Word from inside Rick Perry land: ‘Nothing has changed’
I obviously picked the wrong day to unplug from the news. The mass resignation of Newt Gingrich’s campaign staff itself changes the race more than a bit, but doesn’t knock him out permanently. John McCain went through a similarly massive shake-up early in his 2008 run and went on to win the nomination.
If Gov. Rick Perry gets into the presidential race it’s obviously a game-changer. Perry is the nation’s most experienced serving governor and he has built up an economic record that’s pretty tough to match. That should count for quite a bit as we deal with the worst national economy of most of our lifetimes. And if Dave Carney and Rob Johnson really have left, at least in part, because they’re moving back to the Perry team to power his run, that puts some of the top talent on the GOP side on the Perry team. They know how to run a campaign. They are very disciplined and very very good at what they do. Gingrich wasn’t able to get any traction in spite of the talent he had assembled around him, mostly because of his own record and gaffes coming out of the starting gate; I doubt Perry will suffer from that same problem. If their 2010 run in Texas is anything to go by, Perry’s team will bedevil President Obama at every turn.
Now, having said all of that, let’s get to the important part. I am hearing, from more than one person inside the Perry orbit, that “nothing has changed.” Meaning, Gov. Perry’s decision not to run for president is still operative.
More: Let me revise that last sentence a bit. Commenter AllenG reminds me that since Perry has moved from “no” to “I’ll think about it,” the latter is the part that hasn’t changed. Fair enough. I’m more interested in the tense of the verb, though — “has.”
Actually, latest official word from Perry himself was “I’ll consider it.” So if “nothing has changed” then the current position is “I’ll consider it,” not, “no.”
Fair enough.
Wait until people learn that Rick Perry proposed a law requiring young women receive a mandatory course of treatment to prevent HPV.
Personally, I like him and he’s done well by us for the most part. But I’m not sure his image will survive the Palin treatment he will get.
I’m for Palin but like the competition. Perry would be a good add.
Better Perry than Mitt or Huntsman or Giuliani.
Perry and Palin are close political allies. He is one of the few who would pass her common sense conservative litmus test. If he decides to run she would probably decide not to and instead endorse him. He would be very difficult to beat.
If she decides to run he might decide not to as he would be the likely choice for running mate. Another tough ticket to beat.
Is it possible the Gingrich team is jumping to Palin?
This makes the most sense to me. An article in the Statesman this past week stated that he was waiting to see what Palin was going to do. If Palin runs; he won’t. Regardless which of them actually runs for president, I think they have teamed up.
“Wait until people learn that Rick Perry proposed a law requiring young women receive a mandatory course of treatment to prevent HPV.”
While Mr. Perry has made some bonehead appointments (I’m looking at you, Don McElroy), the vaccination of young women for HPV will prevent thousands of cases of cervical cancer in the future. This is not an exaggeration! The argument that such vaccination promotes sexual promiscuity, as is argued by some people, is completely bogus. The decision of a 16 year old to have unprotected sex (not a good idea, certainly) is not going to be affected by the possibility of cervical cancer 30 years in the future. For goodness sakes, if you don’t believe me on this point, talk to any teenager.
As a protection of citizens, we require many immunizations, polio, formerly smallpox, HPVB, measles, chicken pox, etc. These have a health benefit to the individual and to everybody (herd annuity). Why not HPV?
A parent who does not want these immunizations is guilty of child abuse. This is not an exaggeration.
Jill Great reply, now about that terrible idea, TXDOT. So Perry promotes a super highway through the heart of Texas, and is going to take all this land from those poor farmers. He’s going to allow Mexican drug dealers to go unhindered, whisking their booty to parts unknown in those dangerous Mexican trucks. He suggest a toll be charged, unforgivable. Let’s see, say no to a 12 lane Texas autobahn, built tax free, that will allow some bean farmer to own several thousand feet of highway frontage worth millions. These anti-Perry people have a really good argument.
Perry’s biggest hurdle is handling the slur: “Look what happened when we elected the last Texas governor as president!”
But that can be handled.
“Yep, 54 months of economic growth, low inflation, stock market above 12,000, unemployment below 5%, and more. All this in spite of two wars, 9/11, and Katrina.
“Then the Democrats took over Congress…”
You might be right, but there is a lot of Bush hangover in this country right now, even among independents and repubs, so the last thing we want is a repub candidate who spends all of his time defending Bush. And remember that LBJ was from Tx as well. They do not have a record of producing good presidents. If Perry runs, I will want some strong statements from him abut on how he will NOT be like Bush, including the too many times that Bush caved into the dems on various fiscal issues, and increased spending.
“Bush endorsed my opponent.”