TexasCHLforum.com

anygunanywhere wrote: Perry represents most of what I believe in.

Anygunanywhere

RoyGBiv wrote:Just as Obama's 2008 promises were transparently foolish, Romney's proposals are transparently fungible and prima facia, insufficient.

RoyGBiv wrote:Cain is fairly articulate (there are some nuances about his speaking style that I find annoying, but overall he does a very good job conveying his message, IMO) and his proposals thus far show an understanding of the problem, a direction of attack that is based on both macroeconomic reality and are not tainted by inside-the-beltline political thinking. Cain, IMO, evokes Reagan in that he is clearly guided by his religious compass, but he does not wear it on his sleeve. His "positivity" is engaging, infectious, sorely needed and also evokes Reagan. Cain believes in America, Perry and Romney come across as believing in themselves, primarily. Cain has "been there, done that" in the business world (doing turn-around work requires nuts-and-bolts, hands-on executive skills, not just a spreadsheet and a red pen) and at the Fed, vs. Romney, who is a Missionary, Lawyer, Management Consultant. His job at Bain was purely Finance and M&A, he was a leveraged buyout specialist. As things stand currently, Cain has SUBSTANCE, IMO, YMMV.

RoyGBiv wrote:

anygunanywhere wrote: Perry represents most of what I believe in.

Anygunanywhere

Honestly.... I'm looking for a reason to like Perry... to think of him as someone who not only possesses the desire but also the skill and fortitude to be the leader that this country needs. While I completely respect your decision to support him, I still don't know why exactly. What does he "represent"?

At the moment, he's more "electable" than Cain, but not more so than Romney.

What specifically has Perry accomplished that would cause someone reading this thread to think of him as the best choice.?

Newly obtained White House records provide fresh details on how senior Obama administration officials used Mitt Romney’s landmark health-care law in Massachusetts as a model for the new federal law, including recruiting some of Romney’s own health care advisers and experts to help craft the act now derided by Republicans as “Obamacare.”

The records, gleaned from White House visitor logs reviewed by NBC News, show that senior White House officials had a dozen meetings in 2009 with three health-care advisers and experts who helped shape the health care reform law signed by Romney in 2006, when the Republican presidential candidate was governor of Massachusetts. One of those meetings, on July 20, 2009, was in the Oval Office and presided over by President Barack Obama, the records show.

“The White House wanted to lean a lot on what we’d done in Massachusetts,” said Jon Gruber, an MIT economist who advised the Romney administration on health care and who attended five meetings at the Obama White House in 2009, including the meeting with the president. “They really wanted to know how we can take that same approach we used in Massachusetts and turn that into a national model.”

tbrown wrote:

RoyGBiv wrote:Just as Obama's 2008 promises were transparently foolish, Romney's proposals are transparently fungible and prima facia, insufficient.

Fungible? Like commodities?

RoyGBiv wrote:Cain is fairly articulate (there are some nuances about his speaking style that I find annoying, but overall he does a very good job conveying his message, IMO) and his proposals thus far show an understanding of the problem, a direction of attack that is based on both macroeconomic reality and are not tainted by inside-the-beltline political thinking. Cain, IMO, evokes Reagan in that he is clearly guided by his religious compass, but he does not wear it on his sleeve. His "positivity" is engaging, infectious, sorely needed and also evokes Reagan. Cain believes in America, Perry and Romney come across as believing in themselves, primarily. Cain has "been there, done that" in the business world (doing turn-around work requires nuts-and-bolts, hands-on executive skills, not just a spreadsheet and a red pen) and at the Fed, vs. Romney, who is a Missionary, Lawyer, Management Consultant. His job at Bain was purely Finance and M&A, he was a leveraged buyout specialist. As things stand currently, Cain has SUBSTANCE, IMO, YMMV.

He knows finance but I'm not convinced his heart is in the right place on other issues. For example, when he says states should be able to have strict gun control, despite recent SCOTUS opinions.

Cain might be a good Treasury Secretary, especially if ATF is moved to DOJ under a pro-BoR/pro-RKBA AG.

tbrown wrote:

RoyGBiv wrote:Just as Obama's 2008 promises were transparently foolish, Romney's proposals are transparently fungible and prima facia, insufficient.

Fungible? Like commodities?

RoyGBiv wrote:What specifically has Perry accomplished that would cause someone reading this thread to think of him as the best choice.?

RoyGBiv wrote:What specifically has Perry accomplished that would cause someone reading this thread to think of him as the best choice.?

anygunanywhere wrote:

RoyGBiv wrote:What specifically has Perry accomplished that would cause someone reading this thread to think of him as the best choice.?

He is pro-life and more so than any of the others with the exception of Newt Gingrich. Newt is Catholic, as am I, but Perry has a better chance of being elected. The reason Perry has fallen, IMNSHO, is because of the lies in the media and the fact that few who read the lies actually know Rick Perry for who he is.


Anygunanywhere

Purplehood wrote:
Perry has fallen because he has no public-speaking skills.

mamabearCali wrote:For the primary it will likely be for me anyone but Romney, and in the General Election I will vote Anyone But Obama.

mamabearCali wrote:in the General Election I will vote Anyone But Obama.

Dave2 wrote:

mamabearCali wrote:in the General Election I will vote Anyone But Obama.

I miss my first car. It was a 1977 Volvo 240 that my parents bought before I was born. I had it "on loan" from between when I turned 16, and when I went off to college at 18. Then my sister drove it around for two or three more years until it wouldn't go into reverse anymore. My Dad said that it was still a great car and you just had to "park strategically", but Mom and their mechanic said its time had come. That car ran for 23 years before it finally needed a repair that just cost too much compared to what the car was worth. I suppose it's rusting away in a junkyard somewhere now... and it would still be a better president than Obama.

(Wow, that's a long-winded, round-about way to say , even for me. Do I get a gold star or something? )