Return to “Ron Paul vs Rick Perry”
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.RoyGBiv wrote:What specifically has Perry accomplished that would cause someone reading this thread to think of him as the best choice.?
Nice search results. Thanks. I did not use the same search terms as you, even if I did I doubt I would have read NPR.RoyGBiv wrote:I'll skip the snarky retort to your "Google" comment...anygunanywhere wrote: The Office of the Governor Economic Development and Tourism Division. Last I checked Rick Perry is the Governor of Texas.
http://www.governor.state.tx.us/news/pr ... ase/16632/
Anygunanywhere
For the third time...... Why would I credit Mr Perry for CREATING this environment?
There's a HUGE difference between maintaining an inherited success and LEADING the efforts to create success where it did not exist previously.
I have proposed that the economic conditions for Texas' success preceded Mr. Perry. Nothing in your referenced article speaks to this point.
In fact, your friends at Google might have missed these bits during your search.. All of them Page 1 hits when searching "job growth in texas"
Perry’s record is part of a long-term trend. Texas has done well in the jobs department for decades. “This point goes neglected,” says Bernard L. Weinstein, professor of business economics in the Cox School of Business at Southern Methodist University in Dallas. “Yes, Texas has created more jobs than any other state” in the last two years. “But that’s been true since 1970. For the last 41 years Texas has added more jobs than any other state, and in most years, has led the nation in job creation,” Weinstein told us. “So Gov. Perry can claim that these jobs were created on his watch, but they were created on everybody else’s watch too.”
http://www.factcheck.org/2011/08/texas-size-recovery/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;The non-partisan group found that newly-arrived immigrants claimed 81% of state job growth from 2007 to 2011. What's worse, half of those immigrants were illegal -- representing 40% of state growth.
.....
Newly-arrived immigrants dominated job growth despite representing only 29% of population growth.
Read more: http://articles.businessinsider.com/201 ... z1aV8N7NoI" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;If you draw a rectangle on a piece of paper and put your pen in the bottom left-hand corner and then make a straight line across the box to the top right-hand corner, you've just drawn a graph of employment in Texas for the past 20 years. Really, that's what it looks like. From Gov. Ann Richards to Gov. George W. Bush to Gov. Rick Perry, the state has exploded in population and jobs.
"So it's not just the last 10 years; this has been going on now for 21 years — at least," says Richard Fisher, the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.
Fisher says population expansion is driving growth. Every day, about 1,000 people are either born in or move to Texas. That means new housing, roads, retail, schools, police, firemen — the list goes on. And while Perry touts the success of job creation in the private sector, job growth in government employment has been just as strong.
"We're growing at 80,000 schoolchildren a year, so those children are going to have to be accommodated," says Bill Hammond, the president of the Texas Association of Business.
The oil and gas industry provided nearly 40,000 new jobs since 2009, and most pay good wages. A truck driver servicing an oil or natural gas rig earns on average $1,600 a week. Texas is also creating a lot of low-paying jobs
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; [yes... "Consider the source".. I know]"The notion that Texas' recent performance is due to some unusually favorable business climate is absurd," said James K. Galbraith, a professor at the University of Texas at Austin.
First, Texas is an energy state, so it benefits from the run-up in oil prices, he said. Then Texas dodged much of the subprime housing bust, so it never lost as many jobs.
When the Dallas Fed reports on "net new jobs," he said, Texas' gains are exaggerated, because other big states lost so many.
Galbraith said the final chapter hasn't been written, either. Austin's budget cuts will eliminate work for thousands of teachers and others in coming months, which has already happened elsewhere.
Pia Orrenius, a senior economist at the Dallas Fed, listed many reasons for Texas' job growth. Energy prices rose steadily, the Barnett Shale has been a big growth driver in North Texas, and the Eagle Ford Shale is now creating jobs and wealth around San Antonio.
With natural gas so abundant, petrochemical exports have surged 633 percent since 2002, she said. Exports to China grew an average of 24 percent a year since 2000. Exports of cotton and other agriculture products are strong, too.
Read more: http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/06/14 ... z1aV7sXUAP" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The Office of the Governor Economic Development and Tourism Division. Last I checked Rick Perry is the Governor of Texas.RoyGBiv wrote:I have a hard time crediting Perry for Texas' "business friendly" policies... As I said in the post you quoted, IMO, Perry inherited a good situation and, as when Clinton inherited a strong economy from Reagan and GHW Bush, managed to not muck it up.
I would definitely welcome some specific examples of Perry's leadership on relevant Texas economic successes...
Thus far, I have not heard any from Mr. Perry himself.
Most of the jobs that have been created over the last three years have been in Texas and more Fortune 500 companies have relocated their central operations to Texas under the business friendly policies envisioned by Perry, and we are a much more 2A friendly state as well, but who is counting?RoyGBiv wrote:I am still astounded at how many people fell for the Hope and Change rhetoric.
It was transparently obvious (to me) then that we would get what we now have.
Public speaking is of course only a small part of Leading.
Back on topic...
Just as Obama's 2008 promises were transparently foolish, Romney's proposals are transparently fungible and prima facia, insufficient. Paul's are just plain nutty in some key areas (foreign policy!). 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.
Perry has been my Governor since I arrived in TX in 2003. I still don't know what he stands for. To me, he's a character. A good-lookin' good-ol-boy "Texan", from a storybook. But what has he actually done? Door-to-door book salesman, Air Force (respect.!), Cotton Farmer, Politician. Honestly, "Where's the beef?" As Governor, his most visible "accomplishments" were HPV (opinion deleted) and the Trans-Texas Corridor (which is where now?). I would go so far as to characterize his tenure as Governor as "coasting". Texas was on a good path when he took office and, like Bill Clinton's term in the WH, Perry has managed to not muck it up. Nothing to write home to momma about. He's a frat boy, like GWB, with a good record on 2A. Not enough for me. YMMV
My mind is not made up... but.. there you have it so far... FWIW.
Just because an individual is a better speaker does not make him a better leader, nor does it make him the individual who will do what it takes to get the job done. All it means is that he is a better speaker.CC Italian wrote:Cain is more of a "moderate" or Republican lite but I have to agree with you Roy. After seeing Perry, Romney and Cain talk, Cain is definitely a better speaker. I don't know if I would want him over Perry but I think I would prefer him over Romney. Honestly I think this country needs another Ronald Reagan. It will be interesting in the coming months!
