A Texan looks at Rick Perry…
…and says he’s a bad debater, but should that matter all that much?:
A primary fight is: Who could win? Who should win?
Two different questions.
I think he could win. Should win is up to him…Perry apologists do him no favor by excusing poor performance, or muddled responses, he needs a wake up call…
I’m confident that he can govern as President the way I’d want a President to govern. He’ll go after the EPA, Obamacare, taxes, drilling in the Gulf, over-regulation, intrusive Federal government. All that stuff I care about a lot.
He still has to make the case that he should be leading the charge. Because there are an awful lot of conservatives out there, who he needs to convince. He hasn’t done that.
I do think he could. But it’s on him to do it.
Which is more important, talk or action? I say action. But talk goes to the issue of electability. In his first intense public scrutiny, Perry’s talk is threatening to do him in.
I watched the debate, and Perry indeed fumbled several times–one an attempted attack against Romney that just utterly collapsed, when Perry started to look down at his apparent notes, stumbled and hesitated and stammered and, then, it all just fell apart.
It is apparent in this age of TV that any potential candidate for President–no matter how good his ideas might be, and no matter that his heart might be in the right place–just has to be articulate, a good public speaker, and nimble on his feet in debate or, he is at an extraordinary and fatal disadvantage.
In the case of Perry, though, I thought that the fact that he signed and defended a bill giving illegal aliens in-state tuition in Texas undermined any credibility he might have had for those of us interested in stopping illegal immigration, getting control of our borders, and stopping the enormous drain on our government and society that illegal aliens represent.
I particularly found the defense he chose, that if you were not for this subsidizing of illegal alien’s college tuition “you didn’t have a heart,” to be particularly meretricious.
Wolla,
I agree, but could not have said it nearly as well as you. Perfect!
Independents flocked to Obama in 2008. And they didn’t vote for him based on his non-existent record of military, executive, and leadership achievement, or prior experience governing. He’s been a back bencher his entire life. Presumably, the 53% of the population responsible for his election were in part hypnotized by his oratory.
Now, polls show those independents who elected him are abandoning him in droves. Many realize they elected a guy whose skill set makes him more suited for hawking ShamWow! rags on TV than being President of the United States of America.
It would not surprise me if many of those independents put less of a premium on speechmaking and teleprompter reading this time around, and pay closer attention to actual experience and demonstrated achievement at managing or running something — anything.
And by almost all accounts, Perry has been a good governor. I’ve been disappointed with his debate performances, but his track record at actually governing is solid. If that’s what the independents value in 2012, then Perry has a good shot.
However, I lost alot of faith in the American voter in 2008, so I suppose nothing will surprise me in 2012.
I’m a Texan and I’ve been somewhat disappointed in Perry’s debate performances too. I agree with the Texan who wrote this article that he’s got to do better on his own. He can’t expect people to always make excuses for his lack of ability to articulate his ideas.
He’s a big boy and he needs to earn the right to be our president.
I do want to point out a misconception about his immigration policies. I’ve heard several out-of-state (Texas being the state) US citizens complain that illegal immigrants are getting a better deal than they are. My understanding is that that isn’t true. To get in-state tuition, a person has to have lived here for three years, no matter where he or she comes from. Out-of-state US citizens and illegal immigrants are treated the same.
You can say that illegal immigrant aren’t paying for their education…that they are getting something for free. In Texas, that isn’t true. Here we have no state income tax. Most local and state government revenue is derived from property and sales taxes. If someone lives here, he or she pays sales taxes and also pays property taxes either directly if he or she owns a house or indirectly to the landlord if he or she rents.
Any person living here contributes as much to all local and state governments as anyone else.
Perry needs to get better at pointing that kind of thing out.
Talking well publicly is a necessary (Bush, Perry) but not Sufficient (Obama) condition.
One thing candidates must learn is that everything they say can and will be used against them, especially abroad. They can’t let that shake them, but they should try to avoid egregious misspeaks.
That’s where I have a problem. Illegal immigrants need to be rounded up and deported.
The extra, unnecessary costs that illegal aliens add to state budgets are nowhere near confined to the issue of state imposed taxes.
In general, illegal aliens elbow their way into line in place of American citizens who are really eligible for various benefits, and in a time of limited resources, illegal aliens take some of those eligible American citizen’s places, they crowd some of them out, as they similarly crowd low wage Americans out of the workplace too. Moreover, the porous border and the presence of increasing millions of illegal aliens threatens and weakens U.S. sovereignty, increases our crime rates and drug problem, and distorts both our economy and, increasingly, our political system.
Illegal aliens siphon off taxpayer dollars that should be used to pay for the needs of U.S. citizens and taxpayers which, instead, are used to pay for the extra costs states incur for illegal aliens and their family’s medical care, education, various social services, and associated law enforcement costs. Recent government statistics put the number of foreigners in jail in the U.S. at 25% of our prison population, and 68% of those foreigners are Mexicans. Then, there are the indirect costs, like generalized hikes in auto insurance rates caused by the very large spike in hit and runs, uninsured motorist claims, and robberies that large numbers of illegal aliens bring with them.
In Prince William County, VA, where a package of somewhat tough new anti-illegal alien laws were passed a few years ago, there were reports of the subsequent dramatic exodus of thousands of presumably illegal aliens fleeing the county and, very recently, the University of Virginia–hardly a bastion of redneck racism–reported that, in the couple of years since these laws were passed, the county has experienced a swift and dramatic 47% reduction in hit and runs, and more than a 40% reduction in “property crimes.”
Meanwhile, Mexicans in the U.S., many/most of them illegals, (the respected Pew Hispanic Center recently estimated that 58% of all illegal aliens here in the U.S. were Mexicans) send an estimated more than $20 billion dollars back to Mexico each year i.e. U.S. taxpayers basically pay for all or a large chunk of Mexican illegal aliens living expenses, and they send a large chunk of the money they don’t have to pay for those living expenses back to Mexico, so we are getting screwed both coming and going.
It was recently estimated that Border States like California–on the verge of bankruptcy–have expenses of many extra billions of dollars each year because of costs they incur for benefits given to illegal aliens or costs incurred due to their presence i.e. extra law enforcement, court, and incarceration costs.
I’d say that, surveying the damage, the presence of illegal aliens here in the U.S. is a major financial drain on our system. We are being gamed by Mexico and illegals. The Mexican government deliberately pushes/exports its social, political, and criminal problems across the border into our country (and not coincidentally this “safety valve” has so far kept the ruling Mexican oligarchy in power), where we chumps promptly try to solve them, incurring many billions of extra costs each year and, meanwhile, those very same Mexican illegal aliens remit more than $20 billion dollars each year back to Mexico i.e. they siphon that money right out of our economy–and these gigantic dollar remittances by Mexican illegal aliens back to Mexico are so large and so important for Mexico because they are the second largest input of revenue into the Mexican economy, second only to Mexican oil revenues.
Action trumps talk. Perry’s record just isn’t that appealing to liberty.
Wherever I read it (here?), his talk seems to square with one who loves grand government control, just at the State instead of Federal level.
Can Perry boosters–or the man himself–show me several important examples of him leaving choices for the people? The 10th Amendment is awesome, but only in context where the people are senior to both the state and the States.
Texas is a border state. Hispanics represent 37% of our population, many of whom are illegal.
Why is Texas doing so much better than California financially?
The Left’s response is probably that immigrants are doing the work Americans aren’t willing to do.
Then again, Californian nurses just went on strike because other unions were going on strike.
texexec: “Why is Texas doing so much better than California financially?”
A few guesses.
Texas is still drilling for oil and natural gas when California has shut it down.
Texas did tort reform, California didn’t.
Texas actually wants more business – California drives businesses away.
Texas – low taxes. California – high taxes.
Texas – fiscally more conservative government policies. California – progressive fiscal policies.