Posted on 12/31/2011 9:34:29 AM PST by Berlin_Freeper
With a revamped message and a significant TV presence here, Rick Perry is hoping to revive his disappointing presidential campaign with a surprise finish Tuesday.
But even as they hold out hope that Perry can find a way back into contention, some of his advisers have begun laying the groundwork to explain how the Texas governor bombed so dramatically in a race that he seemed to control for a brief period upon his entry in August.
Their explanations for the nosedive come against the backdrop of a campaign riven by an intense, behind-the-scenes power struggle that took place largely between a group of the governor’s longtime advisers and a new cadre of consultants brought on this fall. In the end, the outsiders won out — and ever since have marginalized Perry’s longtime chief strategist while crafting a new strategy in which the Texan has portrayed himself as a political outsider and culture warrior.
In a series of interviews with POLITICO, sources close to the campaign depict a dysfunctional operation that might be beyond saving because of what they describe as the political equivalent of malpractice by the previous regime.
“There has never been a more ineptly orchestrated, just unbelievably subpar campaign for president of the United States than this one,” said a senior Perry adviser.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
“Folks around FR were not happy when Perry was campaigning hard for Rudy Giuliani. Don’t forget that Rudy Giuliani’s supporters on FR were banned.
And folks on FR were not happy about Perry pushing Gardasil or his Trans-Texas Corridor, or his support for in-state tuition for illegals.”
I know about the Giuliani supporters being banned, although I wasn’t here to see it (I started lurking during the fall of 2008).
I’ve never said that Perry is a perfect candidate; there’s no such thing. But IMO, he comes a heck of a lot closer than Newt. Newt has proven himself to be too untrustworthy and too prone to sliding across the aisle to endorse leftwing ideas. My electric bill keeps going up and up; I don’t need a president who buys into global warming and will help to bankrupt the country AND me. Perry has declared GW to be what it is-—a hoax.
Perry has no votes. He should drop out today and endorse someone while he still is relevant. Harsh but true. He was toast after he failed at debates. A bakers dozen votes at best he will siphon off giving Ron Paul a win.
or
Newt never balanced the budget. Contrary to Clinton’s claims, the budget hasn’t been balanced since 1969.
This is total BS.
I still think he is best of the "C" list candidates (Romney and Perry being the other two) if, for no other reason, that he was effective at one time.
If I were in Iowa, I'd probably caucus for Santorum at this point. How about you?
This is our golden opportunity to put a real conservative in the White House. This GOP race is THE race as far as I am concerned. And Mitt Romney isn't going to win, period. So let's get down to business and get a conservative nominated.
Perry killed her campaign when he came in right after she shot up in the Iowa straw poll. Mr. Ego to the rescue.
As for his campaign there are a couple of things worthy of note. One is that he came to the fray with a lot of momentum, and for a good while he was the one to beat. He had the track-record, he had the funding, he had the center stage, and he was very different from Obama (in a good way). A holistic look at him painted a rather positive view, and anything detractors had to say was largely overlooked. He had a patina that dazzled. Then a couple of things started happening. The most important thing that happened is he started making some comments (some say gaffes, others blame it on back-surgery pain/medication, some point a finger at his campaign not having sufficiently prepared him; all may be correct) that eroded some of that patina. However it wasn't the statements that really messed things up - not even when (at the beginning) he made several of them. After all, when it comes to making gaffes everyone makes them - it is just that when you add the second element (the media) things start rapidly heading downwind. It is like epoxy glue - the one you mix the gels from two tubes. Each of them is a glue, but together you have something that bonds tighter than tight. The gaffes coupled with the media attention on them ended up making Perry look like gaffe-central. With the protective patina eroded, and with Perry making certain statements that drove away some of the Conservative base (there are some statements he made that were quite ...erm ...unfortunate), he started dropping in the polls. Looking at a polling graph one can see the rather drastic fall Perry underwent.
Then, on the smaller scale of things (just looking at FR), there were certain antics from Perry supporters that were also unfortunate. Nowadays some of them claim Perry is unfairly attacked by supporters of other candidates, which is quite ironic considering that the first blood on FR was drawn by Perry supporters (particularly 3 ladies that I think anyone who followed the state of events a couple months ago would immediately identify - I hear one of them got the zot even). Those three Perry supporters were absolutely acerbic in their attacks, some of which were even directed at other FReepers (and were quite juvenile). Anyone who did not support Perry was 'stupid,' a 'giggling love-struck teenage girl,' and all sorts of other silly talk. By that time a good section of FR had started drifting from Perry following his 'heartless' remark - the posts from these 3 Perry supporters simply added heavy anchors to a sinking boat.
Anyways, as I mentioned miracles do happen. Perry could make it through (and if he makes it in the top 3 his campaign may decide to continue). It is even possible it might make some sort of explanation for a number 4 position and continue. I believe Perry would be a much better president than Obama, but I doubt he will have the chance of even running against him unless a miracle happens in Iowa. Also, even if Perry gets the nomination, and even though it is true that debate skills do not necessarily make a good president (as Perry correctly said, look at Obama), the fact still remains that (assuming Perry was to get the nomination, which is a mighty assumption) Perry would have a lot on his hands. I do not subscribe to the meme that Obama is an empty suit. He is not. He is a capable debater (who will have access to the teleprompter based on the Obama/McCain presidential debates last time), and has a support team that is arguably one of the most sly conniving well-funded and ruthless teams in quite a while. Some have talked about Perry's funding - well, Obama will also have some serious funding. Yes, the economy is bollocks. Yes, his campaign promises delivered less than a hazy mirage in the Sahara. Yes, his own 'Messiah' patina has been eroded more than cheap iron in brine solution. All true. But he will still be formidable. Whoever is the nominee will have to have his A-game on, and his campaign team will have to work their socks, skins and souls off.
As for Iowa - barring any weird turn of events the candidates that will go through are probably going to be Mitt (aka the RINO), Paul (aka the crazy), Santorum (the late comer) and Newt (the current FR favorite). Anything can happen, but that is what will likely be the outcome. The rest will most probably fall out - and then will then have the tremendous task of selecting who to nominate. Which brings my fear when it comes to Perry - based on how some of his supporters were acting a couple of months ago (not all ...some like Shield were always civil and logical, but others like the 3 I hinted on were crazy enough to get warnings and one getting zotted) there might be a chance of a GOP/Conservative PUMA (party unity my @$$). I hope people are logical enough to realize that, for the good of the country, the first imperative is to ensure Mitt doesn't get the nomination; and the second is to ensure that a Conservative is elected the next president of the United States of America. I hope everyone realizes that. The circular firing squads make me wonder about that though, but the first indication of whether logic or insanity will prevail will be seen on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday (as the losers start indicating who they will support going forward, and as polls at the end of the week show how the supporters of the losers act).
It will be quite the interesting week.
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.