By all measures, Perry exceeded expectations. He touted his military service and spoke passionately on counter-terrorism in way that would appeal to foreign policy hawks. And perhaps even more importantly, his performance was free of the gaffes that he's become known for in debates.That's the good news for Perry. The bad news is that Saturday Night Live skewered his Wednesday brain freeze a few hours after the Saturday debate, and probably had a bigger influence on voter perceptions.
He may have walked into a trap, however, when he answered a follow-up question regarding his proposal to "start at zero" when it comes to foreign aid. When asked via question about whether that policy would apply to Israel, Perry said "yes," although he quickly confirmed his belief that Israel is a critical ally. The response could still prove risky for a Republican candidate when the GOP base so intensely supports Israel. Furthermore, commentators pointed out the U.S. has a 10-year agreement to provide Israel with about $30 billion for security assistance.
This blog continues the discussion that we began with Epic Journey: The 2008 Elections and American Politics (Rowman and Littlefield, 2009).The latest book in this series is Divided We Stand: The 2020 Elections and American Politics.
Sunday, November 13, 2011
Perry Scores on CBS, Takes a Hit on NBC
In the CBS/National Journal debate on foreign policy, Gingrich was both tough and fluent, Romney was solid, Cain was vague, and Perry was better-than-expected. CBS reports:
Posted by Pitney at 6:20 AM
Labels: debate, government, Herman Cain, mass media, Newt Gingrich, Perry, political science, Politics, Romney, Saturday Night Live