Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour seems to think so:
Q: Is it becoming clear that Mitt Romney will emerge as the Republican nominee?
A: I don’t think it’s clear. I think people make the mistake of writing off Rick Perry and believe he can’t come back. He’s got a mountain to get over, but I don’t think it’s impossible. Both Newt and Romney have a lot of support, but I don’t think it’s a two-man race. I think Perry could get back in it with Gingrich and Romney. I can’t look you in the eye and say nobody else can come up. You’ve got to learn your lesson this year not to say that about anybody.
Coincidentally, this subject came up a day or so earlier on Twitter, in a conversation involving Allahpundit, blogger Karol Markowicz, fundraiser/adviser Nathan Wurtzeland me. AP, skeptical of a possible comeback, asked me what I thought Perry would have to do to get back into contention.
I think the first and most difficult step is for Perry to stop being a bad candidate. He has gotten a bit better under the radar, but needs to continue to improve.
If Perry does improve, he may stand a shot at placing third in the Iowa caucuses. The new Des Moines Register poll has Perry near the bottom at six percent, but the poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.9 percentage points. PPP has a poll in the field in Iowa and teases that Perry appears to be in double digits.
The Register poll shows more respondents choose Gingrich as their second choice than any other candidate. However, Perry could benefit not only from Herman Cain’s collapse, but also from lingering doubts about Gingrich.
In Iowa, the doubts will primarily come from the religious right. In past cycles, social conservatives ensured victories for candidates like Pat Robertson and Mike Huckabee. This year, there is no consensus candidate.
Perry has both a good record to run on and (in my opinion) has the advantage of being the most personally likable of the candidates. And he still has enough money to run a strong finish in Iowa. I expect some rebound for him, though I doubt it will be quite enough. And I think he will continue to have trouble in debates… didn’t do himself any favors in the Huckabee forum, though I don’t know how many watched that.
CURT
HI,
I think, RICK PERRY, CAN COME BACK IF THE AMERICANS USE FAIRNESS AND OBSERVE HIS POTENTIAL
OF THE MAN HE IS TO BE ABLE TO RISE UP OVER THE MOUNTAIN,
WHERE HE BELONG,
HE HAS SHOWN THE QUALITIES THAT IS REQUIRED FOR A PRESIDENT,
strength, passion for his COUNTRY, humility AND pride ability AND energy
vision to be able to fix the problems SWIFTLY, AND THE KNOWLEDGE OF WHO HE CAN CHOOSE TO COMPLEMENT A SUPER CREW TO ACHIEVE THE ENORMOUS MULTIPLE TASKS,
HE CAN BE IN CHARGE OF COMMANDING, NOT DEBATING,
WE KNOW A LOT OF POWERFUL MULTIPLE BILLIONAIRES WHICH ARE UNABLE TO DEBATE IN THE FASHION OF TONGUE GIFTED SOME, BUT DID NOT NEED IT TO PINPOINT THE BAD STRAND OF HAY AND HAVE IT REMOVED SO TO ERADICATE THE POISONOUS OF THE ONLY ONE STRAND,
OVER THE WHOLE BAIL, very unique qualities of leadership,
already have been detected by other very keen leaders
who have support him all along without failing,
they where able to see his brain power and potential
which can do more than his tongue which is very still able to express his message
I could get behind Perry; his record of being conservative is more stable then that of Gingrich, Romney etc..
Sure, he’s not perfect – but who is, after all being perfect means never to fail, and that’s impossible.
Being a Texan, I’m for Rick Perry because he has proven to do good things for Texas. He gets it. He sees the danger we are in and he has proven that he knows how to deal with it. He is not a debater, we Texans are not noted for our guilded tongues…see George W. Perry has strength of character evidenced by the fact that after all his so public mishaps, he gets up every morning, puts his boots on and continues the fight. I don’t know how Iowan’s feel about our Texas swagger. We don’t mean it as a prideful thing. We are just raised to “handle it’ and not “whine about it”. I hope Perry gets a second chance. America will benefit. (For more information about what he thinks that he seems unable to verbalize…pick up his book Fed Up. Rick Perry gets it.)
he decided to run for the right goal,
which is getting AMERICAN JOBS, his prime objective,
as a successful GOVERNOR, he and his family wanted to give
the same deal to AMERICANS ALL OVER THE LAND,
AND GIVE THEIR CHILDREN a better future than what is projected now,
he want to close the borders faster than other CANDIDATES,
IT tell me, that he won’t drag his feet on any project, he know already the solutions,he has shown to be reliable,
and it tell the AMERICANS, HE WILL WORK swiftly
INSTEAD OF TALKING, and he has shown to BE HUMBLE AND SERVE AMERICA not run away from obstacle, he is a never give up and run type, HE WILL FACE THE DEVIL ITSELF TO PROTECT HIS COUNTRY HE LOVE,
he won’t runaway from nothing, he and his family will make AMERICANS PROUD OF THE PRESIDENT, ANYWHERE AND THE WORLD WILL RESPECT HIM.
what you see is what you will get, no surprise,
AMERICA WILL DECIDE, AND GET WHAT SHE DESERVE,
THAT IS THE BEST
AMERICANS want to be sure when you see the IRAN PROBLEM RISING, you want to know who can better deal with it, swiftly
without starting a war.
Perry was my top pick as soon as he entered the race, mainly because I really didn’t like the other choices. To stage a comeback, he is going to have to make some great debate appearances. He has to prove that he can go toe-to-toe with Obama. As it stands now, Obama will clean the floor with him. Newt’s arrogance is starting to irritate me. I’m not looking for another arrogant occupant of the White House.
Aqua
hi,
what about PERRY’S TRUTHS AGAINST OBAMA’S LIES?
where is it written that TRUTH ALWAYS PREVAIL?
BYE
I am a Republican conservative. Perry didn’t do too well on the debate because Romney has been attacked him. If Perry or Romney get the nominee, we are going to lose the election in 2012. I am not planning to vote next year because all of the candidates are not real true conservative.
ml
hi,
not good enough excuse to not vote, hold your nose and vote for one of them, they all are a lot better than what you have now, and by a big margin,
bye
@Aqua:
Aqua nailed it. If he suddenly displays the ability to debate, he will pass Newt for the top spot.
@ml:
Then if obama wins, you get what you deserve. Unfortunately we will also pay for your short sightedness.
I think a ham sandwich will beat Obama. He has basically told the white working class to take a hike. Does he really think that there are enough elite white liberal professors and actors and the welfare set (who will not bother to vote because it requires effort) to get him 51%. He was an novelty before and a blank slate that everyone painted their hopes and dreams. He has a record now and has proved to be lacking. He has alienated Wall Street (they vote for winners) and Main Street. Fly over country can’t wait to remove him from office. With their intensisty, they would crawl across broken glass on their bellies to remove him. The left thinks he has not done enough for them. His approval rating is 43%.
@ml: Perry’s debate problems have mostly been his own. When did Romney go after him? I don’t even remember that (I do remember Bachmann calling him out on the vaccine issue).
As for sitting out the election… little early to start with the ideological purity when you still have something like seven candidates to choose from, don’t you think? If *none* of them pass your bar, you’re really being unreasonable (though I grant you the field is a little weak). Find one you like and start canvasing, campaigning, donating or whatever. I can understand looking at them and deciding that one or two of them would make you stay home (Curt has Ron Paul and Romney on that list, for me it’s Gingrich), but all seven? (or more if you still count Roemer, Johnson, Cain).
if anyone limit hiself to demand a debater for a PRESIDENT when you have a telepronter guy in your face now, you have to be narrow minded, because no PRESIDENT DOING HIS JOB NEED TO DEBATE WITH THE AMERICANS, HIS ACTIONS ARE DOING THE JOBS, AND AS FOR FOREIGN COMMUNICATION, PERRY WOULD NOT NEED TO BOW TO NOBODY,
DEBATING IS TO HAVE AN OPPONENT,
THE CANDIDATES DON’T LOOK AT AMERICANS AS OPPONENT,
WHY ARE THE MEDIAS TWISTING THIS WORD,
MAKING IT AN ATTACKING ACTION INSTEAD OF A STATEMENT OF THEIR AGENDA IN FRONT OF AMERICANS WHICH HAVE THE POWER TO VOTE THEM TO THE HIGHEST POSITION. NOT THE MEDIA