i totally disagree - fred thompson was a wet blanket - zero charisma and zero knowledge of the issues - he didnt really seem to show any interest in the job. "pointy boots" thrives on the campaign trail - its what he does best. he truly loves it.
Disagree on the campaign trail part. Perry was never good at that stuff. His actual campaign skills are laughable. He didnt even run a campaign in 2010. His campaign office consisted of two rooms in Dallas. His field program was nothing. He won purely on outsourcing to consultants and strategy firms. He made only a handful of public appearances and made no interviews. He didnt do much in 2006 for that matter. Everything was delegated to third party firms for ads. He's no campaigner. Just because he goes to tea party rallies and cries about the federal government doesn't make him someone who will like the grind of an election. Also I called him Fred Thompson for the fact that you have an election pool that isn't too exciting and all people then all of a sudden start gravitating to some guy that hasn't even run yet. Perry unlike every other Republican hasn't actually had any scrutiny on him since he hasn't actually declared yet. He's just some mythical savior figure at this point (like Thompson) We'll see what he'll do when he runs. But dont ever call him a good campaigner. He's awful at it. And he'll get exposed in the primary.
My thoughts exactly. Very well put. Let's see how Perry does after he checks into the game. This is a marathon. I don't know about the comparison to Fred Thompson though. Worst case, Perry won't flame out that badly.
Seriously. Fred Thompson? Terrible comparison. The problem with Thompson was he got in and looked old, tired and disinterested. His campaign was what, 2 days old before he took his first vacation?
That's not the point. The point is that Thompson was mytholigized by the media and conservatives as this guy who could come in and be a Republican hero. He of course turned out to be a complete dud. My point is that Perry is getting the same luxury treatment. Sure he may not flame out as quickly but he'll flame out nonetheless. He isn't a good campaigner and I'm not convinced he'll put in the time needed as president. He's a Sarah Palin type ideologue with her sketchy work ethic. That's not the formula to win the nomination.
I get your point, but my point is that Thompson flamed because he was old and had no real desire to be there and it showed.
Wow! I don't like Perry, but putting him on equal footing with Sarah Palin? Seems like a stretch. But whatever he is will be totally exposed under national scrutiny.
The caucuses and primaries don't start for 5 months. That's a long time. The press will comb through his background and the other candidates will take plenty of shots at him also. Look what's happened so far to Gingrich, Cain, Bachmann, Pawlenty, etc. Lot's of razor blades are going to hit Perry too, especially since he's polling so well. He's fresh meat.
I don't suggest that his opponents won't try to hammer him. I just don't think anything they have to hit him with will stick when the vast majority of voters will be right-wingers. If they attack him for being too far right it won't hurt him in primaries or caucuses with the possible exception of NH, which I expect he would lose in any case. If they attack him for being too far left, are they going to support Romney? No. That leaves Bachmann. If the GOP decides Perry is too far left for their liking (LOL) and instead nominates Bachmann I will happily admit I was wrong and take great pleasure in eating my hat. But nothing they hit Perry with will elevate Romney. Or Pawlenty. Who's left?
I could see a scenario in which Perry loses Iowa and NH, but it would be a matter of Bachmann as the likely winner in Iowa and Romney (or maybe even Huntsman though he still polls around 1% there and everywhere) as the winner in NH. If this comes to pass, the race will be wide open and Perry will begin his victory march with a huge win in SC. From there, Romney might remain strong enough to win Nevada but that will be about it. I admit it seems silly to predict a winner right now, as I am in Perry, but then you look at the other candidates and do the math. When you do that, considering the primary/caucus schedule, there is almost only one way to imagine Perry losing and that's for Jeb Bush to get in.
Bachmann can and will hit Perry for being a closet leftie, but Romney would have no credibility doing so. And hitting him for being too far right would be the death of Romney -- he wouldn't even consider it. As I've said before, the frontrunner in this race can't break 32%. That is a weak-ass frontrunner, especially considering the field. Any halfway credible, halfway charismatic candidate can vault that in a second. There is not such a candidate in the race now. When Perry enters, he will be that candidate.
I predict Perry announces in August, and Palin endorses him in September at the big Tea Party Nation rally in Iowa. They are friends and have a similar worldview. Perry will select either Marco Rubio or Nikki Haley as his VP.
I agree about Palin. She's certainly not going to reward Bachmann for stealing her thunder. And she came to Texas to endorse Perry in his primary against Kay Bailey Hutchison. I wouldn't be surprised if she were there when he announced. Pretty good choices for VP but I don't think anybody wants to revisit Nikki Haley's extramarital sex rumors on the national stage. Rubio would be a strong choice.
I would support Perry above all of the other Republican candidates. One positive I will definitely support him on is his handling of disasters in Texas -- I think he is engaged and active. I know that some will disagree with me on that, but I have a somewhat inside angle on his responses to Rita, Katrina, Ike, etc.
Wow - it took less a week to completely flip positions? A week ago: Earlier in the week, Perry told Tony Perkins, the president of the Christian conservative group Family Research Council (FRC), that he supports a federal constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriage. “To not pass the federal marriage amendment would impinge on Texas', and other states', right not to have marriage forced upon us by these activist judges and special interest groups,” Perry added. Now: “I said the other day that the 10th Amendment frees New York to define marriage as they please, but the traditional definition suits Texas and this governor just fine,” Perry told the roughly 1,000 conservatives gathered at the Western Conservative Summit. “Washington needs a refresher course on the 10th Amendment,” he added.
<iframe width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/TNSloevv56M" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
