Can Rick Perry defeat Barack Obama?

Obama may be in charge, but without the support of Congress, there is little he can do, and unless you've been in a cave, you know what the Republican's main goal has been, not to create jobs, but to "bring Obama down" - now that is real patriotism.

As if the Republicans give a rat's ass about jobs. What have they been focused on? Repealing HCR, protecting fetuses and trying to destroy the country's credit rating, and they claim they want to cut spending, only not where it affects the rich and corporations - just the poor suckers that make up America's middle class and below. And if Obama didn't have to put up with the know-nothing Republicans in Congress, the Stimulus might have been the size needed to take care of the giant mess-up Bush left us, but instead, due to their ignorance, we had to settle for less. The GOP'ers didn't want the stimulus but sure were at the front of the line with their grubby hands out to receive a share of it.

Only very uninformed people don't know how our government works. Congress makes and passes bills. That the GOP happens to control the House must be a surprise to you? That they've been obstinate on everything that the President has tried to do is no secret. And considering the many things he has been able to do in spite of their obstinance is something to be commended on.

Are you saying that Obama should bypass the House of Representatives? That Obama should call himself "the Decider" as doofus Bush did and run ramrod over the GOP? I wish he would, unfortunately that isn't how our government works. Just because Republicans have given up all dignity and reverence when it comes to the office of the Presidency, doesn't mean that the rest of America does, too. And, if this country ends up in the toilet, where Bush intended to put it, it will be the fault of the recalcitrant GOP.

As for his hair turning gray - that's what having to put up with a bunch of incompetents (Republicans in Congress) will do to you. Or, he could be like George Bush, who didn't really know what was going on, and remain oblivious to the problems of the nation.

 

I wouldn't call Perry a Bozo, although that is a good description of him. LOL!


,

Confidence? Perry, who doesn't know whether to be for SC or against it.
Who hasn't done much in Texas but run it into the ground. We're competing with Mississippi for God's sake, on some of the ratings.

It's a mite early to be putting so much stock on polls - And, even on the poll in this right-wing Forum, Perry is only up by 2 or 3! Give me a break - it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that Perry is going to burn! This country is trying to recover from Texas fatigue after 8 years of the incompetent George Bush - and Perry is just another Bush, who needs Bush again?

Oh yeah, the ones that supported "the destroyer - George Bush" know all about experience. The ones who think bimbo Palin is more than qualified to be president are warning us! Actually, I hope you do elect Perry as your candidate - it would make Obama's re-election a shoe-in and the country will be better off.

 

On the other hand, many of the better paying jobs are union jobs, so please call me suspicious as to Perry creating any well paying jobs.

 

What has he done that he should deserve credit for something that would still exist even if Perry was not governor?

That Texas is accessing new oil and natural gas reserves, which boosts sales and adds jobs has nothing to do with Perry (oil and gas contribute about $325B per year to the Texas economy.

The housing finance regulations (which originated in the 90's, and not even to Perry's liking - he likes more business friendly regulations) have kept Texas from joining other states in the foreclosure fiasco. Texas never had a housing bubble. Perry can't take credit for that.

That Texas is growing, more people moving to Texas - more people means more customers for Texas businesses - none of which has anything to do with Rick Perry. If you think it does, please list what he has done to insure these happenings.

 

You expanding on Perry's lie? Texas only had 51 companies listed while New York had 57 and California had 53 - and that is considering that Texas is way larger than California and certainly New York! Make sure you can back your statements, don't want to be embarrased.

Pay attention. I didn't say that Texas only had minimum wage jobs - I said that Perry can't take credit for those high paying jobs that are due to our natural resources (oil and gas) - he didn't implement any legislation that made them happen - they would have happened with or without him.

Read my statement above. Perry didn't control the outcome of the amendment that limited awards, it was due to us "voters". Just because it happened during his tenure and he wasn't against it doesn't mean that he was the genius who suggested it, voted it and made it law, so he doesn't get credit for those doctors coming here - I think the tort reform was one of the things that drew them here, and "no state income tax" but Perry can't take credit for either of those two things.


Oh, and it is a fact, Texas is one of 10 states where state and local government jobs have grown since 2009, rising to almost 30k positions - which discredits Perry's claim to "smaller government". If you want to give him credit for jobs - give him credit for those, then forget about his claim for smaller government.

 

the natural resources may exist without Perry or anyone else, but the profitable extraction of them is partly dependent on a state govt which is friendly to the oil and gas industry. there are many potentially prolific sites in the United States which are not produced because govt at some level gets in the way.

if one accepts your slant on govt, then no governmental official anywhere should be given any credit or blame for what happens during their watch. If I were an Obama supporter I would probably spin events just as you do.

why is Texas still growing, while most of the nation stagnates? mostly because a regulatory environment exists in Texas which is a draw for business, and that draws migration. if Rick Perry had the failed ideology of an Obama, and Texas had constructed the nightmare of regulations that characterizes California, then Texas's prospects would be a lousy as California's and Illinois.

 

unlike you I deal in facts and post links to back it up. Texas has 65 Fortune 500 companies. And the rankings do not shadow population, but the amount of business transacted in the state, in that case California and NY should be far ahead of Texas, but Texas ranks over them because of the unfriendly regulatory evironment CA and NY have created.

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2009/states/TX.html

frankly, I am worried about your attention span. most of the growth in higher paying jobs in Texas have come from the Medical sector and the financial sector.

naturally Texas govt has grown, look at the population statistics.

your profile shows that you live in Texas. how can you live in a state and not seem to understand much about it?

are you are recent immigrant from somewhere else?

 

Yeah, and look what that better job paying cost our country,,,,Unions are History,,,Thank God...

 

Is that what Faux News is spewing? Bwahahaha! It must be true, Faux News viewers are the least informed!


Busting the Union Busters
Monday 5 September 2011
by: Dick Meister, Truthout | News Analysis
The good news is that, recently, Wisconsin voters easily turned back a GOP attempt to recall two strong pro-worker state senators who had helped lead the fight against Walker's anti-worker legislation. The fight began in the spring when Republicans targeted eight Democratic senators for recall - and lost. There have been nine recall elections since then and labor has won five of them.

Labor and the Democrats had hoped to wrest control of the State Senate from the GOP. But though failing to do so, they did narrow the Republicans Senate majority to a razor-thin 17-16.

Democrats and union leaders are rightly celebrating the pro-labor election victories as a possible opening shot against anti-labor extremism nationwide, which could, in turn, lead to an attempt to recall Governor Walker or at least force him to back off.

Actually, Walker has done his labor enemies a great favor by provoking public outrage that has brought important new strength and solidarity to the cause of working people and their unions everywhere.

So, it may be a happy Labor Day after all, thanks to a labor opponent.

 

Do you REMEMBER real old time Conservatism?

http://www.politicalforum.com/unite...sit-barry-goldwater-snap-out.html#post4426800

 

Well, your facts are not up to date. You are posting data from 2009, we're in 2011.

California has 53.
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2011/states/CA.html

New York has 57
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2011/states/NY.html

Texas has 51.
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2011/states/TX.html

Not in 2011 they don't.

California and NY rank over Texas, maybe not by much, but they do have more companies.
Considering that Texas has way more land that businesses could use to build their headquarters, that NY and CA have more is amazing.

I'm worried about your comprehension span. Perry didn't have much to do with it, it is something that has been happening in Texas for decades.

The economy of Texas is growing at roughly twice the national average, but the question is: How much did Rick Perry and his low-tax, low-regulation philosophy influence that growth?

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.

A new four-bedroom, three-bathroom house in a Dallas suburb can be bought for $189,000, and one reason is because immigrants, both legal and illegal, are willing to shingle those roofs in 100-degree heat for relatively low pay. Hammond says easy access to inexpensive labor has long been a critical part of the economy's success.

"If you look at agriculture, construction and hospitality, there's simply not enough people born in Texas, or across the country for that matter, to fill all those positions," Hammond says.

Yeah, but Perry wants to shrink government. So, if he becomes President, since the country is growing, will government also grow? If he is for shrinking government, how is it he has had that much expansion?

Oh, I understand it plenty. It's those that are in denial and want Elmer Gantry for President that are skewing the facts.

No, I was born and raised in Texas, but it sure sounds like you are.

 

But the Texas economy has been growing at roughly twice the national average for the past 20 years, long before Perry was on the scene.

If Texas had been in a slump and Perry had done something to bring it out of the slump, you could very well give him the credit for it. But those jobs were happening with or without Perry - had been for the past 20 years. The country is in a slump and Obama needs to initiate a plan that will create jobs - if the country had been booming, I'm sure you wouldn't give Obama credit for jobs he had no part of creating. And that is what it is with Perry.

If you were an Obama supporter you wouldn't blame him for everything that he has no control over, like gas prices, but Reps/cons do - yet when gas prices were high under Bush, it was not his fault, according to Reps/cons.

That's what those who think Perry is so great would like to believe. Perry was responsible for many teachers losing their jobs because he refused to use the "rainy day fund" which was set up for the very purpose of making sure there would be funds to pay teachers and instead choose to let them go jobless. I have Republican friends that are teachers that lost a lot of respect for Perry because of that.

Hammond and Perry say Texas is attractive to businesses because there's no corporate income tax, no state income tax, and environmental and other state regulations on Texas businesses are kept to a minimum. Critics reply that there's a big downside to these policies, as Texas ranks 44th in expenditures per public school pupil and 50th in the number of adults and children who have health insurance.

Dick Lavine, a senior fiscal analyst with the Center for Public Policy Priorities, says the state is tied with Mississippi for the highest percentage of the workforce in minimum wage jobs. His group tracks legislation's impact on middle- and working-class Texans.

"To some extent, people in Texas just do without a lot of the public services that inhabitants of other states enjoy," Lavine says.


http://www.npr.org/2011/08/17/139688463/texas-economy-growing-long-before-gov-rick-perry


He also does not clamp down on employers hiring illegals - why you are able to buy homes cheaper here, because illegals don't earn as much as a legal citizen would.


A new four-bedroom, three-bathroom house in a Dallas suburb can be bought for $189,000, and one reason is because immigrants, both legal and illegal, are willing to shingle those roofs in 100-degree heat for relatively low pay. Hammond says easy access to inexpensive labor has long been a critical part of the economy's success.
http://www.npr.org/2011/08/17/139688463/texas-economy-growing-long-before-gov-rick-perry

Perry's ideologies are not good for the middle-class and below. He thinks SS is a Ponzi scheme (although he is trying to squirm out of that claim) and he would do away with Medicare and Medicaid. He is an empty suit that would make the country wish we had Bush back. Hope you are not middle-class or below, because with Perry you'll be looking at the underside of a bus.

 

After his social security remark, Perry has no chance.

 

Not true, after all, he was correct. After people realize he's not a threat to their benefits, and most do, it won't be a problem.

 

I do not think Perry can win. His past remarks will not alow him to gain much in a general election. Also I just dont like the guy. He does not seem trust worthy or honest. At the same time I do not like Obamas performance so I will have to hope for a differant option.

 

He was dead wrong. SS without tweaking is solvent until 2037. So, Perry doesn't even know what he is talking about.
Only the uninformed think that Perry is right, but where are the facts to prove it? I think even Romney made it clear to Perry - and surely the wise will take note.

Social Security is a self-funding program funded by a dedicated tax. It needs to be tweaked in order to make it remain solvent past 2037. Until 2037 it can pay 100% of its obligations with its own money. After 2037 it will be able to pay 80% with its own money.
http://newmediathinker.com/articles...curity-and-medicare-off-congressional-budget/

 

Hard to believe that Perry doesn't KNOW that, isn't it?

 

Rick perry said 95% of the jobs creatd in texas were above minimum wage. I didn't hear any liberal talk show hosts oor liberal internet websites saying he lied about that, so im going to assume its true.

 

It is a liberal lie that all the new jobs in Texas are only minimum wage. Most are at about average national wage.

Further, it is strange liberal logic that says that it is better to be unemployed than to be employed at a low wage job. Having any job beats having no job.

 

Very few private sector jobs are unionized anymore. In fact the rate is down to 6.9% from a high of 35% in 1945. Them's the facts. Unions are dying. WI was nothing more than a delaying battle in a losing campaign. It was a losing last gasp, similar to the German's 1944 attack in the Bulge.

 

You may be right. That one can be used against him. Romney did a better job in the debate.

 

Rick Perry doesn't believe in evolution or global warming. He thinks problems can be solved by holding prayer rallies. Sorry, but Obama would have to do a lot worse before I'd vote for Perry. The only guy I'd consider among the Republicans is Jon Huntsman, and he hasn't got a prayer.

 

Private companies have benefited from many of the improvements made by unions and have incorporated them into their work procedures, such that union intervention is no longer necessary. But, it isn't just about the private sector. The rate in the public sector is higher than that of private sector. If the unions die due to people not choosing to join, that is fine - but it is not up to some Political figure or political party to try and take that choice away from those who still opt for it. Apparently there are still many that favor having a union, we saw that in WI.


--The union membership rate for public sector workers (36.2 percent) was substantially higher than the rate for private sector workers (6.9 percent).(See table 3.)

In 2010, the union membership rate--the percent of wage and salary workers who weremembers of a union--was 11.9 percent, down from 12.3 percent a year earlier, the U.S.Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. The number of wage and salary workers be-longing to unions declined by 612,000 to 14.7 million. In 1983, the first year for which comparable union data are available, the union membership rate was 20.1 per-cent, and there were 17.7 million union workers.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.nr0.htm

 

Statistics can always be portrayed to present whatever picture you like best.

Perry was not altogether honest.


Editor’s Note: The following “fact checking” was conducted by the Associated Press and not The Blaze.

Yes, employment has grown by more than 1 million since Perry took office in Texas. But a lot of those jobs are not well paid.

A look at some of the claims in the debate, and how they compare with the facts (as compiled by the Associated Press):

PERRY: “Ninety-five percent of all the jobs that we’ve created have been above minimum wage.”

THE FACTS: To support the claim, the Perry campaign provided federal statistics for December 2010 showing only 5.3 percent of all jobs in Texas pay the minimum wage.

But those figures represent all workers, not just the new jobs, for which data are unavailable. And that does not account for low-wage jobs that may be barely above the minimum wage. According to the Texas Workforce Commission, 51 percent of all Texas workers make less than $33,000 a year. Only 30 percent make more than $50,000 a year. Nationally, Texas ranked 34th in median household income from 2007 to 2009.

About 9.5 percent of Texas hourly workers, excluding those who are paid salaries, earn the minimum wage or less, tying Mississippi for the highest percentage in the nation.


http://www.theblaze.com/stories/ap-fact-checks-perry-romney-bachmanns-gop-debate-claims/