Rick Perry to jump into the race?

[dalej42]

Story here.

Out of all the potential Republican nominees, Rick Perry scares me the most as an Obama supporter.

I don't like Perry at all, but I'll agree he's a very savvy politician who knows exactly how to read the political winds. He knows exactly how to pander to the Religious Right. In 2005, he ceremoniously signed the Texas constitutional amendment banning same sex marriage at a Ft. Worth mega church. Of course, constitutional amendments don't need to be signed into law by the governor, but Perry was able to rally the faithful and scare off a potential Kay Bailey Hutchison primary challenge.

He used his connections with the media to sandbag Debra Medina when she started to pick up momentum in the 2010 Republican primary by having Glenn Beck bring up the 9/11 'truther' question.

Perry pandered to the tea party crowd with his talk of secession during the worst of the recession. However, as the tea partiers started getting crazier, he quietly has distanced himself from the fringe.

I'm not sure he is going to run in 2012, however. It is always difficult to knock off an incumbent and it might be a bit too soon to elect another Texas governor. I could see him finishing out his term as TX governor, perhaps delivering the keynote speech at the convention, and appearing on Fox News every chance he gets.

Thoughts on a potential Perry run? Are there any rumors of skeletons in the closet that might keep him out of a national race?

[Chronos]

Sure he'll be able to fire up the base, but is there anyone who'd vote for him who isn't already part of the Republican base? He might end up with the nomination, but there's no way that he'd beat Obama (or rather, if he does, it would be because things have gotten so bad that anyone could beat Obama).

[threeorange]

Originally Posted by dalej42

Perry pandered to the tea party crowd with his talk of secession during the worst of the recession.

This seems like a mallet with which he could be repeatedly hammered by a Republican primary opponent (or Obama, should Perry become the GOP nominee). They could contrast this with their own "unceasing, unwavering loyalty" to the USA.

[Ca3799]

I enjoyed an article by Bob Moser about Perry potentially running. If I may quote a little:

"..permit me to ask you to close your eyes for a minute and meditate on this image: Rick Perry on a debate stage. National TV, scorching floodlights, scores of millions of viewers. Hair just so, Grecian Forumla’d to a lustrous black sheen. He is furrowing his brow, squinting in an effort to look Presidential, reminding himself: Try and not sound exactly like George W. The Yankees don’t like that. He is sporting his lucky pink tie. He is fidgety. He is rarin’ to go!

Across the stage, Barack Obama. Supremely confident. Gray-headed. Exuding cool rationality.

And now imagine the questions from the panel of reporters. George Will, George Stephanopolous, Anderson Cooper, Lady Gaga—doesn’t matter. It goes something like this:

“Governor Perry, you said before the campaign began that the single most important issue in 2012 was the Tenth Amendment. Do you honestly believe that the majority of Americans consider states’ rights a higher priority than improving health care or education or national security?”

“Governor Perry, you have hinged your campaign on your success in bringing jobs to the State of Texas. But during the period you boast about, your state added more minimum-wage jobs than the 49 other states combined. Texas now has more citizens living in poverty, more uninsured children and adults than any other state. Is that your vision for America?”

“As governor of Texas, Mr. Perry, you have doled out hundreds of millions in taxpayer dollars, along with thousands of high-level government jobs and appointments, to your largest campaign contributors. As president, do you intend to continue this practice?”"

[Boyo Jim]

Wow, and not even a mention of secession.

[Chronos]

That sort of goes along with the states' rights thing.

[waterj2]

It's a decidedly perverse world where the fact that over one in four children in Texas (IIRC) have no health insurance and fewer than 2% of children in Massachusetts are uninsured is the biggest problem the former Massachusetts governor faces in a potential matchup.

[joebuck20]

Originally Posted by dalej42

Thoughts on a potential Perry run? Are there any rumors of skeletons in the closet that might keep him out of a national race?

There've been rumors flying around for years that he was once caught in flagrante delicto with a male aide at his office in the state capitol.

[Unix Geek]

I am hoping that he resigns to run for President. Then he would no longer be my Governor and wouldn't become my President. This would be a win-win for me.

[An Arky]

Every single GOP wannabe so far is pure comic relief. It's as if they're just asking for the ol' selzer squirt in the shorts for '12.

[Crane]

The Republican freak show

PALIN / PERRY in 2012

Crane

[Little Nemo]

It would surprise me. Perry is a smart politician. He must realize that 2012 is going to be an uphill battle for any Republican candidate. I think Perry, like many of the other more astute politicians, will wait until 2016.

Granted that can backfire. A lot of top Democrats thought Bush would be unbeatable in 1992.

[gonzomax]

We have had a lot of luck with Texas governors. I can't wait.

[abbeytxs]

Originally Posted by Unix Geek

I am hoping that he resigns to run for President. Then he would no longer be my Governor and wouldn't become my President. This would be a win-win for me.

I couldn't agree with you more. I so hope he runs for president so he will be too distracted to pay attention to Texas.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

The secession thing alone kills him. He doesn't want to be an American. The commercials write themselves.

[Least Original User Name Ever]

Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic

The secession thing alone kills him. He doesn't want to be an American. The commercials write themselves.

Depends how it's spun. He could be seen as a champion for local governance/states' rights.

[Icarus]

Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic

The secession thing alone kills him. He doesn't want to be an American. The commercials write themselves.

Oh come on, you know perfectly well the right-wing-spin-machine will turn his succession talk into being a "Real American, like our founding fathers, rebelling against tyrany!"

[Boyo Jim]

Originally Posted by Least Original User Name Ever

Depends how it's spun. He could be seen as a champion for local governance/states' rights.

I don't see how wanting to secede can be made into a positive for the job of President of the United States.

But for President of the Republic of Texas...

[Onomatopoeia]

Originally Posted by Boyo Jim

I don't see how wanting to secede can be made into a positive for the job of President of the United States.

Really? That's an aphrodisiac for the base. They'll eat that crap right up. And if he makes it to the nomination, he can be comforted by the fact that the high road-taking Democrats won't bring it up.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

Originally Posted by Icarus

Oh come on, you know perfectly well the right-wing-spin-machine will turn his succession talk into being a "Real American, like our founding fathers, rebelling against tyrany!"

That kind of stuff will only work on teabagger types, though. It alienates swing voters.

[Boyo Jim]

Originally Posted by Onomatopoeia

Really? That's an aphrodisiac for the base. They'll eat that crap right up. And if he makes it to the nomination, he can be comforted by the fact that the high road-taking Democrats won't bring it up.

"Real Americans" don't secede from the Union. They take away the civil rights of the un-Americans -- stop them from voting, criminalize all kinds of un-American acts so they can slap them in jail or execute them if possible, and TAKE AMERICA BACK!

[Simplicio]

Meh, Perry's succession talk was pretty stupid, but its not like anyone thought he was seriously musing succeeding from the Union. It'll hurt him a little, but he'll brush it off as hyperbole and get over it pretty easily. Its not like he started shelling federal forts.

I'd be pretty surprised if he ran though, up until last week he was pretty unambiguous about not running.

[Chronos]

It seems to me a pretty basic lesson from Politics 101 that you don't talk about things like secession unless you really mean it, and if you do talk about it, you should fully expect your opponents to blast you on it as if you actually did mean it.

[Simplicio]

Originally Posted by Chronos

It seems to me a pretty basic lesson from Politics 101 that you don't talk about things like secession unless you really mean it, and if you do talk about it, you should fully expect your opponents to blast you on it as if you actually did mean it.

But I don't think most voters will think he really meant it. So blasted or not I doubt it will make a difference. Or at least it might hurt, but no more then other current politicians have been hurt by saying dumb things in front of the camera. Obama claiming Hillary voters are "bitter" or Palin saying she can see Russia from her house.

I'd bet Romney wishes he could trade a few minutes musing about succession in front of a camera for having passed Romneycare.

[Boyo Jim]

He can't just say he was joking, and he can't just say he said it to satisfy the nutcases. Either claim would piss off his base -- you know, the nutcases.

[Merijeek]

Originally Posted by Ca3799

“Governor Perry, you said before the campaign began that the single most important issue in 2012 was the Tenth Amendment. Do you honestly believe that the majority of Americans consider states’ rights a higher priority than improving health care or education or national security?”

“Governor Perry, you have hinged your campaign on your success in bringing jobs to the State of Texas. But during the period you boast about, your state added more minimum-wage jobs than the 49 other states combined. Texas now has more citizens living in poverty, more uninsured children and adults than any other state. Is that your vision for America?”

“As governor of Texas, Mr. Perry, you have doled out hundreds of millions in taxpayer dollars, along with thousands of high-level government jobs and appointments, to your largest campaign contributors. As president, do you intend to continue this practice?”"

Wow, that's not complete fantasy. I'm imagining that the questions, as usual, will just be a variation of "Mr. Perry. As Governor, what was your favorite parade?"

-Joe

[Boyo Jim]

"Governor Perry, how do you keep your hair looking so good?"

[gravitycrash]

Originally Posted by waterj2

It's a decidedly perverse world where the fact that over one in four children in Texas (IIRC) have no health insurance and fewer than 2% of children in Massachusetts are uninsured is the biggest problem the former Massachusetts governor faces in a potential matchup.

Well it is now, at least for me. If he doesn't have enough integrity or balls to stand for what he believes then I have no use for him. He is a major league flip-flopper much like McCain was.

With this field so far, including Perry, Obama will win in a landslide unless the economy goes back into the toilet, which is looking quite possible right now.

[Profound Gibberish]

He won't run. He has too much unchecked power in Texas that he would have to give up. I also can't imagine that he would want to release his detailed financial information. He also has zero personality and that would not resonate with voters.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

Partisanship aside, I think the bottom line is that the Republicans really don't have a candidate who is a credibly better option that Obama. They really don't have anything solid to attack him on. He's had no scandals, no major mistakes, has had some success stabilizing the disastrous economic situation he inherited. On national security (an area the GOP usually tries to claim for itself), he's been stellar. He drew down in Iraq, stepped up drone attacks in Afghanistan, killed bin Laden (and killed him in a very satisfying way), he handled that Somali pirate situation perfectly, etc. They can't call him a pussy on national security.

He really doesn't have a vulnerability. The best they can do is to keep trying to portray his package of modest health care reforms (mostly just consumer protections from insurance companies) as "socialist."

At the end of the day, there's no real reason to replace him. It's 2016 that will be the Republicans next best opening. I don't see any obvious successor to Obama in the Dems field.

[Boyo Jim]

Originally Posted by dbx820

He won't run. He has too much unchecked power in Texas that he would have to give up. I also can't imagine that he would want to release his detailed financial information. He also has zero personality and that would not resonate with voters.

I dunno. I get the impression he would like a big army to play with.

[Least Original User Name Ever]

Originally Posted by dbx820

He won't run. He has too much unchecked power in Texas that he would have to give up. I also can't imagine that he would want to release his detailed financial information. He also has zero personality and that would not resonate with voters.

Is the financial information a big problem for him?

[Chronos]

He won't run. He has too much unchecked power in Texas that he would have to give up.

Wait, don't Republicans keep assuring us that the fact that Texas is a hellhole doesn't reflect badly on its governors, since after all, it's really mostly just a figurehead position without any real power?

[Profound Gibberish]

Originally Posted by Least Original User Name Ever

Is the financial information a big problem for him?

It would give everyone a good idea of where his money comes from (outside of his offical paycheck) and I don't think either he or his financial supporters want that.

Another big issue is that Texas is $25 Billion in the hole due to policies implemented by him during his administration. He would atually have to answer questions about that if he ran for prez.

He also would not debate anyone in the last goobernatorial (sp?) election and I do not see him debating anyone at anytime in the future--he does not like to answer questions.

[Merijeek]

Originally Posted by Chronos

Wait, don't Republicans keep assuring us that the fact that Texas is a hellhole doesn't reflect badly on its governors, since after all, it's really mostly just a figurehead position without any real power?

Well, sure. But they also assure us that the POTUS has no real influence on the economy. That would be before and after insisting that everything bad that happens to the economy is due to a bad Democrat in the big chair and that everything good that happens to the economy is due to a Republican president.

Clear?

-Joe

[LonghornDave]

Originally Posted by dbx820

He won't run. He has too much unchecked power in Texas that he would have to give up. I also can't imagine that he would want to release his detailed financial information. He also has zero personality and that would not resonate with voters.

You're way off on all of this. The Texas governor position is relatively weak. He has been releasing his financial disclosures for over a decade. The guy is a career politician; he's used to releasing his financials. Finally, he doesn't suffer from a lack of personality; he suffers from being a buffoon.

[LonghornDave]

Originally Posted by Least Original User Name Ever

Is the financial information a big problem for him?

No.

[furt]

Originally Posted by dalej42

Out of all the potential Republican nominees, Rick Perry scares me the most as an Obama supporter.

He shouldn't. You should be so lucky as for the GOP to nominate a Texas governor in 2012.

[LonghornDave]

Originally Posted by furt

He shouldn't. You should be so lucky as for the GOP to nominate a Texas governor in 2012.

No kidding. Perry would stand absolutely no chance on the big stage. He just comes across as too dumb. He really would do a terrible job in the debates, and he is a worse public speaker than G.W. Bush. He could possibly be an asset as a VP candidate since his exposure would be much more limited, but he would be so incredibly outclassed by even someone like Sarah Palin in a debate. He's really not even that popular in Texas. If the governor's election had been in 2008 instead of 2010, Bill White probably would have beaten him. The timing of the healthcare insurance legislation just destroyed any Democrats' chance.

[Chronos]

Quoth LonghornDave:

You're way off on all of this. The Texas governor position is relatively weak.

So what you're saying is, it's not really a job that would qualify one for being President?

[LonghornDave]

Originally Posted by Chronos

Quoth LonghornDave:So what you're saying is, it's not really a job that would qualify one for being President?

I do not believe any job qualifies as good experience for the position of President, but I would especially think so of the Texas Governor position in comparison to other large state Governor positions.

In fairness to Perry though, who I obviously do not like, he did serve as the Lieutenant Governor prior to assuming the Governor position. The Lieutenant Governor position is considered to be fairly powerful in Texas.

[Clothahump]

Originally Posted by dbx820

He won't run. He has too much unchecked power in Texas that he would have to give up. I also can't imagine that he would want to release his detailed financial information. He also has zero personality and that would not resonate with voters.

Ummm....the Texas governor has plenty of prestige, but very little power. The true power in Texas is the Lt. Governor, by design.

[Chronos]

So why don't we ever hear of Texan lieutenant governors running for President? And for that matter, what kind of screwed-up system does Texas has, that the guy in charge is called the assistant?

[Little Nemo]

Originally Posted by Clothahump

Ummm....the Texas governor has plenty of prestige, but very little power. The true power in Texas is the Lt. Governor, by design.

This explains a lot about the Bush/Cheney administration.

[BigT]

From this website, it sounds as if the governor has his explicitly limited powers, while the Lieutenant governor, due to his intended less powerful role, does not. It the LtG has more power, I would think it through his role as president of the legislature.

[dalej42]

Interesting story here.

Perry is attending a day of prayer sponsored by the American Family Association in August. Perry doesn't need to pander to Evangelicals in Texas since he just won reelection.

[Recovering Republican]

My thoughts on a Perry candidacy...

Obama should be worried. Every other candidate has some kind of severe flaw that will make the GOP nomination a bloodbath. Romney's a Mormon, and the evangelicals will never support a Mormon. Palin is disdained by the establishment for being, well, kind of dopey and crass. Gingrich is a joke. Bachmann appeals to the TEA bag nutters, but she's feared by, well, sane Republicans.

Perry is the one guy who could unite both the TEA Party and Establishment. He's successfully hit all the hot buttons both sides like. He could easily win Iowa (and winning in Iowa would probably only take about 25% and South Carolina.

The fact that Newt's Staff all bailed yesterday, and a bunch of them have ties to Perry indicates that Perry has seen his moment.

Because, hey, the last time we had a Texas Governor worked out so well.

[Recovering Republican]

Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic

Partisanship aside, I think the bottom line is that the Republicans really don't have a candidate who is a credibly better option that Obama. They really don't have anything solid to attack him on. He's had no scandals, no major mistakes, has had some success stabilizing the disastrous economic situation he inherited. On national security (an area the GOP usually tries to claim for itself), he's been stellar. He drew down in Iraq, stepped up drone attacks in Afghanistan, killed bin Laden (and killed him in a very satisfying way), he handled that Somali pirate situation perfectly, etc. They can't call him a pussy on national security.

He really doesn't have a vulnerability. The best they can do is to keep trying to portray his package of modest health care reforms (mostly just consumer protections from insurance companies) as "socialist."

But all that doesn't really mean anything if unemployment doesn't get better. If Unemployment is still at 9% or worse, higher next year, the Republicans can nominate the Cheney/C'Thulhu ticket and still win.

Now, cards on the table, I didn't vote for Obama, but I don't think he's done a bad job. Everything you say is accurate- he's done a good job with the hand dealt to him. And frankly, nearly every Republican up this time scares me for different reasons.

On Paper, Perry sounds great. Then again, so did George W. Bush and we all saw how well that worked out. (Hense, my handle.)

[bump]

Originally Posted by BigT

From this website, it sounds as if the governor has his explicitly limited powers, while the Lieutenant governor, due to his intended less powerful role, does not. It the LtG has more power, I would think it through his role as president of the legislature.

What makes the Lt. Gov. the real powerful politician is really one thing- he has procedural control of the legislature. What this means is that he has control over assignation of bills to committees, setting the legislative schedule, and determining what measures reach the floor.

The governor can veto stuff, and a limited amount of other things, but the Lt. Governor is who has the statutory powers.

What would worry me about a Perry presidency is that I'm not at all sure that his predilection for power-grabs and trying to concentrate more power in himself and the governor's office, wouldn't also travel to Washington with him. I think that concentrating more power in the Executive branch is a terrible thing, and the last thing we actually want.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

Originally Posted by Recovering Republican

My thoughts on a Perry candidacy...

Obama should be worried. Every other candidate has some kind of severe flaw that will make the GOP nomination a bloodbath. Romney's a Mormon, and the evangelicals will never support a Mormon. Palin is disdained by the establishment for being, well, kind of dopey and crass. Gingrich is a joke. Bachmann appeals to the TEA bag nutters, but she's feared by, well, sane Republicans.

Perry is the one guy who could unite both the TEA Party and Establishment. He's successfully hit all the hot buttons both sides like. He could easily win Iowa (and winning in Iowa would probably only take about 25% and South Carolina.

The fact that Newt's Staff all bailed yesterday, and a bunch of them have ties to Perry indicates that Perry has seen his moment.

Because, hey, the last time we had a Texas Governor worked out so well.

It's going to be hard for Perry to explain his secessionist remarks. He has also said he wants to teach creationism in schools, denies global warming and said he believes that anyone who is not a Christian goes to Hell. I don't see how he's going to have any appeal to moderates. He's socially even more nuts than Bachmann or Palin.