After thanking family and staff, Texas governor Rick Perry announced this morning that he would suspend his campaign and endorse Newt Gingrich.
Saying that he saw “no viable path forward for me in this 2012 campaign,” Perry called Gingrich a “visionary” with the “heart of a conservative reformer.” He said the former House speaker represented the best chance the Republicans had “not only to defeat president Obama, but to replace him with a conservative leader who will bring about real change.”
Perry allowed that he and Gingrich had “had our differences,” and in what seemed to be a reference to the renewed focus on Gingrich’s past marital strife, acknowledged that “Newt is not perfect. But who among us is?” He added that “there is forgiveness for those who seek God, and I believe in the power of redemption.”
“What’s broken in America is not our people, it’s our politics. And what we need in Washington is a place that is humbler, with a federal government that is smaller, so that our people can live freer,” Perry said.
In a written statement, Gingrich said he was “humbled and honored” to have Perry’s support and complimented the governor’s “selflessness” in deciding to withdraw from the race.
Perry characterized his exit as “a strategic retreat” and promised that he had “just begun to fight” for conservative principles.
“there is forgiveness for those who seek God, and I believe in the power of redemption.”
That's a great sentiment and all, but Newt hasn't won the South Carolina primary, let alone the GOP nomination, and he already needs supporters to pull out the redemption card?!? Major FAIL.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbusePerry characterized his exit as “a strategic retreat” and promised that he had “just begun to fight” for conservative principles.
It's only a flesh wound!
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse+1
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseGreat, the two Open Borders, pro-Illegal Immigration, pro-End of Anglosphere America candidates are pals. Maybe in a few months when Newt's out of the race they can form a lobby that advocates against border fences and for racial quotas in hiring.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbusePerry has made a complete mockery of the Office of President by acting out this charade for his own personal gain! Shame on him and anyone who supported him. Fine, agree with his politics ... but to think he could be President?!! What a sick joke. No wonder America's image and standing suffers around the world ... they think we are insane for allowing this joke to go on this long.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWow!
It has been revealed that Mitt actually didn't win Iowa after all. Santorum did by 34 votes.
After SC, it'll be Romney that takes on the "it's only a flesh wound" meme.
I am truly proud of Rick Perry. Truly.
We're gonna take Romney down here in Florida, too.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNot necessarily true, actually. Votes from I believe 8 precincts were lost so whatever the tally is now is unlikely to be the true tally. That is why both the Romney campaign and the Santorum campaign are calling it a tie. It does seem strange and rather unbefitting, however, that Iowa seems unable to count its caucasus votes correctly.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseGreat point about Iowa.
Sort of makes one wonder why they don't vote in their primary after the general election is over with.
If they're losing votes, they certainly should not go first.
Ethanol + Agr. welfare + Losing votes = NOT WORTHY!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThen there were three: Mitt, Newt, and Rick Santorum. Two, really, if we give credence to current polling: Mitt and Newt.
As for Newt, his place as the Great Conservative Hope is baffling, considering his long history of inside-the-Beltway shenanigans. These days he certainly talks the talk, though his attacks on capitalism and Mitt Romney's wealth are troubling.
For what it’s worth, if we did nominate Newt, I know he’d shred Obama in debates. But we’re electing a president, not a debating team captain. And I don’t think Newt can beat Obama. Too much personal baggage, for starters. Too mercurial, too prone to spout grand ideas that are half-baked.
As for Mitt, say what you will about him, he's clean as a hound's tooth and while he has supported liberal positions in the past, since 2008 he seems to have straightened out and flown right.
Conservatives, me included, should go with Bill Buckley’s advice: support the most conservative candidate who can win. Like it or not, right now that’s Mitt Romney.
Unless you'd rather feel good and go down in flames with Newt.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMitt clean? No baggage with Mitt? If you have to spin the hapless, plastic smile candidate who makes John McCain look like a winner, at least try not make voters smile.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseJohn, it is very well said.
I have to agree...
But the level of the hype seems to indicate this is going to get even more destructive.
We shall see.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNewt has never "attacked capitalism." His attacks on Romney's history at Bain are attacks on a particular indiviaul's behavior. The ongoing attempt to conflate the two are, in fact, an attack on capitalism, because they suggest that Bain's looting of companies is the best that capitalism has to offer.
As for your suggestion that Romney is "clean as a hound's tooth," I was shocked to discover yesterday two examples of criminal behavior among his history with Bain. One company he headed was fined $120M for defrauding Medicare. The company policy was to direct unnecessary blood tests to raise its revenue. And Bain turned to Michael Milken and his junk bonds to raise money for one of its take over bids, just as Miljken's insider trading was becoming well known on Wall Street.
Obviously, Romney is far enough away from both of these scandals that he's not going to face criminal charges, but he will be crucified during the general election.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseBy its very terms, the Buckley Rule disqualifies Mitt Romney.
He's not a conservative. End of story.
If Bill Buckley meant to suggest that non-conservatives should be supported by this rule, he should have been more clear.
The fact he specifically used the word "conservative", though, places the onus on the moderates. Expressio Unius. If Buckley wanted us to support moderates, he would've said so explicitly.
He didn't. He used a term that entirely excludes them from consideration.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIf it's Mitt & Newt, I choose to go down in flames with Newt.
Mitt is flying right? Has renounced the idea a government can force two parties to enter into a private contract? No. He still embraces it. Newt has abandoned the idea.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRick Santorum should stick around because Newt will flame out. This interview with Newt's second wife is just another example of the consequences flowing from his poor judgment. Gingrich has tremendous intellect and very little judgment.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRumor has it that, in exchange for his support, Gingrich promised Perry that he would name him Secretary of Energy. Ooops!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWe all wish Rick the best.
It is no surprise Mr. Perry endorsed Newt Gingrich.
Both have been running on the left side politically, sharing the "vision" of Mr. Obama, attacking the successful Private Enterprise of Mr. Romney for personal gain.
They do have a lot in common, Perry and Gingrich are both Public Sector Entities, who ran to the comforts of leftwing populism similar to the mindless "occupy" folly.
The fashion had jumped on Rick's bandwagon so quickly, and abandoned him just as fast.
And now are we really back to inflating Newt Gingrich?
The Beltway Insider who grafted 1.8 Million via Fannie and Freddie?
Or is Rick Santorum the "real" fan fare today?
The Washington Politician of 17 years who opposed "Right To Work"?
It all grows more fascinating everyday, every minute.
Great for the political junkie, but rather embarrassing as well.
Some seem addicted to doing everything they can to stop Romney, almost as if this is more important than removing Barack Obama from the Presidency.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNewt's got style and Perry likes that. Perry has always reminded me of a candidate who is attracted to a certain style and Newt fits that perfectly.
The problem is, Newt would be a great campaign manager, or at least member of a campaign team -- providing input to the overall strategy and being able to publically go on the attack in defense of principles.
But he's a terrible leader, terrible at being someone who can unite, terrible at living the principles he pretends to advance, etc. etc. The only thing he's good at is argument.
A good debater/arguer would be great at getting all the people who agree with you to nod heads, and would be even greater at getting those who don't agree with you to be seething mad at you. Once again, we Americans will get what we deserve if we think this is what the country needs.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRE: "It is no surprise Mr. Perry endorsed Newt Gingrich."
Boy that's the truth -- both are significantly more conservative than Romney, and then, Perry wasn't going to endorse Ron Paul . . .
But then -- we all know that.
The only question now is -- do we vote for the clearly non-conservative guy, or an oft-conservative guy.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abusethat depends upon who you're talking about. If you're saying that Newt is the "oft-conservative guy" you haven't been following his career too closely. I might agree that Newt's the "occasional conservative guy," but that's also Romney.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse