It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
It’s not quite time for his camp to panic but in his third debate in a month – nearly as many as he’s done in the entire decade he’s served as Texas governor – Perry demonstrated why so few presidential candidates who parachute into the race mid-campaign win the nomination.
Perry gave a foreign policy answer that offered no indication he’s thought about how to respond to threats against America, twice bobbled attacks on Mitt Romney’s well-documented departures from conservative orthodoxy, called immigration hard-liners heartless and, in what was otherwise his best answer of the evening, stretched the truth in the course of delivering a well-rehearsed line about why he mandated pre-teen girls to be vaccinated against HPV.
A more seasoned candidate would be better informed on national security policy, fluent to the point of knowing by heart his chief opponent’s core vulnerabilities, and would never offend his party’s base with such a pointed attack. And a more sure-footed one would have recognized that he couldn’t get away with the claim that he issued an executive order on HPV after being “lobbied” by a cancer victim—because it has been publicly established that he met the victim only after he made the decision.
Instead, after a roaring August start, Perry’s second consecutive lackluster debate performance will reinforce the growing view among some Republicans that he’s not ready for the big leagues.
When he’s pitted side-by-side with Romney, as he was Thursday, the discrepancy between Perry’s promise and his actual performance is glaring.
What may hurt Perry the most, though, is if the ongoing series of debates create the impression that he simply doesn’t have the capacity to get up to speed. If, after the four additional forums scheduled between now and the Iowa caucuses, Perry shows no ability to give a cogent answer on a foreign policy question or discuss the country’s domestic challenges in a way that veers from his top-line talking points, Romney’s slow and steady approach will have the ex-Massachusetts governor positioned to take advantage.
“The bottom line is he’s failed to meet expectations in the last two debates,” said a veteran GOP operative who is neutral in the race but didn’t want to offend Perry. “He often starts off strong in replies but tends to wander, displaying a lack of intellectual discipline that doesn’t inspire confidence.”
Originally posted by buni11687
Hmmm.... and Ive been thinking this guy was the "favorite"...or atleast thats what the media has been telling me to believe.
In the meantime, let the Palins, Perrys and Bachmanns parade around acting like they're important.
People will be saying "Perry who"?
Originally posted by Becoming
I don't think that vaccine should be that big of a deal. He already admitted he went about it the wrong way and plus young girls aren't being forced to get it.
My fellow Republicans would be foolish to choose Perry, Bachmann, Santorum, Cain, or Gingrich over Huntsman, Romney or Paul. Johnson is good, in my opinion, but this is just like a practice for him. Not only is Romney more sane and in appearance more Presidential but his poll numbers show that he is the only man who can truly compete against Obama and win. Right now he leads Florida by 7% against Obama, loses Vermont by only 20%, loses Connecticut, California, Massachusetts by just 13%, wins Michigan by 2%, and is competitive in states that would otherwise be solid for the Democrat.