would be this reckless or stupid if they were serious about winning!

Zcat on December 4, 2011 at 5:20 PM

It’s not insanity at all. It’s called “keeping the rubes in place”. The GOP establishment couldn’t care less about “electability” or “winning” or any of the other crap.

ddrintn on December 4, 2011 at 5:48 PM

Who else? Bachmann? Heh. Santorum? Surely you joke.

TheRightMan on December 4, 2011 at 5:15 PM

The Republicans will nominate a former Senator or a current sitting House Representative with no executive experience?

With high unemployment, record housing foreclosures, and a weak economy, I see a Rainmaker on the Republican’s horizon ;) The two listed above are not Rainmakers. In reality neither is Speaker Gingrich, but he understands how to work the levers of the office of the President of the U.S. well enough.

Dr Evil on December 4, 2011 at 5:49 PM

astonerii on December 4, 2011 at 4:57 PM

Well said. I’ve always said that one of “W”s biggest failings (at least early on) was that he came to DC expecting it to work like Texas. He compromised with Democrats, thinking that that would get him into their good graces.

He couldn’t have been more wrong.

29Victor on December 4, 2011 at 5:49 PM

He comes across stupid everywhere. He thought the voting age in the US was 21 while delivering a speech in New Hampshire.

Punchenko on December 4, 2011 at 4:14 PM

Punchy, if you think the multi-term governor of Texas doesn’t know the voting age and didn’t simply misspeak, he isn’t the stupid one.

You know better.

capitalist piglet on December 4, 2011 at 5:50 PM

You mean just like being a Republican President with majorities in the House and Senate gave us nothing?

astonerii, you can try and diminish Perry’s record in every way you can but you won’t succeed. There are many Repubican states but few can match the success in Texas. And you want to put it down to what? Luck?

A recent example is the shenanigans Alabama played by intorducing a law against illegal immigrants that has succeeded in arresting two foreign executives of major car firms and caused untold damage to their economy. I guess the governor can be excused for his stupidity in going along with the law without assessing the potential damage and tweaking it in a way to mitigate that damage.

TheRightMan on December 4, 2011 at 5:10 PM

You mean new laws may have cops who are not supportive of them and go out of their way to discredit them? At the very least the cops maybe just have been ignorant of the law’s rules.

astonerii on December 4, 2011 at 5:51 PM

Perry really does deserve a second look. He’s terrific in one-on-one interviews, and getting much better in debates.

You can nominate a great debater, but if he can’t win the general, you haven’t helped yourself.

capitalist piglet on December 4, 2011 at 5:53 PM

The Media wanted Romney not Gingrich for the nomination, don’t be surprised to see them pitching Perry’s second coming now, in hopes of draining support from Gingrich. The MSM really doesn’t want Obama to face Gingrich they want him to face Romney.

“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”

Dr Evil on December 4, 2011 at 5:56 PM

It’s funny, or sad, that the inside-the-beltway punditocracy has so co-opted the narrative of candidate selection that this sort of balderdash is discussed with a straight face, before any actual citizen has had his or her official say.
…snip…
We’d be better off going back to the 50s and 60s method of choosing favorite son candidates and heading to a brokered convention. A lot more people ended up having a say that way than in this perverted mess of a selection process.

notropis on December 4, 2011 at 4:15 PM

It is really coffee-spluttering to me how the pundits and the chattering class – and I include a goodly number of so-called right-wing bloggers – have already chosen the Republican candidate. Their decision is entirely based upon Mitt, and who is the strongest looking not-Mitt, going into Iowa. The approach to Iowa, not even Iowa itself, is now the deciding factor??
Give.me.a.break. Sheesh!

There is a whole primary season ahead of us. New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Florida are right around the bend. Texas’ redistricting woes might delay Texas’ participation beyond Super Tuesday. Texas has a boatload of delegates, and it’s Perry country. Cast all that aside, shall we? Do you pundits even read your own copy?

No one is happy with the field; no candidate is polling worth a hang. I, for one, look forward to a brokered convention. The typical coronation that the conventions have become don’t satisfy anybody except for the delegates that the anointed brought to the dance in the first place. A brokered convention at least gives a chance to unify the party. I am sick and tired of ‘hold-your-nose’ voting.

ss396 on December 4, 2011 at 5:57 PM

You can nominate a great debater, but if he can’t win the general, you haven’t helped yourself.

capitalist piglet on December 4, 2011 at 5:53 PM

Plummeting from 40% to single digits isn’t very convincing evidence that that candidate can win.

ddrintn on December 4, 2011 at 5:57 PM

He comes across stupid everywhere. He thought the voting age in the US was 21 while delivering a speech in New Hampshire.

Punchenko on December 4, 2011 at 4:14 PM

Punchy, if you think the multi-term governor of Texas doesn’t know the voting age and didn’t simply misspeak, he isn’t the stupid one.

You know better.

capitalist piglet on December 4, 2011 at 5:50 PM

Where I come from, what you’re doing is called “giving the benefit of the doubt,” Piglet. This is pretty minor as reasons to not vote for Perry go in my book, but I don’t know how many voters will be as charitable on this matter as you.

gryphon202 on December 4, 2011 at 5:58 PM

Those who oppose Perry appear to always list one or more of the following:

1. His EO on Gardasil.
2. The Texas Dream Act.
3. His “have no heart” comment.
4. His debate flubs.

Consider that the first two are the only items that conservatives can pick out of his more than ten year governing record. The last two all relate to his initial weakness in the 3-minute soundbite gotcha debates – a format that he has shown great improvement in.

And yet conservatives want to throw their support to a Washington insider, Gingrich, who has stabbed them repeatedly in the back just because… oooo… he debates sooo goooood. *rolls eyes*

TheRightMan on December 4, 2011 at 5:59 PM

Punchy, if you think the multi-term governor of Texas doesn’t know the voting age and didn’t simply misspeak, he isn’t the stupid one.

You know better.

capitalist piglet on December 4, 2011 at 5:50 PM

I like Perry as a person and would have voted for him, but he is not what the country needs right now. We are a country in decline, and Perry hasn’t proved to me he has an idea of what’s going on or how to fix it. I need something more than misspeaking, brain farts, and gimmicky plans to cut Congressional salary (which I think is too low to begin with.) I’m solidly on the Newt Train.

Punchenko on December 4, 2011 at 5:59 PM

onlineanalyst on December 4, 2011 at 5:34 PM

i think he ‘forgot’ that part…the oil thing is just not where our president is.

of course, that’s why the left/barry is so juvenile. they glomb onto the faddish thing…totally incapable of actually thinking outside of the CW. Rs are hardly any better. It saddens me that a beautiful country like ours is run by a bunch of know-nothings whose ‘vision’ was born in the time of Bismark, Marx and the Paris Commune.

I don’t think that true Scientific Marxists would be going with wind mills….but that’s just me, certainly Lysenko made a big splash

r keller on December 4, 2011 at 6:00 PM

Plummeting from 40% to single digits isn’t very convincing evidence that that candidate can win.

ddrintn on December 4, 2011 at 5:57 PM

Since when did polls start to matter to you, Palinista?

TheRightMan on December 4, 2011 at 6:00 PM

I like Perry as a person and would have voted for him, but he is not what the country needs right now. We are a country in decline, and Perry hasn’t proved to me he has an idea of what’s going on or how to fix it.

I need something more than misspeaking, brain farts, and gimmicky plans to cut Congressional salary (which I think is too low to begin with.) someone who will not alter a thing in Washington because everything is working fine the way it is. And so I am voting for the epitome of the corrupt culture in Washington – Newt Gingrich. I’m solidly on the Newt Train.

Punchenko on December 4, 2011 at 5:59 PM

You were saying?

TheRightMan on December 4, 2011 at 6:03 PM

astonerii on December 4, 2011 at 5:09 PM

No but then there are people who can’t get over Newt sharing of a couch with Pelosi for a TV commercial. Different things are deal breakers for different people.

Cindy Munford on December 4, 2011 at 6:03 PM

Those who oppose Perry appear to always list one or more of the following:

1. His EO on Gardasil.
2. The Texas Dream Act.
3. His “have no heart” comment.
4. His debate flubs.

Consider that the first two are the only items that conservatives can pick out of his more than ten year governing record. The last two all relate to his initial weakness in the 3-minute soundbite gotcha debates – a format that he has shown great improvement in.

TheRightMan on December 4, 2011 at 5:59 PM

I don’t necessarily “oppose Perry”. But the basic facts are these: he was almost totally unprepared to be a presidential candidate; he entered the race too late; and many of those expecting a savior from the possibility of an utterly toxic and unelectable Palin were talking him up as if he were Ronald Reagan risen from the grave. He got in too late and the pedestal his supporters set up was way too high.

ddrintn on December 4, 2011 at 6:03 PM

Who else? Bachmann? Heh. Santorum? Surely you joke.

TheRightMan on December 4, 2011 at 5:15 PM

Bachmann Yes
Santorum Yes
Joke? Only your attacks against me.

Your free to pick your candidate. Have you ever heard me say that Perry supporters should ever give up on him? Have you ever heard me say that he is not able to come back? I have no reason to think that voters might not turn on Newt and maybe second look at Perry. I just do not desire that outcome, as long as Perry has the flaws that I am unwilling to overlook. I want them to give Bachmann another chance, but I am convinced that they will not. For some reason a non policy item like Gardasil is enough to take her out of the campaign, and I do not understand that. Santorum is a great guy, and I see nothing wrong with him if he became president, as I know anything that gets his signature is going to be as conservative as the legislature is going to give him, but he is not a charismatic enough leader to make that conservative mean too much.

I did tell Cain supporters to give up on him, the reasons were legion for Cain. I also know that Cain will never come back from this in his lifetime. I may be wrong about his character, I doubt it, but with that doubt does not come the obligation to say he is a good choice to be President. Innocent until proven guilty is a courtroom standard for taking away the rights and freedoms of another citizen. No rights and freedoms are being taken away from Cain by my not giving him the benefit of the doubt.

astonerii on December 4, 2011 at 6:04 PM

29Victor on December 4, 2011 at 5:49 PM

And I think Gov. Romney will do the same thing.

Cindy Munford on December 4, 2011 at 6:05 PM

Call me heartless, but I’d say no.

Ted Torgerson on December 4, 2011 at 5:24 PM

Yeah – good idea. Let’s reject the most successful governor in the United States because he called Rick Santorum heartless for yapping without knowledge about a program that encourages education in taxpaying kids that have few choices in life.

They don’t call us The Stupid Party for nothing.

capitalist piglet on December 4, 2011 at 6:05 PM

Plummeting from 40% to single digits isn’t very convincing evidence that that candidate can win.

ddrintn on December 4, 2011 at 5:57 PM

Since when did polls start to matter to you, Palinista?

TheRightMan on December 4, 2011 at 6:00 PM

Since you started discounting them after spouting them like gospel months. Cuts both ways, PerryKrishna.

ddrintn on December 4, 2011 at 6:06 PM

It’s too bad that most people couldn’t hear Sen. Santorum when he filled in for Bill Bennett on the radio. The man really knows his stuff.

Cindy Munford on December 4, 2011 at 6:06 PM

I find it funny that the so-called “smart” ones dumb enough to fall for the Cain gimmick and the new Newt (old wine in new bottle) dare to describe a three-term successful conservative governor of the most prosperous state as being dumb.

TheRightMan on December 4, 2011 at 6:06 PM

* gospel FOR months

ddrintn on December 4, 2011 at 6:08 PM

Since when did polls start to matter to you, Palinista?

TheRightMan on December 4, 2011 at 6:00 PM

As a Palinista, I have said over and over again that polls don’t determine who I vote for. That stands. I can also point out to you that Perry doesn’t stand a snowball’s chance in hell if these poll numbers don’t come back up (which he could do; don’t get me wrong).

That said, I don’t dislike Perry because he has lousy poll numbers. I dislike Perry because of certain policy proposals he has embraced in the past. If I really believed that Perry was the guy to nominate, polls wouldn’t shake me from that conclusion anymore than high polling will get me to vote for the candidates I *do* like.

gryphon202 on December 4, 2011 at 6:08 PM

No but then there are people who can’t get over Newt sharing of a couch with Pelosi for a TV commercial. Different things are deal breakers for different people.

Cindy Munford on December 4, 2011 at 6:03 PM

Everyone has their last stand issue. I am vehemently against the global warming cabal. I was totally against Newt due to that very thing. Newt frequently comes out towards the left with his policies, and then proceeds to move rightward with them as he find their flaws. I have thus determined that with the speed it takes for policy ideas to become proposals to become law, that in all likelyhood, policies he advocates for in the end will be conservative. I decided it was not worth staying home or voting Obama if that is what I see Newts presidency as.

astonerii on December 4, 2011 at 6:09 PM

Yeah – good idea. Let’s reject the most successful governor in the United States because he called Rick Santorum heartless for yapping without knowledge about a program that encourages education in taxpaying kids that have few choices in life.

They don’t call us The Stupid Party for nothing.

capitalist piglet on December 4, 2011 at 6:05 PM

Evict the criminal “kids”. No Perry!

Igor R. on December 4, 2011 at 6:11 PM

As a Palinista, I have said over and over again that polls don’t determine who I vote for. That stands.

gryphon202 on December 4, 2011 at 6:08 PM

How many PerryKrishnas quoted polls religiously back in July and August? I’ll keep bringing that up.

ddrintn on December 4, 2011 at 6:11 PM

astonerii on December 4, 2011 at 6:04 PM

You support Bachmann and you were telling Cain’s supporters to give up on him?

Come on, astonerii, surely you are better than this! I have always loved your more insightful comments but you are dropping the ball nowadays.

We do not like Bachmann because she has no record to run on. Zero actions but plenty of rhetoric. Cain, at least, could point to his work in the private sector – although I found his lack of a public sector (political) record disqualifying.

TheRightMan on December 4, 2011 at 6:11 PM

I’m solidly on the Newt Train.

Punchenko on December 4, 2011 at 5:59 PM

Newt can’t win the general. It’s not going to happen. He’s too personally unappealing, has too much political baggage – and get ready for the resurrection of grinning-Newt-getting-serviced-in-a-car stories, because they ARE going to happen.

The stories out there are some of the most disgusting I’ve ever heard about a politician (and I’m a professional musician – not easily offended by people’s behavior).

He’s pushing his creepy wife on the public already, and I’ll tell you right now – that isn’t going to go over at ALL.

And besides:

Perry’s plans are not gimmicks. Where do you get that idea? are you referring to his tax plan? If his flat tax is a gimmick, what is Newt’s?

What’s gimmicky about his energy/jobs plan? His intent to reduce the over-regulation climate for business?

If he can get his state working, why don’t you think he can get America working?

capitalist piglet on December 4, 2011 at 6:12 PM

Let’s reject the most successful governor in the United States

capitalist piglet on December 4, 2011 at 6:05 PM

Your subjective opinion.

ddrintn on December 4, 2011 at 6:13 PM

“The GOP establishment couldn’t care less about “electability” or “winning” or any of the other crap.

ddrintn on December 4, 2011 at 5:48 PM”

Ain’t that the truth, as long as they have big spending Democrats in place they live a very very good life. They will simply point at the Democrats and say we weren’t in charge while they make bank sending money to pet projects and insider trading. Establisment Republicans are comfortable in second place, the base is not!

Africanus on December 4, 2011 at 6:14 PM

How many PerryKrishnas quoted polls religiously back in July and August? I’ll keep bringing that up.

ddrintn on December 4, 2011 at 6:11 PM

No doubt. Thing is, I don’t completely discount the possibility of a Perry resurgence. Whether he is willing to do what it takes is a whole other ball of wax.

gryphon202 on December 4, 2011 at 6:14 PM

TheRightMan on December 4, 2011 at 6:06 PM

Perry is the only Alpha Male, well Perry, and maybe Guillermo Huntsman :)

Santorum Alpha or Beta
Gingrich Alpha or Beta
Romney Alpha or Beta
Paul Alpha or Batshit Crazy GRIN.

Dr Evil on December 4, 2011 at 6:15 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3