Giving Rick Perry a Second Look
Anyone who has been paying attention to my posts lately knows that I have adopted Rick Perry as my choice for the Republican candidacy, and have been encouraging anyone and everyone to give him a serious second look.
Given the sub-par candidates available, I was myself very deliberate in making my choice and only recently settled on Perry. And to be frank, I almost abandoned him from consideration on multiple occasions. As with everyone else, I shied away after his early debate performances, which brought back some very uncomfortable reminders of the George W. Bush years. There are also some issues where he and I do not agree. That said, I refrained from abandoning him entirely and the more I examined the candidates the more I appreciated his strengths, in particular his consistency and his predominantly successful record as Governor of Texas.
In my approach to petitioning for Perry's nomination, I have tried to maintain as heavy a dose of realism as possible. This is an approach I likewise see from many of the other Perry hangers-on around Ricochet. You will never find me over-idealizing, obfuscating on Perry’s policy history or his personal one, or berating others for expressing concerns about what his nomination would entail. Given the relatively poor choices, I believe we all need a clear understanding of each of the candidates’ strengths and weakness when making our choice. I ultimately embraced Perry because when comparing his weaknesses with his strengths the latter much outweigh the former in my view. It is my sense that perhaps too many have overrated Perry’s weaknesses and are now overlooking why he was considered such a formidable candidate in the first place.
Perry is not my ideal choice. However, I find him the most appropriate lesser-of-evils candidate, when debates over greater- and lesser-evils is all we have left with this bunch.
Apparently, those of us remaining Perry supporters are not entirely alone. Mike Flynn over at Big Government has recently endorsed Perry, under essentially the same prerogatives that I have established here. He states:
Perry has clearly been a good Governor. He has not, however, been a great candidate. His early campaign was too Texas-centric. We all know about his debate performances. He has positions I disagree with. And his campaign has made some steps I also disagree with. But, I believe he could be a great President. He understand the limits of government, the power of the private sector to create prosperity and the dangers government policies pose to that. And, I believe he understands these principles in a more fundamental way than the other candidates.
I think Flynn’s piece is sober, realistic about Perry’s failings, but also about the strengths that Perry offers as a candidate. I think it is worth reading his article and taking his argument into consideration.
In the meantime, I will continue to repeat my mantra: given the weak field of candidates, Perry is at least worth a second serious look.
- Comment (30)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Apr '11
Re: Giving Rick Perry a Second Look
When Gov. Perry first burst onto the scene I too liked him as a candidate. He had an enviable record as longest-serving Governor of Texas with his state's economy expanding while the rest of the country stood still or contracted. I liked his advocacy for the 10th Amendment believing, as I do, that the only way we're going to dig ourselves out of the mess we're in is for the Governors to reassert the primacy of the States over Washington D.C. And he has that ineffable quality of likability. However...
As I watched Perry's public stumbles I began to see he just doesn't have the intellectual horsepower needed for the top job. Worse, he really hadn't done the preparation to campaign on the issues of the day. I've already suffered through 8 years of one Texan who couldn't express himself without committing capital crimes against the laws of grammar and syntax and I don't want to go through that again. The President's job is to lead, and you can't do that if you can't explain what you're doing or more important, Why you're doing it.
Edited on Dec 23, 2011 at 5:28amAug '11
Re: Giving Rick Perry a Second Look
I really like Perry, but he's not going to the White House. There is no better contrast to Obama, however, leading in Texas, with its part-time congress and strong libertarian streak, is one thing, but doing battle with liberals entrenched in Congress, the judiciary and in the federal bureaucracy is another. The media will brand Perry an idiot from the beginning and at every chance that portrayal will be reinforced with every minor stumble. By comparison, Quayle will seem like Einstein. And of course, Republicans will be seen as equally stupid for puttling A E Newman in control of the country.
Perry is not the guy.
May '10
Re: Giving Rick Perry a Second Look
I fully understand your point. It's clear that Perry's not the most enlightened debater and that he entered the race not having planned for it for the past 4+ years as all of the other candidates clearly have, leaving him relatively unprepared to campaign.
I also fully agree with you on the importance of communication to the Presidency. I don't think anyone sane would. However that's not the only necessary qualification for the job and Perry makes up for his ailments with strengths elsewhere. Read the article. Whereas Gingrich may excel in debate skills, his track record on government management or policy consistency isn't exactly the most reliable. Why should we completely eliminate Perry due to the former but not Gingrich the latter?
That said, Perry must have some measure of communication skills and governing knowledge. Could someone really have been a successful governor of America's second largest without such? Many people have been more than willing to reconsider candidates such as Cain, Romney, and Gingrich in spite of far worse grievances than Perry. So why just dismiss Perry without even a second serious look?
Edited on Dec 23, 2011 at 5:38amMay '10
Re: Giving Rick Perry a Second Look
Douglas Kimball: The media will brand Perry an idiot from the beginning and at every chance that portrayal will be reinforced with every minor stumble.
· Dec 23 at 5:21am
I've never understood this line of argument. Just because the left will attack Perry the same way they did Bush, doesn't mean you'll somehow avoid unfair, albeit successful attacks with the other candidates. The media and Obama will make Romney look like a heartless rich guy who has no concern for the common man. They will also remind people that he's a Mormon. They will make Gingrich look like an undisciplined ogre. They will make Ron Paul appear as an unserious lunatic. All three candidates will undoubtedly say and do things that will reinforce those stereotypes. In fact, they've already previously been used to take down these candidates and proven effective. Also keep in mind that W. Bush was elected to the job twice, in spite of a similar line of attack that will be used against Perry.
If you're letting left-wing caricatures define your decision, you've already lost.
Aug '11
Re: Giving Rick Perry a Second Look
Kofola
If you're letting left-wing caricatures define your decision, you've already lost. · Dec 23 at 5:52am
No doubt the media will denigrate every possible candidate, but the question is, will the portrayal stick in the craw of voters. In Perry's case, I think it will. His stumbles could easliy be seen as lack of depth in addition to an inabiity to deal with stress and general issues with articulation. It is more than intellectual ability - we don't require an intellectual in the White House, but we do need someone who can make a coherent point and master essential arguments and details (without prompting.) Neither Romney nor Newt have these issues - both can make a detailed and complex argument without stumbling or losing focus. Perry can't and hence is fodder for the liberal "conservatives are idiots" brigade.
Edited on Dec 23, 2011 at 6:13amAug '10
Re: Giving Rick Perry a Second Look
The whole primary process is beginning to resemble this commercial.
Aug '10
Re: Giving Rick Perry a Second Look
I respect your opinion, especially because of your "eyes wide open" stance. This kind of intellectual honesty is not always displayed--particularly among Ron Paul supporters.
Perry would make a capable president. He may be a more conservative choice than Romney or Gingrich.
However, on the Ricochet Podcast, Haley Barbour said the most important question is: Can the candidate beat Obama? Based on that criterion, Perry would be a poor choice.
While I simply do not see Romney, as the nominee, losing, I see Perry as being extremely vulnerable because of poor debate performances, a swaggering manner, and an insufficient air of competence. Not to mention the "Texas governor" factor. Just as Jeb Bush is not a viable candidate because he is a reminder of Bush, Perry suffers from the same handicap, notwithstanding his conflicts with Bush. Is this fair? No. Life is not fair. But it's a fact.
May '10
Re: Giving Rick Perry a Second Look
Please believe me when I tell you that I sympathize with you entirely. The left will hit Perry and hit him hard trying to make him into the W. Bush doppelganger. I genuinely spent quite a bit of time deciding whether I wanted to put up with the continued exhaustion of the ‘Republicans are stupid’ meme that would encompass a Perry nomination.
That said, I stand by my position that the other candidates will have equally fatal flaws. The attacks that will be used against Gingrich have already been used to drub him from the speakership. Romney has a refrain that continually haunts him and has accounted for his long history of electoral failures. Perry has heard these same attacks throughout his career and has thus far survived politically. (Keep in mind that Texas has a tendency to disfavor incumbents of any political stripe).
We’ll have to circle the wagons regardless of the candidate, it’s just a matter of how and whether that candidate will reward conservatives for this effort if elected. Ideally we’d have a principled and articulate candidate. Unfortunately we haven't been afforded that convenience.
Edited on Dec 23, 2011 at 9:09amSep '10
Re: Giving Rick Perry a Second Look
I noticed that wasn't a BMW commercial. :-)
May '10
Re: Giving Rick Perry a Second Look
Unfortunately, the product advertised continues to look like this.
Jul '10
Re: Giving Rick Perry a Second Look
Kofola
Unfortunately, the product advertised continues to look like this. · Dec 23 at 8:42am
Or this
Mar '11
Re: Giving Rick Perry a Second Look
I think Perry is the only "A" list candidate running. He is the only candidate who has shown both a strong executive track record, AND a strong conservative record.
Am I enthusiastic? No. But barring a brokered convention and a Mitch Daniels/Anyone ticket, I think Pery is clearly our best shot at reversing the damage Obama has done to our country.
And personally, I couldn't care less about the "Rs are stupid" argument. This was the argument against Reagan, too. Most people believed it, but still voted for him.
Jun '11
Re: Giving Rick Perry a Second Look
I don't have to give him a second look as I always preferred him to the others in this field. However, now that Chris Christie has made it clear (on FNC Thursday 12/22) that he would accept the VP slot if offered by Mitt I wonder how many of the Ricochet crowd sees Romney in a different light. http://urlshort.me/3gi
May '10
Re: Giving Rick Perry a Second Look
There's also the weird situation where Perry is effectively the guy that W. Bush was pretending to be. (Bush was a wealthy New England blue-blood, who adopted a salt-of-the-earth West Texan persona. Perry, for good and ill, is the real deal).
Perry, in my view, has the potential to relate on a visceral level to the working class voters integral to winning Presidential elections (particularly the swing states in the mid-West). His strength in communication is clearly in more personalized settings with voters that he can relate to. Bush, despite being from wealthy roots and having his own communication foibles, was able to reach enough of these votes to win two elections. Perry will of course have to overcome the Bush hangover, and its unfortunate that his early debate performances did little to help that. But the man does, I believe, have the political skills to pull it off.
Or perhaps I'm putting too much faith in the reasoning skills of the general electorate.
Re: Giving Rick Perry a Second Look
"given the weak field of candidates, Perry is at least worth a second serious look."
Nicely put, and I entirely agree. But I keep going back to Bill Buckley's famous dictum that in any race he would always support "the rightward-most viable candidate." Rank the candidates from conservative to moderate and you get Perry, Gingrich and Romney. Rank them according to viability and the order exactly reverses. Perry needs to finish among the top three in both Iowa and New Hampshire, I think, to persuade primary voters that he's even remotely viable.
May '11
Re: Giving Rick Perry a Second Look
I believe that whoever wins the Republican nomination will be in a much stronger position than it appears now. After all he or she will be perceived as a winner by the less engaged non partisan voter. I will probably vote for Perry in the SC primary but doubt if I get a chance to do that in the general election. If Gingrich is the nominee the campaign will be all about Gingrich not Obama. Obama will try to make the election a referendum on his opponent but I don't think that will work with any of the candidates other than Gingrich.
Aug '10
Re: Giving Rick Perry a Second Look
I would prefer Perry to Newt in terms of effectiveness as a president but as a candidate Ricky has zero chance against Obama.
Peter's got it exactly right on this issue
Edited on Dec 23, 2011 at 12:14pmMay '11
Re: Giving Rick Perry a Second Look
Great post. Here's another well reasoned endorsement. The nomination of a candidate has to be on our own terms and not the media's.
Aug '10
Re: Giving Rick Perry a Second Look
Kofola
...Or perhaps I'm putting too much faith in the reasoning skills of the general electorate. · Dec 23 at 9:07am
And perhaps I am being too pessimistic about Perry's chances. I would be fine with him as president IF he could get elected. I just think the IF is bigger with Perry than it is with Romney. It is imperative that the next president be the Republican nominee. Sadly, the election of a Republican will by no means ensure that America avoids driving off the cliff, but if we re-elect the community-organizer-in-chief, it is certain that we will be miles closer to the rim of the Grand Canyon, doing 80 MPH and accelerating. Even if we can't turn the car around immediately with a Republican president, it would be better to be decelerating.
Dec '10
Re: Giving Rick Perry a Second Look
I've been on the Perry bandwagon since he announced even though I've fallen off and had to jump back on a couple of times.
Has anyone made an argument against Perry's electability that is not grounded entirely in left wing tropes? On paper Perry is unmistakably better than the other candidates. As Southern Pessimist said, a Newt nomination would make the general all about Newt. A Romney nomination is as close as I can imagine to Obama running unopposed. Perry is the anti-Obama. It's worth considering whether we want to oppose the president with his antithesis or merely a reformulation of the same man.