Rick Perry to "reassess" campaign

CBS NEWS ^ | Tuesday January 3, 2012

[Bigtigermike]

After a disappointing fifth-place finish in Tuesday's Iowa caucuses, Texas Governor Rick Perry said he is going home to Texas to assess "whether there is a path forward for myself in this race."

"With the voters' decision tonight in Iowa, I've decided to return to Texas, assess the results of tonight's caucus, determine whether there is a path forward for myself in this race," Perry told supporters at the end of the night.

The candidate, once considered a frontrunner in the race for the GOP nomination, earned just 10 percent on Tuesday's contest with more

[rintense]

Don’t forget: commie, socialist, Paultard and Romneybot.

[South40]

I haven't forgotten. The commie came just days ago.

"Who cares" is rather innocuous compared commie and all the pro-ILLEGAL alien crowd has directed our way.

[dragnet2]

Yeah, one of the Perry supporters called me a racist KKK member because I didn’t support Ricardo’s in-state tuition. I was called a “Texas hater” and “Mexican hater” as well.

Funny how some people use leftist talking points, regardless of their political affiliation.

The two beltway parties are filled with the same exact types of people.

[South40]

How can 22,000+ Iowans be dumb enough to support Ron Paul?

Vote fraud.

[MHGinTN]

Have you forgotten that these are the people sending Tom ‘dungheap’ Harkin back to Washington as their chosen representative? ... Iowa will end up the brunt of asshood, like the term ‘cretan’ became the name for stupid people.

[alstewartfan]

WHOSE PAC OFFERED PERRY $5M TO STAY IN THE RACE? ANY CONNECTION TO ROMNEY AND THE GOP ESTABLISHMENT?

[alstewartfan]

Perry has lost, but he is now doing the stalking of Santorum for Romney. $5M new dollars of stalking!

[ez]

Perry could really hurt Santorum in SC. Ouch. And with Gingrich having been a Southerner...

[RedMDer]

Click

[NoRedTape]

Bye, Rick!

[evad]

"Rick Santorum has virtually no infrastructure outside of Iowa."

He didn't have it there either.

[hocndoc]

I would say you’re very much led - way too much led - by your heart and emotions if you allow that statement to over-ride the years and years of fighting for small government and border security, limiting spending and reigning in regulations. Then, add in his history of service as a volunteer in the Air Force and his success in limiting abortion, protecting parental rights and securing marriage in Texas.

[GregH]

A guy who lost by around 18 points in his reelection senate campaign and did so bad that the Democrats did not even bother running major negative ads against him, is not going to be President let alone win the GOP nominaton.

Santorum campaign will be sunk by the brutal reality of New Hamsphire and bigger states after that.

[napscoordinator]

Well if folks like yourself would get behind the only moral conservative, we would not have to worry about anything. We would have our candidate and start fighting Obama. Having all these other conservatives in the race is just going to result in Romney being the nominee. South Carolina could go Romney 23; Santorum 22; Newt 20; Perry 20; Paul 10; Huntsman 5. Isn’t that horrible because we have too many folks fighting the same people?

[GregH]

Well there needs to unity among Conservatives but it should not be behind a weak candidate. Santorum is a decent man having sound moral values, but as a candidate he is not cut out for the Presidency. The election will be about economic issues and executive leadership and Santorum does not have background to compete in a Presidential election.

[ExSoldier]

Okay, after having read your kind freepmail and clicked the links and done a bit of research, I have to conclude you're right and I stand corrected. I have never had any negative interactions with the freeper in question and then looking at the amount of time she's been around, I concluded (wrongly) that she must be the victim instead of the perpetrator. Sometimes I think like that. A character flw in myself perhaps. There is however absolutely ZERO excuse for attacking you on the Perry question! I was totally in the tank for him when he first announced. But then, I started looking at his positions in depth. I came to the conclusion that he was more of an amnesty proponent than the others and when he called me heartless that was it, I folded my tent and slipped from his camp. Add to that he can't debate his way out of a paper bag and THE ONE (damn his soul to HELL) is a silver tongued devil when he gets on that stage. Even without a teleprompter. Worse, Perry simply screwed up too many simple facts he needed to have command of in such a debate. I can't take the chance. I'd rather have Santorum or Newt and I prefer Newt for his razor sharp mind and tough experience in the trenches of DC.

[South40]

If you oppose Perry because he is for amnesty how can you support Newt? Given his contradicting comments below one could say he is all over the map on the issue. But we know now that he is 100% for amnesty as he has said as much.

This I agree with:

Anything less than requiring people who are working here illegally to return home to apply for a worker visa is amnesty.
~Newt Gingrich 2006

This I don't agree with.

I am for a path to legality for those people whose ties are so deeply into America that it would truly be tragic to try and rip their family apart."
~Newt Gingrich 2011

And this I do agree with.

It should also be mentioned that advocates of amnesty should not be taken seriously if they claim to be also in favor of tougher border control. It is simply not credible that advocates of amnesty will be reliably tough on controlling the borders. ~Newt Gingrich 2006