Posted on 10/26/2011 4:28:26 PM PDT by Rational Thought
Either this is the most awesome primary campaign move in recent memory, or an acknowledgment that we shouldn’t expect to see debates become Rick Perry’s strong suit in the near future. I’m know which way I’m betting:
Rick Perry, who made clear during his Bill O’Reilly interview last night that he finds the debate formats geared toward promoting a fight, is going to the No. 9 one after that – but is a question mark for some of the glut of face-offs after that.
The Wall Street Journal also picked up on this statement:
Rick Perry saw his poll numbers swoon after a series of shaky debate performances in September. Now his campaign says the Texas governor may get a lot more selective, potentially skipping some of the jousting contests between now and when voting for the Republican presidential nomination starts in early January. “We are going to evaluate each debate as it comes and take each one on its own merits,” said Perry spokesman Mark Miner, adding that for now, Mr. Perry is confirmed only for the next GOP debate, set for Michigan Nov. 9th. At least five more debates are now scheduled between the Michigan contest and the Iowa caucuses Jan. 3rd. The campaign argues that with less than 10 weeks to go before the first votes fly, the debates devour too much time for travel and preparation. “The primaries are right [around] the corner and there is simply more to do than there is time to do it,” Mr. Miner said.
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
This looks (to me) to be another terrible campaign strategy.
Question for the Perry supporters; Is it time for some wholesale personel changes with the campaign leadership?
Good move by Anita and the Bush RINO advisors Rick has hired. He was embarassing himself up there, brother.
It's already happened. GWB campaign, pick up the white courtesy phone...
Yep! These debates have become ratings foder and the “moderators” serve more as instigators of fratricide.
No doubt they have been revealing, but it does the Republican cause no good in arming for the real battle.
Don’t bother insinuating “conservative” or “tea party”, as my intended meaning is the same.
He can’t survive 14 more debates the way he has performed in the few he has been is so far.
Instead, we get a statement suggesting the Governor might skip upcoming debates? I can't see how such a statement or action can have a positive result.
Having checked the latest schedule, there are now THREE debates in Nov.
There's now FOUR in Dec.
Three of those are in Iowa in span of just nine days.
January has FIVE scheduled debates.
He’s already proving that he doesn’t need debates to continue to shoot himself in various appendages.
Maybe he has received some training. Maybe what we see in these debates is just the best he can, and ever will be able, to do.
I know what you’re saying. I’ve believed for years that debates are not necessarily a good way to better understand who a candidate is. But, debates are part of our election system, for better or for worse.
Point remains, even a lousy debater can be coached to be acceptable. Look no further than President Bush. He was never a good debater, perhaps even lousy. Yet his performances in the general elections of 2000 and 2004 while not great, were generally thought to be sufficient.
“What I don’t get is with all the years Perry has been in politics, and even being a poor debate performer, why hasn’t this candidate received some advice (coaching) to enhance his debating skills? I’m not asking this as a Perry supporter or detractor. I honestly just don’t get it.”
Great question. It’s incredible anyone would make the decision to run for president if they didn’t know how to debate or, if they couldn’t debate, hadn’t at least started training for debates.
That’s a good one too!
Yes, he was. But I think he embarrassed himself even more by this statement. Think of Herman Cain who has announced a one-on-one debate with the "great thinker" of the GOP, Newt Gingrich.
Cain is running a big risk of coming off as an uninformed rube. There is no doubt that Gingrich, think what you may of him, is a policy wonk of long standing.
But Cain is undaunted, will give it a shot and will stand or fall by the results. Perry makes himself look even more ridiculous by admitting he can't stand up to that sort of scrutiny.
I’m not concerned about the Cain-Newt debate. I’m actually looking forward to it. For one, Newt is not going attack dog on Cain. I expect a very professional, highly intelligent debate (and probably boring for some people who want the blood). These two like each other and respect what each other has done.
If you look at his resume, you will see that obviously Cain is not a rube. He didn’t achieve what he achieved in life by being a bumbling stooge. He’s a very intelligence person who can hold his own against anyone.
“Question for the Perry supporters; Is it time for some wholesale personel changes with the campaign leadership? “
I am NOT a Perry supporter but perhaps maybe the people around him are not the problem? It’s easy to point fingers.
That is a distinct possibility.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.