Being wrong about Perry

How can so many people have been wrong about the presidential chances of Texas Gov. Rick Perry?

It wasn’t just the round-the-clock chatter on cable news TV. I can clearly remember the consensus emerging only a few months ago that if Perry were to step into the race, he would be a serious challenger to the White House incumbent. He had the track record of a governor, the social-conservative credentials and religion. Oh, and good looks, too.

How wrong they (we) all were.

But maybe that was in the days when any potential contender from the Republican camp looked like Einstein compared to Sarah Palin. (As I recall, the only qualms about the Texas governor came from the George W. Bush camp, which could easily be put down to personal rivalry.) Do I have to list Perry’s innumerable gaffes in the TV debates, which only magnified his flaws and his inconsistent positions? Never mind his brain freeze in the November GOP presidential debate. The most shocking gaffe for me was in the last South Carolina debate, when he said that Turkey was run by “Islamic terrorists." But Perry’s own party had been on his case anyway, since his decision to go after the multi-millionaire Mitt Romney for being a “vulture” capitalist.

So now there are three in the Republican field seeking the nomination. It is right and proper that they should be subject to scrutiny to avoid another Perry-style misjudgment by the same chattering classes. Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich have had to defend their positions and their respective records, while Santorum has been relatively spared. Yet the former Pennsylvania senator not only won the Iowa caucuses, according to today’s recount, but he was also endorsed by conservative Christian leaders who met in Texas over the weekend.

In this election, we need more information, and less chatter. That is the lesson of Rick Perry’s doomed candidacy.

---