Skip to comments.Perry is blowing it (Needs better grasp of issues, stamina to pick apart Romney's contradictions)
Posted on 09/22/2011 9:10:58 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Mitt Romney is an incredibly vulnerable Republican candidate, from his numerous policy reversals to his championing of the Massachusetts health care law that served as the basis from Obamacare. But for him to lose, somebody else has to beat him. And like Tim Pawlenty before him, Texas Gov. Rick Perry is blowing his chances to exploit Romneys weaknesses.
The defining moment in this debate may well have been the point at which Perry went on the attack against Romney for being a flip flopper. As I noted earlier, theres a long file to choose from. And Perry had clearly rehearsed such an attack you can tell he was starting to go through the list of issues Romney had reversed on, and even used the for it before he was against phrasing, a not-so-subtle reference to the infamous Massachusetts flip flopper, Sen. John Kerry. But the exchange came toward the end of the debate, and as has been his habit, Perry began to fade as the debate wore on. During this particular answer, he wrestled for words and stammered. He couldnt finish his sentences. If you werent a political junkie who knew all of the background, youd have no idea what Perry was mumbling about. And Romney's smooth response made him come off as more steady and reassuring, even though on substance, Perry should have owned him.
The rest of the debate was hit or miss for Perry. But when he received an admittedly difficult question about what he would do if he got a 3 a.m. phone call informing him that Pakistans nukes had been taken over by Islamists, he struggled. He ended up giving an incoherent answer that was more of an information dump of random stuff he had been briefed on about the region. It was not very reassuring for those of us who are waiting to see if Perry can prove his dissenters wrong and come off as someone substantive, capable of beating President Obama, and of running the country competently.
Romney remains vulnerable. And unlike Pawlenty, Perry is starting from a stronger position in the polls, so he certainly has a good chance of ultimately winning. However, hes going to have to step up his game by showing a better grasp of the issues, more stamina in these debates, and by being able to take apart Romneys endless contradictions. In short, Perry has not blown it, but he is blowing it.
I can probably forgive Perry over time for his “heartless” comment...but...I also worry that Obama would all but annihilate him in the general election debates.
Quit pretending, you were never for Perry to begin with, and punishing kids for the actions of their parents is heartless, and 99% of the extremely conservative Texas legislature disagrees with you and the hand full of other anti Perry crusaders on FR.
Seriously, if debates were all that mattered, or if they were even the most important or one of the most important things, then Gingrich and Cain would be fighting for the top spot.
But in the real world, all the good debaters are down in the low single digits. Being a good debater is a handy skill to possess, but is hardly the end all be all of qualities a politician must possess, I wouldn't even put it in the top 10. Perry is human, and he has strengths and weaknesses, debating isn't one of his strengths obviously.
Don't worry, Perry is right on the specifics of his stands and will have ample opportunity to clarify those stands through interviews and ads. Both of which he excels at.
His stance on illegal immigration is worrisome to me and my friends. Have not had a chance to speak with them about the debate last night.
His comment about not having a heart if you don't agree with illegals children being able to attend college ( at tax payer expense ) has soured me quite a bit. Can't understand how he didn't take Mitt apart last night.
All kids are where they are because of their parents. I do not give a rats ass about the Texas legislature.
You Texans are behind the curve on the invasion. Most of the rest of the country is done with Mexicans. The invasion is going to become a big issue in this election.
Go ahead an yawn, your boy is done. Stick a fork in him.
Your partly right, it will be a big issue during the general when Perry racks in 60% of the hispanic vote or more.
Your missing the big picture.
Yeah, just like Reagan, Bush II and McCain got 60% of the Hispanic vote for their stances on illegal immigrants.
Just like how California is a solid conservative state now since the state's demographics have shifted ever more Hispanic.
Oh wait, that never happened. And you don't actually believe it will happen this time, but shilling for Perry and being honest don't exactly go hand in hand so it's understandable.
Bachman is finished. Cain is good and did exceptionally well last night. I like Rick Santorum, but it doesn’t matter because the attacks on Perry are killing him and helping Romney.
The left is loving it. They see it as empowering them, not Mitt Romney.
“His stance on illegal immigration”
I think you’d find many here in Texas have a similar stance. It’s not really about the purity of the question, “illegals or not illegals” it’s about focusing on effect. We see illegals every day. In fact it’s pretty hard not to do business with somebody that has them somewhere in the food chain - either in their business or in one of their supplier’s business. It tends to give people bigger picture attitude, something like:
The illegal gets free health care, free education*, and if they are really bold and good, free food stamps. They contribute low cost labor. So what they cost us is the difference between lower prices and the health care and other benefits.
(I put an astrisk next to education because in actuality, they don’t get free education. We have no income tax, and education is paid for by property tax. If you have a duplex with one side rented to a US citizen, and one side rented to an illegal, the property owner pays the same school property tax regardless. And he’s paying that out of the rent he collects, so who got anything for free?)
Meanwhile, the welfare receipient gets free healthcare, truely free education (government housing), free food stamps
and $832 to $1400+ every month. They contribute only higher crime rates.
The typical old time Texan attitude around here tends to be, “I’ll keep them messkins, they work, let’s deport all them welfare people.” I guess that’s reason most people down here just don’t get as worked about illegals as they do in other places.
I don’t think that Perry has answered any of the questions on immigration very well, all he said was that he had almost 100% support from the Texas state legislature on immigration and in-state tuition for illegals.
He didn’t mention that Texas has one of the cheapest out of state tuition systems in the country, that students from all over the country go to Texas grad schools because the price is right. He didn’t mention that the reason that Texas tuition is lower for UT and Texas A&M is that the tuition is supported by oil and land sales from land that was returned to the state from the RR.
I keep wondering why Perry doesn’t talk about the fact that the Rio Grande runs along the Texas border with Mexico and the border runs through the middle of the river in many places and that if a fence were erected it would cut off ranches from a valuable source of water that they now use for their animals. That is the main reason that Perry opposes the fence, why doesn’t he say it?
My concern with Romney is that he is a big government man. He thinks that he and the federal government have all the answers, just like Obama.
I don’t want someone who thinks that government is the answer. Government is not the answer, government is the problem. Romney’s answer on education hit like an epiphany that Romney still doesn’t get it.
After last night, my concern is that Romney will start picking up a head of steam, jump ahead in the polls and roll to the nomination. The last person we need as the GOP nominee is Myth Romney.
You nailed it. It’s frustrating as heck.
Palin is NOT getting in the race. She and Bachman both blew it on the attacks on Perry over Gardisil.
The attacks on Perry help no one but Romney.
It has been reported that Perry declined to participate in any extra debate training and preparation.
Right or wrongly, American voters form impressions from these Dog & Pony Shows that now pass for "debates". (For transcripts of genuine debates, click here.) Perry, like George W. Bush before him, does not seem to think that he needs to articulate the reasons behind why Policy A or Policy B is being followed.
Again, big mistake.
In the so-called "Dream Act", as Perry pointed out, only 4 Legislators out of 181 opposed it. In a conservative state like Texas, anything that gets 98% support must have something going for it. Perry, however, was just not ready with an answer to a challenge that was certain to come. In fact, Perry seemed surprised at the challenge and had nothing to offer except to blurt out the "no heart" line that is a red flag waved in front of Romney that is now posing as More Conservative Than Thou.
For example, Perry could have prepared and rehearsed something along these lines:
"Maybe the Dream Act should have been called the Sins of the Father Act. We are dealing with young adults that, through no fault of their own, were brought here as children by the Sins of their Fathers. They grew up in Texas, they know no other home but Texas and have been here for so long that they know English so well that they were accepted into college. The conservative Texas Legislature understands that. That is why 98% voted for this bill. Yes, we are all against illegal immigration. But we, in Texas, do not want to end up with college capable, uneducated, unemployed young people, who grew up in Texas and know no other home, though no fault of their own, because we want to punish them for the Sins of their Fathers."
There is your sound bite: "Sins of the Father".
It will take you a lot further than, "You have no heart".
You just don’t get it.
All the facts are on Perry’s side, and through ads, interviews, and speeches, the points WILL eventually get made. Just because he wasn’t able to get them accross in the debates so far, doesn’t mean he wont be able to get them accross.
You are acting like the debates are the only way for people to hear from a candidate, when nothing could be further from the truth.
Why do you think candidates raise millions and in this case possibly billions to run for office, if all they have to do is some debate prep.
You keep comparing Perry to Bush as if that’s a BAD thing!
BUSH WON TWO TERMS!
lol you just don’t get it.
“Well here in the rest of the West the invaders milk the system for every penny they can.”
You know it is funny that you say that, because I have heard it before. One of my old bosses was a North Easterner who used to say, “well it’s different down here because they actually work.”
It may also be that Texas is a little bit tougher on welfare. Not saying people can’t cheat, and I’m sure many do, but it takes a little more creativity. And if you are willing to live on welfare wages, there’s no shortage of people wanting to hire illegals (or ‘wets’ as I grew up hearing them called) for somewhat more than welfare pay.
Well, as surgeons say, "One way or another, all bleeding WILL eventually stop."
Sometimes, "eventually' is simply not good enough.
You know what?
All the facts were on George W. Bush's side during and after Katrina too.
1.) New Orleans was below sea-level, in a storm surge zone, with levees rated to withstand a Category 3 storm when Katrina was predicted to be a Category 5 storm.
2.) Before Katrina hit, Bush was on the phone begging and pleading with the Democrat Governor and Mayor for an evacuation.
3.) The Democrat Governor and Mayor ignored Bush and ignored their own Evacuation Plan and left thousands of people trapped like rats in the Louisiana Superdome.
Who had "all the facts on his side"?
Who got 100% of the blame after the Katrina disaster?
Who did not articulate the facts after he was blamed?
Who had from August 2005 until January 2009, with the entire resources of the Bully Pulpit of the White House, to set the record straight?
Who was never able to set the record straight after the initial impression that "Bush screwed up" was seared into the brains of the American voters?
Just because he wasnt able to get them accross in the debates so far, doesnt mean he wont be able to get them accross.
You are correct.
Just because a first string NFL quarterback shows up at the pre-season training camp, overweight, out of shape and never having studied the new offensive coordinator's new playbook during the off season, doesnt mean he wont be able to be the starting quarterback when the regular season starts. It does mean, however, that he is at high risk for being benched during the regular season or even being traded away.
My point is that quality preparation matters.
My point is that Perry needs to get his butt in gear and start doing some serious debate prep and serious debate study so that he can start articulating the reasons of why he did what he did. Otherwise, Perry is going to end up being pummeled like a rented mule ..... Just as George W. Bush was.
These debates are introducing the new candidates to the American voters and you only get one chance to make a first impression. The first impression that Perry is giving is, "I did not take the time to bother to prepare well".
That needs to change and it needs to change FAST.
As I have posted before, I have no particular brand loyalty to any particular candidate. My candidate is "The most conservative candidate, other than Mitt Romney, that can actually beat Obama in the general election."
No matter how badly Perry does in future debates, Perry still fits the definition of "my candidate" and will get my support.
However, I do not believe in cuddling a slacker's Inner Child or making excuses for him.
What I am saying is that I do not have the final say about who gets cut from the team so Perry needs to start showing up at his playing weight, in shape and with his playbook memorized or else he could end up being cut before the general election game even begins.
How many elections did Bush win after the August 2005 Katrina public relations fiasco, TexasFreeper2009?
See Post 171.
Who was the millstone around the GOP in the 2008 election?
Who is STILL the millstone around the neck of the GOP today?
If, after the Bush disasters that snowballed after the Katrina public relations fiasco of August 2005, you still do not understand how Bush's failures to articulate brought about the Obama disaster we have right now, it is you who just doesn't "get it".
To candidates who would take that stance, Perry said: I dont think you have a heart.
We need to be educating these children because they will become a drag on our society, Perry said.
He didn't say *conservative* although there might be one or two on that stage.
And just to set the record straight, these are *children* brought here illegally not just some vagabond who snuck into this country.
Because the GOP candidate won’t be a conservative?
Oh boo hoo, Perry called me heartwess.
Fact is, you are but, compared to the things Obama has called us.
Stiff upper lip.
You think because I criticize Perry that I support 0? Nice try sparky, logic fail.
Oh yea and I left W when he called me “Vigilante”.
Congrats. Hopefully either President Obama or President Romney will be more to your liking.
Nemo me impune lacessit.
So you are willing to continue to allow the invasion to continue unchallenged?
Just curious, I see where you called me a "Perryista", but where exactly did I call you any names?
Our of all the candidates on stage, he came across as the only one i’d like to have a cup of coffee with and talk to.
So, they got excited over a rare side effect of Gardasil. Hardly anybody is talking about it. Even the liberals know the ethical problems of medicines with possible side effects.
The more concrete policy proposals that Cain comes up with, the better he’ll do. People are leery of a blank candidate, understandably so after Obama.
It’s time we all started taking a hard look at the other GOP candidates, rather than the two current front runners. Four years ago, at this time, Giuliani and Thompson, were the two front runners.
>> He might have had a chance if he had said ...
>> Cain had better take off soon, or we lose.
I hear ya’.
Cain reminds me of the Reagan era. I’m a Cain fan!