Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As many grass-roots Republicans remain in search of a conservative candidate with the pizazz to go toe-to-toe against President Obama, a man from deep in the heart of Texas who was tea party before the tea party was cool appears to be giving the presidential race some thought.
Gov. Rick Perry has insisted on multiple occasions that he has no interest in the presidency, but RCP has learned that political associates have begun to nose around quietly on Perry's behalf.
As much as I'd prefer Texas to secede from the Union, I could go with Perry.
As many grass-roots Republicans remain in search of a conservative candidate with the pizazz to go toe-to-toe against President Obama, a man from deep in the heart of Texas who was tea party before the tea party was cool appears to be giving the presidential race some thought.
Gov. Rick Perry has insisted on multiple occasions that he has no interest in the presidency, but RCP has learned that political associates have begun to nose around quietly on Perry's behalf.
A Texas pol who is close to Perry has been telling a few key strategists that the nation's longest-serving governor sees a vacuum and is waiting to be summoned into the race. This source believes that could happen by late summer. Without fellow Southerners Haley Barbour or Mike Huckabee in the race -- and with Newt Gingrich's early troubles raising further doubts about the current lineup -- there could be a glaring niche for Perry to fill.
According to another well-connected Republican, at least one Perry confidant has been very quietly making inquiries about the political terrain in the nation's first voting state of Iowa. A third Perry associate, RCP has learned, has been heralding a small contingent of Iowans with the time-tested line that is often used by would-be candidates who are leaving their options open: "Keep your powder dry."
The first question in my mind is how many moderates and independents would support a man to be the Chief Executive of the federal government when he as spent so much time over the past couple of years complaining about it?
Second after George W. Bush Jr. is America REALLY ready for another Texas Republican governor?
Rick Perry would be a serious contender for the Republican presidential nomination but I don't think he appeals to many other people besides hard core conservatives.
The economy is booming in Texas compared to the U.S as a whole.
Republicans should not pick a candidate based on who they think moderates and independents approve of. That was tried in 2008 and was an epic failure. The eventual candidate should offer an opposite vision of Obama...not be an Obama lite.
The economy is booming in Texas compared to the U.S as a whole.
Oh really? The unemployment rate in Texas is 8.1% compared to 9.0% nationally. Booming?
Texas faces a $27 billion state deficit. And this is after accepting federal stimulus money, something Gov. Perry railed against.
Texas ranks 49th in the country in SAT scores and 39th in the country in high school graduation rates. This is the educational model we want the rest of the country to follow to produce educated citizens?
Quote:
Republicans should not pick a candidate based on who they think moderates and independents approve of. That was tried in 2008 and was an epic failure. The eventual candidate should offer an opposite vision of Obama...not be an Obama lite.
I disagree with the point of "electability" being a factor.
McCain didn't win in 2008 because he was the best face of the Republican party. He won because conservatives were torn between Huckabee, Romney, Paul, and Thompson (for a time). In fact, the reason McCain was propelled forward was because of his win in South Carolina where Thompson and Huckabee split the Christian vote and allowed McCain to take the victory. This time, the mantra of the Republican primary voters cannot be strict stimulus tests and ultra-right wing grooming. They must choose a candidate who does carry the conservative torch but also has national appeal. This is why Pawlenty and Romney will be the frontrunners. People like Perry and Bachmann are fringe candidates who might be able to win local primary/caucus battles but they cannot battle nationally.
We have seen this already in 2010. The Republicans in Delaware were virtually guaranteed a Republican Senate seat in 2010 but instead shunned Mike Castle and chose Christine O'Donnell, who was trampled in the state election. In Nevada, Harry Reid was in serious trouble and had terrible approval ratings. How was he re-elected? Because Tea Party Republicans through Susan Lowdon under the bus for the gaffe-prone Sharon Angle. The results will be far worse on the national level. If Michelle Bachmann or Rick Santorum or Rick Perry were to get the Republican nomination, the election is over before it has even begun.
The fight for a return to more conservative principles requires people to chose electable conservative candidates, not people who cling to conservative principles that are too far right.
Oh really? The unemployment rate in Texas is 8.1% compared to 9.0% nationally. Booming?
Texas faces a $27 billion state deficit. And this is after accepting federal stimulus money, something Gov. Perry railed against.
Texas ranks 49th in the country in SAT scores and 39th in the country in high school graduation rates. This is the educational model we want the rest of the country to follow to produce educated citizens?
I disagree with the point of "electability" being a factor.
McCain didn't win in 2008 because he was the best face of the Republican party. He won because conservatives were torn between Huckabee, Romney, Paul, and Thompson (for a time). In fact, the reason McCain was propelled forward was because of his win in South Carolina where Thompson and Huckabee split the Christian vote and allowed McCain to take the victory. This time, the mantra of the Republican primary voters cannot be strict stimulus tests and ultra-right wing grooming. They must choose a candidate who does carry the conservative torch but also has national appeal. This is why Pawlenty and Romney will be the frontrunners. People like Perry and Bachmann are fringe candidates who might be able to win local primary/caucus battles but they cannot battle nationally.
We have seen this already in 2010. The Republicans in Delaware were virtually guaranteed a Republican Senate seat in 2010 but instead shunned Mike Castle and chose Christine O'Donnell, who was trampled in the state election. In Nevada, Harry Reid was in serious trouble and had terrible approval ratings. How was he re-elected? Because Tea Party Republicans through Susan Lowdon under the bus for the gaffe-prone Sharon Angle. The results will be far worse on the national level. If Michelle Bachmann or Rick Santorum or Rick Perry were to get the Republican nomination, the election is over before it has even begun.
The fight for a return to more conservative principles requires people to chose electable conservative candidates, not people who cling to conservative principles that are too far right.
There really isn't that much of a difference between a moderate Republican and a Democrat. Conservatives will not be satisfied with a win just because a candidate has an (R) in front of their name. From a conservative point of view it might be better for a Dem to beat a RINO and let the country go off a cliff as we spend into oblivion. After enough financial misery voters will no longer be convinced the conservatives are as nutty as the establishment says they are.
The first question in my mind is how many moderates and independents would support a man to be the Chief Executive of the federal government when he as spent so much time over the past couple of years complaining about it?
Second after George W. Bush Jr. is America REALLY ready for another Texas Republican governor?
Rick Perry would be a serious contender for the Republican presidential nomination but I don't think he appeals to many other people besides hard core conservatives.
and before we had GW we had his father and LBJ. I don't think where he/she comes from should have much to do with who we elect..That is plain silly!!!
There really isn't that much of a difference between a moderate Republican and a Democrat. Conservatives will not be satisfied with a win just because a candidate has an (R) in front of their name. From a conservative point of view it might be better for a Dem to beat a RINO and let the country go off a cliff as we spend into oblivion. After enough financial misery voters will no longer be convinced the conservatives are as nutty as the establishment says they are.
can't rep you again: as for wxjay using things like SAT scores to compare th educational system or any stats like that: he can get over himself. These figures are not much of a determining factor in the overall educationsl system. There are too many variables.
There really isn't that much of a difference between a moderate Republican and a Democrat.
This kind of mentality destroys so-called "moderate" Republicans and narrows the Republican tent instead of expanding it. If you think you can win a national election with a candidate like Michelle Bachmann, you are seriously mistaken. Even Ronald Reagan, the icon for conservatives, had many moderate positions, including pushes for amnesty and tax increases in his second term.
Stop marginalizing Republican candidates like Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty and start embracing them instead. That doesn't mean you cannot criticize their policies. But to actually think that those candidates are identical to Barack Obama means you simply do not know politics in this country. This might be how people in ultra-red states feel. But trust me - Republican voters in NY, MA, CA, VA, etc. see stark differences between the two.
Quote:
From a conservative point of view it might be better for a Dem to beat a RINO and let the country go off a cliff as we spend into oblivion.
First, this term RINO is so stupid. Last I checked, the Republican leaders (often labeled RINOs) are following Republican principles and platforms. Since when does Rick Perry define what a Republican is? Maybe he is a RINO and instead is a secessionist or a libertarian.
Secondly, your argument is that conservatives either have to have it their way or they want complete destruction of America and its economy? This flies in the face of national pride and pursuit for lifting this country to better times. If that is how you feel, then I feel very sorry for you and any other fellow conservatives who would willingly throw their families under the bus just because a candidate didn't pass their litmus test. I don't subscribe to that type of thinking.
As much as I'd prefer Texas to secede from the Union, I could go with Perry.
He's as much Tea Party as Obama is. I wonder if the same clowns who think Cain is Tea Party wrote that article also?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The NEXT Potential GOP Presidential Candidate Gov. Rick Perry of Texas ?
