Rick Perry Announces Candidacy For Presidency
While most of the Republican field was at the Iowa State Fair, Rick Perry was in South Carolina shaking up the field.
It’s been telegraphed for a few weeks now, so it’s not a surprise. However, Rick Perry’s entry into the GOP Presidential Race today is likely to shake things up significantly:
CHARLESTON, S.C. — Gov. Rick Perry of Texas announced Saturday that he was running for president, declaring it was “time to get America working again” as he sought to offer the Republican Party a well-rounded candidate who appeals to fiscal conservatives and can also rally the evangelical base.
As many of his fellow candidates flooded Iowa over the weekend to woo voters at the Ames Straw Poll, Mr. Perry headed here to announce he was seeking the nomination at the RedState Gathering, an annual convention of conservative bloggers.
“I came to South Carolina because I will not sit back and accept the path that America is on, because a great country requires a better direction, because a renewed nation needs a new president,” he said.
“With the support of my family and unwavering belief in the goodness of America, I declare to you today as a candidate for president of the United States.”
And with that, Mr. Perry, 61, whose spectral presence has lingered over the Republican primary contest — he was even the topic of a question at Thursday night’s Republican debate in Iowa — officially became a candidate for the Republican nomination.
Mr. Perry’s entrance into an already crowded field is expected to reconfigure the dynamics of the race, offering Republicans a fiscal and social conservative who not only appeals to the party’s base on social issues but also can challenge Mitt Romney, who is leading in many polls, on jobs and the economy.
His announcement reverberated 1,000 miles away in Iowa, where thousands of Republicans gathered to size up the party’s candidates, who delivered speeches and asked for support at the Iowa Straw Poll. While Mr. Perry’s name was not on the ballot, a group called Americans for Rick Perry urged people to list him as a write-in candidate.
In a sea of people wearing green shirts for Tim Pawlenty, orange shirts for Michele Bachmann and red shirts for Ron Paul, dozens of maroon shirts bearing Mr. Perry’s name stood out in the crowd. He is set to arrive in Iowa on Sunday, where he intends to spend three days in the state as he introduces himself to voters who will open the nominating contest early next year.
“He’s an attractive candidate,” said Tim Gibson of Clive, Iowa, 59, who stood in line at the straw poll, waiting to cast his vote for Mr. Perry. “He brings leadership to the race. My top priority is winning the election and I want to vote for someone who can win.”
(…)
Mr. Perry’s entrance into the already crowded field is expected to reconfigure the dynamics of the race, offering Republicans a fiscal and social conservative who appeals not only to the party’s base on social issues but also one who can challenge Mitt Romney, who is leading in many polls, over jobs and the economy.
Mr. Perry is the longest-serving governor of Texas, having been elected to three full terms and having held the position more than 10 years, and he is known as a fierce and skilled campaigner, and a prodigious fund-raiser. In his past campaigns, he has eked out victories and come from behind to win by large margins, but he also possesses uncanny luck and the ability recognize and capitalize on it.
“He becomes immediately one of the top three candidates and he fills a vacuum, of someone who is a conservative, who has credibility and can speak to the fiscal conservative, anti-big-government and anti-Washington, crowd, but he’s also a social conservative,” said Matthew Dowd, a former strategist for President George W. Bush. “At least in the short tem, he is a major disruption in the race.”
Perry remains untested on the national stage and the next several weeks will be something of a trial by fire for him. Assuming he withstands it, however, and if the enthusiasm I have seen for his candidacy among conservatives holds true, then I think we’re looking at an inevitable Romney v. Perry contest for the GOP nomination further down the line. Compared to all of the other candidates that could challenge Romney, Perry has both the resume and the conservative bona fides to serve as the rallying point for the anti-Romney people in the GOP. If that happens, then Romney’s candidacy could be in serious trouble.
While he’s been silent on his plans for the past several weeks, it’s clear that this has been in the planning stages for some time and that Perry’s campaign intends to hit the ground running. The campaign website went active before started speaking this afternoon, and the visit to South Carolina will be followed by an arrival later today in New Hampshire, followed by a trip tomorrow to Iowa. The choice of states is, I think, rather obvious.
There will be much more to say about Perry in the weeks and months to come, I’m sure, and I know I’ll find something about him I don’t like (I already have, actually). However, listening to his speech this afternoon I was struck with the notion that the message he was delivering was exactly the kind of thing you want to hear from a candidate if you’re a supporter. There was criticism of the incumbent, for sure, but the one thing I heard from Perry that I haven’t heard from many Republican candidates lately is the kind of optimism that Ronald Reagan projected in the depths of 1979 and 1980. Now, I’m not saying that Rick Perry is anywhere close to Reagan, but that message of optimism is one that goes over well on the campaign trail, and if he keeps it up it’s likely to work to his benefit. If this does indeed come down to a contest between Perry and Mitt Romney, as I suspect it will, I doubt many conservatives are going to find a reason to object to Perry.
Update: Here’s video of the speech:
Photo via The New York Times
Call me a snob, but I think that D in Economics puts him right out.
Who cares? there is zero chance that Rick Perry will be president. The idea that any Republican is going to beat Obama is laughable. If the Republicans are stupid enough to nominate Perry, it will be a certainty that Nancy Pelosi or Steny Hoyer will be the next speaker on the House in 2013.
In Texas where they already know the guy there have been a couple of polls that show him in a dead heat with Obama – in Texas. How well will he stand up to scrutiny on the National stage?
I’m sure a lot of people will be called snobs, and much worse, for opposing this W 2.0…
Being a social conserrvative will both be a plus and a minus for Perry’s candidacy. A plus, because Bachmann’s voters will cite that as a reason to shift over from her to him. A minus, because indies tend to be more cautious in voting for a social conservative, because of the potential ramifications such an agenda might bring to the policies that might be pushed by them.
The social conserrvative part of him is what concerned me, personally. However, after reading that Daily Beast interview posted here, I warmth up to Perry. This was mainly because of the clarity and optimism he voiced for economic and fiscal changes he supported in allowing this country to get back in the game of growth, business investment and job formation.
The PPP poll (6/27/2011) had
Obama – Romney, 42-50
Obama – Palin, 46-44
Obama – Bachmann, 47-44
Obama – Paul, 40-45
Obama – Cain, 43-43
Obama – Pawlently, 43-44
and
Obama – Perry, 47-45
What kind of sample picks Bachmann over Obama, but Obama over Perry?
@An Interested Party:
..already getting ready for the ‘talking points’ bashing Perry. Yep, comparing him to Bush — what a creative idea!
One thing for sure, it’s more complimentary than comparing him to Obama! There is going to be lots of “ABO'” sentiment out there in ’12 —> anybody-but-Obama.
The Anyone But X bit worked really well in 2004…
What some people fail to understand is that the Anyone can’t actually be anyone…
@PJ:
Bachmann has been out there longer in the announced row of candidates. I think she will fade fast, though, after Perry officially entered the race today. Perry is already getting financial backers, supporting other candidates, who have changed their allegiance and are coming over to him because they think he is more viable and competitive.
He will definitely be a major player in the ’12 race.
Let’s see… Rick Perry, according to WikiPedia, was an Air Force pilot and then a farmer before going into politics. His wife was a nurse.
How in hell can Perry compete against a Harvard lawyer, Constitutional law lecturer, and (shudder) a community organizer?
J.
@jan:
That’s a Texas poll. They would rather pick Bachmann than their well known governor.
@Jay Tea:
Remember the last president with that kind of background?
@PJ:
Would be interested in the link. And, it would be equally interesting to follow Perry’s numbers in Texas now that he has formally announced.
Well it does have the virtue of being accurate, but I can understand why you wouldn’t want to talk too much about such a comparison…
Well, we’re probably going to find out…anyone care to make a prediction?
@jan: Here ‘s a link.
Hopefully for Perry and for the Republicans (if they end up picking him), his numbers will improve. Otherwise it’s just sad. A nominee should at least be able to deliver his or her homestate.
But then a lot of their candidates for the nomination in 2012 don’t seem to be able to do that…
@An Interested Party: Well, we’re probably going to find out…anyone care to make a prediction?
Not particularly. I know what should happen, but when you factor in a billion dollars of official campaign money, a couple billion more in unofficial campaign money, a largely compliant press corps, and tons of bought-and-paid-for liberal activists, pundits, and unruly mobs can do wonders when it comes to screwing with elections.
J.
@Jay Tea:
It was good to see a wife who is so supportive of her husband’s candidacy, unlike, for instance Mitch Daniel’s wife, who wasn’t.
Being an RN myself, I like the fact that Perry’s wife has an occupation in this field. With all the health care issues this country has, and the probablility of either the current health care bill being unconstitutional or repealed, her background could be an informational asset.
@PJ:
Thanks for the link! 🙂
You would think they could……It was always a curiosity when Gore lost Tennessee.
@An Interested Party:
Hey, I would love to talk about it. Do you?
Let’s see…They both come from Texas. Both are/were Governors. Rumor has it that Bush wanted Perry to run. Both are religious. Both had good fiscal records in their state. Both have pretty wives. Bush was fluent in Spanish and was for immigration reform. Perry ?
Tag, you’re it. Your turn.
@superdestroyer: Pelosi speaker again? Please! I would rather have Richard Nixon.
@jan: Because Gore was out of touch with average, middle class people. Or maybe the climate in Tennessee was too hot for him.
@Jay Tea: Right. But wasn’t there one other little job that Obama has held? You know, something in the last couple of years?
Too bad Bush’s fiscal record was something less than good as President.
Bush is religious. Perry is a religious fanatic. There is a difference.
Well, that’s a woman’s job if you are a conservative. Look good.
There might even be a few black guys in leather jackets and berets. That should set Jays knees to knocking…
@jan
Oh, you mean this fiscal record? All, hell, forget it. Just google ‘Texas budget crisis’. Some fiscal record, that.
@Catfish:
What do you think the push of the Obama campaign will be in 2012. Obama knows he has already won re-election. The real question is whether the coat tails will be big enough to put Pelosi back in charge so that the Democrats can renege on all of the promised spending cuts.
Speaking as aParty activist…
Maybe we can play video of Perry calling for prayer to end the drought, instead of using reason, science, and engineering to solve the water shortage.
Maybe we should show up at his campaign events and do a rain dance, and call upon the gods to smite him down.
Maybe we can suggest that the Palin clan sacrifice a virgin to the rain gods, if they have any left.What, too much?
Yes, I do, for one. And for all the problems that he brought to the table, the greatest success was far greater than that of the current White House occupant. I can understand how you’d want to overlook that point. But, there it is.
Course, Perry differs from Bush in one important aspect- he is a supporter and friend of anti-American traitors, and closet white supremacist..
The libertarians have qualms about Perry. See Balko’s piece.
http://www.theagitator.com/2011/08/12/rick-perry-poster-boy-for-limited-government/
Steve
@steve:
Course they have qualms.
But in the end, they will support him. They always come back home in the end.
In their minds, killing an innocent man is one thing, but delivering health care to millions of people is simply beyond the pale.
Indeed, they can…
Others have already stepped in nicely to your “tag”, but if you think that the second coming of W will have a good chance of winning the presidency, well, you’re even more delusional than I thought…
@Eric Florack:
Cutting taxes a ton for people who aren’t you? Putting 2 wars and a huge welfare program on the credit card? The successes are myriad!
@An Interested Party:
What I said about Perry was I have warmed more to Perry because of his fiscal conservatism, and that he would be a force in the ’12 election. Anything beyond those remarks have been your creative license with words, including your opening salvo about being Bush 2.
If the GOP is going to run someone who reminds everyone of GWB, they might as well just run Jeb.
If not for the terrible taste left behind by GWB, Jeb would look like a good candidate right now.
Actually thats not what you said. You did say:
With that nonsense balloon quickly popped, you are trying to spin away from your own remarks.
I am having a hard time thinking of any success to associate with Bush. Good start in Afghanistan, dropped the ball at Tora Bora, and completely screwed the pooch to follow his Iraq obsession. His other good moments were successful damage control related to his own problems – the surge and TARP.
Of course this is bithead talking, so perhaps torture and gulags are counted as great successes.
Yea, I can’t imagine Bush ever engaging in proto-treasonous talk about succession. Bush has his faults, but that ain’t one of them.
@jan:
Let’s see, Texas, how are they doing?
“Wow: Texas Deficit Estimate Comes In Worse Than The Worst Expectations”
http://www.businessinsider.com/texas-budget-shortfall-2011-1
Is the massive debt run up by Texas a sign of Perry’s fiscal conservatism?
Steve
@An Interested Party: If it’s possible for Bit to be more delusional than you thought, then you’re not thinking hard enough…
Texas did avoid the worst of the real estate bust. Why? A heavily regulated banking industry.
@Scott O.:
From the gist of that article this appears to be right, that Texas is doing worse than expected, with a looming deficit like other states. However, the whole country is experiencing economic difficulties, if not almost financial collapse like what is seen in CA, Illinois and other states. In that same article that you posted it also said:
Also, in looking at the Monthly Review of the Texas Economy — July 2011 it had this to offer about the economy:
But, there is still much to be explored about Perry. And, I am sure people are going to look at his record with a microscope, exposing whatever is negative or positive about it. Neverthemess, I still like his ideas about how to jump-start business, leading to a better hiring atmosphere.
Rick Perry will win the GOP nomination. I feel so certain of this I went to start an account and buy Perry shares on intrade but found it takes 2 weeks for a check to clear. I think he could even beat Obama, but I wouldn’t bet on that right now.
Jan you have yet to support your contention that Perry “had a good fiscal record”. Now your line seems to be “everyone is having trouble”. Yes, everyone is having trouble, including Texas and Perry. You claim Perry has something to do with Texas’ job growth – what specific policies of his do you credit and how exactly have they helped job growth?
From what I know about Texas, and I admit it not all that much, to the extent that they are not hurting quite as badly as some other states it is because a heavily regulated banking industry in that state (probably not something Perry supports) kept if from suffering as badly in the real estate bust as other states did.
@WR: Back to your kennel, lickspittle.
J.
@Rick Almeida:
Actually, the last president with the kind of background that Jay Tea likes: Jimmy Carter.
Submarine officer.
Peanut farmer.
Southern governor.
Alyssa Katz wrote one of the best pieces on the very stringent Texas laws about mortgages. It is offline now, but Kevin Drum has nice summation plus some extra points. These were laws, some on the Texas Constitution, which Perry did not create. Indeed, given his talk, one suspects he would repeal them if able.
http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2010/04/dont-mess-texas-mortgages
If you compare unemployment rates for Texas vs New York, they have not been very different most of the time. If you want to postulate some Texas policy, like no state income tax, as being responsible for the recent performance, you need to explain why it did not matter in the past.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/07/texas-two-step/
Steve
Texas:
That is all you need to know about Texas, anjin.
A hit piece in the WSJ doesn’t bode well for his campaign.
@PJ: Actually, the last president with the kind of background that Jay Tea likes: Jimmy Carter.
Turn down the stupid a smidgen, please.
* Navy pilot and war hero
* Congressman
* Ambassador to U.N.
* Ambassador to China
* Director of CIA
* Vice-President
J.
Sadly, even Bush 41 would be considered a RINO these days and probably wouldn’t be able to get anywhere close to winning the GOP presidential nomination…the irony is that background looks quite impressive compared to either W’s or Perry’s…
@Jay Tea:
Bush 41 was a farmer and a governor? I didn’t know that.
You pointed at some facts about Rick Perry’s background, facts that he shares with Jimmy Carter, not Bush 41.
🙂
@An Interested Party: Sadly for you, I’m old enough to have voted for the guy twice, and supported him once before I could vote. Bush 41 had an approval rating in the 90% range around a year before his re-election campaign, and he still lost by 5.5 points.
He was a good president in a lot of ways, and a bad one in many others. I think he was better than Dukakis, and certainly a better man and better qualified on paper than Bill Clinton, but he was hardly a staunch conservative. He was a moderate to liberal Republican in 1980, and eight years of loyal service as Reagan’s Veep didn’t change that.
He himself admits that it was a mistake to get rolled by the Democratically-controlled Congress and sign several major tax increases, and he started the mission in Somalia that Bill Clinton let culminate in the utter atrocity that was “Blackhawk Down.”
On the other hand, he’s been a stellar ex-president, showing far more dignity and respect than Jimmy Carter — and, to a far lesser degree, Bill Clinton.
Could he win the Republican nomination today? The 1980 Bush, absolutely not. But he didn’t win it then, either. The 1988 Bush? Maybe. But he had the semi-blessing of Reagan, and that helped a lot.
Would either Bush be better than Obama? Absolutely. Hell, present-day Bush, all 87 years of him, would be an improvement.
J.
@Jay Tea: Now that’s the kind of keen political analysis I expect you you. Not only a silly insult, but one of those phrases that pimply morons use when they’re trying to sound tough. Next up: “I don’t suffer fools gladly.” And can “I say thee nay!” be far behind?
@Jay Tea: In the world according to Jay, Papa Bush is a much better ex-president than Carter because apparently retiring and enjoying your wealth is a much better way to behave than trying to help poor people.
I’m trying to imagine something more dignified a former President could do than the aging Jimmy Carter rolling up his sleeves and grabbing a hammer to help build poor people homes. Frankly, I can’t.
It’s not your GOP tightly controlled photo op kind of dignity, it’s something a little more real and impressive.
If all Jimmy Carter did was pound on poor people’s houses with a hammer, I’d laud him. But he stopped doing that a while ago, and took up some truly unbecoming hobbies. Hobbies like freelance diplomacy with North Korea (trying to coerce Bill Clinton into a treaty Clinton had no input on and was a really bad deal), his anti-Semitism and attacks on Israel’s security and sovereignty, his meetings with Bashar Assad and the leadership of Hamas, his palling around with such worthies as Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez…
I understand that you would rather downplay or ignore Carter’s activities that don’t involve pounding on poor people’s houses with a hammer, but I don’t have to submit to your vision of reality.
J.
@WR:
Bush ’41 has done a lot of charity since his presidency ended. He was the chairman of the Eisenhower Fellowships trusts for 7 years. He, together with Bill Clinton, was majorly involved in fund raising efforts following Hurricaine Katrina, the Indian Ocean Tsunami, the Haiti Earthquake. He’s also been involved in a number of international children’s charities like Save the Children and the Vijay Amritraj Foundation
Pointless sound bites. That’s the mother’s milk of progressives.
@Stormy Dragon: The Bush family has always struck me as having a real sense of “noblesse oblige” in them that others — such as several with the last name Kennedy — could do well to learn from.
J.
@WR: I’ve proven, repeatedly and recently, that you are not worth debating, WR. You had to have someone else try to bail out your ass after you accused Rick Perry of being a multiple murderer, and I am STILL waiting for some evidence that the Tea Party is “astroturfed.”
What you don’t grasp, WR, is that when I say “back to your kennel, lickspittle,” I am actually being kind.
J.
I guess that accounts for what Barbara Bush said while touring the Astrodome when it was filled with Katrina refugees:
Kind of reminds me of the various hints we’ve heard lately about how slavery worked “very well” for the slaves.
Also:
Your general point is correct, but your number is somewhat inflated. His highest number ever was 89%, reached on 3/3/91. Gallup polled this question 134 times, and on only three occasions did his number exceed 85%. But there was a long period in ’91 when he was consistently in the range of 70-85%, which is still quite high, of course. Link.
@jukeboxgrad: That’s one quote. I got a whole bunch of actual deeds to back it up. Further, I didn’t say it was the overwhelming tendency of every member of the family, but it’s a lot more predominant in them than in, say, the Kennedys (the most prominent Democratic political family).
Remember the Bush twins? Dubya’s daughters, those crazy, wild party animals who some idiots on the left wanted to draft and send to Iraq? Well, one of them is a teacher who works at a Maryland charter school, after a stint with UNICEF in Panama. The other spent time working with AIDS victims in Africa.
And that quote from Barbara Bush, who did a LOT of work on literacy? Tacky, but it has the merit of being true. Most of the Katrina evacuees were\ poor, who didn’t have the resources to get themselves out in time.
J.
@Jay Tea: No, you’re just being a bad writer. But we all kind of expect that from you.
@Jay Tea: I’m not quite sure how that is sad for me, because even though you voted for him twice, that doesn’t mean that plenty of Tea Party types, or other “conservatives” like Eric Florack, wouldn’t consider Bush 41 to be a RINO…
So he would break his promise again about no new taxes? Or try to blame that on Democrats, perhaps…
Oh, and certainly not to defend the Kennedy family, but, since you yourself wrote about not submitting to other people’s version of reality, are you seriously arguing that members of the Kennedy family haven’t contributed to those less fortunate than themselves, just as members of the Bush family have? Or perhaps it’s just too easy to try to take a potshot at the Democratic Party by going after its “most prominent family”?
@ Jan: Sweetie, as this thread shows (as well as others where you have dropped by), pointless sound bites aren’t just used by progressives…
@WR: Back to your kennel, lickspittle.
J.
@wr
You forgot to mention that he is something of a bore…
Never have been able to understand why conservatives are so terrified of these two. They present about as much danger to the U.S. as a pair of cocker spaniels.