Herbert Hoover 199 Posted December 13, 2016 Report Share Posted December 13, 2016 There are rumors floating around about this. What are your thoughts? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jayavarman 130 Posted December 13, 2016 Report Share Posted December 13, 2016 oops Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Conservative Elector 2 333 Posted December 13, 2016 Report Share Posted December 13, 2016 I think it's good. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Patine 471 Posted December 13, 2016 Report Share Posted December 13, 2016 1 hour ago, Conservative Elector 2 said: I think it's good. Why do you think it's good, out of curiosity? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Conservative Elector 2 333 Posted December 13, 2016 Report Share Posted December 13, 2016 9 minutes ago, Patine said: Why do you think it's good, out of curiosity? Well he has tremendous political experience and name recognition, he is a respected Republican well known beyond the State of Texas. However, I would have chosen him as Secretary of Agriculture but at least he got an office. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jvikings1 40 Posted December 13, 2016 Report Share Posted December 13, 2016 I like it. Like @Conservative Elector 2 said, he has lots of experience. Plus, he was governor when Texas's economy did amazing despite other setbacks that were felt elsewhere. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Reagan04 658 Posted December 13, 2016 Report Share Posted December 13, 2016 Texas is a very energy rich state so I'm sure he'll fair well. I also like people who wish to shrink departments, heading them. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Patine 471 Posted December 13, 2016 Report Share Posted December 13, 2016 3 hours ago, Reagan04 said: Texas is a very energy rich state so I'm sure he'll fair well. I also like people who wish to shrink departments, heading them. By that logic, a Saudi Prince would also be automatically well-suited to the job. :S Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jvikings1 40 Posted December 14, 2016 Report Share Posted December 14, 2016 5 hours ago, Patine said: By that logic, a Saudi Prince would also be automatically well-suited to the job. :S If you loom at that statement narrowly, then yes. But, I am sure @Reagan04 also includes things, such as the willingness to protect the Constitution, in his evaluation as well. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ThePotatoWalrus 471 Posted December 14, 2016 Report Share Posted December 14, 2016 Best candidate to do so imo. I don't like his Labor, Treasury or Commerce picks however. I wish Romney was the Sec. Of State. Carson isn't experienced, but neither is Trump. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Herbert Hoover 199 Posted December 14, 2016 Author Report Share Posted December 14, 2016 I'm seeing that there are essentially two reactions to this cabinet appointment: 1. Rick Perry is an awful choice, due to his lack of experience and how he views the department as unnecessary, and his biggest political mistake (his "oops" moment) revolved around his abolishing the department. He's a hypocrite for accepting if he does so. This is obviously a more liberal and even center view on Perry. 2. Rick Perry is experienced as a traditionally conservative governor in a large state that has an abundance of energy in a variety of fields. He is for shrinking the department and that is a plus. His disdain for the department makes him a perfect candidate to lead it. This is a more conservative view on Perry's appointment. I believe that Perry is qualified experience wise for the post. His experience gained as Governor of Texas is valuable, even if it was somewhat overhyped. While I do have my own concerns about his connections to oil, that is a heavily partisan issue and I feel that my own opinions could quickly become clouded about ANY Republican appointee, so that is null. However, for me, why I believe Perry to be a bad choice is his own dislike of the department he is supposed to lead. He rallied against the department, and for its abolition, but somehow he can turn around and lead it? I just do not think that it is anywhere close to ideal for someone that has no real interest in the post to be appointed, as a matter of having them in the cabinet for ambition reasons, which is what I see it as. It's also to be noted that Perry isn't the worst choice that could have been made. I just don't think he was the right one, nor a good one for the department. I would have not had qualms about him leading a different department as he is obviously qualified for a leadership position in a Republican administration. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jayavarman 130 Posted December 15, 2016 Report Share Posted December 15, 2016 On 12/13/2016 at 3:35 PM, Reagan04 said: Texas is a very energy rich state so I'm sure he'll fair well. I also like people who wish to shrink departments, heading them. The primary mission of the Department of Energy concerns our nuclear weapons and power. That's why the current Secretary is a nuclear physicist. Oops. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest_Moniz Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Reagan04 658 Posted December 15, 2016 Report Share Posted December 15, 2016 Just now, Jayavarman said: The primary mission of the Department of Energy concerns our nuclear weapons and power. That's why the current Secretary is a nuclear physicist. Oops. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest_Moniz Yes I'm aware, but TX is also nuke rich. oops! But in all seriousness I do think Perry will be great! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rarename91 0 Posted December 16, 2016 Report Share Posted December 16, 2016 On 12/14/2016 at 5:01 PM, ThePotatoWalrus said: Best candidate to do so imo. I don't like his Labor, Treasury or Commerce picks however. I wish Romney was the Sec. Of State. Carson isn't experienced, but neither is Trump. Romney was only conisder to torture him that was trump plan romney is a traitor trump donated and supported him romney refuse to do the same he lost out! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Patine 471 Posted December 16, 2016 Report Share Posted December 16, 2016 22 minutes ago, Presidentinsertname said: Romney was only conisder to torture him that was trump plan romney is a traitor trump donated and supported him romney refuse to do the same he lost out! A "traitor?" Oh, my! Obviously you're very naïve about how politics works if that sort of "loyalty" should be unconditionally and without reservation counted on in your political viewpoint. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jvikings1 40 Posted December 16, 2016 Report Share Posted December 16, 2016 1 hour ago, Patine said: A "traitor?" Oh, my! Obviously you're very naïve about how politics works if that sort of "loyalty" should be unconditionally and without reservation counted on in your political viewpoint. While I agree that this can go too far, there are some cases where loyalty needs to be there. Romney said some nasty things about Trump while not running against him. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.