AHC: Republican Nominee Rick Perry

Not sure if this has been done before, but here I think this an interesting and contemporary "what-if?" When Texas Governor Rick Perry jumped into the Republican Presidential contest in August of 2011 he was perceived as a front-runner and strong challenger to Mitt Romney. But as we all know, his campaign quickly imploded due to a number of gaffes and embarrassing debate performances. This challenge is to have Governor Perry win the Republican Nomination for President, with or without the gaffes, in the most realistic way possible.
 
Greatly reduce the number of debates. After debate #x have the public turn against these debates, watch their ratings drop, and future debates are scaled back. Have him get in a week or so before the Iowa Straw Poll, win the Straw Poll, and then let him focus on raising money (which he did IRL).

Next, get Bachmann, Gingrich, and Perry relentlessly attacking Romney on his health care bill and keep playing the clip of Obama talking about how Romney was the basis for Obama's bill. With less debates Romney's less likely to shift public opinion. Also, get Perry to retract his ponzi scheme remark.

Furthermore, keep Cain out and have Bachmann or Santorum or Gingrich leave before Iowa and endorse Perry. On Iowa Night, Perry wins with Romney in second. In New Hampshire Perry gets third with Paul in second. By South Carolina Gingrich, Bachmann, and Santorum are out (all endorsing Perry). With this it's a three way race between Perry, Romney, and Santorum.

I think in that match-up Perry has a legitimate shot at Ohio, Michigan, and other big states that Santorum came close to winning. Also, with the field down to three I think Perry takes Florida which is a major boost to his campaign.
 
Not sure if this has been done before, but here I think this an interesting and contemporary "what-if?" When Texas Governor Rick Perry jumped into the Republican Presidential contest in August of 2011 he was perceived as a front-runner and strong challenger to Mitt Romney. But as we all know, his campaign quickly imploded due to a number of gaffes and embarrassing debate performances. This challenge is to have Governor Perry win the Republican Nomination for President, with or without the gaffes, in the most realistic way possible.

Well, it would first help if he hadn't engineered, with the help of the Texas Republican Party, an environment where he didn't face anything like the scrutiny he did during the Presidential election. It would also help if George W. Bush hadn't ruined Texas' reputation for Presidents just prior.

Putting those together, perhaps you might have something like this:

Somehow (waves hands) Kay Bailey Hutchinson doesn't run for the Texas Special Senate election in 1993. Perhaps she decides she would like to continue advancing within state politics (she did make a go at the governor's in 2010...). Therefore, she decides to run for the governor's race in 1994; Bush decides he'd rather be a senator than a governor, and ends up easily defeating Bob Krueger. And so he disappears from our tale, destined to become a respected senior figure in the Republican Party...

Hutchinson faces a harder fight, but does defeat Ann Richards that year. She goes on to win reelection in 1998, as well. On the same ticket for the Lieutenant Governor's position is Rick Perry, who ends up winning that position. Unlike Bush, Hutchinson does not decide to make a move for President in 2000, and instead quits the governor's office in 2002 (incidentally, this sets a record for length of time spent in the Governor's Mansion by a single person serving consecutive terms), passing the torch along to Perry, who wins the Governor's Mansion for himself. In 2000, Gore wins the Presidential election by a slight margin (there is Republican grumbling about how he "stole" it--he wins both the popular and electoral votes, but only by a slight margin).

Two years later, in 2004, Rick Perry decides to go for the presidential nomination; with the mediocre economy and no "war" bump (the al-Qaeda plot was rolled up early on and most people still have never heard of al-Qaeda or Afghanistan; Saddam still rules Iraq), together with 12 years of Democratic occupancy, the White House looks up for grabs. Despite having in some ways the thinnest resume of all the Republican contenders, Perry still manages to grab the nomination, largely on the strength of the Texas economy, and largely coasts to victory against Gore. Badda-boom, Perry's in the White House. Of course, he's a different Perry.

I should probably note that I envision Hutchinson making a move for the Senate in 2002, which unlike her foray for the governorship back in 2010 would probably go well for her. No Tea Party or any of that, and I imagine she has a solid record as governor to go on.
 

Thande

Donor
Apparently Perry was on lots of drugs for a back problem or something, which might explain his poor debate performances.
 
I don't think this is quite as difficult as it seems. Perry led in the polls in Iowa and South Carolina pretty much from the moment that he jumped in the race. I agree that the debate's are very important, but what I'm really getting at is whether or not Perry needs to do something really significant to beat Romney. Does anyone have any insights to his organization or his campaign staff?
 
I don't think this is quite as difficult as it seems. Perry led in the polls in Iowa and South Carolina pretty much from the moment that he jumped in the race. I agree that the debate's are very important, but what I'm really getting at is whether or not Perry needs to do something really significant to beat Romney. Does anyone have any insights to his organization or his campaign staff?

He actually had a really quite interesting campaign strategy. It was very scientific and they tried to really maximize all spending and actions in his campaign. If it weren't for his mouth he would have done much better. For reference this article/interview is pretty interesting.
 
I don't think this is quite as difficult as it seems. Perry led in the polls in Iowa and South Carolina pretty much from the moment that he jumped in the race. I agree that the debate's are very important, but what I'm really getting at is whether or not Perry needs to do something really significant to beat Romney. Does anyone have any insights to his organization or his campaign staff?

Honestly, given how disdained Romney was and how flaky the rest of the field was, Perry had even odds of a comeback right up until "oops", which ranks with the Dean Scream as a campaign insta-kill.

Maybe Perry just refuses to attend all the debates -- insisting on a one-on-one with Romney while the two dominate the field, with Romney refusing... Gingrich et. al. would scream bloody murder, but nobody actually cares about the primary debates unless somebody gaffes, so avoidance may be the best strategy...
 
I think if Rick Perry wants to have a decent chance at the Republican Nomination in 2012, he's going to have to make his decision earlier than he did historically. Either that, or there are going to have to be almost no debates between 2011-2012. Part of the reason Perry did so poorly in the debates had to do with how late he entered the race. He simply wasn't as polished as his opponents were. I'm not saying his own intelligence didn't create some problems for him, but had he been better prepared than he was, the debates might not have been as disastrous as they were for him. Perry needs to maintain his position as the serious alternative to Mitt Romney he had initially. If he can't do that, he can't win the nomination.
 
Top