Skip to comments.Rick Perry is preparing himself to run for president
Posted on 06/19/2014 11:22:59 PM PDT by South40
Whether or not he chooses to run, he will be ready, Perry says
Its hard to imagine a presidential campaign that began with as much excitement, money and hope and ended as quickly and dramatically as Texas Gov. Rick Perrys primary bid did three years ago.
Initially touted as an unbeatable conservative alternative to Mitt Romney, Perry quickly proved woefully unprepared for the national spotlight. A series of blunders led the dismantling of his campaign in the first weeks of the 2012 primary contests.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Yes, he said that. And it wasn't back when he was supposedly taking pain medication as he and his defenders claim. It was just one week ago.
Do you think he can string two complete, unscripted sentences together this time?
Horses for courses: he ain’t the horse, and this ain’t the course.
Ted Cruz 2016
Absolutely! That Ted is so popular among conservatives was predictable. Which is probably why Perry endorsed and campaigned for his opponent.
Yeah, I think he’s done. We don’t want anyone who has EVER sincerely given Hitlery any complements on her roles as a puke stain in various offices. Also, Perry’s immigration stance is questionable, he’s gaffed spectacularly, he ran before and lost.
On the other hand, if he is in the primary, he might dilute the amnesty vote.
We are going to have to start strategizing for this 2016 election the second the Midterms are over. I’m going back over the 2012 primary debates and its no wonder Mitt Romney won the nomination. He chewed up Rick Perry without mercy. The Establishment trained him well to divide and conquer, lie about his positions, and woo the audience to cheer for him.
We need to coalesce behind a candidate and launch an all out infowar on the RINOs, whether its Krispy Kreme or stupid Jeb.
Sad to say, but I would hold my nose and vote for Perry. Romney will never get my vote. Period.
Oh boy, I couldn’t care less if I tried, but I suppose I can thank him for my tagline.
Why is it every cycle the same frickin’ losers start strutting around like they goin’ somewhere ;/
As I previously mentioned, we’re going to make the Democrats job very easy...we’ll destroy our own candidates...one by one.
Give it time, some here will disown Cruz before it’s all said and done should he decide to run for POTUS. There will be no candidate who is pure enough, conservative enough, or presidential enough for some here.
Democrats must laugh their a$$es off at us.
The way I saw it was the merciless number of debates killed us, but when Newt caught fire in one, the debate rules were changed to end chances of that ever happening again, ending it once and for all. They had to throw a bag over Newt, tied at the neck. Newt takes South Carolina and Adelson cuts off his money conveniently, as the cash cascade begins in earnest for Mitt with Big Money to take Florida.
Wa-Lah! Newt’s broke, therefore done, and Romney is the “it” guy, but for the short bump for Santorum.
Money and timing was key in ‘12. It will be again.
I don’t see that happening. “Destroying candidates” as you call it is what happens to liberal Republicans like Romney and Perry. Given that Cruz is a solid conservative that will never happen with him. Not here, anyway.
Im all aboard for Cruz 2016, but conservatives have to be even more fervent than Paulbot supporters were in 2012. If we were that zealous and committed, with our numbers, we could get Cruz nominated.
Perry distant 3rd or 4th choice- I don’t think I trust him, even though he has the best executive (economic results) record you could imagine.
He used to be a Democrat and seems just a little bit odd to me- not really married to conservative principles so much as knowing well what sells and works in TX politically
It’s how conservatives allow themselves to be continually divided. Fiscal conservatives seem to be more socially liberal and they tend to be hesitant to vote for a social conservative. Social conservatives seem to be more financially liberal and are hesitant to vote for those who are more strictly fiscally conservative.
The Dems, depending on which conservative audience they are talking to, will point out why a particular conservative should not be voted for and will eke out a win by running up the middle.
It works every time and it is destroying the country.
FMR. He went intramural and then went completely flacid against Barrack.
Then again, he was either Barrack lite or a manager who’s only intent was to climb the ladder in “his” career move.
Just say no to Mr. Rick McCain Romney Perry.
Perry is a good, basically conservative guy, but his last presidential campaign was an embarrassment. His gaffes either infuriate the right or give ammunition to the left. It will be very difficult for any Republican candidate to get his or her message past the Propaganda Corps and to the people. Perry is not up to the job.
Comments like that I find hard to understand given his record and what we know about him. A real conservative would never have worked to keep Ted Cruz from going to Washington. A real conservative should not oppose a border fence or try to impose a nanny-state executive order to force females to have injections of unproven medication. A real conservative would not have endorsed RINO Mitch McConnell for reelection. A real conservative would not give financial aid and instate tuition to ILLEGAL aliens. A real conservative would not characterize as heartless the conservative voting base who oppose such handouts for ILLEGAL aliens. And just last week he praised Hillary.
Perry is no conservative. Certainly not by any definition of the word that I am aware of.
But he was on drugs, r so say his faithful followers. Was he on drugs 1 week ago today when he praised Hillary?
Good points. Maybe I should have said that he was occasionally conservative.
Did anyone see his interview with Megyn Kelley last night? He came across pretty sharp to me.
And stop being a one issue voter. Putting your hands over your eyes on immigration won't work. Something has to be done.
Of course, border security comes first.
But if you think you're going to send a bazillion kids who have been here 10...15 years back to Mexico, you're kidding yourself.
And everytime you speak of "amnesty"...define it....because everyone has a different concept.
Will La Raza Rick run?
Well, if Mr. Perry runs and is the nominee the good news is that barring a conservative second party on the ballot, I’ll have a cleaned out fridge on Election Day 2016.
Gotta look on the bright side. Nominating corporatist twits saves time otherwise spent voting.
And I can’t wait until his campaign organizers join FR and disrupt everything like they did in 2012.
Perry’s handling of the mass flooding of his borders has been a disaster.
They never left.
Well, they’re a lot quieter. And I do know several by name who have dropped out of FR.
Either way, I don't trust the man.
I can’t say that I’m excited especially after how he’s handled the current invasion from the south
I won’t forget the Perry supporter who tried to find out my identity through the internet. She was a real winner! I haven’t seen her name on FR in years. Generally, the real bad ones quit when their candidate drops out.
I just beg supporters of Perry that if he runs again, don’t put up those soft focus photos of him pitching hay. Please, I beg of you!!!
I saw him on Fox yesterday and noticed he now has no eyes. The eyes have disappeared from under those horn-rimmed glasses he sports.
The American public will not elect as president a guy with no eyes. Eyes are the window to the soul. Ask GW Bush.
I'm not kidding. Perry's eyes are gone.
The eyes have disappeared from under those horn-rimmed glasses he sports.
That is correct. Basically lighting is blocked by the large lens frame and
temples on the glasses. Thus a shadow is cast.
Personally I think this is a means to promote another gov’t position after his tenure
as governor is over. Gets some national exposure with the candidates and hope whomever
is elected will put into some gov’t position on the national level. JMO.
Ted Cruz and Rick Perry are the only two candidates I am remotely interested in voting for in 2016.
I am ashamed to say I bought into the Perry is a RINO carpola back in 2011. I have listened to countless interviews with Rick Perry and speeches to CPAC etc. He is a thoughtful and principled man.
Its unfortunate that Rick Perry was not prepared for the 2012 presidential campaign and I think a good bit of it was due to him coming off back surgery and being on pain medication. He should have probably delayed getting into the race for a few months. If he decides to run in 2016 I think we will see a different Rick Perry. He appears to be a good decent Christian and a states righter. He sure isn’t going to try to take our guns away.
Hey, we've done it before, and we're going to watch it done again. We magnify every little thing we can that a candidate might have said or done, exaggerate their horribleness, then preen around bragging about our purity while the country is being savaged and destroyed by the totalitarian left.
It's a lovely MO.
La Raza Rick former Democrat, in-state tuition for illegals, franchise tax. No. It’s a sad thing that one of the few politicians that we can support (Ted Cruz) is popular for doing what they all should be doing: following the Constitution and the rule of law.
No doubt they will.
What bothers me more than that are the people who actually believe that the GOP and people such as Perry are on their side.
People in this country, both left and right, seem entirely unable to identity clear and present dangers to their country and their freedom, and that is a fatal flaw.
It's not for money or power in his case. Politics was my career, and from up-front observation I know that once they're in the limelight and the center of attention it's just not possible for many politicians to retire and "go gently into that good night". The public "spotlight" is both seductive and rewarding to political egos.....and many times becomes addictive.
I think that wherever the Governor ends up in government he will perform admirably. He's a terrific administrator.
However, in my opinion, he just doesn't have enough of that particular "oomph" or "charisma" nor enough projection of that certain command/inner dynamics that it takes to capture a presidential brass ring.
The last couple GOP nominees didn't have "it" either. They never captured the public imagination and the results could have been predictable.
If I may take a stab about defining AMNESTY, I would recommend to never utter the word, in any sentence, without the following words so near by that one couldn’t open their mouth about AMNESTY without them.
Those words are, BORDER. SECURITY. FIRST.
Here’s why. The word war is simply a dis-information campaign gone wild, to DIVERT. Why participate in that diversion? Why entertain that discussion, when it is a trap, a rabbit trail?
As long as we talk about AMNESTY by itself, and about all the little illegal innocents, then we are *not* talking about, BORDER. SECURITY. FIRST. Therefore we are intentionally kept not secure in our person, places, or things.
Talking AMNESTY and about the poor innocent little workers just want to work and be with grampa, furthers the Marxists key aim, to try to establish a broader and permanent under class that will keep the Marxists in business, until we working middle class soon can no longer pull the wagon full of benefits these underclass demand to enjoy, on our backs and our dime. Then *WE*, become them— underclass ourselves, under an entrenched Marxist regime.
Obama needs this INVASION and wants AMNESTY. He has said so! He does not want BORDER. SECURITY. FIRST. He does not want order or process, and he doesn’t want scientists, educators, philosophers or medical genius immigrating here. He wants socialist/Marxist poor, and in speedy, great numbers.
We are being played. The shell game is to divide us by looking over here, when we should be looking over there. Media doesn’t want to talk about BORDER. SECURITY. FIRST. They want to talk AMNESTY.
AMNESTY is ALWAYS a REWARD for breaking the law.
We learned that is true, following the REAGAN AMNESTY that over the years brought us here today, because the missing link was the certain absence of enforcing, BORDER. SECURITY. FIRST.
ANYBODY who is talking about AMNESTY-only has a ring in their nose engraved with the word
S T U P I D, or they are NOT conservative, but Marxist, or they are being rewarded from somewhere outside the normal political and legal process.
INVASION feeds on AMNESTY, but is stopped cold with BORDER. SECURITY. FIRST.
So, why do we suppose we are talking only about AMNESTY? HMMMMM?
BORDER SECURITY FIRST! AND SECOND. AND THIRD. AND CONTINUOUSLY.
Palin, Cruz, or LOSE. Perry sucks.
South, all one needs to do is look at the post histories of the people screaming loudest about ‘purists’ and ‘destroying’ candidates to see the very same names pushing hardest for the Romneys of the Right.
Here we are, all this way away from the 2016 election and with about 150,000,000 potential eligibles to choose from, they are already pretending that the furthest left candidates with the worst records on amnesty/border security, and oh BTW, keeping their stories straight, are really great folks and its those evil ‘purists’ that are the problem.
Working for more conservative governance : BAD
Working against leftist candidates : BAD
Electing liberals ; GOOD!
Reagan was an aparent idiot it seems. As were the founders. But these frauds are the true way, truth and light.
Yup. we are well and truly infiltrated with leftists. We now live in an Orwellian world where one can hold the diametrically opposed concepts of border security forever and ever, Amen, by supporting and electing people that hire illegals and speak at LaRaza events.What a perfectly logical idea.
All we need now is a picture of Yosemite Sam on a Dragon and the Idiocracy will be complete.