I wonder if being a sitting governor gives one a bit more leeway in timing, since there’s already a natural political base, active donor contacts and a national profile (more so than a senator or ex-governor).
I think that allows them to save face if they choose not to run.
“Well, we did an exploratory committee and the primary voters are happy with the people already in. Sorry. Come back and talk to me in four years when these other losers get washed out.”
I think Perry is unique in that so much of the ground has changed in the last couple of months.
Haley Barbour opted out.
Trump opted out.
Huckabee opted out.
Daniels opted out.
Gingrich imploded.
Pawlenty has gained no traction.
Bachmann, who makes a lot of people in the GOP nervous, has surged ahead.
So there is a slot for him to move into. My guess he jumps in just before the Iowa Ames poll, where if he finishes ahead of Pawlenty, he can force Pawlenty out.
And yet you continue to post those “throwaway lines,” which suggests you’re about as interested in annoying people as you are in a serious discussion. From now on you’ll be warned for trolling when you do it. If you feel you’re being insulted, report the post and let the mods handle it.
Still, though, is he waiting for the ground to change even more? What’s the advantage to waiting until just before the Ames poll, rather than officially jumping in now?
He gets in now, there will be expectations over this largely meaningless event. He gets in just before it, no matter where he places, that will be the story.
Furthermore, it’s actually in his best interest if he sits Ames out. Romney isn’t competing, and Bachmann is coming on strong. Will probably outdo and elimnate Pawlenty. So essentially, he can point to Ames, say, “Look, Bachmann beat Romney, so you really want to take the risk she’ll take it all?”
But for that tactic to work, he needs to be able to present himself as someone who can beat both Bachmann and Obama. And it’d really help his case if he could point to some hard data like the results of a well-respected poll to support that idea.
Right now, polls put him ahead of Bachmann, and he isn’t even running yet.
Two of these polls put him ahead of Palin as well, and very close to Romney even though Romney has obscene advantages in money and name recognition.
Now, as for beating Obama, the thing is, Obama does very poorly against “Generic Republican”, but beats named people right now because a lot of people haven’t thought about a specific name yet. That’s what a campaign is for.
I’ve discussed a lot of what I think Perry’s advantages are on other threads so I won’t repeat them here. I think he could contend very well just on comparison of records alone.
Generic <party member> always does better than any specific candidate from that party, because people fill in the blank with whomever they like best. Some people like Perry best, and so when a pollster asks them “Obama or generic republican?”, they choose Perry. And once Perry officially enters the race (if it happens), he will of course continue to have the support of those folks. But then there are also some folks for whom “generic Republican” is Romney, or Bachmann, or Ron Paul, or Fred Karger, or whomever, and those folks may or may not support Perry (or any other specific person) who gets the nom.
Are you happy that Your Boy Perry will probably kick off his campaign at his August 6 Prayer-A-Palooza in Houston’s Reliant Stadium? His backers at the event are the narrow-minded types who only regard certain Christians as good enough…
Sure, Obama has problems. But we look at the Republican “hopefuls” & ask–Is that the best you can do? Close scrutiny of Perry’s actual record in Texas shows he has covered himself in something other than glory.
Bridge, I’m 50 years old. I’ve lived through ten presidents, three wars, and by my count about six recessions.
For the life of me, I’ve not seen someone as inept as Obama is. So, yeah, there’s going to be a lot of times when I’m gritting my teeth when I hear a president talking about Jesus like he really existed.
You know what, though, I kind of don’t care that much. What I care about is that we are nearly three years after the recession hit, and we haven’t bounced back yet, nor are we likely to on this guy’s watch. Texas has been able to produce jobs and economic growth. Perry might be doing something right.
Why don’t you move to Texas and take one of those $16,000/year jobs and open a thread “Ask a Guy in Perry’s Utopia.”
If I may ask, which three wars? Because I’m only 34, and I’ve lived through at least that many. And if I’d been born two years earlier, I’d have unambiguously lived through at least four.
Vietnam
Gulf War
Global War on Terror (sorry, count the whole thing as one war.)
I don’t count “bombing some third world shithole to get my poll numbers up” to be a real war. (Grenada, Libya, Kosovo).
16K is where you should start. Heck, my first job was less than minimum wage (in 1978!), I worked my way through college with two minimum wage jobs and doing the national guard part time.
I did what I was supposed to, paid my dues, did the hard work to get where I’m at. Except in Obama’s “utopia”, it’s about 20% less than what I made in my best year under EEEEEEEEvil George W. Bush.
Or by your fuzzy logic, is it just better to collect welfare?
There’s no shame in falling down, just in refusing to get back up.
Misdirection and balderdash. You want to tout Perry as the savior of mankind (I’m perfectly willing to use your own hyperbolic paraphrase) because he CREATES JOBS! You have resolutely refused to look at the quality of those jobs or the consequences of creating those jobs.
Besides, if he got those jobs by attracting businesses from other states by boasting of lower taxes and the freedom to pollute, it won’t work on a national level. We won’t be stealing crappy jobs from Mexico and Thailand. And believe me, you won’t want those jobs, or to live here, if that’s the solution.
The right has been “Brazilifying” the country for thirty years. It’s not just rich getting richer, poor getting poorer. It is rich getting beyond accountability, poor getting increasingly desperate. Perry’s jobs in Texas – where there is still a lot of poverty and unemployment – is exactly the America we shouldn’t settle for.
You didn’t live through the second Iraq War? How’d you manage that one?
1+1 = 1!
From here: http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/06/14/3152456/story-of-texas-job-growth-not.html
“Pia Orrenius, a senior economist at the Dallas Fed, listed many reasons for Texas’ job growth. Energy prices rose steadily, the Barnett Shale has been a big growth driver in North Texas, and the Eagle Ford Shale is now creating jobs and wealth around San Antonio.”
Energy and energy prices, not Perry’s polices account for most of the job growth. That and we missed most of the housing bubble. With with the massive cuts in state education spending over the next two years a boat load of teachers are going to be out of work. The job numbers won’t look so rosy come early next year.
** I live in Texas, if the biggest recession in since the 1930’s isn’t reason enough to dip into the state’s rainy day fund, I don’t know what a severe thunderstorm looks like.
Once again- Iraq war- afghanistan war- war on terror. All the same conflict.
I know you guys all think Saddam was a clubbed baby seal who had nothing to do with terrorism, but, um, yeah, he did.
Again, you talk about firing public school teachers like that’s a bad thing. Fire the whole lot of them, hire people who’d actually do the job. Or better yet, privatize education.
I do find it funny that you guys talk about how the Housing Bubble missed Texas. Now why is that? Well, because while the rest of the country was letting people buy houses with food stamps, Texas under Perry insisted you actually come up with a downpayment first. Wow. Imagine that.